Talk:Halo: Combat Evolved

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Halo: Combat Evolved is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 15, 2007.
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:
  • Virginia Heffernan (5 November 2010). "Prize Descriptions". The New York Times. Retrieved 2 September 2011. Take another such artifact: the video game Halo. The entry on Wikipedia for Halo: Combat Evolved, which Wikipedia’s editors have chosen as a model for the video-game-entry form, keeps its explanations untechnical...  (details)

Some idiot completely trashed the page.[edit]

I recently reversed the vandalism, but it should be fine now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Woodhouse (talkcontribs) 08:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested Semi Protection[edit]

Yes, due to Vandalism and Game Guide information being added I have requested a semi Protect. Stealth (talk) 01:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Quit the blocking for a moment[edit]

Please could you remove the blocking for a moment, I noticed a few mistakes such as "The Master Chief and Cortana flee in a UNSC Autumn" when it should be "The Master Chief and Cortana flee in a Longsword Fighter". —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Cancelled Dreamcast version[edit]

since it xbox had a deal with sega do u think it was originally a dreamcast game —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

It also was suppose to be PS2 also67.180.225.161 (talk) 22:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Halo was initially to be a Mac/Windows PC game. Console versions were rumored but never confirmed, and Microsoft's acquisition of bungie effectively axed any other console versions from ever coming out. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 23:07, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
In addition, speculation about "what ifs?" and "do you think?" are not allowed. Anakinjmt (talk) 00:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Halo PC Multiplayer[edit]

Could/Should there be a section in the "Multiplayer" section that refers to the PC version, because that section seems to focus on the xbox version.Tortinshaar (talk) 17:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the multiplayer section (except the first sentence) covers it. — TKD::Talk 17:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

German Version is wrong![edit]

Please change the German Version de:Halo (Spieleserie) to de:Halo: Kampf um die Zukunft. Thank you. -- (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Improving the Plot section[edit]

I believe one of the most captivating aspect of the Halo series is its story and plot. The current plot section could be improved by providing more details, but I'm wondering if it's necessary. After all, I don't want to go through the trouble of rewriting a section only for it to be reverted. Zijian (talk) 01:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

We aren't the place for discussing how captivating the plot is. Fact is that a plot summary is no substitute for actually playing the game. We're aiming for comprehensiveness and comprehension, not detail. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Agree. Zijian, keep in mind that we're writing for a general audience. Adding extra details can impair understanding by bogging down the reader. Good writing is concise. — TKD::{talk} 04:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, point taken. Zijian (talk) 21:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC) Update[edit]

We need a paragraph on the update, as it no makes the game no longer require the original disk to play. Plenty of people i know did not know about this update, because it has to be downloaded from the Bungie website, and cannont be downloaded from the Microsoft support site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacemarine288 (talkcontribs) 00:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

EGM/Edge review quotation[edit]

The Reception section gives a couple of quotes from EGM, including this one:

  • "GoldenEye was the multiplayer standard for console first-person shooters... It has been surpassed"

Edge's review (a promotional reprint of which is available from the Press Scans section of contains a very similar quotation:

  • "GoldenEye was the standard for multiplayer console combat. It has been surpassed."

This brings up the possibility that at some point during the course of this article's editing, someone had mixed up the Edge and EGM quotes. So could someone with that issue of EGM confirm that the article does contain the correct review quotation? If it does, it's curious that both magazines' phrases should be so similar... --Nick RTalk 15:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

other name?[edit]

It says this on the article

Halo Combat evolved (Frequently called just Halo)

shouldn't it be changed to

Halo Combat evolved (Frequently called just Halo 1)?

because the term "Halo" is usually used to refer to the series in general, not nessesarily the first game, which is more often called "Halo 1" or "Halo One" (talk) 13:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Dates in Infobox[edit]

Before I go and iron this issue out myself, I thought I should point it out to you all. The format for the release dates in the infobox looks terrible as YYYY-MM-DD. I'm going to change it to DD-MMMM-YYYY. Any problems with that? CR4ZE (talk) 09:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


While working on the online print archive, I located a few PC previews for this game. They date back to when it was a third-person PC exclusive, and probably include information that will be useful for filling out the Development section, should this article ever be put up for FAR. The two previews are here, and here. The archive also contains numerous reviews for the game, most of which do not appear in the article. Those may be found here. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:11, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I'll see about adding them. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 11:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I posted these on David Fuchs' talk page, but I thought I'd put them here, as well:

In addition, I found yet another preview from this time period, courtesy of Next Generation Magazine: Link. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:03, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Wrong Rating[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} The BBFC rating is 15 not 18! (talk) 16:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 23:45, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Halo: Combat Evolved Remake CONFIRMED[edit]

A section for the remake should be added to the article. The Halo: CE remake for Xbox 360 was confirmed, and has a release date for November 15, 2011 (however, the date is subject to change). Here is my source (and it's a fairly reliable one): (talk) 04:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you read the articles you quote. A blog reports that an anonymous source has said there's going to be a remake. There's no official word on this. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 21:08, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
It was on E3 that Halo:CE is being published with new graphic--bean 17:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
forgot to sign lol--bean 17:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Told ya. :P (talk) 18:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


What's with that BBFC shit? It was never rated by them.

Removed, now stop talking shit and get something better to do. Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 07:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

The readaption of Halo CE[edit]

As of last week it was confirmed that a company owning small shares of Bungie(tm)has decided to remake Halo CE for the XBOX 360 and possibly the Microsoft Windows 7 for those asking for more info go to youtube and type in "Halo CE remake" you should get a nice smorgess of answers and it will inform you more on what i was tooo lazy to do seya on the Beta peoplezzzzz byeeeee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:48, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

The Halo engine[edit]

I heard that Bungle made a Halo engine,should this be mention?~( of Sonic News Network and others

Remake photos and info gathering[edit]

just for development of the halo remake section i reckon this photo of comparison of the silent cartographer should be used. this source indicates also that you can swap the graphics between 2001 and 2011 engine styles on a in-game menu among other things. Jonjonjohny (talk) 18:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

splitting Anniversary from this article[edit]

I think it is time for it to have its own page... well maybe a little bit later if someone finds even more info, but with the info used in should be just enough....--SGP (talk) 02:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

It's our general policy not to split ports or remakes unless they garner enough notable coverage and reception. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I would agree with an entirely new page for Anniversary. While the plot may stay the same, the gameplay, reception, and development will be entirely different than the first game. It won't be like the 'ports' from Xbox to Xbox 360, because it will use an entirely different engine (reportedly). I also feel that there has been notable coverage and reception across the internet and general media to warrant a separation. Tcardone05 (talk) 07:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
The gameplay is entirely the same, only with a new coat of paint. It's the same engine with new stuff built over it. Let's wait for the amount of reception to dictate the worthiness of a separate article. Right now there's maybe three paragraphs top of content that wouldn't be going into unnecessary detail for a Wikipedia page. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
The gameplay may be entirely the same, but it's using the Reach engine, so the game will have to be built from the ground up. This is why there is a probably pretty hefty development cycle, which to me means its an entirely different game. The press coverage will (and to this point has been) be equivalent to a new game. Tcardone05 (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, the Campaign will not be using the Reach engine at all, it is the Combat Evolved engine with a new graphical engine developed by Saber Interactive running on top ( Secondly, Anniversary is not purely a CE remake given that it has Reach's multiplayer, it contains aspects from two titles. Details of this multiplayer were revealed at PAX. Either we ignore half the game, talk about Reach's multiplayer in-depth on the CE page, split the Anniversary coverage between the Reach page and the CE page, or give the game its own page. To me, the final option seems like the only sensible one, with links from this page and Reach's page to the Anniversary article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:29, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree Halo Combat Evolved may have the same HaloCE campaign(excluding the addition of in-game terminals and skulls) it has a entirely diffrent multiplayer similar to Reach not CE I belive we should make a seperate page for this article. GZ411 (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

It has the Reach multiplayer, it's not just similar. We aren't a fansite, so we don't have to go into depth about the same kind of things. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 21:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Removed unreferenced statement[edit]

Specifically, this one:

"In addition multiple ways have been found to change the appearance of Halo:Combat Evolved for your computer only without mods. Common applications of this include sightjacker, flycam and HMT 3.5. Some of these have been shunned by Halo communities due to the perception that these programs are cheating due to the advantage these programs can potentially give."

It seems a little non-notable to me, but I don't profess to being a Halo expert. If it is notable enough for inclusion, it still needs cleanup and sourcing. Comments?
ClayClayClay 10:40, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

It seems like a valid removal to me. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 11:52, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Updating Halo Anniversary section[edit]

This section should be updated since most of the info hasnt changed since June 2011 and most of the eligible info was realeased at the Penny Arcade Expo please update. GZ411 (talk) 19:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Reception section: Edge/EGM quote confusion[edit]

Both on this talk page and again much later in more detail here, I mentioned the concern that a phrase comparing Halo's multiplayer to that of GoldenEye 007 was cited to EGM but definitely appeared in Edge. It seemed likely that at some point during the course of the Halo article's editing, someone mixed up the Edge and EGM quotes. Since no-one's yet confirmed the EGM source, I've cited that quote to Edge alone.

Another reason the EGM reference needs to be checked: the EGM issue date is given as Jan 2001, but surely Halo was reviewed in the Jan 2002 issue? If that date's wrong, maybe the "[It] engages your intellect on a whole different level" quotation's wrong as well? And the other EGM quotation used in the article is "This game has me' totally mesmerized..." - if we quote a reviewer saying "me", shouldn't we give that reviewer's name? --Nick RTalk 14:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't really have any way to confirm so I think just cutting the comments might be in order. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 15:52, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[edit]

The three games in the series—Marathon (1994), Marathon 2: Durandal (1995), and Marathon Infinity (1996)—are widely regarded as spiritual predecessors of Bungie's Halo series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Halo:CE is Halo Custom Edition; Halo Combat Evolved is sometimes incorrectly referred to as such.[edit]

I have revised your edit, The1337gamer. Halo CE is incorrect; Halo CE is Halo Custom Edition, NOT, Halo Combat Evolved. A common and annoying error. Please don't revert the page again until it has been discussed here. WikiTyson (talk) 23:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Who refers to Custom Edition as Halo CE? Akdrummer75 (talk) 06:39, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Please provide reliable sources that agree with what you say before making this edit. The1337gamer (talk) 12:00, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
There are no sources at all saying that Halo Combat Evolved is referred to as Halo CE, so Halo:CE should not be used on the article. Halo:CE is Halo Custom Edition. I assume the developers themselves are a reliable enough source for that.WikiTyson (talk) 14:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
But CE is the obvious abbreviation of Combat Evolved. And publications have shortened Halo Combat Evolved to Halo CE. Examples: link, link2. I have no idea why you have changed it to Halo PC, it has been reverted, stop making unconstructive edits and discuss them if non-trivial. The1337gamer (talk) 15:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
In my opinion, the developers and publishers link [ are a more reliable source of information than some random news sites. Here, you can see that HaloCE, on the gearbox website (who developed Halo Custom Edition), refer to Halo Custom Edition as HaloCE. Various other sites also correctly refer to Halo Custom Edition as HaloCE, such as halomaps, and place77.

The developers of the game saying so should be enough to end this dispute, and that Halo:CE is halo Custom Edition, NOT Combat Evolved. WikiTyson (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

You keep making claims but you have yet to provide a reliable source saying that abbreviating Halo: Combat Evolved to Halo: CE is incorrect. Halo: CE can be abbreviated to either Halo: Combat Evolved or Halo: Custom Edition. There is nothing incorrect about abbreviating Halo: Combat Evolved to Halo: CE, and I have already provided reliable sources showing that Halo: Combat Evolved has been abbreviated to Halo: CE in articles. The1337gamer (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

You have not provided reliable sources, actually. is generally not a reliable source, and the IGN article supports my claims, because it explictly says bringing Halo:CE into a new decade, by this it means the engine, NOT the game. The remake uses Custom Edition's engine for gameplay, and that is what you where referring to. Being employed at 343 Industries, I know that I am correct in this aspect.
You have not provided any reliable sources to support your own claims, whereas I have. Please find reliable sources to support your claims.

WikiTyson (talk) 20:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC) is a reliable source. Gamesradar is also a reliable source, they also abbreviate combat evolved to CE. I don't understand how you incorrectly abbreviate two words, as you seem to think. The1337gamer (talk) 20:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The developers of said game have said themselves that Halo:CE is Custom Edition, not combat evolved. Naming combat evolved as such is incorrect. This is basic English, I don't see how you struggle to understand it. It may be because you are rather new to the wiki, I don't know. Also, that report also supports my claims, in the same way as before. Read carefully, they are referring to CE as the games engine, not the game itself. Two very different things. If you still struggle to understand the concept of incorrect abbreviations, think of it like this. Unpossible or Impossible? Same type of thing. WikiTyson (talk) 20:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Your argument is that because Custom Edition is abbreviated to CE, that Combat Evolved cannot be abbreviated to CE. Abbreviation can stand for multiple things, as it does in this case. It is not incorrect to abbreviate to Halo: Combat Evolved as Halo: CE because people actually abbreviate it like that. The1337gamer (talk) 21:13, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with 1337gamer on this point. In a recent vidoc Halo's own developers referred to Combat Evolved as CE. It's a common abbreviation, and more common than the usage for "Custom Edition" simply because the custom edition is not as widely known. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
On pc at least, the custom edition is much more widely known and more popular then the stock, for the reason that it allows custom maps. A simple internet search will prove this. I highly doubt that neither 343I nor bungie would refer to Evolved as such, so could you provide a link to that?WikiTyson (talk) 22:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC
At 3:53 in this video, Kiki Wolfkill, executive producer at 343 Industries refers back to the CE days, she is abbreviating this from Combat Evolved days, she is not referring to Custom Edition. The custom edition is merely an add on, it is not more widely known seeing as it requires the original game to play. The1337gamer (talk) 07:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Going to see that video. Custom Edition is not merely an add on, it is a separate game entirely. It does not require the original game, either. Don't know where on earth you got that idea from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiTyson (talkcontribs) 07:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Both Gamespot and IGN articles state that it requires an original retail key, hence an original copy of the game. It is not an adaption of the game, it is an add on or updated version for the PC that allows multiplayer mods and custom content. The1337gamer (talk) 07:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Still incorrect. It is a completely separate game. It requires a key, but not of an original retail game. Keys solely for custom edition can be bought, so your proposal that it requires the original game is incorrect. This is a separate game from Evolved, with no backward compatibility, and is heavily different from the original game, thus an adaption of the original. Being one of the developers of the game, I am 100% sure of this. Also, please cite the developers as source instead of articles. The Editing Kit was developed solely by Gearbox, not Bungie. Bungie used their own tools to develop the original halo. Gearbox developed their own, and thus the HEK. WikiTyson (talk) 07:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
You're writing all this stuff but you haven't provided any reliable sources. I am going by the IGN reference, which states that: "Halo Custom Edition should be considered a multiplayer expansion pack, as it requires an original Halo PC disc (and CD key) to install." and also it states that the HEK is from Bungie. The1337gamer (talk) 08:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
The Nintendo GameCube can be referred to as the "NGC" for short. It might not be the standard or most common way of shortening it, compared to "GCN" (at least, not in English speaking countries, as that article's first sentence explains). But the words do contain those three capitalised letters in that order, so it's not an incorrect way of referring to it.
Likewise, "Halo CE" is a correct way of referring to either "Combat Evolved" or "Custom Edition". The question is: is one of those two meanings at all non-standard? I'd say both are acceptable, even though in my experience "CE" usually refers to "Combat Evolved". (But then I only really have experience of the console version; someone more involved in modding communities might have encountered the latter more often.)
However, regardless of which is the most common meaning of "CE", in my opinion the text "sometimes incorrectly referred to as..." should not be included - commentary like that only serves to convolute the opening sentence. --Nick RTalk 18:53, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Move to 'Halo (video game)'?[edit] says that the games name is 'Halo'.[1] I thought 'Combat Evolved' is a slogan in the same way as 'Finish the Fight' is used in the phrase 'Halo 3: Finish the Fight'.[2] Shouldn't this be moved to 'Halo (video game)'? Regards, Rob (talk) 21:01, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

In fact, you may be in the correct. Per references, they refer to it as "Halo". Even if its current name is the official, WP:COMMONAME applies. Maybe you should use WP:RM. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:18, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
There are other official sources ([3], for instance) that refer to the game as Halo: Combat Evolved. Finish the Fight was a tagline for Halo 3, but Combat Evolved is a subtitle that may or may not be included in different contexts. WP:SUBTITLES makes allowance for subtitles in the case of "short titles, for disambiguation purposes". An analog to the situation here would be Orlando: A Biography, rather than Orlando (book). (Note that this issue was also discussed several years back, in Talk:Halo: Combat Evolved/Archive 4#Is "Combat Evolved" a subtitle or tagline?.) —TKD [talk][c] 02:24, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Inaccuracies in Setting[edit]

I can´t remember what expanded universe material revealed this (I think a novel), but Cortana actually used coordinates to get to Halo. So this is wrong ´The ship initiated a random jump to slipspace´. The fifth paragraph of this source explains how I don´t know if it´s a ´reliable source´ though. What follows is also wrong: ´hoping to lead the enemy away from Earth´. There´s no way they lead them away from Earth and the source used doesn´t exactly say that as the quote used can be interpreted in other ways. Edgth (talk) 01:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

The point of Cole Protocol is to lead the Covenant away from Earth by never directly jumping to a human world. As to your other point, while The Fall of Reach explains Cortana used coordinates derived from a Forerunner artifact, this is not actually presented in the game. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 02:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Well to avoid leading them to Earth, but it doesn´t lead them away from Earth. I would´ve thought that despite being outside the game, as canon it still belongs. For example, in the same section it give the reason for colonising other planets, but that´s not said in the game. Edgth (talk) 02:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I've removed "random" as part of a copyedit (the entire setting was in past tense unnecessarily per WP:WAF. I'm not sure I understand your point though; the goal of randomly jumping was to avoid leading the Covenant to Earth. They didn't lead them to Earth (they discovered Earth's coordinates another way) but that doesn't dispel the intent. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 17:23, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, avoid leading them to Earth, but that doesn´t lead them away from Earth. I was going to just change that, but I´m unsure of the wording. Because just saying that they made a jump to avoid leading them to Earth doesn´t make sense without the random bit. More detail may be needed of the coordinates that Cortana put in. But in a FA article it needs those complicated sources apparently. Btw, Halo Anniversary needs to be changed too.
On a related note, I feel like the sales figures need to be updated to 2013. I bet people reading that will be wondering what they are today, as the one given is nearly 8 years old. Although going for 5 million sales to 6.43 million in the last 8 years isn´t impressive, it seems strange to have it so out-of-date. Here´s the source that I used but it got reverted because it was a bare url - I´m not sure how to make it proper, as for example, I don´t know who the author is. Edgth (talk) 20:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
VGChartz isn't a reliable source for sales information. The1337gamer (talk) 20:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Ah, okay. I see that the sales are just for the Xbox platform anyway and total sales among all platforms would be better. Edgth (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


Not sure that the "TalkXbox" source (used once in the "Combatants" section) is reliable. Should be easy enough to replace, though. I am no longer watching this page—whisperback if you'd like a response czar  07:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


Is the pistol really not mentioned even once in the article? It's covered by plenty of sources as one of the most enduring legacies (or at least memories) of the game czar  17:16, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

GameSpy phaseout[edit]

Since the online service is being phased out, the article should be updated with something like czar  01:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Halo Custom Edition redirects to this page.[edit]

Why in the hell? --Adriano G. V. Esposito (talk) 16:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

It was merged into this article in 2008: Halo Custom Edition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Looks like it's been edited out since. The topic would need to meet the notability criteria to have its own article. czar  22:54, 7 June 2014 (UTC)