Jump to content

Talk:Halo Studios

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:343 Industries)

Comments

[edit]

I'm basically the founder of this article, just letting everyone know, cause I'm special, and yeah...no need to thank me 343, I'll take that job as wikipedia article editor.Nex Carnifex (talk) 02:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have the logo, I just can't upload it. Can someone else? I found it here. Uploader49 (talk) 11:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Employees

[edit]

So I just checked the source for the number of employees and the source cites 450 and not 750 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2800:4000:1100:842B:2DD7:F279:D70D (talk) 04:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. This was apparently vandalized last year. Should be fixed now. IceWelder [✉] 07:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

I don't see how this thing isn't notable, it's the future producer of the triple A Halo franchise, and this has been confirmed. If you go to there website you can see they're already hiring.NexCarnifex (talk) 22:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it isn't produced a Halo game to date yet, but it's notable because it will be making it into the future though. IRWolfie- (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it had, but the fact it will makes it notable.Nex Carnifex (talk) 21:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone hear anything about their next project?

[edit]

We should add something about speculation of their next project, and it can be updated from there. I come to Wikipedia to keep up to date with things like this, but that includes the speculation in the news. Nex Carnifex (talk) 14:16, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, as 343i has not stated a single bit about their 10-year anniversary events other than the fact that they will have one, its pointless to have any information on the article leading people to believe that there will be a game out on that day. While the likeliness of such information is popular and wanted, its nonetheless unofficial. The only game-related content that should be added is the fact that they've been hiring for game developer positions on an unnamed and unannounced title. Tonster (talk)

Should Halo Waypoint have a section in this article?

[edit]

I think it deserves a solid paragraph about it on Wikipedia, maybe not an entire article, but this page also should be the redirect for Halo Waypoint, it would just make more sense. Nex Carnifex (talk) 01:09, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We could certainly use more references

[edit]

There are tons of articles about 343 on Google News, if anyone has the time you could reference this article much better.Nex Carnifex (talk) 13:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Current Projects section

[edit]

Should the current projects section be titled that? Because most, if not all of the stuff in that section currently are old projects, and I don't see Halo V anywhere in current projects.

2014 Game

[edit]

I just edited the 2014 game section of the table; there is currently no evidence for the 2014 game being anything related to "Halo 5". Most evidence in fact points to it being Halo 2 Anniversary (patents, interviews etc.). I don't think conjecture has a place here, that's all.

Regards, Sam. Samcooke343 (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Master Chief Collection in the "developed by 343" category?

[edit]

When looking at the companies that worked on the collection, is it really accurate to say that 343 developed it? It would seem more fitting in the "contributed" category, as 3 out of the 4 games were made by Bungie, the remastered Halo: CE and Halo 2 campaigns were done by Sabre, Halo 2A cutscenes by Blur, the interface was done by United Front, the remastered Halo 2 multiplayer done by Certain Affinity, and the Halo 3 and 4 ports done by Ruffian. The amount of work that 343 would have done is far less than an actual developed game, and seems far more fitting with "contributed". Xl.Sean (talk) 11:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Master Chief Collection as a whole has to have a primary developer, and it wouldn't be fitting to say Bungie, Blur, Sabre, or any other company. While a lot of that work wasn't done specifically by 343i, that doesn't change the fact that they were the head of the project and are cited as the primary developer in reliable sources. I understand where you're coming from, but I think it is well-documented in the game article who contributed to each piece that makes up the collection, and that's really where that information (or controversy from your perspective) belongs. Here we are giving credit to the studio that released the game, regardless if they merely delegated a lot of the work. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Gone here. "Developed" can be a very precise or very broad role, and in this case 343 oversaw the entire project and championed it to fruition, even if many of its constituent parts were produced by other companies. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see where you guys are coming from. Maybe it would work in the notes for the Master Chief Collection, something like "The collection was also a culmination of work from a multitude of studios." That would still add in that it was not completely from one company while not detracting from the overall subject, and much like how the other games have similar notes. Xl.Sean (talk) 11:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine with that. Cross out "also" and add "including 343i who oversaw the project's overall development" or something along those lines. --GoneIn60 (talk) 04:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added the line in. Xl.Sean (talk) 07:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

343 doesn't care about community

[edit]

They only answer to Microsoft and its shareholders... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.150.209 (talk) 00:29, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected edit request on 20 June 2017

[edit]

A protected redirect, Halo Waypoint, needs redirect category (rcat) templates added, which will remove the redirect from Category:Miscellaneous redirects. Please modify it as follows:

  • from this:
#REDIRECT [[343 Industries]]

{{rcat shell}}
  • to this:
#REDIRECT [[343 Industries]]

{{Redirect category shell|
{{R from subtopic}}
{{R printworthy}}
}}
  • WHEN YOU COPY & PASTE, PLEASE LEAVE THE SKIPPED LINE BLANK FOR READABILITY.

The {{Redirect category shell}} template is used to sort redirects into one or more categories. When {{pp-protected}} and/or {{pp-move}} suffice, the Redirect category shell template will detect the protection level(s) and categorize the redirect automatically. (Also, the categories will be automatically removed or changed when and if protection is lifted, raised or lowered.) Thank you in advance!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  16:01, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — xaosflux Talk 02:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated, xaosflux!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  12:17, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 343 Industries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 22 June 2017 (UTC) –  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  12:59, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

[edit]

This article is the subject of an educational assignment supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Division or subsidiary?

[edit]

Hello everyone, I’m finding conflicting information about the status of this studio. Are we sure that 343 is a division and not a subsidiary like most other XGS studios? Thank you in advance. PaulUsuloo (talk) 19:49, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simple: If it doesn't have a separate corporate entity, it is a division of an existing entity. This is the case here. IceWelder [✉] 07:46, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 October 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Speedy move. There is a wide consensus of support for moving the article to Halo Studios, a consensus that doesn't seem likely to shift. (non-admin closure) - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 15:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

343 Industries → Halo Studios – 343 Industries has recently changed its official name to Halo Studios. While the current common name is 343 Industries, news outlets are beginning to use Halo Studios instead.
1. https://www.ign.com/articles/future-halo-games-moving-to-unreal-engine-as-developer-343-industries-officially-changes-its-name "Future Halo Games Moving to Unreal Engine 5 as 343 Industries Rebrands, 'Multiple Projects' in Development"
2. https://www.thegamer.com/multiple-new-halo-games-in-development-343-industries-halo-studios-microsoft-xbox-gaming ""Multiple" New Halo Games In Development" CitrusHemlock 02:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. TheGamer article in particular already goes to using Halo Studios like you said, so it becoming the common name is evident. DarkRevival(Talk / Contributions) 06:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. YannickFran (talk) 09:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. It appears they're now exclusively using Halo Studios instead of 343 Industries, and the halowaypoint.com website has now been updated to reflect this. --213.105.55.130 (talk) 14:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Napalm Fire (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Does this really need a discussion? Seems like a pretty uncontroversial move. Speedy move, please. IceWelder [✉] 15:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, not many companies that change their name have their old name remain the common name. The only recent example that comes to mind is Twitter and that was a botched job from Twitter. Especially for a company where the name is not the same as the product, this shouldn't have required a discussion. YannickFran (talk) 17:06, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Their website shows they have already changed the name of the studio Ryan York (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, and per 343industries.com redirecting to their new name. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 18:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and suggest this discussion be speedy closed, as I seriously doubt there'll be any objections. RadiculousJ (talk) 20:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Magnificianttimemachinelight (talk) 00:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Overwhelming support already, seems there's hardly any room for debate here. Speedy move territory, even. RadiantTea (talk) 00:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The studio changed its name less than two days ago, and the two sources given above refer to the name change and use both names together. This is likely to indicate that the new name is not yet commonly recognizable under WP:NAMECHANGES, although our determination of this should be based on a preponderance of sources actually using the new title, not a small number of examples that are reporting on the studio's rebranding announcement. (There are also articles from yesterday that report on the studio's new development plans without using or reporting on the name change.) Clearly there is significant support for this move request, but whether the studio itself has altered its website is not the standard for changing an article title, and for that matter we do not necessarily use official names (WP:OFFICIAL). When participating in these types of move discussions, please try to base comments on policies and guidelines. Dekimasuよ! 00:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That feels like cherry picking a source. It ignores the fact that that same source wrote an article about the rebrand minutes later and then another few minutes later posted another article referring to the studio only as "Halo Studios". A source splitting one announcement up in 3 different articles to maximize their ad revenue shouldn't influence the decision making here.
Also, neither of the above mentioned sources use Halo Studios and 343 industries interchangeably? The "The Gamer" article only mentions "343 Industries" in their sentences about how the name changes, while the IGN article does the same and once refers to the studio as "the studio formerly known as 343 Industries" but otherwise both articles consistently refer to the studio as "Halo Studios". There are plenty more reliable sources that consistently call it Halo Studios as well. Of the examples below, only Polygon and Engadget ever refer to the studio as "343 Industries" after discussing the rebrand and only ever in the context of past events where it is logical to use an older name.
  1. https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/7/24264129/halo-unreal-engine-5-halo-studios-announcement
  2. https://www.polygon.com/halo/461480/halo-studios-343-indurstries-reboot-unreal-engine
  3. https://www.engadget.com/gaming/halo-developer-343-industries-rebrands-itself-to-halo-studios-120041943.html?guccounter=1
  4. https://venturebeat.com/games/microsofts-343-industries-rebrands-as-halo-studios-adopts-unreal-engine/
Recent examples with game studios that come to mind are Nintendo Cube last month and Arc Games earlier this year. This issue is very reminiscent over the Facebook to Meta discussion and Google to Alphabet discussion. YannickFran (talk) 07:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Prior move

[edit]

Hello, Halo Waypoint redirects to 343 Industries (redirect to this page) with the recent move a double redirect has been left. (Halo Waypoint is fully protected, so the bot cannot fix it, talk says discussion should occur here) Geardona (talk to me?) 11:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That page has been fully protected since... 2010?! And judging by the edit history, not for a good reason. The protection should be lowered if not removed. IceWelder [✉] 12:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the redirect. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, as for @IceWelder, Wikipedia:RFPP/D. Geardona (talk to me?) 00:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
David Fuchs already fixed the protection level :) IceWelder [✉] 13:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Halo_Studios&oldid=1250611534"