Halo 3 Recon only 3-5 hours long

By Robert Purchese Published 13 November, 2008

But price will reflect this, says Bungie.

The standalone expansion Halo 3 Recon may only be three-to-five hours long.

To offset this, Bungie will offer the game at a cut-down price, according to snippets from the upcoming Game Informer December magazine (spotted by Kotaku).

Halo 3 Recon, which was unveiled in October during the Tokyo Game Show, acts as a precursor to Halo 3. It casts players as an Orbital Drop Shock Trooper piecing together events after the Covenant left Earth.

Bungie has previously told us that Recon will have plenty of replayability in the form of Achievements and four-player co-op, plus new multiplayer maps and perhaps modes.

Other than that, details have been scarce. But what we do know is cobbled together tenderly on our Halo 3 Recon gamepage.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (67) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • insincere_dave #1 3 years ago

    I hope every level has The Flood in it.

  • mcmonkeyplc #2 3 years ago

    Damn right the price will reflect this!

  • miiiguel #3 3 years ago

    Bungie defining video-game history, once again.

    Bow before mighty Halo.

  • S.J.Rogers #4 3 years ago

    Bow's

  • redneon Verified Programmer, SUMO Digital #5 3 years ago

    Bow's what? I want to know what Bow has or what Bow is!

  • Kill_Crazy #6 3 years ago

    Bow's wob backwards.

  • Gnort #7 3 years ago

    I'm in. Shorter game at a cheaper price sounds good to me.

  • leftlion #8 3 years ago

    If that truly is the length then that is awful, i don't care what the price is! I bet that length includes cut scene videos as well. I think even games that just give 10 hours of game play are a rip off too.

  • krudster #9 3 years ago

    If only Quantum of Solace (4-5 hours) was budget priced, it might have scored higher.

  • HolyJebus #10 3 years ago

    Uh oh Krudster, you're opening a can of worms there I don't think you want to. Delete post. DELETE.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/08 @ 17:34

  • miiiguel #11 3 years ago

    I really don't care much (nowdays) with the size (hours-wise) of games. Rather prefer an extraordinary experience (Halo 3, f.e.) rather than a draging one, just for the sake of it.


    edit: and I really don't think a quality of a product depends on that. I mean, it can make sense to be short, or not.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/08 @ 17:39

  • Xerx3s #12 3 years ago

    "I hope every level has The Flood in it. "

    Considering the time and location: This will have no flood in it.

  • Stuz359 #13 3 years ago

    COD 4 was 4-5 hours long and that was full price

  • J.C #14 3 years ago

    3-5 hours? fuck that! dont know why bungie are bothering with this tbh.
    i wantz da proper halo 4 wiv teh flying /|\070RB1K35!

  • Xerx3s #15 3 years ago

    "If that truly is the length then that is awful, i don't care what the price is! I bet that length includes cut scene videos as well. I think even games that just give 10 hours of game play are a rip off too."

    What a stupid comment. If a film gives me about 90 minutes of entertainment for 11 euro, why can't a game that gives me about 300 minutes of entertainment (ex MP and stuff like that) be sold around 30 euro?

  • insincere_dave #16 3 years ago

    "Considering the time and location: This will have no flood in it. "

    Thank you! If anyone wants to have a really in depth chat about Halo time lines please send me a message!

  • Skurmedel #17 3 years ago

    The price surely will "reflect this", as in £35 instead of £43 or what.

  • optimusprym8 #18 3 years ago

    Gears 1 = 6 hours, Gears 2 = 8 hours, Halo 3 = 6 hours, Fable II = 6 hours... more and more games are high quality, less length, high price. Nothing unusual here no need to get on a high horse about it. Unless the price is gorged.

    NB. The times are what it took me to complete them, am not suggesting I know anything factually correct.

  • Jonathan_Fakenham #19 3 years ago

    COD 4 was 4-5 hours long and that was full price

    4-5 hours? I guess you didn't play it on veteran, then.
    Sure, every game is short if you run right through it on easy.

    But then again, I don't mind a short game really.
    You know what they say, "it's not the length that matters, it's the girth." :D
    Edited by 2 at 13/11/08 @ 18:00

  • drumbaby #20 3 years ago

    10/10 score then?

  • canoot #21 3 years ago

    3 hours,why bother,they can keep it.

  • DUFFKING #22 3 years ago

    I presume Valve shouldn't have bothered with Portal then either, canoot/

  • Yossarian #23 3 years ago

    "Gears 1 = 6 hours, Gears 2 = 8 hours, Halo 3 = 6 hours, Fable II = 6 hours... more and more games are high quality, less length, high price. Nothing unusual here no need to get on a high horse about it. Unless the price is gorged."

    Those numbers are surprising to me. I think my times for these were Gears 1 = 10 hours, Gears = 15 hours, and Fable II = 35 hours. And that's not including multiplayer for Gears 1/2. If I added up all the time I have spent playing Halo 3 including multiplayer, it would be several hundred hours, and probably more than everything else this generation added together.

  • phoenixology #24 3 years ago

    Surely if its only 4-5 hours long, then it may as well be a download from the marketplace as an update for Halo 3?

  • bad09 #25 3 years ago

    As long as the price is good enough I'll bite, H3 is an awesome game and this expansion will do until H4...

  • the_dudefather #26 3 years ago

    @optimusprym8

    Fable 2 in six hours? lol wut?

  • CreepinJesus #27 3 years ago

    Was Halo 3 much longer?

  • Zomoniac #28 3 years ago

    As everyone else has said, try and get a challenge out of games. I played through COD4 on veteran first time through, because I'm an achievement whore. Took me 15-20 hours and I bet I had a lot more fun playing through it than everyone who ran through it on easy in 6 hours, said they'd finished it and whined at how short it was. Same with Halo 3. 6 hours on easy, yes, on Legendary the Covenant level alone takes around 3 hours.

  • leftlion #29 3 years ago

    @Xerx3s

    "What a stupid comment. If a film gives me about 90 minutes of entertainment for 11 euro, why can't a game that gives me about 300 minutes of entertainment (ex MP and stuff like that) be sold around 30 euro?"

    Well, ignoring the idea that i think movies are over-priced anyway, you're not really making a fair comparison. If an average film is 90mins for 11 euro, this new halo game would be like a film giving you 5 mins for 11 euro. do you think that is worth it? and lets face it i bet it will just be halo 2 or 3 with just new characters/storyline.

    My point is a lot of games out there offer more length for your money. take some of the later zelda games on the wii or cube for example which can last 40+ hours. Even if bungie do lower the price of the game a bit I don't think it will really be worth the money.

  • DUFFKING #30 3 years ago

    By the way, I tried CoD 4 on veteran and thought it was probably about as much fun as having my own balls fed to me. Hardened FTW!

  • Gearskin #31 3 years ago

    If it's 19.99, with a brief campaign, coop options, new maps and online multiplayer options what exactly is the problem?

  • the_dudefather #32 3 years ago

    Yeah COD4 on Veteran was really not much run, I finished it, but it basically meant that I played most parts of the game over and over again until I got lucky enough to progress

    finished the epilogue was so satisfying though :)

  • el_pollo_diablo #33 3 years ago

    Hmmm. When any developer says "this game is between x and y hours long" you can bet it'll always be more x than y.

  • TRUTH #34 3 years ago

    Bungie put the effort and cost into a new IP or new Halo game, not a sub middle cash in!!!!.

  • TRUTH #35 3 years ago

    Fable story is about 8 to 9 hrs...But if you play the way it's meant, it can last over 15hrs+, all depending on your own decisions and style of play.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/08 @ 20:32

  • McGeeza #36 3 years ago

    Does that time include having to fight your way back through each level like in every other Halo game?

    /awaits arrival of the HDF

  • AtomicBanana #37 3 years ago

    Erm, every fps in the known world has backtracking :p

  • WinterSnowblind #38 3 years ago

    Fable can easily be finished in around 8 hours if you're playing through very quickly..

    But both my play throughs (with a good and an evil character) each lasted well over 30 hours. If you played through the game in less than 10, then you missed the entire point of it.

    5-6 hours for this does sound short, but this is only an expansion, after all. I can't think of many expansions that are any longer.

  • Skurmedel #39 3 years ago

    DUFFKING, Portals price is probably a fraction of Halo Recons price.

    So no, Portals release was great, but it had a price that really reflected what you got.

  • dsmx #40 3 years ago

    Well at least they're dropping the price don't see EA doing the same with Mirrors Edge which is about the same length.

  • Xerx3s #41 3 years ago

    "Gears 1 = 6 hours, Gears 2 = 8 hours, Halo 3 = 6 hours, Fable II = 6 hours... "

    Sorry but that made me laugh. If you just play games on the easiest difficulty so you can rush through them, why bother at all?

  • Xerx3s #42 3 years ago

    "you're not really making a fair comparison. If an average film is 90mins for 11 euro, this new halo game would be like a film giving you 5 mins for 11 euro. do you think that is worth it?"

    0_o

    ....

    o_0

  • Xerx3s #43 3 years ago

    "DUFFKING, Portals price is probably a fraction of Halo Recons price.

    So no, Portals release was great, but it had a price that really reflected what you got. "

    Where does this assumption come from that this won't be the case with HR?

  • Super_Zee #44 3 years ago

    Excellent news. Shorter, cheaper (boxed) games are the way forward.

  • daz_john_smith #45 3 years ago

    "3-5hrs", myself and 2 of my friends finished Halo 3 in under 6hrs on co-op when it launched and we certainly weren't rushing. I think 5hrs based on the length of Halo 3 is optomistic, 3hrs sounds more likely.

  • Charlie_Miso #46 3 years ago

    I completed Halo 1.

  • muscleblade #47 3 years ago

    @Yossarian

    Good point. I have never played a so called 8-10 hour game only 8-10 hours. I usually complete the camapaigns on both normal and the hardest difficulty and spend a lot of time in mp aswell. Except for a few games ive borrowed from the store i usually spend atleast 20 hours on most games. 3-5 hours sounds good to me.

  • muscleblade #48 3 years ago

    Btw. I completed Mass Effect on hardcore in 4,5 hours LOL. Very fun. I will do the same on insane when i find the time.
    You might call Mass Effect a 5 hour game too. Depends on how you play it.

  • muscleblade #49 3 years ago

    "Bungie has previously told us that Recon will have plenty of replayability in the form of Achievements and four-player co-op, plus new multiplayer maps and perhaps modes."

    Sounds like a 20hour+ game to me.

  • menage #50 3 years ago

    Anyone rushing through Fable 2 in 6 hours clearly should be playing other games.

  • JahB #51 3 years ago

    price will reflect this? lots of games these days are 3-5 hours long, most recent example being mirror's edge.

    it would be great if the price could be tied to game-length by default, anything with less than ten hours shouldn't be allowed a full price tag

  • godfatherobie #52 3 years ago

    So it's gonna be £40 then...

    Afterall Halo 3 only lasted me 5 hours,

  • mazzl #53 3 years ago

    @potatofan
    it took me well into 30 hours to complete fable2

    ontopic: i thing shorter games can be good, at a reduced price point, devs take less risk,thus so more room for innovation. and i don't have that much time to play games annyway.

  • Xerx3s #54 3 years ago

    ""3-5hrs", myself and 2 of my friends finished Halo 3 in under 6hrs on co-op when it launched and we certainly weren't rushing. I think 5hrs based on the length of Halo 3 is optomistic, 3hrs sounds more likely."

    Sorry but I call BS on that.

    EDIT:

    "3-5 hours is longer than Halo 3.

    If they think its only a short game (and halo 3 is a 'full' game) then I expect Recon to be over in 45 minutes. "

    This is just hilarious.
    Edited by 1 at 14/11/08 @ 09:41

  • mechamonkey #55 3 years ago

    I would buy more games if they were shorter and cheaper.

  • muscleblade #56 3 years ago

    At 3-5 hours i easily pay full price for it. Games are too cheap these days anyway. Not as cheap as many gamers mind.
    The NES cartridges from the 80s was actually more expensive than games these days.

  • whome #57 3 years ago

    "COD 4 was 4-5 hours long and that was full price "

    yeah but Halo 3 was 20 minutes long.

    oh wait, that's how long I played it for before realising all I wanted to do was trade it in.
    Edited by 1 at 14/11/08 @ 10:16

  • Colin8703 #58 3 years ago

    Who gives a shit about the length. It's all about the new multiplayer maps surely. COD 4 may have been short but how much play have you had from multiplayer? Likewise with Halo.

    With a game like Halo, the campaign is a very small part of the package so I don't even know why people are banging on about the length of the single player..

  • BillyBrush #59 3 years ago

    some people like singleplayer & 4 player co op the most, i know i do

  • crazyhorse174 #60 3 years ago

    I think people are just using this thread as an excuse to boast about how quickly they've finished games in their collection...

  • Petulant_Radish #61 3 years ago

    Anyone who steams through their games purely for the fact of garnering a higher gamerscore or trophies without actually sitting back to enjoy every facet that a game can give you (I am fully aware that this does not necessarily apply to all games) shouldn’t really be bothered about how long a game is anyway. Personally I like to take my time, just like I do with lots of other things, like making tea.

  • miiiguel #62 3 years ago

    Now that I have a house of my own I don't do "quickies" anymore, they're not cool, believe me.

    I normally play every game at least 20 hours. Then again, I have a deep respect for the work of those guys (most), and I never rush to the end, ever. I like to see everything, do everything, even sightseeing.

    There's a part of the community that digs that "speed run" stuff, maybe that's your thing. Take a look, for example: [link url=http://www.vortiginous.co m/
    ]http://www.vortiginous.co m/
    [/link]

    It's the "ownage/pwnage/omg I'm so l33t" crew...

  • Vic #63 3 years ago

    It was funny to hear so many people bitching about GT Prologue saying 'But its only a demo'...but now they say 3 hours is fine for £20...

  • captainrentboy #64 3 years ago

    I think people are just using this thread as an excuse to boast about how quickly they've finished games in their collection...

    Not me, I'm renowned amongst my friends as being the one who takes facking yonks to finish almost every game. I've just got onto the third act in GOW2, everyone else I know had finished it by Sunday :)
    I like to savour my games, especially if they've had a lot of work put into them, I like to see all the sights and shit like that.
    Fable 2 in 6 hours sounds like absolute crazy talk, soooo much game content must've been missed to do it that fast, seems a bit daft to me, especially after paying £40 :/

  • Slipstream #65 3 years ago

    What's Halo?

  • subtlesnake #66 3 years ago

    "Unlike Bungie, EA are actually pushing an original product with unique selling point. Soon Bungie will be paying us to keep buying generic Halo.

    Who'd ever have thought EA would be praised for original output? Bungie could take a few lessons at this point. "

    Bungie are working on an original IP. It's just that when Microsoft took the Peter Jackson Halo game in-house, they had a small team left over, so they decided to put that team to work on this Halo expansion.

  • $olokid #67 3 years ago

    Who the heck doesn't know who Halo is Slipstream? Tell me who? well, apparently you.