Support NeoGAF

[StalkerUKCG]

I don't *need* 60fps, but I think its a fair expectation for a remastered game from 10 years ago. But if it can't even be locked to 30fps? That'd be tragic.

The graphically overlay likely has a very detrimental effect on the framerate, that and it running an entire other engine in the background. Not many console games are running at 60fps or even 30fps locked. it is tragic but unfortunately not always avoidable and for me at least hardly ever has a major negative effect on the game

 

[NullPointer]

The graphically overlay likely has a very detrimental effect on the framerate, that and it running an entire other engine in the background. Not many console games are running at 60fps or even 30fps locked. it is tragic but unfortunately not always avoidable and for me at least hardly ever has a major negative effect on the game

While unfortunately true, I think its fair to hold remastered versions of last gen games to a higher standard, especially considering the remastered versions and remakes we've seen this gen. If the performance for Anniversary isn't locked at 30fps then the niche that this game was meant to satisfy is only getting smaller and smaller.

I really do hope they can at the very least lock it at 30fps. Otherwise I honestly don't see the point, and I've wanted a remaster/remake for a long time now.

 

[thezerofire]

Standoff was good, while not great. But anything with AR starts in Halo 3 was generally bad. In Reach it's a better because of the Pistol, at least.

it could have been a lot better if the spawns weren't so awful, or there was more anti-vehicle weaponry. if you had decent people nading the hogs, it literally did become a standoff with people BR-ing from behind rocks and hiding when they got hit.

 

[Kibbles]

If we were getting the original I was hoping for 60fps, but with the new graphics layer that probably won't happen. I don't see why it can't be 30fps locked though.

 

[StalkerUKCG]

While unfortunately true, I think its fair to hold remastered versions of last gen games to a higher standard, especially considering the remastered versions and remakes we've seen this gen. If the performance for Anniversary isn't locked at 30fps then the niche that this game was meant to satisfy is only getting smaller and smaller.

I really do hope they can at the very least lock it at 30fps. Otherwise I honestly don't see the point, and I've wanted a remaster/remake for a long time now.

For me the point is to replay halo 1 in an non scaled HD resolution with that amazing graphical overlay. Im a sucker for halo and id buy it without the 7 multiplayer maps, hell ill be getting the SE if there is one.

While id love it to have more things im happy with what we are getting now, no real issues and the reduced price is a added bonus.

I hope to god they do it with halo 2 for its 10th birthday with the multiplayer component intact. while i dont hold the halo 2 sp in as high regard as halo ce the mp was nothing short of outstanding, it didnt have the clutter of halo 3 and beyond and while flawed (bxb bxr rrx ect) it played really well and is still one of the best online experiences iv had to date even after iv sunk countless hours into halo 3 and reach

 

[Striker]

The bigger question is how will they handle the netcode. With Halo 3 and Reach's campaign coding, it hasn't been for the best endeavors. I'm guessing there's no search for co-op MM, either.

 

[StalkerUKCG]

The bigger question is how will they handle the netcode. With Halo 3 and Reach's campaign coding, it hasn't been for the best endeavors. I'm guessing there's no search for co-op MM, either.

Halo reach netcode was more than playable.

 

[Striker]

Halo reach netcode was more than playable.

They were playable, but I thought it still had a little ways. It was far better than what we had for Halo 3 campaign netcode, for sure.

I just want no chugging during checkpoints or cut-scenes.

 

[thezerofire]

They were playable, but I thought it still had a little ways. It was far better than what we had for Halo 3 campaign netcode, for sure.

I just want no chugging during checkpoints or cut-scenes.

Firefight netcode is pretty awful

 

[MrBig]

The bigger question is how will they handle the netcode. With Halo 3 and Reach's campaign coding, it hasn't been for the best endeavors. I'm guessing there's no search for co-op MM, either.

This was a team from 343 doing the coding, and they said they are using the MP Reach code as a base rather than the synchronous model. No way to tell what the results will be for now.

 

[ido]

In the grand scheme of things, not I doubt a very big percentage of Halo 1 players lugged their shit around for LAN parties, or bothered with XBConnect. I'm a hardcore Halo player and have been since I first climbed into a warthog, and my Halo 1 playtime was at least 10 to 1 campaign > multiplayer. But I should also say that 90% of my campaign playtime was co-op. I understand in a place like a GAF forum you have more hardcore users that game a lot more and go to greater lengths to partake in their offline multiplayer, but Halo 1 for me and probably for most people is about the campaign. It's what made masterchief a staple character in the videogame landscape.

I somewhat disagree. The truth would be impossible to truly know, but I think there is evidence to show that the multiplayer of Halo was what gave the series it's popularity. The main example would be number of people on Halo 2 multiplayer as soon as the game was released. Most of these people, I would wager, were craving for this online multiplayer experience of Halo, and the numbers prove it. I cannot prove that all or most of these people played the first game, but it's a pretty good assumption to say that most did. Later on, once Halo 2's popularity online really soared, obviously word of mouth convinced a great number of people to finally experience Halo for the first time.

Either way, it's senseless for us to even argue. We both agree that both aspects of Halo(SP/MP) are important, and both have a rabid fanbase, and both sell the shit out of games. I'm just sore that the campaign fans finally get to relive their CE experience in updated HD-glory, and the MP fans get jack shit in the way of CE multiplayer. It's just a little disheartening is all.

Oh and as for my take on the series, I found the first game to be the most enjoyable, and arguably the most balanced. Power weapons were extremely powerful, and every weapon(sans the needler) was deadly. Sure, the pistol was amazing and that was the go-to weapon for damn near everyone, but it could be beaten, and it was amazingly fun to use. The shotgun from CE was amazing... at almost mid-range(I exaggerate) it was a one-shot kill. The AR from CE was the best AR to date. The plasma rifle from CE was the best plasma rifle to date. The sniper rifle was the best to date, argued only by the swipe-sniping rifle of Halo 2, imo. Rockets were the fastest and best rockets of any Halo game to date. The grenades have still never felt better than they did in CE.

And to think, we'll never get any of that on Live...

 

[StalkerUKCG]

While i understand and im not overly hurt by lack of multiplayer as the last thing that a game like reach needs now is 30+ % of its population swanning of to CE i do think local multiplayer would of been nice. or even just port all the MP maps into firefight for reach so we can at least see them all in hd glory. Obviously 19 maps would of been alot to do but i think it would be worth it, reach is in desperate need of more big maps and firefight maps hopefully both problems are fixed with the new 7.


Wishlist

Sidewinder
Lockout ( didnt they say 1 h2 map?)
Hang em High
Damnation
Timberland
Beaver Creek

PoA Engine Room (Firefight)
Bridge Area from AotCR (Firefight)
Swamp (Firefight) (since it looks sexy)

 

[ido]

While i understand and im not overly hurt by lack of multiplayer as the last thing that a game like reach needs now is 30+ % of its population swanning of to CE i do think local multiplayer would of been nice.

I'm just not sure why this would even matter? Reach already pulls pretty damn amazing numbers... It's not as if it would be hard to find someone to play against in either game if it were released. I still play Marvel vs. Capcom 2 and I have no problems finding an opponent... I'm pretty sure Reach would not suffer as badly as you think it would. And isn't it strange that it is worrisome to people that say CE multiplayer would take away huge numbers from Reach? Surely, subconsciously, everyone knows that CE was better, for why else would you fear a mass Reach exodus? lol.

Calm down.

 

[StalkerUKCG]

I'm just not sure why this would even matter? Reach already pulls pretty damn amazing numbers... It's not as if it would be hard to find someone to play against in either game if it were released. I still play Marvel vs. Capcom 2 and I have no problems finding an opponent... I'm pretty sure Reach would not suffer as badly as you think it would. And isn't it strange that it is worrisome to people that say CE multiplayer would take away huge numbers from Reach? Surely, subconsciously, everyone knows that CE was better, for why else would you fear a mass Reach exodus? lol.

Calm down.

Reach numbers arnt that amazing, 100,000 online at any one time is small time for a halo title splitting your audiance between 4 games isnt a good option either, its not just reach but h2v and h3 that are pulling players away, not to mention the black ops behemoth.

Personally im not a fan of CE multiplayer Halo 2 was the MP for me, but anything that means you have less people playing your game isnt a good thing.

Like it or not the majority of gamers wouldnt really be attracted to playing multiplayer from 2001 anyway, its a scenario where effort most certainly would not be worth the reward.

The best thing from a community, a publish and a developer stand point is for reach to run to 2012 as the multiplayer game and to wait for H4

 

[ido]

The best thing from a community, a publish and a developer stand point is for reach to run to 2012 as the multiplayer game and to wait for H4

I admit I know nothing of the numbers for Reach, but a few people in this thread made mention that they were good and I took their word for it.

Regardless, I disagree. I am not interested in what the developer and publisher think is the best idea, and I do not think the Reach community would suffer from CE getting its own MP. You say people still play Halo 3... that is because they do like approve of Reach. Can you not see why we want CE? We do not approve of Reach! I speak for the people who share my opinion, obviously.

 

[MrBig]

PoA Engine Room (Firefight)
Bridge Area from AotCR (Firefight)
Swamp (Firefight) (since it looks sexy)

You're not going to see flood in firefight (unless it's implemented as a hazard) because there are no calls for it in the gametype.

My guesses for the firefight map:

The first dropship area from Halo
Silent Cartographer beach
The first ground battle of AotCR/The last ground area of Two Betrayals (same area) with flood hazards

 

[StalkerUKCG]

I admit I know nothing of the numbers for Reach, but a few people in this thread made mention that they were good and I took their word for it.

Regardless, I disagree. I am not interested in what the developer and publisher think is the best idea, and I do not think the Reach community would suffer from CE getting its own MP. You say people still play Halo 3... that is because they do like approve of Reach. Can you not see why we want CE? We do not approve of Reach! I speak for the people who share my opinion, obviously.

Yeah and your essentially the vocal minority no disrespect intended,
Alot of people still play halo 3 because they simply didnt buy reach ill admit maybe 20,000 returned to halo 3 , but putting in mutliple years of hard work to add multiplayer to a game thats going to be replaced by halo 4 in 2012 is crazy, its not like call of duty where the engine and multiplayer is the same your adding a whole online multiplayer portion to a game that didnt have it originally not to mention creating new textures and models for at least 12 multiplayer maps.

If your one of the people that dosnt like reachs multiplayer that's fine but you have halo 3 and halo 2 vista aswell as halo ce pc to be playing multiplayer on if you dont want to play reach's.

The request for multiplayer in CEA simply isnt reasonable, it would of pushed CEA back to 2012 if they tried to add it and in that scenario you would of had a game out max 11 month before its replaced.

 

[godhandiscen]

Any chance of this being 60fps at all?

If not, any chance of it being a LOCKED 30fps?

Considering they are improving the lighting in Reach, there is a high chance they got the performance down.

If we were getting the original I was hoping for 60fps, but with the new graphics layer that probably won't happen. I don't see why it can't be 30fps locked though.

Maybe it has to do with the fact the gameplay engine was designed for 30fps?

 

[MrBig]

Considering they are improving the lighting in Reach, there is a high chance they got the performance down.

Don't expect much better than 30fps.
It's having the console run two virtual machines. And no it's not using the Reach engine, it's whatever Saber built for it using their own stuff.

 

[Pudding Tame]

What do you guys need campaign theater for? I don't think I have ever used it.

You've never had an awesome one-in-a-million type moment in a Halo game that you wanted to save just to have proof that it happened?

And you can use it to take pretty pictures too.

 

[soulassssns]

This sucks! I'll be deploying within a couple weeks of the release of this. Probably just wait until I return...

 

[Deputy Moonman]

Reach numbers arnt that amazing, 100,000 online at any one time is small time for a halo title splitting your audiance between 4 games isnt a good option either, its not just reach but h2v and h3 that are pulling players away, not to mention the black ops behemoth.

Personally im not a fan of CE multiplayer Halo 2 was the MP for me, but anything that means you have less people playing your game isnt a good thing.

Like it or not the majority of gamers wouldnt really be attracted to playing multiplayer from 2001 anyway, its a scenario where effort most certainly would not be worth the reward.

The best thing from a community, a publish and a developer stand point is for reach to run to 2012 as the multiplayer game and to wait for H4

Reach numbers aren't that great because the game has too many issues. I really get tired of this weird argument that the best thing for Reach is for it to last another year or 2. And the best thing for gamers is to not be stuck playing a game they don't like. I'm not interested in supporting a dud. Why should I be?

And this statement is coming completely out of your butt:

Like it or not the majority of gamers wouldnt really be attracted to playing multiplayer from 2001 anyway, its a scenario where effort most certainly would not be worth the reward.

How could you even pretend to know this? And it completely contradicts your argument that coming out with Halo:CE matchmaking would pull too many people from the Reach player base.
Your post...

 

[StalkerUKCG]

The simple fact is its not coming, all arguments aside its pretty late in development and its not going to be pushed back to add multiplayer support for the vocal few so talking about the issue is redundant.

You misread or maybe i portrayed my points badly, Right now we have something that looks like this

Halo Reach 700,000 active players
Halo 3 100,000 - 200,000 active players
Halo 2 Vista 12 in GFWL Charts, 10,000 players
Halo CE PC 165 active players currently,

The time and effort required to add a working balanced multiplayer to H:CEA would of pushed the game back into 2012, The same year that Halo 4 Launches which will be 343's first true solo endeavour into multiplayer.

In less that 18 months your splitting the market twice, H:CEA wont have the sales performance of something like Halo 4, its going to do better than ODST but i dont think its going to be that big of a seller,

Even if it does perform very well all that hard work is going into a multiplayer thats gunna be replaced less than 12 month after shipping.

I said the majority of players wouldnt be attracted to Halo 1 multiplayer, it would still splinter the userbase which wants to avoided at all costs or both groups of players will suffer.

Okay maybe you dont want to keep playing reach, i do and so do 700,000 other people. No one is forcing you to play it, if you want to play halo 1 grab a 360 controller and go play the pc version.

Halo CEA is a side title nothing more, its not even a full remake of CE just a graphical overlay. Its another "ODST" title. something for the fans to bridge the gap before halo 4 and to make a quick buck for M$.

 

[nVidiot_Whore]

700,000 other people

700,000 is just the number of people in the last 24 hours as well.

Wonder how often the "average" person plays?

Do they have a "unique Halo Reach players in last 7 days"? That would be a better stat.. or maybe monthly, but over time, to measure trend.

 

[ido]

Even if it does perform very well all that hard work is going into a multiplayer thats gunna be replaced less than 12 month after shipping.

Who says it would be replaced? Why does Halo 4 mean I have to stop playing CE?

I said the majority of players wouldnt be attracted to Halo 1 multiplayer, it would still splinter the userbase which wants to avoided at all costs or both groups of players will suffer.

Having two games to pick from does not equal suffering, imo. Plenty of people to go around on Live for all of them.

Okay maybe you dont want to keep playing reach, i do and so do 700,000 other people. No one is forcing you to play it, if you want to play halo 1 grab a 360 controller and go play the pc version.

You have apparently never played the PC version with a controller... It does not work. Well, it does, but it does not control movement the same.

Halo CEA is a side title nothing more, its not even a full remake of CE just a graphical overlay. Its another "ODST" title. something for the fans to bridge the gap before halo 4 and to make a quick buck for M$.

Thank you for summing that up... What WE are saying is, fuck that, we want CE Multiplayer. We are the consumers still, right?

 

[godhandiscen]

Don't expect much better than 30fps.
It's having the console run two virtual machines. And no it's not using the Reach engine, it's whatever Saber built for it using their own stuff.

No, I am not expecting 60fps, but a locked 30fps.

 

[Photolysis]

I don't *need* 60fps, but I think its a fair expectation for a remastered game from 10 years ago. But if it can't even be locked to 30fps? That'd be tragic.

If they changed it to work at 60FPS, that would mean having to redo every single tag in the game, and could create a huge amount of bugs which would not be easily fixable.

 

[Blue Ninja]

What do you guys need campaign theater for? I don't think I have ever used it.

Who likes taking screenshots and film clips anyways, huh.

 

[squidhands]

Firefight netcode is pretty awful

Maybe for people outside of the US, but I play gobs of Firefight and find the netcode to be great with few exceptions. Framerate on the maps take a serious nosedive during the bonus rounds, but I rarely have problems getting my shots to land where I want them.

 

[The Real Napsta]

I really want a stable framerate on the 6 new competitive MP maps. Condemned and Highlands have serious framerate issues.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Who likes taking screenshots and film clips anyways, huh.

I would add: the 9(2nd) Halo 3 screenshot thread, and the Reach screenshot thread.

It's a beloved feature.

I hope the trims to theater and co-op over the past few Halo games are not a sign of things to come. Since Halo 3:

Reach cut party viewing of films (was four players online, now solo).

CEA cut out theater entirely, reduced co-op players to two from four.

CEA's changes are most likely driven by the nature of the package and I'm hopeful Halo 4 returns to form.

 

[Treythalomew]

I'd settle for a good 30 fps in Reach if they could. I played the stock Sanctuary remake for the first time in a long time and couldn't believe they hadn't fixed the sniper framerate drops when aimming into the middle ring.

 

[MrBig]

If they changed it to work at 60FPS, that would mean having to redo every single tag in the game, and could create a huge amount of bugs which would not be easily fixable.

I can load up Halo PC and run it at well over 100 fps right now. It's a limitation imposed by 6 year old harware and having it run in a virtual machine from 10 years ago (assuming they didn't port it to 360).

 

[The Elite]

You've never had an awesome one-in-a-million type moment in a Halo game that you wanted to save just to have proof that it happened?

I haven't played in a long time but I'm dying to go home and play tonight because of this pic. The shit that can happen in a Halo game is crazy.

 

[The Librarian]

I haven't played in a long time but I'm dying to go home and play tonight because of this pic. The shit that can happen in a Halo game is crazy.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=27863138&postcount=913

 

[Photolysis]

I can load up Halo PC and run it at well over 100 fps right now. It's a limitation imposed by 6 year old harware and having it run in a virtual machine from 10 years ago (assuming they didn't port it to 360).

It's not a hardware limitation, it's the way the engines work on the Xbox consoles. All Halo games from H1 to Reach run at 30 ticks a second, one per frame. If Bungie were to change H3 and Reach to play at 60FPS (not that I'd imagine the game would ever be able to hit that frame rate), they'd have to redo all the tags as well.

The engine in Halo PC is a different beast to the Halo engine in CE & CEA.

 

[NullPointer]

It's not a hardware limitation, it's the way the engines work on the Xbox consoles. All Halo games from H1 to Reach run at 30 ticks a second, one per frame. If Bungie were to change H3 and Reach to play at 60FPS (not that I'd imagine the game would ever be able to hit that frame rate), they'd have to redo all the tags as well.

The engine in Halo PC is a different beast to the Halo engine in CE & CEA.

Not my problem, and hard work is what I pay my monies for. But just to reiterate, I don't require 60fps. Its just a reasonable expectation when comparing it to other remastered games I've already bought this gen.

What seems mandatory to me is a locked 30fps. If you're going to remastered a decade old game, it should at least play as smooth as silk. If it has framerate woes and no multiplayer (as we know) then there is a very, very small audience that will be excited for this. I'd like to be in that group but at this point it really depends upon performance.

 

[MrBig]

nvm

 

[Kibbles]

Considering they are improving the lighting in Reach, there is a high chance they got the performance down.


Maybe it has to do with the fact the gameplay engine was designed for 30fps?

I played 60+fps on Halo PC, nothing wrong with it. But yeah, I wasn't expecting it for this, just adding to that point someone made. I just hope it's locked at 30fps.

 

[Warm Machine]

Optimization is the last phase of a game's development. If you are seeing chunky video now it is somewhat better than smooth video. All games run at shit framerates prior to release (usually fluctuation between 20 and 30). When you see video of one that doesn't they have often frame for frame captured a chunk in a replay or debug camera mode and then reassembled the frames in an editing package.

Typically in the last few months enough of the game is in and running so you can begin the optimization pass. Otherwise, why optimize if you don't know what you are optimizing for?

 

[thezerofire]

Maybe for people outside of the US, but I play gobs of Firefight and find the netcode to be great with few exceptions. Framerate on the maps take a serious nosedive during the bonus rounds, but I rarely have problems getting my shots to land where I want them.

I'm inside the US, and I consistently get slideshows in 4 person firefight. My internet isn't too bad either. Maybe I just get matched up with people outside the US.

 

[PooBone]

I listened to that youtube vid of the terminal dialogue from CEA, and it's pretty interesting if you listen to the content of what 343 GS is saying. (instead of just complaining about the quality like someone earlier in the thread) He was talking about the Masterchief not being there by coincidence and whatnot. I wonder if the entire plot of the Masterchief was somehow engineered by a Forerunner AI. Remember in the terminals in Halo 3 Mendicant Bias was saying how he was going to help MC, but you never know to what extent he actually helped, whether it was just opening a door or two or something major. Maybe MB was the one responsible for collapsing the portal at just the moment necessary to split the Forward Unto Dawn in two and propel MC towards the forerunner planet in the Halo 4 trailer.

 

[MooMoo]

Wait, I'm slightly confused about the multiplayer maps. So the only maps available are the Reach multiplayer suite ones, which includes remakes of the older Halo 1/2 maps? Which means all the Halo 1 maps won't be available for play, not even for local multiplayer?

 

[lybertyboy]

CEA...INCREASED online co-op player count from zero to two.

"Fixed."

This is semantic difference I know, but definitely feel it's worth pointing out.

 

[MrBig]

Wait, I'm slightly confused about the multiplayer maps. So the only maps available are the Reach multiplayer suite ones, which includes remakes of the older Halo 1/2 maps? Which means all the Halo 1 maps won't be available for play, not even for local multiplayer?

From the CEA disc you'll be able to play all 7 remake maps with all the standard features from reach (forge, films, etc). The H1 multiplayed has not been ported.

 

[MooMoo]

From the CEA disc you'll be able to play all 7 remake maps with all the standard features from reach (forge, films, etc). The H1 multiplayed has not been ported.

Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up for me. Looks like I'll just tread cautiously about getting this or not.

 

[stryker1138]

I listened to that youtube vid of the terminal dialogue from CEA, and it's pretty interesting if you listen to the content of what 343 GS is saying. (instead of just complaining about the quality like someone earlier in the thread) He was talking about the Masterchief not being there by coincidence and whatnot. I wonder if the entire plot of the Masterchief was somehow engineered by a Forerunner AI. Remember in the terminals in Halo 3 Mendicant Bias was saying how he was going to help MC, but you never know to what extent he actually helped, whether it was just opening a door or two or something major. Maybe MB was the one responsible for collapsing the portal at just the moment necessary to split the Forward Unto Dawn in two and propel MC towards the forerunner planet in the Halo 4 trailer.

Check out the Reach data pads if you haven't already: http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Data_pads

 

[exYle]

Reach numbers arnt that amazing, 100,000 online at any one time is small time for a halo title splitting your audiance between 4 games isnt a good option either, its not just reach but h2v and h3 that are pulling players away, not to mention the black ops behemoth.

Surely it's not that low? Halo games have never fallen below the Top 3 most played games on XBL and I can't imagine the population of the whole of XBL being that barren...

 

[Tunavi]

Surely it's not that low?

Welcome to Reach...

 

[nephilimdj]

Even says on Bungie site

Halo 3 http://www.bungie.net/online/default.aspx

Players (24h):
172,990

Not much divided by 24, hardly splitting the community.