Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary

So Ring... you think they should just up the polly count on the exact same models, up the resolution on the textures, and upgrade the lighting? That's barely worth $20...

As Bungie's technical ability has progressed, they have fine-tuned Halo to look as they originally envisioned it. When they made the first one, they didn't expect the success it would have and probably didn't pay that much attention to details that you're talking about. That changed with time.

CivBase wrote:So Ring... you think they should just up the polly count on the exact same models, up the resolution on the textures, and upgrade the lighting? That's barely worth $20...

No, you're right, arbitrarily changing the models so nothing looks constant makes it worth it, lol. No, not improving the game without changing things around, it has to look better AND different in order to be worth it.

Because it's impossible to make things more detailed without making them look completely different.

here's an example of why that makes no sense:

From this,


To this.

And from these:








To these:








Notice how things look better without looking different, it's POSSIBLE ladies and gentlemen.

As Bungie's technical ability has progressed, they have fine-tuned Halo to look as they originally envisioned it. When they made the first one, they didn't expect the success it would have and probably didn't pay that much attention to details that you're talking about. That changed with time.

Oh, kind of like how George Lucas and Steven Spielburg re-invisioned all their chops? Changing things =/= making them better.

As far as weapon names go, it should be added that iteration is also commonly used. For example, the M16 was the sixteenth Armalite firearm, and was thusly named.

Also, Ring, what are you complaining about now?

Usual speel. He doesn't like the graphical changes.

FREEEEESPACE!!!

Kasrkin Seath wrote:FREEEEESPACE!!!

those were amazing games.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:

Ringleader wrote:Lol, I know, yeesh.

speaking of PAK 38, how's that coming along?

Shush, you!
It's the FlaK 88 now. Finals are this week, so I won't get significant work done until Friday.

I haven't read anything in this thread really, but I noticed FlaK 88 and I was like "heyyyy, Germany!"

I hate to say it guys, But I'm in agreement with Ring here over the visuals....

This is great but when something is 're-mastered' it should be for the fans. Anyone else have the feeling this is going to have an unreasonable cost?

The Pariah wrote:This is great but when something is 're-mastered' it should be for the fans. Anyone else have the feeling this is going to have an unreasonable cost?

It's going to be $40.

Unless by 'cost' you meant something else.

Rotaretilbo wrote:As far as weapon names go, it should be added that iteration is also commonly used. For example, the M16 was the sixteenth Armalite firearm, and was thusly named.

And the M4 would be?
Honestly, I can't figure out WHAT logic the US Military applies to model designations.

Rotaretilbo wrote:Also, Ring, what are you complaining about now?

Freespace? Isn't that a mod for something?

And as far as the Purple>Blue argument, most of it seemed to be confined to the Halo 4 thread, where Ringleader said, and I quote

But you know, the Covenant isn't purple anymore, so I guess that's what we all wanted this whole time!

The Covenant haven't even been confirmed to be IN the new trilogy!

JumpingJet wrote:I hate to say it guys, But I'm in agreement with Ring here over the visuals....

Wow.
That's a first...
Anything in particular bugging you?

BBJynne wrote:

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:

Ringleader wrote:Lol, I know, yeesh.

speaking of PAK 38, how's that coming along?

Shush, you!
It's the FlaK 88 now. Finals are this week, so I won't get significant work done until Friday.

I haven't read anything in this thread really, but I noticed FlaK 88 and I was like "heyyyy, Germany!"

Deutschland, Deutschland, Deutschland uber alles...

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:And the M4 would be?
Honestly, I can't figure out WHAT logic the US Military applies to model designations.

1994, I think.

Rotaretilbo wrote:Freespace? Isn't that a mod for something?

I think he was just using that as an example.

Rotaretilbo wrote:And as far as the Purple>Blue argument, most of it seemed to be confined to the Halo 4 thread, where Ringleader said, and I quote

But you know, the Covenant isn't purple anymore, so I guess that's what we all wanted this whole time!

The Covenant haven't even been confirmed to be IN the new trilogy!

Then ya, I officially and completely sever any connection I had to his side in that argument. And I apologize for anything I might have said.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:

Rotaretilbo wrote:As far as weapon names go, it should be added that iteration is also commonly used. For example, the M16 was the sixteenth Armalite firearm, and was thusly named.

And the M4 would be?
Honestly, I can't figure out WHAT logic the US Military applies to model designations.

Model 4? IIRC, we're on the fourth generation of M16s.

If i'm right, you guys should be ashamed, btw. I don't know shit about firearms. <3

Edit: Wikipedia magic, i'm not even talking about the right weapon. I was thinking the M16A4.

Rotaretilbo wrote:As far as weapon names go, it should be added that iteration is also commonly used. For example, the M16 was the sixteenth Armalite firearm, and was thusly named.

Also, Ring, what are you complaining about now?

Well, mmmmbasically I was just showing how it's possible to have improved graphical detail without changing the design, and how the changes that make the Anniversary worth it are improved textures and models, not changed designs.

I mean, as much as I hate to admit it, I'm gonna have to side with Ring on this one.

JumpingJet wrote:I hate to say it guys, But I'm in agreement with Ring here over the visuals....

Well Ring does have a point. I'd rather the covys stay purple and them NOT do a bunch of re-vamps on the old designs, but I don't think that what they're doing is near as bad as what Ring is saying. I feel as though they've stayed within reasonable limits.

TNine wrote:
Model 4? IIRC, we're on the fourth generation of M16s.

No, I have a M16A4

A# is how iterations without major changes are recognized.

the M4 did start production in 1994, but with only 1 number that doesn't really dismiss the number being arbitrary and coincidental.

But Ring's point crashes and burns when it is realized that Bungie has been changing models to be more detailed since Halo 2. Further, the Covenant are just as purple as before, from what I've seen.

It was the fourth U.S. Carbine model.

I feel this is getting a little off topic.



Stick to Halo or move the weapon talk to debate thread.

Okay, Halo.

So, $40 dollars. Good price, IMO. I read on the 343 forums that you can play Reach MM on H: CEA if you have Reach, ODST-esque.

How do you guys think the cutscenes will go? I mean if you can change back and forth between old and new, I was wondering if they can change character models and facal expressions, or will they keep the weird bottom mouth movement thing.

I think the first one used the game engine to make cutscenes, so I imagine the second one will do the same thing. I'm sure they'll improve the expressions and whatnot.

keep in mind the original Halo was made in 9 months. The engine is clearly capable of doing more than they accomplished, it just would have taken too long.

Felix wrote:How do you guys think the cutscenes will go? I mean if you can change back and forth between old and new, I was wondering if they can change character models and facal expressions, or will they keep the weird bottom mouth movement thing.

Classic mode most likely, they said they weren't going to mess with the cinemas or the voiceovers.

But in the new graphic engine it will probably look a lot smoother.

I can't wait to see the Flood Reveal cutscene in this. Probably my favorite cutscene in CE.