Trailers: Halo: Combat Evolved - Anniversary Trailer

Rooster Cogburn

New member
May 24, 2008
1,637
0
0
SnakeoilSage said:
Leftnt Sharpe said:
Maybe for people who can't play Combat Evolved on their 360 because they use a PC monitor?
Mm, a good point, but that niche is too small to warrant it.

Try again. Feel free to use "milk" and "franchise" if you like.
It's a remake with new graphics, rerecorded audio and reworked classic maps. It's fair if you don't like it, but what more do you want us to say? Say your piece and move on.

Although you can play the original on 360, it suffers from pretty bad slowdowns, especially in coop. Since that is the one reason I don't play it anymore, I'm looking forward to this.

I think I'm looking forward to the new audio even more than the graphics.
 

SnakeoilSage

New member
Sep 20, 2011
1,211
0
0
Rooster Cogburn said:
Although you can play the original on 360, it suffers from pretty bad slowdowns, especially in coop. Since that is the one reason I don't play it anymore, I'm looking forward to this.
Now that is a reasoned arguement. I concede.
 

Leftnt Sharpe

Nick Furry
Apr 2, 2009
560
0
0
OhJohnNo said:
Leftnt Sharpe said:
SnakeoilSage said:
"343 Industries," not that we're buying into our own hype or anything.

This would be slightly more impressive if 343 went multi-platform with Halo I'd even buy it, because as co-op's go it was a pretty solid game even if it never tried to explain or acknowledge a second Master Chief.

Quick question since I'm a PS3 user with no drive to buy an Xbox - doesn't the original Halo work on your 360? If so... what's the friggin' point of this release? Try to word your response without using the words "graphics" or "improved" or words that can be defined as either.
Maybe for people who can't play Combat Evolved on their 360 because they use a PC monitor?
Oh, you too? Woo, monitor-buddies! *hi-five*

Yeah that's why I'm getting it too.
*cheap bastard high five* Hell yes my friend!

Also, yes the 360 does run CE pretty poorly. In fact, emulation on the 360 in general is rather shite all-round now I think about it.
 

Slash Dementia

New member
Apr 6, 2009
2,692
0
0
The nostalgia that I've been getting from these videos made me pre-order. Well, that and knowing that I was going to but the maps anyway as well as the original Halo for Xbox--this just bundles them up with a few extras.
 

dickywebster

New member
Jul 11, 2011
497
0
0
So beyond looking a bit better, sounding a little stupider and someone clearly trying to make it sound like an epic new game that hasnt already been rereleased, is there really anything new to this game? Or any need (beyond pumping more money from the fanhordes) to actually make this game?, Considering that they wont let halo rest in peace as well...
 

VladG

New member
Aug 24, 2010
1,127
0
0
The Critic said:
Well, a poorly-constructed trailer aside, I'm excited for this.

I mean, 343 is including classic maps, they're including classic gameplay (they confirmed that CE gameplay can be found in multiplayer, but it will probably be relegated to a seperate playlist. Not sure what they mean by this, as the only example that they highlighted was that some gametypes can feature the Halo 1 pistol in MP), and they're only charging $40 for it.



VladG said:
So is this just a HD remake of the original Halo?

(Before you jump me with "omfgrofl how can you not know this" take note that I am a pc gamer, have tried Halo 1 and 2, was thoroughly unimpressed and have cared very little about the franchise).

And if it is, what's the point of buying it? Isn't the 360 supposed to be backward-compatible? (instead of just backward? hur hur. Sorry, couldn't help myself.) Is simply a HD remake worth buying? Full price?
The PC versions of Halo 1 and Halo 2 were both released some time after their respective XBox versions. By the time they were released, their PC competition had far outdone them.

To put this in perspective, Halo 1 was released for the PC in late 2003, while the original XBox version was released in Late 2001. Halo 2 was released on the PC (as Halo 2 Vista) in 2007, the same year that it's 360-exclusive successor came out (also, the same year that CoD4 was released). By the time either game made it to PC, it was rather dated, and, in Halo 2's case, had technical issues. If there's one silver lining to the release of the first 2 Halos on PC, it's the fact that Halo 1 was ported well, was given additional maps, and recieved Custom Edition.

To answer your question on whether it's worth it to buy it; it's debatable, but the game isn't being released for full-price, it's coming in at around $40, so, it's a matter of whether you liked the original campaign (and Reach's multiplayer) enough to justify $40.
I know the games were delayed for the pc, but frankly I consider games like Half Life 1 and Deus Ex superior to Halo 1(and both were released several years before Halo). If Half Life 2 hadn't been delayed for as long as it had due to it's many problems before launch it would have likely blown Halo out of the water.

Actually I consider Half Life 1 and Deus Ex superior to pretty much every FPS out there and they have never felt dated.

Anyway, even as a 40 buck game, I don't much see the point in it (especially since you can still play the original on a 360). I guess multiplayer kinda is an incentive, but 40 bucks for what is essentially a map pack?...
 

Shoggoth2588

New member
Aug 31, 2009
10,250
0
0
Now, as awesome as that was (and awesome it was) I would have loved to see that with half of the screen showing the original footage from the early 2000's just as a way to show
A:) The graphical level of the original release and
B:) The fact that you can do that in the anniversary edition (switch between visual styles I mean)
 

Orks da best

New member
Oct 12, 2011
689
0
0
Hardcore_gamer said:
OhJohnNo said:
Norix596 said:
This reminded of how stupid I thought the Halo was where a friend first explained it to me WAY back when. "So it's a defense against the Flood that will wipe out all life in the universe EXCEPT the Flood? Brilliant."
The only way to stop the flood is to starve them to death. The Forerunners couldn't make a device that would kill all the Flood in the galaxy, but they could make it kill everything else, thus taking away their food.
It still makes no sense.

How does it come that a race of super advanced aliens that could create massive rings accross the entire galaxy could not defeat a sluggish parasite threat? Its too much for me to be able to suspend disbelieve.

I also don't get it why only sentinent life can be eaten by the flood. What did the flood eat before sentinent life?
um check the halowiki, it is explain if ye hunt deep enough, but halo legends also explains some of it too, the flood was adapting to their plans, whatever they tried the flood would adapt to it. So the forunners planned to target the flood's food supply, cut it off and the flood dies. this is after they fought the flood for 300 hunderd years and done thousands of plans, it was a last resort.

despite being call out for a lame story, the expanded universe has a lot story, its just not in the games all that much.
 

The Critic

New member
Apr 3, 2010
263
0
0
VladG said:
The Critic said:
Well, a poorly-constructed trailer aside, I'm excited for this.

I mean, 343 is including classic maps, they're including classic gameplay (they confirmed that CE gameplay can be found in multiplayer, but it will probably be relegated to a seperate playlist. Not sure what they mean by this, as the only example that they highlighted was that some gametypes can feature the Halo 1 pistol in MP), and they're only charging $40 for it.



VladG said:
So is this just a HD remake of the original Halo?

(Before you jump me with "omfgrofl how can you not know this" take note that I am a pc gamer, have tried Halo 1 and 2, was thoroughly unimpressed and have cared very little about the franchise).

And if it is, what's the point of buying it? Isn't the 360 supposed to be backward-compatible? (instead of just backward? hur hur. Sorry, couldn't help myself.) Is simply a HD remake worth buying? Full price?
The PC versions of Halo 1 and Halo 2 were both released some time after their respective XBox versions. By the time they were released, their PC competition had far outdone them.

To put this in perspective, Halo 1 was released for the PC in late 2003, while the original XBox version was released in Late 2001. Halo 2 was released on the PC (as Halo 2 Vista) in 2007, the same year that it's 360-exclusive successor came out (also, the same year that CoD4 was released). By the time either game made it to PC, it was rather dated, and, in Halo 2's case, had technical issues. If there's one silver lining to the release of the first 2 Halos on PC, it's the fact that Halo 1 was ported well, was given additional maps, and recieved Custom Edition.

To answer your question on whether it's worth it to buy it; it's debatable, but the game isn't being released for full-price, it's coming in at around $40, so, it's a matter of whether you liked the original campaign (and Reach's multiplayer) enough to justify $40.
I know the games were delayed for the pc, but frankly I consider games like Half Life 1 and Deus Ex superior to Halo 1(and both were released several years before Halo). If Half Life 2 hadn't been delayed for as long as it had due to it's many problems before launch it would have likely blown Halo out of the water.

Actually I consider Half Life 1 and Deus Ex superior to pretty much every FPS out there and they have never felt dated.

Anyway, even as a 40 buck game, I don't much see the point in it (especially since you can still play the original on a 360). I guess multiplayer kinda is an incentive, but 40 bucks for what is essentially a map pack?...
As already stated on this thread, the original game performs rather poorly on the 360, since the emulation leaves much to be desired. So, it's more than a glorified map pack; it's the proper Halo CE experience on 360, minus the technical issues that plagued the emulated version, plus an improved multiplayer suite, and vastly improved graphics, animation, sound, etc. Considering that the original costs, what, $15 on Games on Demand in XBLM, the additional $25 seems worth it to update the package for modern times, fix the technical issues, and add some cool new content.

As for how dated it was on the PC, that's a matter of some debate. As you said, Half-Life 1 and Deus Ex (really more of an Action-RPG than straight-up shooter) can be argued to be superior to the PC Halo (personally, I think they were great, but that they've aged much worse than Halo, particularly in the graphics department). You could also make the arguement that contemporary PC-only shooters like Battlefield 1942 and Medal of Honor: Allied Assault were superior to the PC Halo, and you could make convincing cases for either. The point that I'm trying to illustrate is that Halo was an early Console-FPS, it's hard to compare it to it's contemporaries on the PC and not find it lacking in some respect. Which is why, I suspect, the series has stuck to consoles after Halo 2's disasterous port.
 

fozzy360

I endorse Jurassic Park
Oct 20, 2009
688
0
0
Hardcore_gamer said:
OhJohnNo said:
Norix596 said:
This reminded of how stupid I thought the Halo was where a friend first explained it to me WAY back when. "So it's a defense against the Flood that will wipe out all life in the universe EXCEPT the Flood? Brilliant."
The only way to stop the flood is to starve them to death. The Forerunners couldn't make a device that would kill all the Flood in the galaxy, but they could make it kill everything else, thus taking away their food.
It still makes no sense.

How does it come that a race of super advanced aliens that could create massive rings accross the entire galaxy could not defeat a sluggish parasite threat? Its too much for me to be able to suspend disbelieve.

I also don't get it why only sentinent life can be eaten by the flood. What did the flood eat before sentinent life?
I'm gonna try to remember some of the more important points, so...

If I remember correctly, the problem with The Flood is that the smallest of spores can being the infection, and it seems that any and all kinds of different species of creature can and would succumb to it. There is simply no way to combat the Flood head on because of how resilient it is (like I said, smallest spore), and the Forerunners really didn't know what they were up against when they initially encountered the Flood. They could quarantine sections of the galaxy, but the chances of the infection spreading were way too high. The only way to effectively destroy the infection would be to starve it.

As far as targeting sentient species go, I believe the reason is because of the intelligence and the mind of the creature is assimilated along with the body of the creature. Once the infection has assimilated enough matter (the by-product of which would the minds of those as well), then you get the Gravemind.

I could be mistaken, so I'd recommend checking on some wikis if you're really interested.
 

The Bandit

New member
Feb 5, 2008
967
0
0
CkretAznMan said:
Despite all the hype and such, Halo Anniversary still doesn't look like very "upgraded", but whatever.
Please tell me you're joking. Go look at any comparison video on youtube. The graphics are a billion times better.