• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Halo: Campaign Evolved (remake)

P

polonyc2

Fully [H]
2FA
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
30,044
Halo: Campaign Evolved Announced for Xbox, PC and PS5

Halo: Campaign Evolved is a faithful yet modernized remake of Halo: Combat Evolved’s campaign...experience the original story rebuilt with high-definition visuals, updated cinematics, and refined controls, plus three brand-new prequel missions featuring the Master Chief and Sgt. Johnson...a broader arsenal of weapons, vehicles, enemies, and gameplay-modifying “Skulls” – optional modifiers that change combat in fun and challenging ways – add fresh tactics and endless replayability...

https://www.theverge.com/news/805174/halo-campaign-evolved-remake-xbox-ps5-release-date


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efThjRym-ks


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSjbIM0iegY&t=2s
 
My Only gripe so far is. Yep, You guessed it. The use of Unreal Engine 5. But the Oblivion remaster/remake seemed to be somewhat ok this year. So i've some hope. But yeah, most likely day one for me.
 
Rev. Night said:
Wasn't there already a remake of Halo 1!
Click to expand...
Sort-of. The master chief collection version had 'improved' graphics, but they actually looked worse than the original. The original holds up pretty well at higher resolutions.

One remake/re-release of a game is enough though, the first is nice to keep the game playable on modern systems, the second is just for the money.
 
Rev. Night said:
Wasn't there already a remake of Halo 1!
Click to expand...

"three brand-new prequel missions featuring the Master Chief and Sgt. Johnson...a broader arsenal of weapons, vehicles, enemies, and gameplay-modifying “Skulls” – optional modifiers that change combat in fun and challenging ways"
 
It looks good but it kinda just reeks of desperation from M$ at this point. Like really?...more Halo...again...and a remake?...and probably $70. Well they'd be absolutely stupid to launch this at that price, but I wouldn't be surprised. Also kinda strange to see it launch on PS5 simultaneously.
 
Spaghetti said:
Sort-of. The master chief collection version had 'improved' graphics, but they actually looked worse than the original. The original holds up pretty well at higher resolutions.

One remake/re-release of a game is enough though, the first is nice to keep the game playable on modern systems, the second is just for the money.
Click to expand...
I would agree but, but they're ”remaking” the trilogy so it would be weird to not remake 1 but do 2 and 3 in this case. They're probably sharing the majority of the graphics between the 3 games.
 
It's certainly pretty, but it still looks exactly the same gameplay wise. All the Halo games were a slog, but especially the first one.

I guess since all of 343/Halo Studios' efforts to continue the series have all floundered, they have to do this.
 
Armenius said:
It's certainly pretty, but it still looks exactly the same gameplay wise. All the Halo games were a slog, but especially the first one.

I guess since all of 343/Halo Studios' efforts to continue the series have all floundered, they have to do this.
Click to expand...

The open parts were fun. Then it goes to the interior sections which were not very good, the parts where you are swarmed with the Flood, repetitive gameplay. The floaty physics are still there which is faithful to the original but it always felt awful. Many things in games such as vehicle physics used to be very awful and sometimes we forget how bad things were. Halo CE hasn't aged well here.
 
Flogger23m said:
The open parts were fun. Then it goes to the interior sections which were not very good, the parts where you are swarmed with the Flood, repetitive gameplay. The floaty physics are still there which is faithful to the original but it always felt awful. Many things in games such as vehicle physics used to be very awful and sometimes we forget how bad things were. Halo CE hasn't aged well here.
Click to expand...
It's supposed to feel awful. You're not on Earth, you're on a ring careening toward Earth. That said, I thought the first was pretty good. Maybe not as good as some of the later games, but not bad. I mean, it's not Doom.
 
Flogger23m said:
The open parts were fun. Then it goes to the interior sections which were not very good, the parts where you are swarmed with the Flood, repetitive gameplay. The floaty physics are still there which is faithful to the original but it always felt awful. Many things in games such as vehicle physics used to be very awful and sometimes we forget how bad things were. Halo CE hasn't aged well here.
Click to expand...
Totally agree and this remake reeks of MS' desperation. I have always maintained that Halo was a mediocre game with a B-grade sci-fi plot which only succeeded because Bungie successfully translated FPS gameplay to a gamepad. If it wasn't for MS buying Bungie and making Halo an Xbox exclusive launch title, it would have never taken off. Apart from Halo die hards, is there anyone who really wants to replay this, especially Playstation owners?
 
Blade-Runner said:
Totally agree and this remake reeks of MS' desperation. I have always maintained that Halo was a mediocre game with a B-grade sci-fi plot which only succeeded because Bungie successfully translated FPS gameplay to a gamepad. If it wasn't for MS buying Bungie and making Halo an Xbox exclusive launch title, it would have never taken off. Apart from Halo die hards, is there anyone who really wants to replay this, especially Playstation owners?
Click to expand...

I think it was a decent game (for its time) but flawed. It did do some things well. You're right though, it did push FPS gaming forward on console. I'd still be interested in more Halo games but like you said they're kind of mediocre, but seeing the lack of any good AA/AAA FPS campaign/story driven games these days I wouldn't mind more Halos. Infinite was decent. We get a million sword fighting RPG type games with dozens of copy/paste quests but only a handful of good FPS games a year. You can even add in 3rd person shooters and the list is still small.
 
So, they were already moving assets over to UE 5 and decided to milk the nostalgia teet. Interesting.
 
Spaghetti said:
Sort-of. The master chief collection version had 'improved' graphics, but they actually looked worse than the original. The original holds up pretty well at higher resolutions.

One remake/re-release of a game is enough though, the first is nice to keep the game playable on modern systems, the second is just for the money.
Click to expand...
The Halo anniversary remaster was included in the Master Chief Edition but it was a standalone product. Secondly, that's fucking absurd. The gameplay was identical to the original game but the graphics were far better. The assets were much higher quality than those of the original game. Cinematics were also redone and far superior to the originals.
1761361838999.png


You can't tell me the potato mode crap on the left is better than the remaster on the right. I know some people bitched about some changes in art style or lighting, but that's what happens when you redo things over a decade later and have different people doing the actual work. Also, neither of the earlier versions of the game look all that good by modern standards. I'm OK with the update. It's good enough I'm willing to buy it a third time.

Both remasters are far better than the usual low effort remasters we typically get from game companies.
 
Dan_D said:
The Halo anniversary remaster was included in the Master Chief Edition but it was a standalone product. Secondly, that's fucking absurd. The gameplay was identical to the original game but the graphics were far better. The assets were much higher quality than those of the original game. Cinematics were also redone and far superior to the originals.

Also, neither of the earlier versions of the game look all that good by modern standards. I'm OK with the update. It's good enough I'm willing to buy it a third time.
Click to expand...

He doesn't mean look bad from a technical standpoint, he means it from an artistitic standpoint. And I totally agree from an artistic standpoint the anniversary remaster looks terrible.

You can find tons of people with this opinion and a plethora of youtube videos with millions of views explaining in detail how the anniversary graphics are shit. It's actually surprising how popular Halo CE videos are.
 
Dan_D said:
The Halo anniversary remaster was included in the Master Chief Edition but it was a standalone product. Secondly, that's fucking absurd. The gameplay was identical to the original game but the graphics were far better. The assets were much higher quality than those of the original game. Cinematics were also redone and far superior to the originals.
View attachment 762175

You can't tell me the potato mode crap on the left is better than the remaster on the right. I know some people bitched about some changes in art style or lighting, but that's what happens when you redo things over a decade later and have different people doing the actual work. Also, neither of the earlier versions of the game look all that good by modern standards. I'm OK with the update. It's good enough I'm willing to buy it a third time.

Both remasters are far better than the usual low effort remasters we typically get from game companies.
Click to expand...
I think the left looks better than the right. Right side is flat, too clean and sharp. I mean he just escaped an exploding space-ship, getting shot by plasma weapons, and crash-landed. But there's no scorch marks? No dents? Just some chips missing? And then the gun he's holding has even less detail...

Yes, the visual effects are better...sometimes. And the textures are higher resolution. But if that little care is put into the actual details, I can't imagine it's actually much better. A superficial improvement, at best.
 
Dan_D said:
The Halo anniversary remaster was included in the Master Chief Edition but it was a standalone product. Secondly, that's fucking absurd. The gameplay was identical to the original game but the graphics were far better. The assets were much higher quality than those of the original game. Cinematics were also redone and far superior to the originals.
<snip>

You can't tell me the potato mode crap on the left is better than the remaster on the right. I know some people bitched about some changes in art style or lighting, but that's what happens when you redo things over a decade later and have different people doing the actual work. Also, neither of the earlier versions of the game look all that good by modern standards. I'm OK with the update. It's good enough I'm willing to buy it a third time.

Both remasters are far better than the usual low effort remasters we typically get from game companies.
Click to expand...
I wasn't comparing it to the original xbox version, that one did look awful by today's standards, primarily due to low resolution. I was comparing it to the original PC release (equivalent to the classic mode graphics in the remaster). Basically you got the choice of blurry textures and slightly-higher poly models from halo 2, or crisp textures and lower poly models from Halo 1, and the Halo 1 version looks massivley better.

None of that really holds true for the later games in the MCC. Every halo game after the first uses the same artstyle and those remasters stuck to that style (more or less).
 
Wow, yet another remaster. Maybe if MS hadn't put the MC collection only on xbox for a couple of years and then brought it to PC thus yet again proving there is no point to xbox consoles or consoles in general since many of their precious exclusive games go PC now.
 
Flogger23m said:
I think it was a decent game (for its time) but flawed. It did do some things well. You're right though, it did push FPS gaming forward on console. I'd still be interested in more Halo games but like you said they're kind of mediocre, but seeing the lack of any good AA/AAA FPS campaign/story driven games these days I wouldn't mind more Halos. Infinite was decent. We get a million sword fighting RPG type games with dozens of copy/paste quests but only a handful of good FPS games a year. You can even add in 3rd person shooters and the list is still small.
Click to expand...
It was alright, but nothing particularly special, and certainly not deserving of the accolades and praise heaped on it. What was most annoying about Halo's popularity was copycatting by other developers of dumb gameplay mechanics like regenerative health and limited weapon pickups.

I will probably play Infinite when I run out of more interesting games in my backlog, but I don't expect to be blown away based on recent experience with Halo 4 and Reach which were both utterly boring.
 
Infinite had a better focus on vehicles which I did like but the story was forgettable. I don't recall what it was about. Didn't help that Halo 5 is not yet on PC. I know people say it sucked, but for a 12-16 shooter campaign I'd still like to play it. Instead we're getting... more Halo CE before Halo 5. :ROFLMAO:
 
It's too bad they didn't put PVP multi-player in. Original Halo MP but with dashing, would've been a good time and given the title more longevity.
 
DF-1 said:
i thought they did a remaster of the original once or twice already.
develop new games!
Click to expand...

I think the idea behind doing the remasters instead of a new game is they need to get PlayStation players caught up on the series before they start making new Halos.

Also since Halo Studios is a new studio it will be easier for them to just remake a game before they start making their own Halo games.


I don't like a lot of the things they're doing in this remake but that's as a diehard OG Halo fan that knows every little detail that made the game special.
But for PlayStation people that never really played I think it will be easily worth getting even if it's only half as good as the original.
 
sharknice said:
I think the idea behind doing the remasters instead of a new game is they need to get PlayStation players caught up on the series before they start making new Halos.

Also since Halo Studios is a new studio it will be easier for them to just remake a game before they start making their own Halo games.


I don't like a lot of the things they're doing in this remake but that's as a diehard OG Halo fan that knows every little detail that made the game special.
But for PlayStation people that never really played I think it will be easily worth getting even if it's only half as good as the original.
Click to expand...
Halo Studios is not new, it's just 343 renamed.
 
Armenius said:
Halo Studios is not new, it's just 343 renamed.
Click to expand...

MS says they're brand new because they got new management, so maybe that's their reasoning behind it.

I agree with you though. IMO it's just a PR move because 343 was terrible and everyone knows it. And they're making all the same mistakes they did with the first remaster.
 
Nobu said:
I think the left looks better than the right. Right side is flat, too clean and sharp. I mean he just escaped an exploding space-ship, getting shot by plasma weapons, and crash-landed. But there's no scorch marks? No dents? Just some chips missing? And then the gun he's holding has even less detail...

Yes, the visual effects are better...sometimes. And the textures are higher resolution. But if that little care is put into the actual details, I can't imagine it's actually much better. A superficial improvement, at best.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but I don't see how blurry low resolution textures and lower poly objects looks better. I can understand some issues people take with the art direction, but to say that blurry, dated, low poly shit looks better is insane to me. Would I prefer differences in lighting or art direction? Yeah, probably. I think these things can always look better but I'll take the new over the old any day. I think its mental gymnastics at best to say that the older shit looks better. I'm not sure if that's nostalgia talking or what. I can understand the point about how the Master Chief shouldn't look all clean and pristine but the shit on the left is so fucking blurry and lacks detail.

The one thing I will say about the remake is that they need to turn off the goddamn motion blur in those videos. It's not doing them any favors.

Motion blur, chromatic aberration, and depth of field can fuck right off.
 
Last edited:
Dan_D said:
I'm sorry, but I don't see how blurry low resolution textures and lower poly objects looks better. I can understand some issues people take with the art direction, but to say that blurry, dated, low poly shit looks better is insane to me. Would I prefer differences in lighting or art direction? Yeah, probably. I think these things can always look better but I'll take the new over the old any day. I think its mental gymnastics at best to say that the older shit looks better. I'm not sure if that's nostalgia talking or what. I can understand the point about how the Master Chief shouldn't look all clean and pristine but the shit on the left is so fucking blurry and lacks detail.

The one thing I will say about the remake is that they need to turn off the goddamn motion blur in those videos. It's not doing them any favors.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't get it either. Texturewere roughened up in that era due the tech not being there to show those kinds of details, and it just made things look even uglier. Halo was one of the biggest offenders of this. Remember "detail texturing" in the original Unreal and Quake engines? Yeah, it was ugly as sin. To say modern graphics where that detail is more realistic due to physical lighting and other properties is worse than the original is an insane cope. We could certainly do without the ever-present patented Unreal Engine fog, I will agree with that.
 
Armenius Dan_D
It's flat and boring. Woo! It's shiny and high-resolution! Yeah, still boring. It does look good, but I like the old look better. You can cope if you want, that's my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top