343 is idiotic

Clappy · August 16, 2011

Hurr let's put in Reach Multiplayer instead of the engine we're already using for campaign hurr.

Everybody loves Reach its the best halo lets ruin 50% of the game hurr.

Don't worry, if it does end up being screwed up by our half-***** $40 job, 10 years passes by in a breeze and we'll have a re-remake!

They can't justify ruining multiplayer. I don't care if it would have taken an extra year, if you're going to make a 10 year anniversary game for arguably the biggest gaming franchise out there, put in your full god **** effort.

What are you people's thoughts on this matter?

SHAMAZING T4CO · August 16, 2011

um, actualy the engine they used in campaign is to new to be used in multiplayer, so before you start saying stuff please get your facts right...

Vore · August 16, 2011

The way I see it, the main concern of this game isn't the multiplayer, being a cool bonus, it's actually the remastered campaign that they are putting a lot of effort into. As for them putting more time into it, they have bigger and better things to worry about. My opinion without having played the game, I see nothing wrong with it so far.

xUnH0Ly xKiLLeR · August 16, 2011

:Facenuke:

Now with that said, i don't get how you can call a game half-assed if it hasn't even come out yet. And have you even looked at the remastered CE gameplay? Dunno how you call that a bad job. And about the multiplayer, how did they ruin the Halo multiplayer? And the classic maps that are coming with CEA, including the TU that will happen, will basically improve Reach MP.

So one of my fav games remastered with seven Reach maps for $40? I'll take that anyday.

Vore · August 16, 2011

um, actualy the engine they used in campaign is to new to be used in multiplayer, so before you start saying stuff please get your facts right...

Hate to tell you that you are wrong, but the campaign will be using the original engine while the new multiplayer maps will be on the Halo: Reach engine.

SHAMAZING T4CO · August 16, 2011

Hate to tell you that you are wrong, but the campaign will be using the original engine while the new multiplayer maps will be on the Halo: Reach engine.

no im talking about the revised engine, 343 said so themselves that its to engines running on top of each other, the new engine, and the old engine.

Spectral Jester · August 17, 2011

Well Clappy 1 post and its inaccurate.

Facts are this....

Halo Combat Evolved has been remastered, so up to date graphics and sound, and for nostalgia they added the back to the past button.

Game also includes 7 classic maps remade for Reach.

Your point then is ?

Save your money for Halo 4!

CandiBunni · August 17, 2011

no im talking about the revised engine, 343 said so themselves that its to engines running on top of each other, the new engine, and the old engine.

It's not a new engine.

Kurt S-501 · August 17, 2011

no im talking about the revised engine, 343 said so themselves that its to engines running on top of each other, the new engine, and the old engine.

they are only doing that for the Campaign, not the MP. the MP will in fact, run on the reach engine. think of it as a DLC for reach (which is what it will be soon).

Clappy · August 17, 2011

I can't understand what you guys are talking about. The problem is:

They're using the Reach Engine for multiplayer.

That's a problem because the Reach Engine sucks.

If you say that either of these statements are false, explain your reasoning. Since the first one's a fact, I'll skip to the second in a preemptive argument. The Reach engine is terrible because its just a dumb luck combat situation. Bloom is ultra lame, but more or less controllable. The only problem is that I eventually lose to johnny call o duty because hes shooting much faster than I am, and that's not acceptable.

Next, armor abilities ruined just about everything. If you are killing a guy and he armor locks, you better hope to god that one of his many team mates isn't anywhere in the area because you're screwed. Or maybe he'll just stick you close range and then armor lock into safe mode. An ability whose only counter is the same ability isn't balanced and therefore isn't acceptable.

The melee system is terrible, too. It promotes double beatdowns and tying, but I guess that's not a problem because everyone likes tying (sarcasm).

If you have issue with anything else besides what I've addressed in this post please say so.

xLG Atomix · August 17, 2011

I can't understand what you guys are talking about. The problem is:

They're using the Reach Engine for multiplayer.

That's a problem because the Reach Engine sucks.

If you say that either of these statements are false, explain your reasoning. Since the first one's a fact, I'll skip to the second in a preemptive argument. The Reach engine is terrible because its just a dumb luck combat situation. Bloom is ultra lame, but more or less controllable. The only problem is that I eventually lose to johnny call o duty because hes shooting much faster than I am, and that's not acceptable.

Next, armor abilities ruined just about everything. If you are killing a guy and he armor locks, you better hope to god that one of his many team mates isn't anywhere in the area because you're screwed. Or maybe he'll just stick you close range and then armor lock into safe mode. An ability whose only counter is the same ability isn't balanced and therefore isn't acceptable.

The melee system is terrible, too. It promotes double beatdowns and tying, but I guess that's not a problem because everyone likes tying (sarcasm).

If you have issue with anything else besides what I've addressed in this post please say so.

the mp is just new maps to reach pretty much idk if its a download or if its on the disk but it has two original maps from halo ce plus the campaign is remastered but you can still switch to old graphics and all the for $40 dollars? i say hell yeah plus i heard there is a halo 4 beta on it

Kurt S-501 · August 17, 2011

^^^ I hope this is true!^^^

agent kung foo · August 17, 2011

I can't understand what you guys are talking about. The problem is:

They're using the Reach Engine for multiplayer.

That's a problem because the Reach Engine sucks.

If you say that either of these statements are false, explain your reasoning. Since the first one's a fact, I'll skip to the second in a preemptive argument. The Reach engine is terrible because its just a dumb luck combat situation. Bloom is ultra lame, but more or less controllable. The only problem is that I eventually lose to johnny call o duty because hes shooting much faster than I am, and that's not acceptable.

Next, armor abilities ruined just about everything. If you are killing a guy and he armor locks, you better hope to god that one of his many team mates isn't anywhere in the area because you're screwed. Or maybe he'll just stick you close range and then armor lock into safe mode. An ability whose only counter is the same ability isn't balanced and therefore isn't acceptable.

The melee system is terrible, too. It promotes double beatdowns and tying, but I guess that's not a problem because everyone likes tying (sarcasm).

If you have issue with anything else besides what I've addressed in this post please say so.

if youre gonna complain that much, dont get it, the halo reach engine is actually pretty good and does it really matter? if youre a true fan you wouldnt care

SHAMAZING T4CO · August 17, 2011

they are only doing that for the Campaign, not the MP. the MP will in fact, run on the reach engine. think of it as a DLC for reach (which is what it will be soon).

yeah i know the engine isnt for multiplayer, but on campaign thats why you can switch between graphics, the new engine is running right on top of the original engine. And the 7 multiplayer maps are for reach.

SplendidSAHIL · August 17, 2011

Guy Halo Anniversary is gonna be a like a Halo 3: ODST for Halo Reach. But the good part is that we don't have to swap discs when playing Multiplayer with the new map packs. And yes Halo 4 beta will be available for Halo Anniversary owners (ITS STILL A RUMOR AND NOT CONFIRMED)

But yes. They should have made Halo 1 Remake like a proper remake with the original multiplayer instead of making us play reach! If they really want us to enjoy playing The Halo 1 maps on Halo Reach then they should just make it a DLC for Halo Reach! Not just REPLACE it with the Original Multiplayer experience that we experienced 10 years ago.

343i themselves said this. "We keep saying this and we will say it again. We want everyone to have that feeling they felt playing Halo CE 10 years ago with our remake and want our remake to play EXACTLY how it played in the Original Halo CE"

Well 343i. You did a pretty good job with the campaign and I am sure ALL of us will enjoy it and have that feeling what we had 10 years ago.

But 343i. You must also understand that allot of us as Halo CE fans STILL play halo ce's multiplayer and love it and Halo Reach just cannot replace those glory days of when we use to use that Over powered automatic pistol and use to see the amazing physics of Halo CE and had indestructible vehicles and had no bloom and also the famous plasma launch! And also my personal favorite. THE FIRST PERSON WARTHOG/SCORPION PASSENGER SEAT!! that was the best! and we could zoom with the pistol and the sniper too while sitting in the PASSENGER SEAT! It was the funnest thing!

And now you are removing all that and making us play Reach with stuff like stupid bloom, armor abilities. Weak vehicles which can be easily destroyed by a freakin SNIPER!!

Please. I am a concerned fan and I would really love to see the Original multiplayer back and please allow us to finally play it on the Xbox 360.

Go ahead and make the game $60, Delay the game to next year if you don't have enough time but atleast you will please the fans! This is what all the fans want! We want a true Halo CE Remake!!

Twinreaper · August 17, 2011

All the above statements are wrong in part. Reach's Blam! engine runs along side the script engine dubbed Megalo. Megalo executes scripts which control up to 75% of everything in the map or maps level assets. This powerful script engine can control, manipulate and load any game asset present in the games own resource library. This is how they achieved the gametypes we play like haloball.

That being said, the engine used primarily for the CEA release is actually the entire Reach Blam engine. In order to utilize the function to call Reach's graphic layer in substitution for CE's, requires either that the CE envine be re-written to include the new layer or the Reach Blam engine has to use Megalo to call the CE graphic layer.

CEA is using Reach's engine as its core processing and using Megalo to call the CE engine to be used when the game is first loaded. This is the only way to make the game.function as we have seen from the trailers. Remember, CE's blam engine is no where near sophisticated enough to run anything outside 10 years ago.

Furthermor, calling it an updated graphic layer is not entirely accurate. During the trailers and comparison shots we are given, it is clear that the shaders are not the only update. Much of each levels geometry is slightly off or changed. Shaders alone using increased bump map depths cannot change structures to appear longer or shaped differently. What we are in fact seeing is touched up physical geometry mesh.

Basically callibg CEA a remastered game is accurate. Everything but the core CE engine was touched up and changed.

Twinreaper · August 17, 2011

Sorry for the double post but I also wanted to touch on the whole multiplayer aspect. Does anyone know how much money and pro essing power is needed and utilized to fully collect deploy and provide a multiplayer experience? Didn't think so. This is why we have idiotic fanboys bitching about CEA being included to be part of the current gen multiplayer.

It would take more than a year for 343 alone to ship a CEA game with a standalone multiplayer element. The CE engine for multiplayer was written 10 years ago by 6 guys. Gaming languages have changed so drastically that using anything from CE's engine standalone now, you would have to also write an exclusive Live handling servi e just for it.

Keep in mind also, 343 nor Microsoft want to split apart the player base. It would takes about a 1.75 years to fully recreate, impliment and deploy a standalone game remastered like CEA. And it would take primarily another year after the title was developed, to.create and deploy a standalone service just for it. Also, who's gonna pay for the added server equipment and maintainence on the equipment?

Let me guess, you guys want all this but would be appauled at the thought of having to pay for the extra service of it?

Vitamin Pwn · August 17, 2011

Sorry for the double post but I also wanted to touch on the whole multiplayer aspect. Does anyone know how much money and pro essing power is needed and utilized to fully collect deploy and provide a multiplayer experience? Didn't think so. This is why we have idiotic fanboys bitching about CEA being included to be part of the current gen multiplayer.

It would take more than a year for 343 alone to ship a CEA game with a standalone multiplayer element. The CE engine for multiplayer was written 10 years ago by 6 guys. Gaming languages have changed so drastically that using anything from CE's engine standalone now, you would have to also write an exclusive Live handling servi e just for it.

Keep in mind also, 343 nor Microsoft want to split apart the player base. It would takes about a 1.75 years to fully recreate, impliment and deploy a standalone game remastered like CEA. And it would take primarily another year after the title was developed, to.create and deploy a standalone service just for it. Also, who's gonna pay for the added server equipment and maintainence on the equipment?

Let me guess, you guys want all this but would be appauled at the thought of having to pay for the extra service of it?

thank you for explaining this, i knew that it would take more time in order to add classic ce multiplayer, i just didnt know why.

Twinreaper · August 17, 2011

thank you for explaining this, i knew that it would take more time in order to add classic ce multiplayer, i just didnt know why.

Not a problem my friend. And to clear a few things up also, I add the following....

Calling multiplayer and campaign seperate engines is not true. The engine itself is the core of the game. the difference between multiplater and campaign, is how the engine itself utilizes the game assets and the individual scripts.

people always say stuff like CE multiplayer engine was the best and all that jazz. fact is, the multiplayer handling, physics, particle system etc, are the same core assets we see in the campaign. the only difference in CE's case, is that the spawning scripts for players are different.

That being said, the only real world difference between the two, lie in how the game uses netcode, and how much data can be processed and synced with said netcode. The netcode of CE was bar far the worst piece of garbage ever constructed. And that garbage alone took a team of 6 guys about 7 months to make. the Reach scripting uses by Megalo to handle multiplayer probably took a team of 32 or more people the same time frame of 7 to 9 months to create alone.

Dean PHD · August 17, 2011

Sorry for the double post but I also wanted to touch on the whole multiplayer aspect. Does anyone know how much money and pro essing power is needed and utilized to fully collect deploy and provide a multiplayer experience? Didn't think so. This is why we have idiotic fanboys bitching about CEA being included to be part of the current gen multiplayer.

It would take more than a year for 343 alone to ship a CEA game with a standalone multiplayer element. The CE engine for multiplayer was written 10 years ago by 6 guys. Gaming languages have changed so drastically that using anything from CE's engine standalone now, you would have to also write an exclusive Live handling servi e just for it.

Keep in mind also, 343 nor Microsoft want to split apart the player base. It would takes about a 1.75 years to fully recreate, impliment and deploy a standalone game remastered like CEA. And it would take primarily another year after the title was developed, to.create and deploy a standalone service just for it. Also, who's gonna pay for the added server equipment and maintainence on the equipment?

Let me guess, you guys want all this but would be appauled at the thought of having to pay for the extra service of it?

Thank you! I wish people would read or at least take the 5 min to watch the videos from 343 where most of this is explained. The reason behind releasing CEA to get people excited about Halo again. All effort for a new multiplayer engine is being focused on Halo 4, a project that is solely 343 with no bungie influence. CEA is built on the original CE engine with updated graphics and sound layered over the existing graphics. It is the original game. You can at any moment click over to the original graphics.

CEA HAS SAME ENGINE AS CE!