Halo Anniversary or Halo 7: The Quest for More Money

[OneOfTheMichael's]

It's true
Just the graphics are changed. No changes in gameplay, story or missions
The fact is that it is just what halo 1 would be if it were made in todays time. the changes that they did make is that you can switch between how it did look, and how it looks now in a weird vision sort of manner, play with a friend online and graphics improvement.
Never-less i will probably buy it, not as soon as it comes out but sometime when i already bought gears of war 3, ES: skyrim, MW3, and AC revelations.

 

[bkdlsf89990]

OK, this is what I meant by it seeming you had some vendetta against CEA. I already told you why.

They've added things to the lore, they've added online co-op, the game is now in HD with incredibly improved graphics. Plus, the seven maps for Reach it comes with.

These are the reasons many, many people are buying it. It may not be enough for you, but for me and many others it is.

At this point I'm just repeating myself.

Yeah, we've been over all that.

 

[ZeroMachine]

OK, this is what I meant by it seeming you had some vendetta against CEA. I already told you why.

They've added things to the lore, they've added online co-op, the game is now in HD with incredibly improved graphics. Plus, the seven maps for Reach it comes with.

These are the reasons many, many people are buying it. It may not be enough for you, but for me and many others it is.

At this point I'm just repeating myself.

Yeah, we've been over all that.

Then what aren't you getting? Why did you ask again?

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

I will be buying Anniversary for two fundamental reasons.

1) I am a MASSIVE Halo fanboy. Every novel, every game at least 4 times, every piece of Halo I can get my nerdy little hands on.

2) While this may be heresy on THIS website, I care quite a bit about graphics. Halo: CE, while solid, is hard for me to play because of the outdated graphics. Understand that while I do NOT buy games solely on how good it looks, I don't buy the other way either.

I can't wait.

 

[gabe12301]

Here's what I read.

Warning: What follows is a 5 minute rant.

So: Halo Anniversary. I have to admit I rolled my eyes slightly when I found out that 343 Industries (Bungie no longer) was re-releasing Halo 1. Still, I was hopeful. This could be a fun. A trip down nostalgia lane with updated graphics and sweet new gameplay? Yes please.
I got what I expected

However, my mouth fell open when I started hearing their marketing scheme.

They are pitching this game as being exactly the same as the original Halo game. This is apparently meant to be a good thing. I've watched a few gameplay videos, and it definitely lives up to that promise. It is exactly the same. Enemies move and act the same. The sounds are identical. Environments are identical. They're even using the same code.

And the graphics, while an improvement, look exactly what they are: an updated version of an old and outdated graphics engine.

So first: Why are we supposed to be excited to "re-live" an experience we've been living already for 10 years? Is the Halo 1 gameplay really so great that it's something we actually want to go back to? Wouldn't it be better to update the gameplay as well as the graphics?
Why would we want to re-live a fun experience?

And the graphics, while definitely an upgrade, still fall short of most modern games. The graphics are superior to Halo 2 graphics, but definitely below Halo 3 graphics.
The 10 year old engine's graphics don't look new enough

But the ultimate irony is that they are actually including a "feature" that lets you toggle back to the original Halo 1 graphics. Do you realize what this means? They are giving players the opportunity to spend $40 to buy literally the exact same game. No really. Exactly the same. This is like those dumb Disney marketing schemes where they re-release "The Little Mermaid" as a "Platinum edition" or something, and you will buy it because there are "bonus features" on the disc. But again, this is meant to be a good thing.
how dare they give us an extra option? those greedy moneymaking F**kers!


Anniversary is powered by one thing and one thing alone: nostalgia. But if I wanted nostalgia, couldn't I just play the actual game that I've already owned for 10 years rather than spending $40 to buy it again?

A remake powered by nostalgia is pure evil

I understand many people are excited about this game. An updated Halo 1 is definitely exciting. But this is not an updated Halo 1. This just Halo 1. I guess if you've never actually played Halo 1, this would be a good way for those people to experience it. But when you sell your game as literally being the game that we've already had for 10 years, and asking us to buy the "new" one just because of a slight graphical update, no way am I spending 40 bucks. And even hinting at the possibility that we might want to play (and pay for) a modern $40 game with the old 2001 graphics makes my head explode.
I am annoyed that people want to buy things that I don't want to

 

[theheroofaction]

Now, the thing is, the cash cow remake complaint, while somewhat legitimate, isn't really your problem. Really it's the fact that it's happening to halo which, by number of games, started getting remakes rather early.

Let me give you an example from the side of the ocean where all the wierd games come from.
SquarEnix has recently begun churning out remakes of their final fantasy and dragon quest franchises. The thing is, nobody complained about it, at all, because both franchises had passed the arbitrary number of games (generally 8) that make people realize that a new entry in those franchises wasn't an attempt to make a great story, but an attempt to make something people like and are cool with paying for. (There's a surprisingly big difference between those two goals.)

 

[bkdlsf89990]

Then what aren't you getting? Why did you ask again?

I guess because one of us failed to convince the other at some point. ;]

 

[Azaraxzealot]

I have been wanting to see a re-released version of Halo for a long time primarily because the mechanics have changed. With a massive shift towards multiplayer gaming, the mechanics of Halo's campaign have also changed. It's going to be interesting to see how the changes made in Halo 2 through Reach affect the performance of the original campaign.

they aren't changing any of that, but what pisses me off about the re-release is it is campaign ONLY.

i was hoping to see an updated version of ALL the multiplayer maps (or at least Sidewinder, Blood Gulch, Beaver Creek, Hang Em High, and the space ship one) and have at least ONE new thing, like forge for all the classic maps, or a new forge world, or some new firefight maps based off of classic locations in Halo 1, or Firefight with flood, or, y'know SOMETHING new. hell, at this point, i feel like microsoft just tried to fuck me.

It's true
Just the graphics are changed. No changes in gameplay, story or missions

if they kept the multiplayer portion of it with all the classic maps getting a graphical upgrade it MIGHT constitute a buy for me, but they didn't even do THAT.

 

[thelonewolf266]

http://www.geek.com/articles/games/halo-anniversary-reverts-to-original-graphics-with-a-button-press-20110722/ The graphics look as good as Reach which had very good graphics plus its not like they are forcing you to buy it Halo fans will love it an people that didn't play Halo make when it was released can now experience the classic game with current graphics.I don't see how this is hurting anyone so why rant about it.And no I'm not Halo fanboy I enjoy the campaign but I'm not really into the multi-player though Reach multiplayer was an improvement in my opinion.

 

[Jimmybobjr]

$40? Maybe. Maybe.

The $120 thats its going to be in Australia?

HELL NO!

I agree completely with the topic starter- from what ive seen its the %100 percent same. For $120? Or the tenner i can get it for in the bargin bin?

 

[Laser Priest]

Companies like money. EVERY GAME is a quest for more money.

I'm sure this will be entertaining. A cash-in, possibly, but entertaining nonetheless.

 

[Jegsimmons]

wait...you mean i only get one lousy map pack, a full 10 year old game with updated gameplay and graphics, the ability to turn it back to old school graphics, co-op, good story, no change to the original voice work and plot, and multiplayer on classic maps and possibly a beta access to halo 4 for 40 frikkin hard earned dollars?
thats all i get?!?!
...
...
...
SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!!

seriously, halo is one of the few franchises that actual provides story, characters and overall substance in their games anymore. not too mention some of the best written books and tightly packed continuity between book and game for a great sci fi universe.

so whats the problem?

also, its not like they lie and say its a completely different game

*whistles and walks away inconspicuously.*

 

[Volafortis]

It's also adding online multi/co-op capabilities to the game, which is a MAJOR plus.

Also, it's bringing the PC exclusive maps to it as well, IIRC.

 

[Jegsimmons]

Sure there are people who put a lot of love into their craft, the people at Bungie who made Halo were among them

I disagree with this. Bungie was a cash cow ever since they were bought bby microsoft and I will explain why.
Bungie started out as a company used to spread a free version of pong for mac. They got fairly famous in the mac community for some great games of their time. Then they started working on a new project, a space game focused around a huge ring in space. Halo. Originally it was an RTS, but when they were bought by microsoft they were told what to make. A shooter for their new console.

and do you think they ever look back and say "we shouldn't have gone and revolutionized the console FPS genre and make some of the highest acclaimed games of time"?

nope, because they are looking back and thinking..thank god we did not do that.

thats not being a cash cow, that being smart.
bungie even gave a map out for free as good will and cares for it's community, and i have no reason to think 343 is different (since its the same people)

 

[Dfskelleton]

Hell, if I want to relive Halo, I'll go over to my game bin, pick up Halo, pop the disk into my 360 and play it. Sounds better to me than paying 40 bucks. The only real difference is the graphics, which is worse because I like Halo's graphics. This isn't nostalgia talking, this is what I think. Halo knew what it wanted to be: A sci-fi action adventure FPS. However, it wasn't the dark, ugly future where everything is dull and cruel. Halo was like Doom's Sci-fi: bright and vivid colors, unique and interesting enemies, and plenty of fun weapons with which to kick ass. However, Recent Halo games have been improving the nitpicky things while constantly dulling the palette. I mean look at Master Chief in Halo compared to Master Cheif in Halo 2. In halo, he had a lovely rich green color, while in halo 2 he got a sort of dull, sage color.
I'm not giving Microsoft money for the same game with an uglier palette.

 

[SinorKirby]

A) It's not Halo 7. Halo 7 will be the inevitable sequel to Halo 6, which will come out after 5, which will be released after 4. Seeing as Halos 4, 5, and 6 have yet to be made, and since Halo: Combat Evolved: Anniversary Edition is not called Halo 7: Combat Evolved: Anniversary edition, there's no reason to be calling it that. It puts you in the same boat as all the people who refer to Black Ops as CoD7, when there hasn't been a CoD game since CoD4.

B) They're using the original code to keep the game as close to the original as possible, which I think is awesome, considering Halo: Combat Evolved had the best gameplay and AI out of all the Halo games. However, the multiplayer code is not the same, and apparently is more like Reach's code, which I hope is not true because the weapons would not function the same as in singleplayer.

C) The graphics are not an updated version of the first game's, they're using the same graphics engine that Reach used. Definitely better than Halo 3's by a longshot.

D) I'd still pay $60 for it. Halo: Combat Evolved was the best game in the series, and I am going to love to be able to play the campaign with three other people as well as play the multiplayer with more than 4 people.

 

[Volafortis]

snip

To be fair, even Reach still has a color palette tenfold of what you see in most shooters.