Trailers: Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary Edition - Campaign Demo

[fulano]

Doesn't anyone find it a bit unnerving how they try to pass up no change for a feature? asically they should just say that you are playing a 10 year old game with better graphics and the option to turn them off.

So far, I haven't seen anything that makes me wanna buy it.

It also has copied halo reach multiplayer. So its not even a good remake when they changed the multiplayer.

Most will get it for the achivemnts, the sake of getting it and the updated graphics.

I loved the original (massive understatement), and would love to play it again with better graphics; but to plow again through the same thing and for 40 some bucks, what's the point? I would give it a shot if instead of better graphics it had better AI, but apparently they didn't intend to polish that part.

Unless they show up some new feature like theater and picture taking I'm out, I think.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

Hmm... Whilst I (still) like the idea, I'm finding the insistence that this is exactly the same annoying. Halo:CE's enemy AI was nowhere near as effective as Reach's. Give me CE with Reach's AI, and I'll be happy. Not the equipment etc..., that'd make it too easy.
But more than just a graphical overhaul would be nice. That said, I'll probably still get it.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

His repeated emphasis that it'll have exactly the same gameplay seems like a dangerous design choice to me. Shooters have evolved a LOT in the last decade, there's a reason most successful updates/remakes of classic games focus on capturing the spirit of the original rather than the exact mechanics.

Cheers

Colin

I can't really think of a lot of ways in which shooters have evolved since Halo:CE, other than adopting Halo's featureset. What would they do to update it other than maybe adding in a cover system?

 

[Srs bzns]

Doesn't anyone find it a bit unnerving how they try to pass up no change for a feature? asically they should just say that you are playing a 10 year old game with better graphics and the option to turn them off.

So far, I haven't seen anything that makes me wanna buy it.

They're changing nothing apart from the graphics, yeah, but that is probably better. The Master Chief has become a sacred icon (purty much) and any attempt to change him in the Bungie games (other than in resolution) will probably cause an outrage.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

Right? I feel like most people that are bashing it don't realize it isn't going to be full price. This isn't another ODST debacle (even though I think it was totally worth the 60$ I... would... have... payed for it if I bought it when it first came out. But that's me.)

Always found the ODST "debacle" funny... it had as much singleplayer content, along with more innovation, as COD sequels have had since COD4.

 

[Godhead]

Now if only they just improved the AI, it would be ANOTHER great game to end the Halo franchise on. (Still denies the existence of Halos 4-6)

 

[Covarr]

Since 2 and 3 had kinda sucky campaigns, I'm glad to see they're not really changing it. All I hope for is that they bring this version to PC.

P.S. Thanks

 

[No_Remainders]

I don't mind the game playing the exact same way, but I dislike the fact that they haven't changed the AI at all. It's just a graphical update.


Fuck.

 

[josemlopes]

Doesn't anyone find it a bit unnerving how they try to pass up no change for a feature? asically they should just say that you are playing a 10 year old game with better graphics and the option to turn them off.

So far, I haven't seen anything that makes me wanna buy it.

It also has copied halo reach multiplayer. So its not even a good remake when they changed the multiplayer.

Most will get it for the achivemnts, the sake of getting it and the updated graphics.

You can play the classic multiplayer or the one that is on Reach, next time be more informed.

And dont forget that the multiplayer in Halo was always highly costumisable so you can play it whatever way you want to.

 

[fulano]

Doesn't anyone find it a bit unnerving how they try to pass up no change for a feature? asically they should just say that you are playing a 10 year old game with better graphics and the option to turn them off.

So far, I haven't seen anything that makes me wanna buy it.

They're changing nothing apart from the graphics, yeah, but that is probably better. The Master Chief has become a sacred icon (purty much) and any attempt to change him in the Bungie games (other than in resolution) will probably cause an outrage.

But how about the AI? I mean, if you payed the original and then all the subsequent releases, or even other FPS's, and now go back and play it again you'll find it to be a breeze until after the Flood pop out. I'd rather have had new enemy AI instead of new graphics.

 

[Sentox6]

You can play the classic multiplayer or the one that is on Reach, next time be more informed.

And dont forget that the multiplayer in Halo was always highly costumisable so you can play it whatever way you want to.

The "classic" multiplayer will just be a different playlist using the Reach engine with modifications.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to playing this with shinier graphics. And I'm hopeful for Halo 4; maybe 343 can erase the memory of the horrible tragedy that Bungie created in Reach.

 

[Karma168]

No matter what you have to say about the Halo series you have to admit the graphics technology has come on amazingly over the past 10 years, that ability to flick between the two graphics shows how good it's got.

I know i'm getting this at some point but it will be in a few years when i can pick it up for £15 or less from the pre-owned shelves. I've not played it before but that doesn't mean i'll pay full price for a remake.

 

[HooterNanny]

Well, that could have just been a 30 second demo really. "We changed the graphics, everything else it the same, oh, and also you can switch back to the origional graphics for shits and giggles". That's a feature I really don't understand. Why is it there?

To be honest, I already have the arcade version of CE, so I'm not going to purchase this, and while its an interesting project, I can't see much point to it. I guess multiplayer, but there is stil Halo 3 and Reach for that, both of which I find superior to Halo 1 multiplayer

ALos, I'm pretty sure that guy also does the voice of the pig in Toy Story.

 

[mariofan1000]

I'm going to get it because, sure, you can play Halo 1 on the XBOX 360 for the cheap, but the emulation is absolutely horrible.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

I'm in it for the multiplayer. CE has no online. Aside from that.... hey, it looks pretty.

Here is a question, how come I was awesomesauce at Halo 1 multiplayer but sucked dog balls at Halo 2 multiplayer? (cept for driving)

Because the combat evolved.

HEY-O!

You're rofling my copter.

Glad to entertain.

And if you're talkin' bout the co-op, sure. But the competitive is just effectively a hefty map pack for Reach, made up of six remakes of old maps and one Firefight map.

EDIT: Also, I know you like the story- they've added terminals a la Halo 3, but it's video and voice acted.

Hmm. This isn't going to be 60$ is it?

Forty. So considering the normal price of a Reach map pack, you're basically getting an advanced Combat Evolved campaign for 20$ and then the Reach maps for 20$. Plus one map free.

EDIT: Totally feel like it should be spelled "fourty" for some reason. But Google Chrome denies it.

Ah, good, that's a deal. I'm on board completely.

Right? I feel like most people that are bashing it don't realize it isn't going to be full price. This isn't another ODST debacle (even though I think it was totally worth the 60$ I... would... have... payed for it if I bought it when it first came out. But that's me.)

i'm bashing it because it includes nothing more on disc than a campaign with prettier graphics. i already own Halo 1 for my xbox and its forward-compatible, so this would just be a waste of money unless they included the Halo 1 multiplayer on disc with all the original maps AND they included new firefight maps based on locations in the Halo 1 campaign AND included the option to play multiplayer and firefight with classic weapons AND included the option for flood to be mixed in with covenant for firefight (or just all flood all the time) with the same level of customization as was in Reach.

otherwise? all the work they did was add some new textures and lighting, make us pay 40 bucks for it, and called it a day.

 

[ryo02]

His repeated emphasis that it'll have exactly the same gameplay seems like a dangerous design choice to me. Shooters have evolved a LOT in the last decade, there's a reason most successful updates/remakes of classic games focus on capturing the spirit of the original rather than the exact mechanics.

I wouldve quite liked to keep the sprint ability from reach in this "remake"

 

[Lord Beautiful]

Here is a question, how come I was awesomesauce at Halo 1 multiplayer but sucked dog balls at Halo 2 multiplayer? (cept for driving)

Because the combat evolved.

HEY-O!

Well done, sir.

OP: This game seems almost tailor-made for people like me. I loved the original Halo to an extent that none of its subsequent entries could match, even Reach.

Too bad for them I don't have a 360.

 

[Waaghpowa]

Here is a question, how come I was awesomesauce at Halo 1 multiplayer but sucked dog balls at Halo 2 multiplayer? (cept for driving)

Because the combat evolved.

HEY-O!

Well done, sir.

OP: This game seems almost tailor-made for people like me. I loved the original Halo to an extent that none of its subsequent entries could match, even Reach.

Too bad for them I don't have a 360.

Just get the PC version of Halo one, there might be some mods out there.

*Does a Google search*

Yes, there are mods, not sure about graphical mods, but mods none the less.