The Halo Combat Evolved remake

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYBv8iYsKaA

I can honestly say I'm impressed with what I have seen. It actually stuck to its guns and looks like it plays like the good ol' shooters from that time (red faction, the suffering, area 51, etc)

It looks somewhat enjoyable.

Your thoughts?

I like the Halo series, this looks awsome & you can change back to "classic mode" with the push of a button.

Already? Quit squeezing the turnip, it's bleeding.

TheEndOfUs said:

You can change back to "classic mode" with the push of a button.

This reminds me of the similar gimmick in the leaked Goldeneye XBLA remake thing, which, incidentally, I would rather play than this.

Are they going to fix the nonexistent story progression?

Unfortunately, this is really a port and not a remake. Its the exact same game, with new graphics, and online co-op/multiplayer (which the original game did not have).

Mithran Denizen said:

This reminds me of the similar gimmick in the leaked Goldeneye XBLA remake thing, which, incidentally, I would rather play than this.

Strangely Perfect Dark also had this feature but it was pulled out of the final release. I didn't really like the looks of it since it seemed overly filtered compared to the actual N64 game.

From the commentary:

"First thing you're gonna get a taste of when you pick up this game and start playing is that this plays exactly like the original."

I'm no marketing guru, but I'm somehow doubting the effectiveness of the strategy of telling your viewers exactly why there's no point to this remake whatsoever. :/

Xaser said:

From the commentary:



I'm no marketing guru, but I'm somehow doubting the effectiveness of the strategy of telling your viewers exactly why there's no point to this remake whatsoever. :/

We're talking about the Halo fanbase here. You could re-release literally the same product with literally no changes whatsoever aside from maybe better 360 support and they'd buy it up in droves and scream at anyone who might point out the idiocy of it.

I have the original game for the xbox that I bought used (*gasp!*) a few years back. Why would I want another copy of it with multiplayer from Reach? Especially considering how AWFUL Reach's multiplayer was in the beta and in the final product. It's at least at a more reasonable price than charging $60 for a literal rehash. Now if only they followed that pricing for ODST instead of shoe-horning in the multiplayer and DLC maps that fans of the series had already purchased with H3 + a couple new ones...

Xaser said:

I'm no marketing guru, but I'm somehow doubting the effectiveness of the strategy of telling your viewers exactly why there's no point to this remake whatsoever. :/

Because it is the original game updated to have all of the features of current Halo games? I know that people on these forums don't care for Halo or console FPS in general, but these games are actually really fun coop and over xbox live. I never had an original xbox and had limited play with the original Halo so I'm actually really looking forward to this game with all of these new features and getting a chance to coop it with my brother like we did Halo 3

Hopefully I can once more snipe people across the map with the pistol, otherwise I will pass.

This is really a gift for the fans

Yep, a gift they're charging them $40 for.
HUEHUEHUEHUE

I guess I have to at least give them credit for not being complete assholes and charging full price for it like they did with ODST

Xaser said:

I'm no marketing guru, but I'm somehow doubting the effectiveness of the strategy of telling your viewers exactly why there's no point to this remake whatsoever. :/

One one hand I disagree, because if Id software decided to say that they were gonna make Doom 4 play exactly like Doom 1, I'd jump up and down in excitement.

On the other hand, in my experience with playing Halo and many of it's sequels, I didn't sense much deviation in the gameplay mechanics minus weird additions like use of equipment and unnecessary new weapons, so I'm having trouble grasping why this kinda approach is in demand. I mean, it's the same fuckin levels with a coat of paint on them.

This is coming from the same forums that I remember busting many nuts about e1m1 and entryway being remade in modern engines for years. Just saying

Ralphis said:

This is coming from the same forums that I remember busting many nuts about e1m1 and entryway being remade in modern engines for years. Just saying

I'd like to see those threads.

I was pretty grateful that Nintendo put out the Metroid Prime Trilogy disc for the Wii. I never had the opportunity to play Prime or Echoes on the Gamecube (PS2 / Timesplitters instead) and I love how the control scheme was remapped for the Wii's controller; it's quite nice. The idea that this is for fans of the original release of Halo amuses me but if I had a 360 and hadn't played the original yet, I'd strongly consider picking this up.

Back when Settlers 2 had its anniversary remake I thought that was a great idea, since the original was a Dos game and had sprite graphics so bringing it back to modern PCs was a great way to honor an awesome game. But in this case I don't really see the point, shouldn't Halo 1 work just as fine on XBox 360? And the technological differences aren't that huge. Sure the textures look better and the models are more detailed, but it's no transition from slightly dreary 2D sprites into 3D with lush colors.

Maybe if they had waited five more years so that the original would have really become obsolete and the technology truly older this would have made sense, but at this time they could have just as well reprinted the original and sold it for ten bucks.

$40 for a ten year old game? BOY HOWDY!

One odd thing here is that the new version of the game is much more colourful than the old one. Now there's a trend reversal if ever I've seen one!

All the Halo games are pretty colourful, except ODST.

Phobus said:

One odd thing here is that the new version of the game is much more colourful than the old one. Now there's a trend reversal if ever I've seen one!

The Halo games are some of the most colorful FPS games of the past 10 years. I disagree with your assertion!

Xaser said:

I'm no marketing guru, but I'm somehow doubting the effectiveness of the strategy of telling your viewers exactly why there's no point to this remake whatsoever. :/

Halo and COD fans generally don't seem to give too much of a fuck about gameplay as long as the GRAFFIX LOL look good; it's the main reason COD has such a large fanbase and why all these CoD kids say "doom sux ass lawl" That seems to be the point of this remake, to please the graphics whores. So yeah, this is probably gonna net another fortune for Microsoft.

What exactly is wrong with not changing the gameplay? If anything, the first game did a lot of stuff much better than it's sequels. I really wish to see a return of it's shield/health system, it really didn't work like the infamous regen health does nowadays. The shields were actually shields (not just a metaphor for health), and you still took actual damage that had to be repaired with medical supplies.

I'myourtarget said:

Halo and COD fans generally don't seem to give too much of a fuck about gameplay as long as the GRAFFIX LOL look good; it's the main reason COD has such a large fanbase and why all these CoD kids say "doom sux ass lawl" That seems to be the point of this remake, to please the graphics whores. So yeah, this is probably gonna net another fortune for Microsoft.

Hey look, it's a stereotypical COD hater!

as a big Halo fan (not that my name didn't make it obvious), i'll be picking up the CE remake for sure.

deference said:

as a big Halo fan (not that my name didn't make it obvious), i'll be picking up the CE remake for sure.

Except that it isn't a remake and people should stop calling it that. Its a port.

A very good port with better graphics, but not a remake. A remake is something like Doom 3: A re-imagining of the original. This isn't, so its not a remake.

Its basically a modernized version of the original game for new players and people who want to replay the game with better graphics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remake#Video_games said:
Some of them are simply the original game with some added content, such as the Xbox 360 and Wii versions of Bully. Others are essentially the same game, perhaps with some added content, simply ported to newer video game consoles or operating systems.

Hmm, that's one case where I'm going to have to disagree with Wikipedia. That basically translates to "Ports are remakes", and while I'm sure that's correct by some definition of either term, the two are different enough to warrant distinction.

Xaser said:

Hmm, that's one case where I'm going to have to disagree with Wikipedia. That basically translates to "Ports are remakes", and while I'm sure that's correct by some definition of either term, the two are different enough to warrant distinction.

I thought a port was bringing the exact same experience (or watered down version) to a different platform. IE Doom 3 to xbox.
A remake being an entire remake of the game with new graphics on a different console, even if maintaining the same experience.

I don't think that the terms are or need to be mutually exclusive.