Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | |
| Posted By: Narcogen <narcogen@rampancy.net> | Date: 4/24/11 11:12 p.m. |
In Response To: Boo this man. *longish* (Gravemind) : You say "We know 343i have the Reach engine so why not use it to remake : Halo?" : I say "Horrible idea." Gutting Halo 1's assets and replacing them
For me, a big part of what makes Halo 1 superior to Reach is its setting, characters, and story. I don't really have a problem with where Halo's gameplay went from Halo 3 through ODST and finally to Reach. I think Loadouts is an improvement on Equipment, and I think it's a fun idea. I like some (not all) of the new enemies and units. Reach has greater visual fidelity-- it's just that, by and large, the subject of Reach's art is just not as interesting to me as that of Halo 1 and Halo 2. So... a game that plays like Reach, looks like Reach, but has the art, setting, and characters of Halo 1? I'd buy that in a hot second. Sure, there are certainly a lot of open questions. The more elements of Reach you add in, the more encounters in Halo 1 would break. Halo 1 isn't built for a jetpack at all. You'd either have to keep that out, or redesign a lot of things. Halo 1's human vehicles are indestructible, and enemy vehicles cannot be boarded. That's a great Halo feature that came after H1, and I wouldn't want to give that up. It probably requires a bit less tweaking of Halo 1's encounters than the jetpack would. Halo 1's arsenal, on the Covenant side, is a bit thin: plasma pistol, plasma rifle, powerful single-wield Needler, and a non-player-usable FRG. There might be a legitimate role in the campaign for some of the newer weapons, either from Reach or other games in the series. Given the equivalencies it might not be a huge improvement, rather just a touch of variety. I've no idea what, if anything, 343i has planned in this respect. I tend to think that a re-skinning of H1 without other modifications isn't in the cards, and I've written that before. H1 already runs on the 360 in emulation. If you want to have that codebase be able to run at significantly higher resolutions, you probably have to drop emulation. That means porting Halo 1's rendering engine, made to run on the Xbox's Intel CPU and Nvidia GPU, using shared memory, and porting it to run on the 360's PowerPC CPU and ATI GPU. The thing is, that engine has already made its way onto that hardware-- in the form of Halo 3, Halo:ODST and Halo:Reach. There's little sense, and quite a lot of inefficiency, in doing that job over in order to keep elements in Halo 1 that have already been iterated several times in Halo: Reach. In short, you use the Reach engine, updated art assets, and then figure out how much, or how little, of the new game's elements can have a place in the existing Halo 1 campaign, and then decide how much, if at all, you're willing to tweak that campaign to adjust for the new elements. The old game is already out there, running in emulation. I don't think there's room for a product between that and a full rebuild on the Reach engine; the cost-benefit analysis isn't favorable. If all you're talking about is a texture upgrade-- Halo 1 HD-- I'd probably pay five bucks for it, as I'd consider that an upgrade to a game I already own several copies of-- one on Mac, two on PC, a couple of Xbox 1 discs, and two Games on Demand copies for different 360s. Now, a port of the Halo 1 campaign to the Reach engine? I'd probably at least consider paying full new title price for that, and if it was something less than that, I'd say it's a guaranteed purchase. I tend to think the portion of the market that is so completely devoted to Halo 1's original experience, including all the elements that wouldn't be changed in a straight port: physics, etc-- is too small to justify even the smaller expense, whereas a more complete upgrade feels less like a ripoff and would appeal to a broader segment of Halo fandom.
| |
|
| Replies: |
| Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Dani | 4/23/11 12:26 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Moorpheusl9 | 4/23/11 12:39 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Dani | 4/23/11 1:06 p.m. |
| 11th Suggestion. | Bones153 | 4/23/11 12:44 p.m. |
| Re: 11th Suggestion. | padraig08 | 4/23/11 1:16 p.m. |
| Re: 12th Suggestion. | DMFanella | 4/23/11 1:27 p.m. |
| "I never want a remake. Period." Mentality. | NsU Soldier | 4/23/11 7:23 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Pkmnrulz240 | 4/23/11 12:53 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Dani | 4/23/11 1:15 p.m. |
| One Amendment | padraig08 | 4/23/11 1:10 p.m. |
| Re: One Amendment | Dani | 4/23/11 1:18 p.m. |
| Re: One Amendment | padraig08 | 4/23/11 1:31 p.m. |
| I remember that | SEspider | 4/25/11 1:30 a.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Taco Power | 4/23/11 1:42 p.m. |
| Would prefer it remasted than remade meself *NM* | Firestorm12 | 4/23/11 1:50 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Cody Miller | 4/23/11 1:45 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Dani | 4/23/11 2:03 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Cody Miller | 4/23/11 2:07 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Dani | 4/23/11 2:18 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | RC Master | 4/23/11 3:53 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | DHalo | 4/23/11 2:11 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | DHalo | 4/23/11 2:08 p.m. |
| We can rebuild it, we have the technology | SonGoharotto | 4/23/11 3:26 p.m. |
| Argh, want to reply to OP... *NM* | SonGoharotto | 4/23/11 3:29 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | Quirel | 4/23/11 6:01 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | SonGoharotto | 4/24/11 8:09 a.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | Quirel | 4/24/11 12:28 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | SonGoharotto | 4/24/11 2:15 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | Quirel | 4/24/11 3:38 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | SonGoharotto | 4/24/11 4:38 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | Quirel | 4/24/11 10:22 p.m. |
| Re: We can rebuild it, we have the technology | SonGoharotto | 4/25/11 4:18 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | BanditORR | 4/23/11 2:13 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Dani | 4/23/11 2:18 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Quirel | 4/23/11 5:49 p.m. |
| "Softly Does It" | Hyokin | 4/23/11 2:17 p.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | Dani | 4/23/11 2:29 p.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | Hyokin | 4/23/11 2:40 p.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | Kermit | 4/23/11 2:58 p.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | The BS Police | 4/23/11 5:21 p.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | Hyokin | 4/23/11 9:41 p.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | The BS Police | 4/24/11 4:17 a.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | Joe Duplessie (SNIPE 316) | 4/24/11 5:21 a.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | The BS Police | 4/24/11 6:19 a.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | Joe Duplessie (SNIPE 316) | 4/24/11 6:47 a.m. |
| Re: "Softly Does It" | The BS Police | 4/24/11 7:13 a.m. |
| You just don't get it. | Joe Duplessie (SNIPE 316) | 4/24/11 7:29 a.m. |
| Re: You just don't get it. | The BS Police | 4/24/11 7:46 a.m. |
| Re: You just don't get it. | Kermit | 4/24/11 8:37 a.m. |
| Re: You just don't get it. | Hyokin | 4/24/11 11:59 a.m. |
| I just don't care. | uberfoop | 4/23/11 3:16 p.m. |
| Boo this man. *longish* | Gravemind | 4/23/11 6:23 p.m. |
| Addendum. | Gravemind | 4/23/11 6:34 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | Dani | 4/23/11 6:52 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | DEEP NNN | 4/23/11 7:05 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | Cody Miller | 4/23/11 7:15 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | DEEP NNN | 4/23/11 7:22 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | Narcogen | 4/24/11 11:12 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | Gravemind | 4/25/11 2:35 p.m. |
| Re: Boo this man. *longish* | Narcogen | 4/26/11 1:48 a.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | FyreWulff | 4/23/11 6:59 p.m. |
| I should add | FyreWulff | 4/23/11 7:02 p.m. |
| Re: I should add | Dani | 4/23/11 7:16 p.m. |
| Re: I should add | FyreWulff | 4/23/11 7:21 p.m. |
| Re: I should add | General Vagueness | 4/23/11 9:42 p.m. |
| Re: I should add | The BS Police | 4/24/11 8:36 a.m. |
| Re: I should add | General Vagueness | 4/24/11 11:09 a.m. |
| Re: I should add | uberfoop | 4/24/11 2:06 p.m. |
| Wait, what? | uberfoop | 4/24/11 2:25 a.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | The BS Police | 4/24/11 4:12 a.m. |
| Before somebody takes that comment out of context | The BS Police | 4/24/11 6:26 a.m. |
| Re: Before somebody takes that comment out of cont | DEEP NNN | 4/24/11 8:08 a.m. |
| Re: Before somebody takes that comment out of cont | The BS Police | 4/24/11 8:21 a.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | Gravemind | 4/24/11 12:02 p.m. |
| No new multiplayer! | ElzarTheBam | 4/23/11 7:00 p.m. |
| Re: Ten Suggestions For A CErtain Remake | SEspider | 4/25/11 1:23 a.m. |
| "DUMB" are we?! | SEspider | 4/25/11 2:46 a.m. |
| ::facepalm:: | Louis Wu | 4/25/11 7:45 a.m. |
| Re: ::facepalm:: | Quirel | 4/25/11 9:41 a.m. |
| Re: ::facepalm:: | CaneCutter | 4/25/11 10:52 a.m. |
| Re: ::facepalm:: | Narcogen | 4/26/11 1:53 a.m. |
| Re: ::facepalm:: | Dani | 4/26/11 2:47 a.m. |
| Re: ::facepalm:: | Kermit | 4/26/11 9:44 a.m. |
| Re: ::facepalm:: | Narcogen | 4/27/11 12:12 a.m. |
| HBO: Sarcasm? On the Internet? Impossible. *NM* | General Vagueness | 4/25/11 7:34 a.m. |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |