Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

Let's all pretend I'm in charge of this mcc update for a moment. I'm sitting here scratching my head wondering if all these posters are just making this stuff up. I mean why would somebody want to change the spawn system anyway? Should I tell this programmer to spend a bunch of time looking for some problem that might be there? Nah, I'll put him to work on halo 1 bugs. The halo 1 players have a nice website showing all the problems with video proof.

Yeah, for example the shot leading bug. If you believe it's an issue it's not difficult to post a video comparing the original vs the mcc version in a custom game. I'm not sure about the other bugs but this one is definitely easy to test and contrast.
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Gameplay is mechanical - situations tend to keep playing out the same. Take the same path through a level, use the same sniping point, use the same attack strategy. Noob combo is the most glaring example of "mechanical". Effective does not necessarily equal fun.

 

Character development and nice cutscenes don't excuse the tangled plot.

 

"Visuals are subjective" - not in this case. The textures are noticeably rougher than Halo 1, and the lighting is darker. Everything is less colourful and the delicate atmospherics have been replaced with garish bloom. Even ignoring Halo 1, the art style doesn't speak for itself very well. Flat, muddy, and haphazard describe it perfectly.

 

Without online play, does Halo 2 hold up to other classic first-person shooters without online play? Halo 1, GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Metroid Prime? Also, the one thing it pioneered, matchmaking, was a step backwards in my opinion. The prior standard, custom game browser, offers WAY more flexibility, and doesn't prevent ranked play (Rainbow Six 3 used Elo).

 

Speedrunning is niche. Halo 2 had a big tricking scene too, but that's not how most people used it. ALL of my criticisms are regarding its typical usage.

“situations tend to keep playing out the same.” That’s a bold face lie. Halo is known for having intelligent AI that varies gameplay encounters. Bungie has marketed this key design repeatedly during the development of the series. The halo trilogy is famous for having excellent AI that rivaled half life and FEAR. If anything H2 is more linear, that’s a valid criticism and something I wish future halo games addressed. But it was a concession to reduce the constant backtracking of CE. It’s a decision with pros (varied environments) and cons (linear). Still doesn’t disqualify H2 from being a “good game”.

 

I’m sorry but a standard A and B plot that combines in the third acted is tangled? There’s nothing confusing about the plot of h2, I think you need to go into detail about the apparent narrative missteps.

 

I don’t know if you know much about the visual arts but it’s always subjective. This isn’t debatable. I personally think both CE and H2 isn’t the best looking games in terms of artstyle but at the time of release H2 was a technical beast. Easily one of the best looking games of the generation. Only games like Chaos Theory/ninja gaiden and pc games looked better.

 

Again why are you trying to take away online play from H2? It’s in the game, it was designed with online play in mind and it was shipped with online enabled. You can’t take away a key feature of a product to try to lessen the impact it had on the entire industry. It’s cheap. Gee I wonder how counter strike would be without its online. So you dislike matchmaking cool.. but how about the friends list or ranks? Or in game messaging? Or invites? Features so prolific that it molded the entire industry. Or we just going to sidestep that?

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

7-10 million, but I'll give it to you. I could argue that while those 3 games were AAA, the series stopped producing the numbers and fell out of that budget range as time continued. Meaning the budget for this remaster definitely doesn't fit into the category of AAA. But we can just agree to disagree, there really is no point.

We're talking launch period (couple weeks, a month?), both games were broken buggy messes. I still consider MCC to be in the top 3 worst launches of gaming ever.

 

Average movie overall was 65 million (some sources say 60) in 2007.

Blockbusters were much higher, these are some from 2006.

Casino Royale - 150 Million

Pirates of the Caribbean: DMC - 225 Million

Da Vinci Code - 125 Million

 

But since I'm the only one actually looking up sources and not relying on what my friend says. Average horror movies were in the 30-40 millions. You're welcome.

"I'm not relying on sources?" I dug up the budgets for the games lol. And I literally have worked in and have tons of peers in the industry. I'm simply giving an example of how difficult it is to get 50 million in funding for even good movie projects backed by name talent.

 

What criteria are you using for average film budget in 2006? Source?

 

I saw one source that said Hollywood movies. Well yes, Hollywood movies are by default expensive, just like most EA and Activision games are expensive by default and this makes them AAA. If you're saying only movies that were released widely by Hollywood, I mean that criteria alone puts it in the upper echelon and "AAA" category of film. Only about 1 film per week is released in more than 3000 theatres like Silent Hill was.

Share this post


Link to post

Gameplay is mechanical - situations tend to keep playing out the same. Take the same path through a level, use the same sniping point, use the same attack strategy. Noob combo is the most glaring example of "mechanical". Effective does not necessarily equal fun.

 

Character development and nice cutscenes don't excuse the tangled plot.

 

"Visuals are subjective" - not in this case. The textures are noticeably rougher than Halo 1, and the lighting is darker. Everything is less colourful and the delicate atmospherics have been replaced with garish bloom. Even ignoring Halo 1, the art style doesn't speak for itself very well. Flat, muddy, and haphazard describe it perfectly.

 

Without online play, does Halo 2 hold up to other classic first-person shooters without online play? Halo 1, GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Metroid Prime? Also, the one thing it pioneered, matchmaking, was a step backwards in my opinion. The prior standard, custom game browser, offers WAY more flexibility, and doesn't prevent ranked play (Rainbow Six 3 used Elo).

 

Speedrunning is niche. Halo 2 had a big tricking scene too, but that's not how most people used it. ALL of my criticisms are regarding its typical usage.

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark don't really hold up that well tbh. The controls are so bad. I'd definitely rather play Halo 2.

 

Like count me in as not a big fan of Halo 2, but it's definitely not a bad game. The plot and character development are far better than Halo 1. The cliffhanger sucks but isn't that bad and really isn't an issue now when you can play Halo 3 right after. The graphics are aesthetically poor imo but still technically impressive.

 

It is a too linear in gameplay but the gameplay is still tight at least and feels fun. A lot of levels are pretty bad though. Like all of the flood ones and Outskirts and driving through the city is pretty boring.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark don't really hold up that well tbh. The controls are so bad. I'd definitely rather play Halo 2.

 

Like count me in as not a big fan of Halo 2, but it's definitely not a bad game. The plot and character development are far better than Halo 1. The cliffhanger sucks but isn't that bad and really isn't an issue now when you can play Halo 3 right after. The graphics are aesthetically poor imo but still technically impressive.

 

It is a too linear in gameplay but the gameplay is still tight at least and feels fun. A lot of levels are pretty bad though. Like all of the flood ones and Outskirts and driving through the city is pretty boring.

Dude, I love me some Perfect Dark. I can still play that shit today. Single-player or multiplayer. I own all 3 versions of it. Probably in my top 3 shooters of all time.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

I have the Perect Dark soundtrack on my phone and listen to it fairly often. One of my favorite games of all time.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

I have the Perect Dark soundtrack on my phone and listen to it fairly often. One of my favorite games of all time.

I noticed you used it in some of your vids.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

Sorry for my terrible commentary. Was an unfinished vid so I only got the spawn demonstration.

Proximity spawning for team slayer, oddball, koth are very noticable. CTF and bomb spawns are pretty much OG.

here you go. send this to the right person @@GrimBrother One

 

Wild cherry is probably a top 50 halo2 player and has not stopped playing halo 2. Even after the servers shutdown, he would play on XBC / tunnel link programs before MCC came out

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

"I'm not relying on sources?" I dug up the budgets for the games lol. And I literally have worked in and have tons of peers in the industry. I'm simply giving an example of how difficult it is to get 50 million in funding for even good movie projects backed by name talent.

 

What criteria are you using for average film budget in 2006? Source?

 

I saw one source that said Hollywood movies. Well yes, Hollywood movies are by default expensive, just like most EA and Activision games are expensive by default and this makes them AAA. If you're saying only movies that were released widely by Hollywood, I mean that criteria alone puts it in the upper echelon and "AAA" category of film. Only about 1 film per week is released in more than 3000 theatres like Silent Hill was.

I was specifically referring to the fact that you referenced your friend.

 

I'm not sure why it really matters anymore, I agreed with you. SH was higher budget than horror movies of its time.

Share this post


Link to post

Another difference in OG Halo 2 vs Vista.

 

Fall damage.

I had a second render where I showed radar comparisons + fall damage. Updated in my original post.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

I had a second render where I showed radar comparisons + fall damage. Updated in my original post.

Is there a difference in Radar visibility? I don’t know if it’s just me but the radar and the dots on it feel so fucking hard to see in MCC. I hardly played the original Halo 2 so I don’t know if this is normal.

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a difference in Radar visibility? I don’t know if it’s just me but the radar and the dots on it feel so fucking hard to see in MCC. I hardly played the original Halo 2 so I don’t know if this is normal.

I honestly don't think its a big difference. Haven't played on tube tv H2 in a good while. The stretched res on monitors for OG could make the dot bigger.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly I miss the old tube tvs. No latency felt so good that it was hard to swap over when everyone did originally because like every monitor/hd tv had 5ms delay or higher

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly I miss the old tube tvs. No latency felt so good that it was hard to swap over when everyone did originally because like every monitor/hd tv had 5ms delay or higher

just a correction. the best monitors now have a delay of 9ms. in 2007, they probably had a good bit more than 9.

 

The "1ms monitors" aren't advertising input lag. it's gray2gray. which is essentially meaningless.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

just a correction. the best monitors now have a delay of 9ms. in 2007, they probably had a good bit more than 9.

 

The "1ms monitors" aren't advertising input lag. it's gray2gray. which is essentially meaningless.

What should I be looking at to determine 9ms, or whatever the value actually is?

Share this post


Link to post

What should I be looking at to determine 9ms, or whatever the value actually is?

Input lag.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a difference in Radar visibility? I don’t know if it’s just me but the radar and the dots on it feel so fucking hard to see in MCC. I hardly played the original Halo 2 so I don’t know if this is normal.

 

Thats how Halo 2 always was.  Motion tracker required more guesswork as the dots were blurry and had a tad bit of lag to them.

 

What should I be looking at to determine 9ms, or whatever the value actually is?

 

Input lag which is a metric that companies don't advertise much, if at all.  You really need to check out proper reviews and tests.  Google is your best friend here, you can just search for "{Monitor/TV Model} Input Lag" and generally find it.  this info is scattered all over the place.  

 

The "Response time" that companies do advertise is basically useless.  Its not a standardized metric, so 1ms on one monitor =/= 1ms on a monitor from another manufacturer.  What that is supposed to indicate is how fast pixels can finish switching colors. The faster the time, the less issues with ghosting.  Most companies advertise "Gray to Gray".  Basically how fast a pixel can switch from gray to white to gray again.  Now there are so many shades of gray... who knows what shade they pick for the metric?? And often that metric is taken with pixel "Acceleration" turned on.  Basically that means they are overvolting the panel to force the pixels to change faster... which tends to introduce artifacts into the picture and having that jacked up to 11 is not a normal use case.

 

so yeah... TLDR; search for input lag times.  "Response time" is an advertising tactic, not a real metric.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

What should I be looking at to determine 9ms, or whatever the value actually is?

No company actually advertises the number because they don't want someone to not buy their 9ms monitor over a 1ms g2g because of ignorance (heck we are a competitive forum and we just saw a frequent member not even knowing this info, think of all the people who don't go out of there way to research). You can go to displaylagdatabase's website or you can browse forums like sf5/smash/or other gaming sites. Some people go through the effort of determining the inputlag of your monitor, but it requires equipment.

 

If you cant find your monitor, find one that is the same size produced by that manufacturer in the same year. Or if you found 27" MHM30 is 11ms and your monitor is a 26" MHM41, they're probably the same input lag.

 

and btw. 9ms is basically as lagless at it gets. CRTs generally have a input lag of 0-16.67ms randomly. If it updates every 60frames/s (1frame is every 16.67ms), and you do an input at 20.01 frames, then it's not going to be entered until the 21st frame.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly I miss the old tube tvs. No latency felt so good that it was hard to swap over when everyone did originally because like every monitor/hd tv had 5ms delay or higher

Dude, me too. The best way to play Halo and Smash.

Share this post


Link to post

just a correction. the best monitors now have a delay of 9ms. in 2007, they probably had a good bit more than 9.

 

The "1ms monitors" aren't advertising input lag. it's gray2gray. which is essentially meaningless.

I know its just a lot easier to say what I did than to find a website with my old monitors linking what the actual delay was lol

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.