Support NeoGAF

[Miles Quaritch]

For the upscale, sub 1080p should be substantial better.

900p upscaled is fine, I really don't see the need for them to go these lengths to attain 1080p only for the sake of PR when it does nothing to make the image sharper and actually results in less pixels.

What they need to focus on is sorting out the black crush/gamma issues.

 

[omonimo]

900p upscaled is fine, I really don't see the need for them to go these lengths to attain 1080p only for the sake of PR when it does nothing to make the image sharper and actually results in less pixels.

What they need to focus on is sorting out the black crush/gamma issues.

I knew upscale should gain a notable sharpness compared 900p.

 

[dark10x]

900p upscaled is fine, I really don't see the need for them to go these lengths to attain 1080p only for the sake of PR when it does nothing to make the image sharper and actually results in less pixels.

What they need to focus on is sorting out the black crush/gamma issues.

It does look sharper, though, and it shouldn't require any additional effort. It's just a different resolution choice.

 

[nOoblet16]

Well, let's be clear here, the multiplayer Anniversary maps were built around modified Halo 4 tech while the campaign uses something else entirely. They really have nothing in common from a technology standpoint.

Is Saber using the updated CE Anniversary engine for Halo 2 anniversary campaign ?

 

[Miles Quaritch]

From I know upscale should gain a good sharpness compared 900p.

It does look sharper, though, and it shouldn't require any additional effort. It's just a different resolution choice.

Ah, my bad. I misinterpreted that part of the article.

 

[Dictator93]

Head to 5:30 in the framerate analysis video. You can see the shadows from the bridge suspension cast onto the various smoke plumes from the tank explosions.

Damn does that look nice. Every game should have particles receive and cast shadows from arbitrary light sources.

The only one I know of that has recieve and cast shadows is Battlefield 4. But that is jsut from the sun. Otherwise it just gets shaded.

 

[AlStrong]

Damn does that look nice. Every game should have particles receive and cast shadows from arbitrary light sources.

The only one I know of that has recieve and cast shadows is Battlefield 4. But that is jsut from the sun. Otherwise it just gets shaded.

It's a tad expensive, so it usually will mean lower resolution particles. Not too sure if they're volumetric or not for this case.

 

[Madness]

It's more than a gimmick, they are running the original engine with its physics and logic with a new skin on top for the new graphics and music. Without the old engine running simultaneously they would have to redo all of it from scratch for the new engine and in effect also end up changing the game, as it stands the game plays 100% like Halo 2 since it is essentially using the same engine for gameplay. The new engine is like a coat of paint on top of the old one rather than a 1:1 remake of everything.

This is wrong. They don't need the original Halo 2 running to have Anniversary Mode running. They can easily have made the original version be a menu toggle on and off. All Frankie said was, they couldn't have had it be a delay like it was in CEA, so it was either instant switch, or it was having it be changed in menus and then you start the campaign.

The instant switching and the fact Halo 2 OG is running alongside the new one is the reason they couldn't hit 1920x1080 full resolution. I'm of the camp that it's a niche feature that wouldn't be used much. That I've already played through the original Halo 2 campaign over a half dozen times, give me the best quality possible. With the newly updated audio as well, why would I ever want to switch back?

 

[Conduit]

T
The instant switching and the fact Halo 2 OG is running alongside the new one is the reason they couldn't hit 1920x1080 full resolution.

I think it's not the case. Original H2 engine can be easily push via DDR3 bandwidth. Original engine is not graphical demanding even @1080p/60 for slow DDR3 bandwidth. I mean, eSRAM is for the new engine, DDR3 is for the old engine and that's how 343i use switching.

 

[JLeack]

Is it so hard to just give us the option to either play the original or the anniversary edition in the menu so it can be 1080 and stable? I would much prefer that over a gimmick feature I would use a few times until the novelty wore off. Only thing it did for me in the original Halo Anniversary was make me realize how much I prefer the look of the original over blue LED: the art style.

The toggle adds way more value than minorly improved visuals. It's one of the coolest thing I've experienced in a game, especially the cutscene toggle.

 

[morukutsu]

It's more than a gimmick, they are running the original engine with its physics and logic with a new skin on top for the new graphics and music. Without the old engine running simultaneously they would have to redo all of it from scratch for the new engine and in effect also end up changing the game, as it stands the game plays 100% like Halo 2 since it is essentially using the same engine for gameplay. The new engine is like a coat of paint on top of the old one rather than a 1:1 remake of everything.

Well I don't agree. What you are explaining is that the two engines running simultaneously are a "physics + logic" engine (the original one) and the graphics engine (the new one).

Of course a remake can be made without rewriting everything from scratch. This is how everyone does remakes: they improve textures, models, resolution, etc and this doesn't affect gameplay at all because the logic part stays untouched.

What I have read is they are running two graphics engines simultaneously to provide a seamless switch between the new look and the old one.

If the old engine running simultaneously was really only physics + logic, it would mostly affect CPU load, not GPU load and therefore it wouldn't justify a drastic drop in resolution like that. If they drop the resolution from 1080p to something like ~900p its only because they want to save GPU time for something else... Like running another rendering engine simultaneously.

So it's really a gimmick, a weird design choice but fan seems to like it so I guess it's OK.
I would have personally prefered to pick which engine I want to run in some kind of menu before starting the game in favor of a greater resolution.

 

[JLeack]

Fewer pixels and still blurry. I think we're more likely to see most developers stick to 900p...

900p upscaled is fine, I really don't see the need for them to go these lengths to attain 1080p only for the sake of PR when it does nothing to make the image sharper and actually results in less pixels.

What they need to focus on is sorting out the black crush/gamma issues.

I agree, but man you would get destroyed saying 900p is fine eelsewhere. I got slaughtered earlier in the year for saying that.

 

[Dictator93]

It's a tad expensive, so it usually will mean lower resolution particles. Not too sure if they're volumetric or not for this case.

I am stickler for graphics consistency and fluidity more so than raw numbers. Having everything properly shaded and shadowed goes a longer way, IMO, than just having higher res alpha.

 

[AlStrong]

I am stickler for graphics consistency and fluidity more so than raw numbers. Having everything properly shaded and shadowed goes a longer way, IMO, than just having higher res alpha.

Well, it's just that you may end up with a lot of artefacts (objects in front of it) when blending to the main scene. It really depends. At least with the tank section, the actual screen-space area is relatively small versus viewing the explosion on-foot and up-close, and there's very little scene complexity.

The lower res artefacts are already noticeable elsewhere, as pointed out in the article.

 

[rokkerkory]

Well I don't agree. What you are explaining is that the two engines running simultaneously are a "physics + logic" engine (the original one) and the graphics engine (the new one).

Of course a remake can be made without rewriting everything from scratch. This is how everyone does remakes: they improve textures, models, resolution, etc and this doesn't affect gameplay at all because the logic part stays untouched.

What I have read is they are running two graphics engines simultaneously to provide a seamless switch between the new look and the old one.

If the old engine running simultaneously was really only physics + logic, it would mostly affect CPU load, not GPU load and therefore it wouldn't justify a drastic drop in resolution like that. If they drop the resolution from 1080p to something like ~900p its only because they want to save GPU time for something else... Like running another rendering engine simultaneously.

So it's really a gimmick, a weird design choice but fan seems to like it so I guess it's OK.
I would have personally prefered to pick which engine I want to run in some kind of menu before starting the game in favor of a greater resolution.

Did u complain wen H1A was out?

 

[Endoplasmatisch]

I think it's not the case. Original H2 engine can be easily push via DDR3 bandwidth. Original engine is not graphical demanding even @1080p/60 for slow DDR3 bandwidth. I mean, eSRAM is for the new engine, DDR3 is for the old engine and that's how 343i use switching.

Why is it not 1080p then? Every other aspect of The Collection is 1080p@60fps. All multiplayer and singleplayer, except Halo 2 Anniversary SP.

 

[AlStrong]

Why is it not 1080p then? Every other aspect of The Collection is 1080p@60fps. All multiplayer and singleplayer, except Halo 2 Anniversary SP.

It's very likely they store more than just the framebuffer in the esram. It's also possible that they may have gone with a deferred lighting/shading setup as well to support all those dynamics lights.

 

[le.phat]

Well, at least there is room for another HD remaster on rhe next xbox.

 

[morukutsu]

Did u complain wen H1A was out?

No one is complaining.
I said it's a weird choice, it has big consequences on the graphical aspect but they did it for a reason and the fans like it so it's a wise choice.

 

[Magwik]

Apparently people would rather have 1080p than the game actually play like Halo 2?

 

[Naminator]

I put this one together - if anyone has any questions not covered feel free to ask away!

If you don't mind me asking, but why doesn't DF use Gamersyde instead or in conjunction with YouTube for the comparison videos?

 

[ref]

They did a great job with the visuals, I must say. It may be a shallow reason but I won't be getting this because of not being able to play with the original soundtrack. I'm not a fan at all of the "remastered" soundtrack.

For those that don't mind though the package is an insane deal, so much content.

 

[Somnia]

They did a great job with the visuals, I must say. It may be a shallow reason but I won't be getting this because of not being able to play with the original soundtrack. I'm not a fan at all of the "remastered" soundtrack.

For those that don't mind though the package is an insane deal, so much content.

You can use the original soundtrack in original graphic mode

 

[ref]

You can use the original soundtrack in original graphic mode

Yeah, I meant to say with the anniversary visuals, haha. I've played Halo 2 on PC at 1080p, but the visuals don't look too hot

 

[Madness]

Apparently people would rather have 1080p than the game actually play like Halo 2?

Why do people keep saying this? The instant switching is what's causing them to not be able to hit full resolution. There are two versions of the game running simultaneously and need to be switched to instantly.

They could have made the same game, have the original or Anniversary Mode be a choice in the menu and then you start campaign, and most likely they would have easily hit full 1080p. It's a fallacy to think they need both games running at the same time. They're only doing that for the switch feature. Imagine wind waker HD had the original gamecube version running simultaneously or Last of Us had the original ps3 version running as well, it's bound to affect performance.

 

[nOoblet16]

Well I don't agree. What you are explaining is that the two engines running simultaneously are a "physics + logic" engine (the original one) and the graphics engine (the new one).

Of course a remake can be made without rewriting everything from scratch. This is how everyone does remakes: they improve textures, models, resolution, etc and this doesn't affect gameplay at all because the logic part stays untouched.

What I have read is they are running two graphics engines simultaneously to provide a seamless switch between the new look and the old one.

If the old engine running simultaneously was really only physics + logic, it would mostly affect CPU load, not GPU load and therefore it wouldn't justify a drastic drop in resolution like that. If they drop the resolution from 1080p to something like ~900p its only because they want to save GPU time for something else... Like running another rendering engine simultaneously.

So it's really a gimmick, a weird design choice but fan seems to like it so I guess it's OK.
I would have personally prefered to pick which engine I want to run in some kind of menu before starting the game in favor of a greater resolution.

Why do you think physics in CE anniversary runs at 30FPS then? If they aren't tied down by the logic of the original in any way.
I know that the reason it is sub 1080P is because of two rendering engines, what the discussion was about was whether it was just a gimmick or was it really necessary for creating an exact replica of the original gameplay wise and if it was then was it easier for them to just couple it with the original including rendering (like they have) or just use the logic from the original.

 

[boeso]

Seems all involved did a great job. It has been a year for some great remakes/remasters. The Last of Us, this and GTAV. Such a good time to be a gamer.

Oui oui!!

 

[Conduit]

Why is it not 1080p then? Every other aspect of The Collection is 1080p@60fps. All multiplayer and singleplayer, except Halo 2 Anniversary SP.

Well, Halo 3 and 4 are not graphical demanding games @1080p/60 for eSRAM like H2 enhanced engine or maybe my opinion is not correct.

 

[morukutsu]

What the discussion was about was whether it was just a gimmick or was it really necessary for creating an exact replica of the original gameplay wise and if it was then was it easier for them to just couple it with the original including rendering (like they have) or just use the logic from the original.

No it wasn't necessary gameplay wise.

And no it wasn't easier, what they did was hard, harder than just running a single graphics engine.

Anyway, everything has been said on this thread about this matter. I just wanted to precise things, as a game engine programmer. The switching feature is cool, fans are happy, it's fine.

 

[SURGEdude]

I know how it looks to complain about the MCC because of its epic value. But I wish they had dumped the quick engine switching thingy and made the title 1080 like the rest.

Its really cool the first few times, but after that you forget it exists. If they wanted to include it I'd have rather a delay, or separate launcher instead of the solution deployed.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I agree, but man you would get destroyed saying 900p is fine eelsewhere. I got slaughtered earlier in the year for saying that.

Eh, Sunset is 900p and I consider it to be one of the most visually impressive games I've played this year.

I can understand wanting 1080p native and it's nice when developers achieve it, but I'd rather have games pushing effects and stabilising frame-rates over a hard 1080p requirement for all games.

 

[darthbob]

Only thing about the MCC that bugs me is that loading screens.

They detract from what I remember as being a pretty smooth experience.

 

[Nintendont]

It's more than a gimmick, they are running the original engine with its physics and logic with a new skin on top for the new graphics and music. Without the old engine running simultaneously they would have to redo all of it from scratch for the new engine and in effect also end up changing the game, as it stands the game plays 100% like Halo 2 since it is essentially using the same engine for gameplay. The new engine is like a coat of paint on top of the old one rather than a 1:1 remake of everything.

It is a gimmick to an extent. 343 opted to have both graphics engines running at the same time to allow instant switching instead of loading between them like Halo CEA.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

It is a gimmick to an extent. 343 opted to have both graphics engines running at the same time to allow instant switching instead of loading between them like Halo CEA.

Didn't CEA also have instant switching?

 

[Queen of Hunting]

why do so many devs ignore AF still ? it makes games look alot better up close to be honest.

 

[crazyprac]

I still don't get the reasoning behind leaving the original resolution. I think its one of those "hey let me check it out for nostalgia sake... never mind back to remastered version".

 

[Shin-Ra]

What they did not intend, however, is the addition of loading screens where once there were none. One of the feats of the original Halo 2 was the seamless nature in the way the game weaved between missions - once the game was loaded, the player wouldn't see another loading screen throughout the run of play. On Xbox One, however, loading screens pop-up following the end of each mission segment and sequences that once felt seamless are now broken up into chunks. This situation arises throughout the campaign but proves most jarring during the introduction sequence, where we see three cuts to loading screens before the game proper begins - somewhat disappointing when the original experience was completely seamless by comparison. Furthermore, replacing the stylised animated loading screens with static images was another bad move that detracts a touch from the quality of the overall presentation. This was always an element that separated Halo from other games and it's disappointing that something more in line with this design wasn't created here. It's an issue that persists throughout the entirety of The Master Chief Collection.

So even if you play the original version of Halo 2, there's a bunch of load screens added?

 

[Alcifer]

The classic particles aren't running when in anniversary mode. If you watch the DF video you'll see that the particles start again every time they switch back to classic. It's most notable about 3:28 where the dust kicked up by the down draft from the drop ship restarts each time.

Looks like they're not running two rendering engines, just keeping two sets of assets in memory and switching rendering pipeline on a button press.

 

[Shin-Ra]

We weren't allowed yet.

I noticed Gamersyde removed their high quality video downloads early too. Some of the files are still up with the bittorrent links at least.

http://btt.gamersyde.com/Halo_2_Gameplay.mp4.torrent

It's amazing to see the new level of detail present throughout each scene - surfaces that were once completely flat have been replaced with intricate pipework and chunks of machinery, giving a new life to the level design. Foliage is plentiful where appropriate, with the transformation of Delta Halo in particular taking flat textures and replacing them with complex layers of foliage and trees. Normal maps were used extensively in the original Halo 2 to give the impression of greater detail, and the remaster adapts this effect into real geometry, while also utilising superior textures. Overall texture quality is excellent throughout with a nice boost in fidelity that goes well beyond what was achieved in the original Halo's Anniversary release on Xbox 360.

And low-res textures

Low-res prebaked shadow/light

And low-res grass

Unfortunately, the resolution of these effects is compromised in order to maintain a high frame-rate - looking closely at any explosion effect reveals some pretty serious pixellation. It's not usually a problem, but when the screen is filled with explosions and plasma it becomes pretty clear that resolution has been sacrificed.

There's a lot of plasma and explosion effects in Halo (and often close up) so I think it is a frequent problem.

I noticed that in addition to hair/fur, plasma shields have dithered transparency.

 

[Timu]

Well, Halo 3 and 4 are not graphical demanding games @1080p/60 for eSRAM like H2 enhanced engine or maybe my opinion is not correct.

That's probably it since H2 is getting a bigger upgrade.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Minus hosted pics weren't loading so I rehosted.

 

[Shin-Ra]

nbnt's beaten Digital Foundry to posting some good quality screenshots.

And quite frankly, the image quality is bad.