Halo: Combat Evolved Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why Halo 3: ODST beats Halo CE
  • Subject: Why Halo 3: ODST beats Halo CE
Subject: Why Halo 3: ODST beats Halo CE

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: SweetTRIX
This thread is hilarious, but i'll add in my 2 cents anyway:

ODST, IMO, is an homage to the perfect gameplay of Halo CE. CE (out of the main titles) had the best balance, the best gamepley, in MP and campian, the the best story. Simply put, they did everything right with the first title. I'm in no way saying the others are garbage, but CE is one of those rare titles that just happens to nail everything.

CE had a campaign that is still exciting to this day. The story, the scripting, the pacing and the feel, was far superior to either of it's sequals. To this very day, as a gamer for nearly 20 years, I can say with no doubt that Halo CE is the most replayable shooter I have ever played.

Now, we move to ODST. It is a tough comparison between CE and ODST for two very big reasons, the way each game tells their stories, and the way each game was formated. Hace CE was a standalone title, a fresh new property. ODST was built off of the same engine as a previous title, and had an established world to play in. Halo CE was a linear story, whereas ODST is not, allowing for some very different play scenarios. While I certainly enjoyed ODST, it is alarmingly short, even on legendary. CE is a fun but challenging game, whereas ODST is more like an exciting romp.

The "meat" of the game is in the night missions as the Rookie, the exploration and the tension, the catch is that much of that can be avoided and rushed through. Add to that that if you are not searching the area, and simply traveling from way-point to way-point, you greatly cut the game time down. All said and done i've beaten the game on legendary inside of 3 hours. That doesn't make it terribly, but it does make it terribly short, and affects it's replayability.

What ODST does have for it is Firefight, which is a ton of fun, and a great addition, but saddled with it's own issues. Halo CE's MP was strictly console or LAN, meaning it avoided the problems on online gameing (xbox connect notwithstanding) and played marvelously. I cannot take graphics and presentation into account when comparing titles that are seperated by as many years as these two are, not to mention an entire console generation. The score in ODST is by far more touching, but it was supposed to be the more emotionally "grabbing" game. CE was large, ominous. ODST was tight and threatening, and the music reflected as much.

I guess all said and done CE is still my favorite Halo title, but ODST is an easy second and obvious choice for consistent play due to current features. ODST's success is largely due to the fact that it brought Halo's gameplay back to the simplicity of CE, something that was lost in 2 and 3.


ODST is very short mainly because it's purely an expansion to Halo 3 which is why I don't think ODST should've cost $60. But yeah, what makes ODST hard to compare to other games is like you said, the way campaign works is different. However, while I like ODST, it falls in either 2nd or 3rd place on the list of Halo games in my opinion. Here's how I rank the Halo games.

Halo 3 > Halo 2 > ODST >= Halo 1 (can't decide between ODST and Halo 1)

Oh and as for the graphics, I think there are cases where older games have better graphics than newer games. I can't name any examples at the moment, but I think some Valve games used to have better graphics and the newer versions barely changed at all. But I can't name any examples at the moment so I won't comment on that any further.

Also, in about 1 year, the last Bungie-made Halo game will come out, Halo: Reach. This will be the first stand-alone Halo game in awhile that is built from a new engine that is not an expansion of an older game like ODST. The game isn't out yet so all we can do is speculate, but Halo: Reach should offer a whole new experience. If Halo: Reach is as good as Bungie says it's going to be, then I expect it to surpass all the Halo games.

By the way, in that list above, I didn't list Halo Wars because I thought it was such a fail game that it can't be compared to any other Halo game. Halo 1 is like 100 times better than Halo Wars. I'm sure RTS fans will disagree, but no matter what, Halo 1 is better.

  • 10.05.2009 7:59 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: bob570
  • user homepage:

R.I.P. Halo 2
11/9/04 - 4/15/10

- B( )B

I honestly doubt Halo: Reach will surpass all the previous Halos. I thought Halo 2 would be better than Halo 1, I was wrong. I thought Halo 3 would be better than Halo 1, again I was wrong. I hope Halo: Reach will be the greatest Halo game ever, but the chances are slim.

  • 10.05.2009 8:48 PM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

Halo Reach stands the best chance to be a "better" game because it is not not bound by the rule of the sequal. Even though it is an FPS, there is much that can be done with this game to give it a fresh start. However personally I feel that if Reach needs to mimmick a game, it would be best served by immitating CE or ODST.

Halo2 and 3 streamlined the MP experiance and simplified to the point where skill no longer ruled the playing field, consistent use on a weapon did. A weapon should have a purpose, and that purpose should be singular, not map control. Both Halo2 and 3 suffered greatly from balance issues due to the BR, and the way singular weapons were affected by dual wielding. Take into account the map design and you have a terribly balanced game that the mainstream auidence eats up because it is so damn easy it's boring, (unless you really care about that little number by your GT in MM).

I actually enjoyed Wars, becuase I am quite able to step back from a property and enjoy many facets of it. Personally I do not feel that Halo games must play as FPS, truth be told I wanted Reach to be a 3rd person shooter, with stronger attention payed to troop movement. The game still has a good chance to be something special though, i'm looking forward to a new visual style, and a great story.

  • 10.06.2009 1:01 AM PDT

Gamertag: I am 7he 7ruth
I have all the Halo games(From 1 to ODST).I just don't know how to link my gamertag.

Have you ever played Halo?Halo 3:ODST is a homage to it,the pistol,health system,and the questions(When I first played 343 Guitly Spark I had some questions).And I still play mutliplayer with my friends(spilt-screen) 'till this day.After Halo 2 came out I also made a SWAT(FFA) mode too,it's fun on Prisoner and Hang Then High!I have yet to play ODST but I know no-other Halo game could ever beat Halo:Combat Evolved.

  • 10.06.2009 8:42 AM PDT

BYAHH

Posted by: thewhorocker15
Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: Micro5
Saying all this, note that I absolutely love my ODST:

Replayabilty: After completing the campaign, you can hunt down (co-op) achievements and audio logs, but after that, I don't see anyone but regular Halo fans like forum-goers here playing it more. I don't want to get into the sweetness of Combat Evolved's campaign, but if you're a regular here you don't need to hear it - long story short, no comparison. At all.

Graphics: ODST's art was very well done. I was pleasantly surprised at the visor's opaque/transparent switches and of course the epic drop sequence. That said, Halo's simplistic art style still appeals to me more than Halo 2 and 3's. Multiplayer maps are the exception.

Soundtrack: It's music, you can't compare them. Personally, I did like the new one better: New, creative, original tracks that had a full orchestra backing (that there obviously wasn't budget room in for Halo 1).

It's unfair to compare multiplayer modes, seeing as it wasn't even a main feature 'til Halo 2.



I like ODST too and I think the entire city with all the buildings is just amazing! You don't see too many games like that. As for the multiplayer, Halo 1 technically did have online multiplayer when the PC version of it came out. But even the PC version of multiplayer had lots of downsides until Halo 2 came.

But all in all, ODST has the best graphics to date and good replayability.


Who cares if Halo 1's multiplayer doesn't have Xbox live? It's gameplay was better than every other Halo, and in the end gameplay is all that matters.


Halo 1 on computer is the best. It has an equivalent to Xbox live and has Halo 1 gameplay. So good especially if you hook up a 360 controller.

  • 10.06.2009 9:09 AM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: Salamakajakawaka
Posted by: thewhorocker15
Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: Micro5
Saying all this, note that I absolutely love my ODST:

Replayabilty: After completing the campaign, you can hunt down (co-op) achievements and audio logs, but after that, I don't see anyone but regular Halo fans like forum-goers here playing it more. I don't want to get into the sweetness of Combat Evolved's campaign, but if you're a regular here you don't need to hear it - long story short, no comparison. At all.

Graphics: ODST's art was very well done. I was pleasantly surprised at the visor's opaque/transparent switches and of course the epic drop sequence. That said, Halo's simplistic art style still appeals to me more than Halo 2 and 3's. Multiplayer maps are the exception.

Soundtrack: It's music, you can't compare them. Personally, I did like the new one better: New, creative, original tracks that had a full orchestra backing (that there obviously wasn't budget room in for Halo 1).

It's unfair to compare multiplayer modes, seeing as it wasn't even a main feature 'til Halo 2.



I like ODST too and I think the entire city with all the buildings is just amazing! You don't see too many games like that. As for the multiplayer, Halo 1 technically did have online multiplayer when the PC version of it came out. But even the PC version of multiplayer had lots of downsides until Halo 2 came.

But all in all, ODST has the best graphics to date and good replayability.


Who cares if Halo 1's multiplayer doesn't have Xbox live? It's gameplay was better than every other Halo, and in the end gameplay is all that matters.


Halo 1 on computer is the best. It has an equivalent to Xbox live and has Halo 1 gameplay. So good especially if you hook up a 360 controller.


Halo 1 PC doesn't support the 360 controller. You need to use a program like Xpadder and manually change the controls. However, on the other hand, Halo 2 PC does support the 360 controller and does have Xbox Live (Games for Windows Live). So there's that.

  • 10.06.2009 1:06 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All it took was a stew of whoopass.

Well, sometimes they talk for the majority.But I have my doubts.It may sometimes be a good idea, but not always.Maybe most of the little kids will follow the critics, but not people who follow their own judgement.
Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: cRaZyT101
Critics are nothing.They can say that this game could be the worst game ever.Then if you play it, and you think it's good, what will you think of the critics?Are they wrong?No.They are just expressing they're own opinions of the game.And why are you even posting this?Who cares if a game is better than another game.It's all about opinions if you like it or not.Not about features, unless you think it makes the game better.Besides, can critics rate the feeling you get when you play Halo:CE for the first time?If you even get a feeling that is.


Generally, critics reflect the opinions of the majority of players. Obviously not everyone agrees with the critics, but the majority will usually agree with it more or less.

  • 10.06.2009 1:19 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: cRaZyT101
Well, sometimes they talk for the majority.But I have my doubts.It may sometimes be a good idea, but not always.Maybe most of the little kids will follow the critics, but not people who follow their own judgement.
Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: cRaZyT101
Critics are nothing.They can say that this game could be the worst game ever.Then if you play it, and you think it's good, what will you think of the critics?Are they wrong?No.They are just expressing they're own opinions of the game.And why are you even posting this?Who cares if a game is better than another game.It's all about opinions if you like it or not.Not about features, unless you think it makes the game better.Besides, can critics rate the feeling you get when you play Halo:CE for the first time?If you even get a feeling that is.


Generally, critics reflect the opinions of the majority of players. Obviously not everyone agrees with the critics, but the majority will usually agree with it more or less.


Actually, I didn't say that we follow the critics. I said the critics follow us. They reflect our opinions in most cases.

  • 10.06.2009 3:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All it took was a stew of whoopass.

I didn't say we follow them, I said they sometimes speak for the majority.Sometimes.

  • 10.07.2009 11:56 AM PDT

Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: Salamakajakawaka
Posted by: thewhorocker15
Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: Micro5
Saying all this, note that I absolutely love my ODST:

Replayabilty: After completing the campaign, you can hunt down (co-op) achievements and audio logs, but after that, I don't see anyone but regular Halo fans like forum-goers here playing it more. I don't want to get into the sweetness of Combat Evolved's campaign, but if you're a regular here you don't need to hear it - long story short, no comparison. At all.

Graphics: ODST's art was very well done. I was pleasantly surprised at the visor's opaque/transparent switches and of course the epic drop sequence. That said, Halo's simplistic art style still appeals to me more than Halo 2 and 3's. Multiplayer maps are the exception.

Soundtrack: It's music, you can't compare them. Personally, I did like the new one better: New, creative, original tracks that had a full orchestra backing (that there obviously wasn't budget room in for Halo 1).

It's unfair to compare multiplayer modes, seeing as it wasn't even a main feature 'til Halo 2.



I like ODST too and I think the entire city with all the buildings is just amazing! You don't see too many games like that. As for the multiplayer, Halo 1 technically did have online multiplayer when the PC version of it came out. But even the PC version of multiplayer had lots of downsides until Halo 2 came.

But all in all, ODST has the best graphics to date and good replayability.


Who cares if Halo 1's multiplayer doesn't have Xbox live? It's gameplay was better than every other Halo, and in the end gameplay is all that matters.


Halo 1 on computer is the best. It has an equivalent to Xbox live and has Halo 1 gameplay. So good especially if you hook up a 360 controller.


Halo 1 PC doesn't support the 360 controller. You need to use a program like Xpadder and manually change the controls. However, on the other hand, Halo 2 PC does support the 360 controller and does have Xbox Live (Games for Windows Live). So there's that.


You would honestly chose a controller over a M/K?? and everyone knows GFWL fails, hell the PSN is better than GFWL.

  • 10.07.2009 12:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: JacobGRocks
Wait, isnt this from the same guy who also goes in to the halo 2 forum, and says in the omg shutting down (not really) threads, that we should move on and get Halo 3 odst.

But seriously, Halo 1 is the best campagin, and unlike ODST, it has multiplayer over lan tunnel and the pc version is even better, with more weps (fuel rod gun and flamethrower), more viechles (rocket hogs, shees), and best of all, online and custom edition.

Not to mention, general heed has also trolled the Halo PC forum, getting called a console n00b, not knowing what he is talking about.

General heed aka general kid on youtube is a dick that only likes the graphics.

  • 10.07.2009 12:56 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: LoneStaruner
You would honestly chose a controller over a M/K?? and everyone knows GFWL fails, hell the PSN is better than GFWL.


It depends what type of game it is. For racing games, I tend to prefer the controller. For RTS games (I don't usually play them), I prefer the mouse and keyboard. For FPS, I'm split 50-50, but because I've played more FPS's on the console, I'm more used to the controller. For RPG games, I definitely prefer the controller for that. For Fighter games, that would be the controller. But for some classic arcade games like Pacman, I would prefer mouse and keyboard.

The only reason I like GFWL is because it let's me keep in touch with my friends on Xbox Live even when I'm not able get on my Xbox 360. While GFWL is limited, it's got all I need for a PC game.

  • 10.07.2009 2:21 PM PDT

"I was born with Halo, live with Halo...die with Halo."
Bungie forever7 <3
Guide to Canon in the Halo Universe

Im a Bungie veteran. I have and always will serve them well.

Halo 3 ODST is an expansion...not a FULL game. Halo CE is better hands down.

  • 10.08.2009 2:54 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: Dark Spartan 218
Halo 3 ODST is an expansion...not a FULL game. Halo CE is better hands down.


That all depends on the criteria...

  • 10.08.2009 4:39 PM PDT

I am open to doing free clan tags for anyone. Contact me on my deviant art profile through a note and NOT on my comments page as they will not be acknowledged.

Click on the "My Homepage" button to be directed to my page.

No. Halo was the MOST epic campaign out of all the Halo's.

The multiplayer was also much more competitive.

  • 10.10.2009 1:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Raawry
  • user homepage:

Contribute to 10,000,000,000 covie kills!

I'm bored of ODST already. Havn't played it in days. TBH Halo: CE lasted me all the way until Halo 2.

ODST = A week
Halo: CE = 3 years

Think I prefer Halo: CE...

  • 10.10.2009 5:18 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: SHAOLINMONKEY 93
No. Halo was the MOST epic campaign out of all the Halo's.

The multiplayer was also much more competitive.


I think that Halo 3 is actually the most competitive. If you've ever played in a ranked playlist with people who are ranked generals with 50's, they are extremely competitive and get extremely angry if they lose or miss a headshot.

  • 10.10.2009 7:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: General Heed
Not everything original is better. Is the original xbox better? Is the original way of connecting to the internet better (dial-up)? Is the original light bulb better? Is the original computer better? The answer is no for all of them. Technology always gets better.


Xbox 360 - Red Ring Of Death
Original Xbox - no red ring of death
*Xbox 360 - 4 out of 5 people Xbox 360s broke
*Original Xbox - 1 out of 50 people Xbox's broke

Yes, I have had both systems sold my Original Xbox a few years ago. Got a Xbox 360 and had a total of 3 or 4 of them because it broke so often. Therefore, I actually sold my Xbox 360 over the summer to get an Original Xbox Halo Edition just because it has better reliability.


*Stats are based off of my opinion.

  • 10.11.2009 9:45 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: ErikReventon
Posted by: General Heed
Not everything original is better. Is the original xbox better? Is the original way of connecting to the internet better (dial-up)? Is the original light bulb better? Is the original computer better? The answer is no for all of them. Technology always gets better.


Xbox 360 - Red Ring Of Death
Original Xbox - no red ring of death
*Xbox 360 - 4 out of 5 people Xbox 360s broke
*Original Xbox - 1 out of 50 people Xbox's broke

Yes, I have had both systems sold my Original Xbox a few years ago. Got a Xbox 360 and had a total of 3 or 4 of them because it broke so often. Therefore, I actually sold my Xbox 360 over the summer to get an Original Xbox Halo Edition just because it has better reliability.


*Stats are based off of my opinion.


Well, let me be the first to say that you made a huge mistake by selling your 360. Microsoft has been talking about it and it's going to happen eventually, but they're planning on shutting down Xbox Live to all original xbox games forever in order to improve the Xbox 360 version of Xbox Live.

Also, in case you don't read the news, the Red Rings of Death problem has pretty much been fixed. Those stats you presented are like 2-3 years old. All new Xbox 360's and repaired Xbox 360's shouldn't get the Red Rings anymore. Plus, with the original Xbox, you're going to miss out on all the awesome new games like Halo: Reach, Gears of War 3, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Fable 3, Forza Motorsport 3, and all the blockbuster franchises of the Xbox 360.

Now, my Xbox 360 has only broken one time a couple years ago and ever since it got repaired, it has performed flawlessly and it's almost like nothing ever happened. With the original Xbox, you're missing out on all the fun features of Xbox Live. If you don't use Xbox Live, then you're still missing out on a lot of other features.

Now it's been at least a year since I heard about anyone getting the red rings of death. That is not an exaggeration. About 2 years ago, I would hear about the Red Rings of Death almost as much as you hear about Swine Flu today. But of course that Red Rings rarely occur anymore. Now the reliability of your Original Xbox is going to drop as it ages. Just like how an old car breaks down a lot, your Original Xbox is going to start showing signs of aging. In fact, at this point, the Xbox 360 is probably more reliable now.

  • 10.12.2009 12:19 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: bob570
  • user homepage:

R.I.P. Halo 2
11/9/04 - 4/15/10

- B( )B

Posted by: General Heed
Oh and as for the graphics, I think there are cases where older games have better graphics than newer games. I can't name any examples at the moment, but I think some Valve games used to have better graphics and the newer versions barely changed at all. But I can't name any examples at the moment so I won't comment on that any further.
You obviously know nothing about video game tech, do you?

Valve, up until fairly recently, has only been a developer of computer games, which have much more potential graphically than console. They have used the same engine for every game they made since 2004, the Source engine, it hasn't been changed at all since then.

Halo 1 was made for Xbox, 8 years ago. Halo 3 ODST was made for the Xbox 360, 3 weeks ago, and they use completely different engines. Here are the consoles specs.

Xbox
CPU - 733 MHz Intel Pentium III
GPU - 233 MHz nVidia NV2A
RAM - 64 MB of DDR SDRAM @ 200 MHz

Xbox 360
CPU - 3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core (3.2 GHz x 3)
GPU - 500 MHz ATI Xenos
RAM - 512MB of GDDR3 RAM @ 700MHz

[Edited on 10.12.2009 4:09 PM PDT]

  • 10.12.2009 4:06 PM PDT

This is the average H2 Fanboy.
Xfire: JacobGRocks.
50 in H2/H3? Great, but you still fail at this.

Several things:
1. MS isnt going to shut down original live because of Halo 2.
2. There is always xbc and kai
3.It has been "fixed", as now there is e74, another heat related error. Also, i got a rrod because of a bad psu once.
4. I know people who have had their 360s repaired and then had to send it in again.
5. And about that older better than newer, you meant Half Life Source, that lame port of HL1 to the source engine. That is an example of older>newer.

  • 10.12.2009 5:45 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: BOB570
Posted by: General Heed
Oh and as for the graphics, I think there are cases where older games have better graphics than newer games. I can't name any examples at the moment, but I think some Valve games used to have better graphics and the newer versions barely changed at all. But I can't name any examples at the moment so I won't comment on that any further.
You obviously know nothing about video game tech, do you?

Valve, up until fairly recently, has only been a developer of computer games, which have much more potential graphically than console. They have used the same engine for every game they made since 2004, the Source engine, it hasn't been changed at all since then.

Halo 1 was made for Xbox, 8 years ago. Halo 3 ODST was made for the Xbox 360, 3 weeks ago, and they use completely different engines. Here are the consoles specs.

Xbox
CPU - 733 MHz Intel Pentium III
GPU - 233 MHz nVidia NV2A
RAM - 64 MB of DDR SDRAM @ 200 MHz

Xbox 360
CPU - 3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core (3.2 GHz x 3)
GPU - 500 MHz ATI Xenos
RAM - 512MB of GDDR3 RAM @ 700MHz


Great use of Wikipedia there. I think we've all read that article. The PowerPC Tricore CPU is actually codenamed Xenon in case you didn't know.

You've pretty much repeated the same thing I've said so far. I already said that the graphics look fairly similar in all Valve games using the Source Engine.

  • 10.12.2009 5:47 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: bob570
  • user homepage:

R.I.P. Halo 2
11/9/04 - 4/15/10

- B( )B

Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: BOB570
Posted by: General Heed
Oh and as for the graphics, I think there are cases where older games have better graphics than newer games. I can't name any examples at the moment, but I think some Valve games used to have better graphics and the newer versions barely changed at all. But I can't name any examples at the moment so I won't comment on that any further.
You obviously know nothing about video game tech, do you?

Valve, up until fairly recently, has only been a developer of computer games, which have much more potential graphically than console. They have used the same engine for every game they made since 2004, the Source engine, it hasn't been changed at all since then.

Halo 1 was made for Xbox, 8 years ago. Halo 3 ODST was made for the Xbox 360, 3 weeks ago, and they use completely different engines. Here are the consoles specs.

Xbox
CPU - 733 MHz Intel Pentium III
GPU - 233 MHz nVidia NV2A
RAM - 64 MB of DDR SDRAM @ 200 MHz

Xbox 360
CPU - 3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core (3.2 GHz x 3)
GPU - 500 MHz ATI Xenos
RAM - 512MB of GDDR3 RAM @ 700MHz


Great use of Wikipedia there. I think we've all read that article. The PowerPC Tricore CPU is actually codenamed Xenon in case you didn't know.

You've pretty much repeated the same thing I've said so far. I already said that the graphics look fairly similar in all Valve games using the Source Engine.

Do you even know what you wrote on the post I quoted? It looks as if you were attempting to justify comparing Halo 1 to Halo 3 ODST's graphics.

Also I think you're completely missing my point, Halo 1 and Halo 3 ODST were made on completely different engines for different consoles, 8 years apart. Therefore their graphics cannot be compared. Valve's games are made on the exact same engine, for computers, which have much less limitation. Valve's games all look pretty much exactly the same because they use the exact same engine, even new games look exactly the same.

Oh, and actually the Xenon's are only for the first generation of 360's. They were later replaced by the Falcon chipset, which was later replaced by the Jasper chipset, which is rumored to be replaced a Valhalla chipset with 45 nm CPU and GPU.

[Edited on 10.12.2009 7:12 PM PDT]

  • 10.12.2009 7:08 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: BOB570
Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: BOB570
Posted by: General Heed
Oh and as for the graphics, I think there are cases where older games have better graphics than newer games. I can't name any examples at the moment, but I think some Valve games used to have better graphics and the newer versions barely changed at all. But I can't name any examples at the moment so I won't comment on that any further.
You obviously know nothing about video game tech, do you?

Valve, up until fairly recently, has only been a developer of computer games, which have much more potential graphically than console. They have used the same engine for every game they made since 2004, the Source engine, it hasn't been changed at all since then.

Halo 1 was made for Xbox, 8 years ago. Halo 3 ODST was made for the Xbox 360, 3 weeks ago, and they use completely different engines. Here are the consoles specs.

Xbox
CPU - 733 MHz Intel Pentium III
GPU - 233 MHz nVidia NV2A
RAM - 64 MB of DDR SDRAM @ 200 MHz

Xbox 360
CPU - 3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core (3.2 GHz x 3)
GPU - 500 MHz ATI Xenos
RAM - 512MB of GDDR3 RAM @ 700MHz


Great use of Wikipedia there. I think we've all read that article. The PowerPC Tricore CPU is actually codenamed Xenon in case you didn't know.

You've pretty much repeated the same thing I've said so far. I already said that the graphics look fairly similar in all Valve games using the Source Engine.

Do you even know what you wrote on the post I quoted? It looks as if you were attempting to justify comparing Halo 1 to Halo 3 ODST's graphics.

Also I think you're completely missing my point, Halo 1 and Halo 3 ODST were made on completely different engines for different consoles, 8 years apart. Therefore their graphics cannot be compared. Valve's games are made on the exact same engine, for computers, which have much less limitation. Valve's games all look pretty much exactly the same because they use the exact same engine, even new games look exactly the same.

Oh, and actually the Xenon's are only for the first generation of 360's. They were later replaced by the Falcon chipset, which was later replaced by the Jasper chipset, which is rumored to be replaced a Valhalla chipset with 45 nm CPU and GPU.


Technically, Halo 3 uses the same engine as Halo 2. It's just heavily modified. You can modify a game engine to the point where the graphics are improved so much as demonstrated from Halo 2 to Halo 3. Even ODST has slightly better graphical improvements from Halo 3. Now Halo 3 does have a different engine than Halo 1. You're right. But there is another game that's also on the original xbox that uses the Halo 1 engine. It's called Stubbs The Zombie. It uses a heavily modified Halo 1 Engine. It's graphics are way better than Halo 1's though. And the engine has been modified to the point where its capabilities come close to the Halo 2 Engine which also runs on the original xbox.

So just because a game uses the same engine as another, doesn't mean the graphics will always be the same. Valve is just lazy and doesn't take the time to dramatically modify their source engine to improve the graphics to a next-gen level.

So the Halo Engine is a good example of how possible it is to improvement greatly.

  • 10.12.2009 7:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Anyways..back on topic. You can't compare certain characteristics of the games such as graphics because of time difference. Though it seems fair that the only thing you can compare Halo 3: ODST to Halo Combat Evolved would be the campaign mode. Since neither game has playable Xbox Live Multiplayer like Halo 2 and Halo 3 do.

  • 10.12.2009 8:37 PM PDT