i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
This topic is locked from further discussion.
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Great prediction and net code. Can go a long way.
How are you enjoying the X1... Did they sort your problem out?
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Nice joke m8
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
I was going to give up vag.. due to nostalgia I couldn't bring myself to do it.
it couldn't be nostalgic because you weren't seeing any at young age so your point is irrelevant as always
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Great prediction and net code. Can go a long way.
How are you enjoying the X1... Did they sort your problem out?
honestly not had that much spare time yet because im applying for jobs and stuff but i bought titanfall and enjoying that. bf4 is complete and utter shit, nfs rivals is ok i guess. i rang up ms cs and they recommended i power cycle the console and that sorted the problem out
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Nice joke m8
#no jokes
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
I was going to give up vag.. due to nostalgia I couldn't bring myself to do it.
it couldn't be nostalgic because you weren't seeing any at young age so your point is irrelevant as always
I'm 42.... I was seeing it at a young age my friend... :p
Why do you think old guys buy antique cars they had as a young man... and fix them up?
Why do people listen to old music?
Why do people watch old movies?
Think about the point you're trying to make. Just saying.
I do enjoy blanket statements. Continue.
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
Halo games are awesome. All of them in this collection are AAA. Don't be a hater.
@ghostwarrior786:
No FH2? Yeah the hard reset and power cable go a long way. I do mine every 3-4 days. Also don't leave all the apps running.
WTF would they not give a setting to QUIT an app when you close it, I have zero clue.... I know why.... for speed, but they should give an option in the settings for every app to either Keep Open or Quit on exit .. The way it's set up now is dumb.
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Nice joke m8
#no jokes
You honestly can't tell the difference between 30 and 60? Even after watching the IGN video? Nice joke m8
@ghostwarrior786:
No FH2? Yeah the hard reset and power cable go a long way. I do mine every 3-4 days. Also don't leave all the apps running.
WTF would they not give a setting to QUIT an app when you close it, I have zero clue.... I know why for speed, but they should give an option in the setting for every app to either Keep open or quit on exit .. The way it's set up now is dumb.
gona get fh2 later when i have more time on my hands.
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Nice joke m8
#no jokes
You honestly can't tell the difference between 30 and 60? Even after watching the IGN video? Nice joke m8
ign player is so crap even people who can tell a difference wouldnt be able to. and no im not joking, if i increase the cursor sensitivity in halo reach to maximum it feels fast and fluid like titanfall/team fortress, i cant tell the difference at all
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Nice joke m8
#no jokes
You honestly can't tell the difference between 30 and 60? Even after watching the IGN video? Nice joke m8
ign player is so crap even people who can tell a difference wouldnt be able to. and no im not joking, if i increase the cursor sensitivity in halo reach to maximum it feels fast and fluid like titanfall/team fortress, i cant tell the difference at all
Wouldn't you have to play it at 60 fps also to make that call :P
I bought FH2... All the other games I'm waiting on the buy 2 get 1 free sales. We have in America every year.
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
I was going to give up vag.. due to nostalgia I couldn't bring myself to do it.
it couldn't be nostalgic because you weren't seeing any at young age so your point is irrelevant as always
I didnt play Halo 4. Im glad I didnt so I can enjoy this collection with no hesitation. Sucks that you have nothing to be excited about.
It's too bad the CE multiplayer didn't get the same treatment the campaign did. Still looks nice though.
Well...can't polish a turd.
Halo was and is nothing more than a mediocre bro shooter.
oh look , a cow damage controlling in a Halo thread, theres a suprise*rolls eyes*
i am so Glad the Majority of the gaming world disagrees with you.
Cows always seem to have a meltdown over Halo, tis funny to watch.
Halo, AAA franchise that sells a Ton more than anything exclusive to the playstation.
Frame rates on shooters does matter. For those who only play occasionally they would not notice, but for people like me that can detect an ounce of lag or slow down... it makes all the difference in the world. Funny how I am not a hermit since that matters to me... the reason is mostly because where I live the internet speed is too slow to make a difference, and lag sinks it's ugly fangs in regardless. I have always predominantly been a console gamer, but I do play on every console and PC. If I ever get a killer internet speed things like this will be MUCH more important to me. 60 fps should be what consoles strive for on shooters... gameplay over a thin layer of shine. I will likely buy this. Hopefully by the time I either move to an area with higher speeds, or they bring higher speeds to my area 60fps will be the industry standard. If not, then I will be stuck between a rock and a hard place, because I want to play on my big screen and with a controller without being at a disadvantage. I guess you can't have your cake and eat it too.. :(
@delta3074: well you know many ere hate it when you like something they don't. The funny thing is you would think they would be the low level trolls that do it. However, it's usually the people who have been here as long as you or me.
Of course it matters but this is just a case of some incredible games becoming even better and more polished. They were amazing then, and various improvements will make them amazing again today. But when they were first released, the fact that they were not running at 60 fps was certainly not a deal breaker then, I think that's what's a lot of people refer to when they downplay the 60 fps thing..yes it is important, but lets not lose interest in a game just because of it.
IGN just posted a first look at Halo Combat Anniversary in the Halo Master Chief collection on the Xbox One at 1080p60. As a fan of Halo who has probably played the game over 20 times through, this footage makes me extremely excited.
This is what Halo CE looks like with the Combat Anniversary HD graphics upgrade and at 1080p60.
Those who have played Halo for years can instantly see how much more fluid the combat is and how much better the game looks to play overall. It makes such a difference in the feel of a game. Action feels quicker, aiming is easier and more precise, and the whole game feels even more polished than ever.
The jump to 1080p60 for the Halo series is huge and extremely appreciated. Too bad they couldn't get Halo 2 Combat Anniversary at 1080p60 and had to settle for sub 1080 to keep that 60fps. Oh well, Halo 1, 3, and 4 are all 1080p60.
The only reason Halo 2 Anniversary is sub 1080P is because they kept the switch from the older Xbox 360 graphics to the new HD graphics. If they had removed that switch, they could have easily ran it at the regular native 1080P. So it wasn't that they couldn't do it, they chosed not to so that feature could be there for all 4 games.
Well...can't polish a turd.
Halo was and is nothing more than a mediocre bro shooter.
As opposed to sophisticated, aficionado videogames.
Halo 2 is one of the best competitive FPS games in history, other than Quake and CS.
If your sense of self-worth is derived from the perceived "complexity and nuance" of videogames...you've got bigger issues.
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
It's not "nostalgia" if it is better than anything that has released in the subsequent decade...
What "advancement" in the FPS genre has improved on Halo's winning formula since then?
Sprint? Perks? Load-outs?
All have served only to decrease skill cap and competitive advantage of skilled players.
Well,while everyone bitches about fps and resolution Im just gonna say I cant wait for the MCC.Its my favorite franchise and Halo CE is the greatest game Ive played.Bungie was great with all the games but come on 343,do what Bungie couldnt and bring me back to installation 04.
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
Absolutely can't wait for that nostalgia. People like nostalgia, why are you considering that negative? Four of the best first person shooters EVER in their entirety, redone with better graphics in 60FPS at 1080p. Uhhh what sounds bad about that?
i really cant tell the difference between 30/60fps even when playing a game, halo reach feels just as smooth as titanfall on x1 to me. personally dont give a shit about 60fps
Nice joke m8
#no jokes
You honestly can't tell the difference between 30 and 60? Even after watching the IGN video? Nice joke m8
seriously, 30fps in certain genres might as well give me a seizure
https://gfycat.com/FeistyWavyAcaciara
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
It's not "nostalgia" if it is better than anything that has released in the subsequent decade...
What "advancement" in the FPS genre has improved on Halo's winning formula since then?
Sprint? Perks? Load-outs?
All have served only to decrease skill cap and competitive advantage of skilled players.
Sprint, perks and loadouts decrease skill cap? How?
@silversix_: Because I really, really enjoyed it and I'd like to play it again. The new graphics are just a cherry on top. Can't wait... MCC is my system seller.
In other words you're spending whatever this costs for NOSTALGIA purposes only.
It's not "nostalgia" if it is better than anything that has released in the subsequent decade...
What "advancement" in the FPS genre has improved on Halo's winning formula since then?
Sprint? Perks? Load-outs?
All have served only to decrease skill cap and competitive advantage of skilled players.
Sprint, perks and loadouts decrease skill cap? How?
Any competitive FPS gamer from the 90s or early 2000s will tell you the same thing.
Competitive gameplay is at its best when the primary deciding factor on who wins an engagement is player skill (positioning, map knowledge, weapon control, and technical skill, ie aiming and character movement)
Sprint makes it a very viable option for a player who is losing an engagement to simply run away, hide, wait for his recharging health (another bad addition), and then come back to try to win the next engagement. Bad. You want the best option to be for the player to try to actually win the firefight with superior aiming, movement, etc.
Perks frankly shouldn't need explanation. If I die because I got shot by a bloody AC-130 gunship which I have almost 0 chance of harming or fighting back against...that simply destroys competitive gaming. Every kill should be because I was "out skilled" by the other player. Not because some other player got lucky with a few consecutive kills and then is rewarded with an automatic "I win" unlock for the next 15 seconds.
Load-outs differentiate players base abilities. Bad. It works fairly well in large, strategic games like Battlefield, but these aren't skill based arena shooters. A fundamental pillar of competitive FPSs is that every player is exactly the same at spawn. The only difference between players is skill. Part of this skill is knowledge of the map and where strategic areas/power weapons spawn. I should die because the other player fought that last engagement better than I did. Not because he spawned with a weapon that is far more effective at the range we happened to first engage in a firefight at (I spawned with a sub-machine gun and he spawned with a scoped assault rifle).
This attempt to reduce the skill cap has been prevalent across all genres of games, especially large budget titles, for the past decade. Developers want their titles to be "accessible", meaning they don't intimidate any potential buyers in hopes of increasing sales. The FPS genre is just one in which this shift has been exceedingly obvious. Unreal Tournament 2004 to UT III is one egregious example.
It's not "nostalgia" if it is better than anything that has released in the subsequent decade...
What "advancement" in the FPS genre has improved on Halo's winning formula since then?
Sprint? Perks? Load-outs?
All have served only to decrease skill cap and competitive advantage of skilled players.
Sprint, perks and loadouts decrease skill cap? How?
Any competitive FPS gamer from the 90s or early 2000s will tell you the same thing.
Competitive gameplay is at its best when the primary deciding factor on who wins an engagement is player skill (positioning, map knowledge, weapon control, and technical skill, ie aiming and character movement)
Sprint makes it a very viable option for a player who is losing an engagement to simply run away, hide, wait for his recharging health (another bad addition), and then come back to try to win the next engagement. Bad. You want the best option to be for the player to try to actually win the firefight with superior aiming, movement, etc.
Perks frankly shouldn't need explanation. If I die because I got shot by a bloody AC-130 gunship which I have almost 0 chance of harming or fighting back against...that simply destroys competitive gaming. Every kill should be because I was "out skilled" by the other player. Not because some other player got lucky with a few consecutive kills and then is rewarded with an automatic "I win" unlock for the next 15 seconds.
Load-outs differentiate players base abilities. Bad. It works fairly well in large, strategic games like Battlefield, but these aren't skill based arena shooters. A fundamental pillar of competitive FPSs is that every player is exactly the same at spawn. The only difference between players is skill. Part of this skill is knowledge of the map and where strategic areas/power weapons spawn. I should die because the other player fought that last engagement better than I did. Not because he spawned with a weapon that is far more effective at the range we happened to first engage in a firefight at (I spawned with a sub-machine gun and he spawned with a scoped assault rifle).
This attempt to reduce the skill cap has been prevalent across all genres of games, especially large budget titles, for the past decade. Developers want their titles to be "accessible", meaning they don't intimidate any potential buyers in hopes of increasing sales. The FPS genre is just one in which this shift has been exceedingly obvious. Unreal Tournament 2004 to UT III is one egregious example.
Both players can sprint though. You're speaking as if only the losing player has sprinting ability.
AC 130 is a killstreak, not a perk and players don't just randomly get access to it. You need to play very well to get it, I think it's either 9 or 11 kills without dying to get it. It's a power up that's not all that different from quad damage in Quake.
Load outs are the one thing that is noob friendly but I wouldn't use your scenario. What if in Quake I spawn near the shotgun, enemy spawns near the railgun and we spot each other from afar? Not much different from your loadouts are bad scenario. Load outs make a game easier because it allows the player to spawn with their fav weapon and they don't have to learn how to use any other weapon to do well. Map knowledge is still very important even in games with loadouts though.
Now that Quake Live has loadouts you never have to bother with those weapons you had the most trouble with, although in ffa I still see the same players winning just like they used to.
UT 3 was an attempt to get back to UT's roots. There was a huge outcry when UT2k3 came out with it's jump dodging, wall running and focus on hitscan.
60 FPS and 1080p is soooooo last decade. silly peasants not having 1440p at 144fps.
On a more serious note... I don't miss Halo at all... that slow gunplay.... easy reticule sizes... and slow overall movement... amplified in 60 FPS just reminds me how "Baby's first arena shooter" Halo actually was.
i thought this wasnt going to run in 1080p?
That's only Halo 2 b/c it's running duel engines simultaneously so you can switch back & forth on the fly from original Xbox version to this new remade HD version plus there's some destructible environments now that can be used to damage the enemies. The new Halo 2 is what I'm looking forward to the most in MCC... .. by far.
It's not "nostalgia" if it is better than anything that has released in the subsequent decade...
What "advancement" in the FPS genre has improved on Halo's winning formula since then?
Sprint? Perks? Load-outs?
All have served only to decrease skill cap and competitive advantage of skilled players.
Sprint, perks and loadouts decrease skill cap? How?
Any competitive FPS gamer from the 90s or early 2000s will tell you the same thing.
Competitive gameplay is at its best when the primary deciding factor on who wins an engagement is player skill (positioning, map knowledge, weapon control, and technical skill, ie aiming and character movement)
Sprint makes it a very viable option for a player who is losing an engagement to simply run away, hide, wait for his recharging health (another bad addition), and then come back to try to win the next engagement. Bad. You want the best option to be for the player to try to actually win the firefight with superior aiming, movement, etc.
Perks frankly shouldn't need explanation. If I die because I got shot by a bloody AC-130 gunship which I have almost 0 chance of harming or fighting back against...that simply destroys competitive gaming. Every kill should be because I was "out skilled" by the other player. Not because some other player got lucky with a few consecutive kills and then is rewarded with an automatic "I win" unlock for the next 15 seconds.
Load-outs differentiate players base abilities. Bad. It works fairly well in large, strategic games like Battlefield, but these aren't skill based arena shooters. A fundamental pillar of competitive FPSs is that every player is exactly the same at spawn. The only difference between players is skill. Part of this skill is knowledge of the map and where strategic areas/power weapons spawn. I should die because the other player fought that last engagement better than I did. Not because he spawned with a weapon that is far more effective at the range we happened to first engage in a firefight at (I spawned with a sub-machine gun and he spawned with a scoped assault rifle).
This attempt to reduce the skill cap has been prevalent across all genres of games, especially large budget titles, for the past decade. Developers want their titles to be "accessible", meaning they don't intimidate any potential buyers in hopes of increasing sales. The FPS genre is just one in which this shift has been exceedingly obvious. Unreal Tournament 2004 to UT III is one egregious example.
Both players can sprint though. You're speaking as if only the losing player has sprinting ability.
AC 130 is a killstreak, not a perk and players don't just randomly get access to it. You need to play very well to get it, I think it's either 9 or 11 kills without dying to get it. It's a power up that's not all that different from quad damage in Quake.
Load outs are the one thing that is noob friendly but I wouldn't use your scenario. What if in Quake I spawn near the shotgun, enemy spawns near the railgun and we spot each other from afar? Not much different from your loadouts are bad scenario. Load outs make a game easier because it allows the player to spawn with their fav weapon and they don't have to learn how to use any other weapon to do well. Map knowledge is still very important even in games with loadouts though.
Now that Quake Live has loadouts you never have to bother with those weapons you had the most trouble with, although in ffa I still see the same players winning just like they used to.
UT 3 was an attempt to get back to UT's roots. There was a huge outcry when UT2k3 came out with it's jump dodging, wall running and focus on hitscan.
Yes, and in medium to long range engagements, by the time the attacker has managed to sprint behind the cover that the fleeing person hid behind, his/her health and managed to regenerate half-way (or completely), thus negating the advantage initially given to the attacker for getting "the jump" on the other player and winning the initial engagement.
I guess killstreaks would be a better term, my apologies. I just checked out some of these killstreaks for the newest "hot" fps Call of Duty: Ghosts. At 5 kills, you get a guard dog that automatically attacks people for you. At 7 kills, you get a "Trinity Rocket" missile I win button. At 9 kills, you get a bloody Hind helicopter that automatically attacks all enemies.
NONE of these help to create a game conducive to skill based, competitive FPS games. In Halo 2, the "killstreak" you got for killing 10 enemies in a row was...the ability to position yourself in a strategically advantageous location and the ability to set up control, with your teammates, of areas in which power weapons spawn.
Developers has systematically made games with lower skill caps in order to appeal to larger audiences. Since development costs have skyrocketed, this is a logical step for them. Hell, even Gamespot, hardly a "hardcore" gaming forum, has been complaining about this for years. The FPS genre is just one of the most noticeable.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment