I have played Halo alot back when i had my Xbox 360 and hearing the possibilty of it added into the MCC made me super excited, i just wanted to propose and idea here in the feedback section because i dont know any other place.
If reach was to be remastered (graphics and fps wise) i think one of the most crucial aspects to why it is still si popular today should remain, and that is shared servers between Xone and X360 players. Im thinking you could still play with OG and BK. Compatibility players while you have the version with better graphics. Since i belive that is no advantage, not even the higher FPS bc all Reach players that remain are super used to 30 and have no disadvantage at all, not to mention the frames on Reach are insanely stable even with explosions all over the place.
“What about updates?” if you are planning on updating UI’s or adding new maps, why not let the OG crowd enjoy it too? Yes it would take more time but the outcome would be more than worth it, keeping the game alive and even raising its daily amount of players. Who knows, maybe the game reaches another golden age and enters the over 15k player amount? It is very plausible with an amazing game like that.
New in-game content:
I dont think adding more guns is good, especially since the balance of the game is so good (ok maybe a BR but thats it lol). However, what about something resembling a prestige after reaching the Inheritor rank? I dont mean reseting all items but exclusive armor that can only be obtained in that “prestige” giving players even more reason to play!
Thats all i have to say, im sure the Halo community will agree with me at least on the first major point. But remember NO REQ packs, maybe weapon skins obtained through playing the game…
My thanks to the developers and halo community for reading, feel free to discuss this further and give your own ideas! (sry for any grammar errors ENG is not my first language)
Talked about numerous times, Reach does NOT need a remaster. Halo 3 partially, but it’s another story. If Halo 3 wasn’t HD, it’s highly possible it would have gotten it’s remaster, but since it is, not really worth it, so Reach certainly is NOT worth the effort to make the graphics better. There would be NO difference at all, maybe aside from better anti-aliasing and texture filtering, but besides that, the remaster would look EXACTLY the same as the original.
If I’m reading that right, you’re suggesting for the remaster to run at 60 FPS and still share the servers with it’s 30 FPS brothers. That’s a TERRIBLE idea. Framerate matter ALOT. A 60 FPS user will have an advantage that the 30 FPS user doesn’t, making it unfair, thus making games more uneven, me getting a worse K/D not being the only me, and making people leaving Reach because of the unfairness and it would in turn, in no time, become a ghost town like Halo 3. You should NEVER pit 30 FPS users against 60 FPS users.
> 2533275010817669;2:
> Talked about numerous times, Reach does NOT need a remaster. Halo 3 partially, but it’s another story. If Halo 3 wasn’t HD, it’s highly possible it would have gotten it’s remaster, but since it is, not really worth it, so Reach certainly is NOT worth the effort to make the graphics better. There would be NO difference at all, maybe aside from better anti-aliasing and texture filtering, but besides that, the remaster would look EXACTLY the same as the original.
>
> If I’m reading that right, you’re suggesting for the remaster to run at 60 FPS and still share the servers with it’s 30 FPS brothers. That’s a TERRIBLE idea. Framerate matter ALOT. A 60 FPS user will have an advantage that the 30 FPS user doesn’t, making it unfair, thus making games more uneven, me getting a worse K/D not being the only me, and making people leaving Reach because of the unfairness and it would in turn, in no time, become a ghost town like Halo 3. You should NEVER pit 30 FPS users against 60 FPS users.
True but you have to admit if 3 or reach had a remaster we’d all but it again.
> 2535457901035640;3:
> > 2533275010817669;2:
> > Talked about numerous times, Reach does NOT need a remaster. Halo 3 partially, but it’s another story. If Halo 3 wasn’t HD, it’s highly possible it would have gotten it’s remaster, but since it is, not really worth it, so Reach certainly is NOT worth the effort to make the graphics better. There would be NO difference at all, maybe aside from better anti-aliasing and texture filtering, but besides that, the remaster would look EXACTLY the same as the original.
> >
> > If I’m reading that right, you’re suggesting for the remaster to run at 60 FPS and still share the servers with it’s 30 FPS brothers. That’s a TERRIBLE idea. Framerate matter ALOT. A 60 FPS user will have an advantage that the 30 FPS user doesn’t, making it unfair, thus making games more uneven, me getting a worse K/D not being the only me, and making people leaving Reach because of the unfairness and it would in turn, in no time, become a ghost town like Halo 3. You should NEVER pit 30 FPS users against 60 FPS users.
>
> True but you have to admit if 3 or reach had a remaster we’d all but it again.
Perhaps. Remember when Halo 3 became Backwards Compatible. People though it would light a larger flame of life in the community, but it did nothing. One can hope.
> 2533275010817669;4:
> > 2535457901035640;3:
> > > 2533275010817669;2:
> > > Talked about numerous times, Reach does NOT need a remaster. Halo 3 partially, but it’s another story. If Halo 3 wasn’t HD, it’s highly possible it would have gotten it’s remaster, but since it is, not really worth it, so Reach certainly is NOT worth the effort to make the graphics better. There would be NO difference at all, maybe aside from better anti-aliasing and texture filtering, but besides that, the remaster would look EXACTLY the same as the original.
> > >
> > > If I’m reading that right, you’re suggesting for the remaster to run at 60 FPS and still share the servers with it’s 30 FPS brothers. That’s a TERRIBLE idea. Framerate matter ALOT. A 60 FPS user will have an advantage that the 30 FPS user doesn’t, making it unfair, thus making games more uneven, me getting a worse K/D not being the only me, and making people leaving Reach because of the unfairness and it would in turn, in no time, become a ghost town like Halo 3. You should NEVER pit 30 FPS users against 60 FPS users.
> >
> > True but you have to admit if 3 or reach had a remaster we’d all but it again.
>
> Perhaps. Remember when Halo 3 became Backwards Compatible. People though it would light a larger flame of life in the community, but it did nothing. One can hope.
Yes, but if you remastered it and gave players a reason to come back then H3 could go back to its glory days. For a bit at least
> 2535457901035640;5:
> > 2533275010817669;4:
> > > 2535457901035640;3:
> > > > 2533275010817669;2:
> > > > Talked about numerous times, Reach does NOT need a remaster. Halo 3 partially, but it’s another story. If Halo 3 wasn’t HD, it’s highly possible it would have gotten it’s remaster, but since it is, not really worth it, so Reach certainly is NOT worth the effort to make the graphics better. There would be NO difference at all, maybe aside from better anti-aliasing and texture filtering, but besides that, the remaster would look EXACTLY the same as the original.
> > > >
> > > > If I’m reading that right, you’re suggesting for the remaster to run at 60 FPS and still share the servers with it’s 30 FPS brothers. That’s a TERRIBLE idea. Framerate matter ALOT. A 60 FPS user will have an advantage that the 30 FPS user doesn’t, making it unfair, thus making games more uneven, me getting a worse K/D not being the only me, and making people leaving Reach because of the unfairness and it would in turn, in no time, become a ghost town like Halo 3. You should NEVER pit 30 FPS users against 60 FPS users.
> > >
> > > True but you have to admit if 3 or reach had a remaster we’d all but it again.
> >
> > Perhaps. Remember when Halo 3 became Backwards Compatible. People though it would light a larger flame of life in the community, but it did nothing. One can hope.
>
> Yes, but if you remastered it and gave players a reason to come back then H3 could go back to its glory days. For a bit at least
Unfortunately, nothing can bring back the glory days of Halo 3. It’s just like how 343 Guilty Spark said in the one of the terminals of Halo CEA ( believe it’s the second)
> What once was will never be again.
No. 60fps is already a major advantage regardless of your belief that people will be fine because they’re used to 30fps. You get a quicker response time from your controller and in-game, you get smoother precision, less stuttering than the OG Reach had. If your basis is “everyone is used to 30fps so they’ll be fine” then what happens when that changes to “60fps players are unfair”? Two equally skilled players with equal map knowledge, one at 30fps and one at 60fps, the 60fps player will have an advantage. Your opinion does not overrule fact. Reach also is not super stable. It suffers from a lower framerate, which struggles to maintain 30fps with improper frame pacing, leading to stuttering. Only the Xbox One can provide a more stable experience via BC.
Reach also does not need remastering. Halo CE and Halo 2 had a point to them because both games had functionality added to them that was either not present on consoles (Online gameplay was only available on Halo PC, not Halo Xbox) or was removed (Halo 2 Xbox Live). HCEA and H2A add/restore both of these sought after features, which were in demand. Reach on the other hand, as with H3A, has no reason to be remastered. Ask yourself, when does the remastering end? HCEA and H2A do not set a precedent for remastering every single Halo game. It is a waste of time and resources and will detract form future Halo titles as well as further splitting the fanbase across multiple games. It is illogical.
The only thing I agree with in your post is that Reach was a good game. Nothing more.
> 2574155679901782;7:
> No. 60fps is already a major advantage regardless of your belief that people will be fine because they’re used to 30fps. You get a quicker response time from your controller and in-game, you get smoother precision, less stuttering than the OG Reach had. If your basis is “everyone is used to 30fps so they’ll be fine” then what happens when that changes to “60fps players are unfair”? Two equally skilled players with equal map knowledge, one at 30fps and one at 60fps, the 60fps player will have an advantage. Your opinion does not overrule fact. Reach also is not super stable. It suffers from a lower framerate, which struggles to maintain 30fps with improper frame pacing, leading to stuttering. Only the Xbox One can provide a more stable experience via BC.
I can confirm by saying that in a game we cannot mention, because I have a weaker computer, I could only run the game from 25-40 FPS. And I got DEMOLISHED by everyone who I’m sure were playing it at 60 FPS. By the forging rings I even gave up on the game altogether. And since I’m buying an Xbox One X, I don’t see myself playing it by the time being, because I’ll just get frustrated because my PC can’t handle the game like others’.