Just read the Open Sauce features. I thought that remake of Halo 3, 4, ODST and Reach levels (and of any other game that comes out sometime in the future only for 360). It would all work better with Open Sauce.

NO. Really. It is a bad idea.

oh god 0.o

Yes, it's possible, but you would need a huge collaborative effort to pull off a single campaign, let alone 4.


You can extract models, but the amount of work that it would take to get those assets compatible with the -Blam!- engine is staggering.

Sorry to say, but the people here have such huge egos that any more than 2 working on a single project usually results in a lot of arguing, and nothing getting done.

Most of the assets will also have to be hand made to adapt to CE, it seems like a simple idea to you, but you are basically asking us to make an entire game, almost from scratch...

It is an idea that is totally possible but extremely difficult.
We don't have any BSP extraction yet, so it could take one months to model a replica Halo 3 bsp, and thats just one bsp. Halo reach and Halo 4 would have to wait.. even if we did have BSP extraction for them. The world geometry is developed completly diffirent then Halo 3 and those under it.

For example, the sealed world rules can be ignorned, and you could build your bsp similar to a scenery tag in halo 1. (Build the non-sealed mesh and followed by seperate collision).

However we do not yet have such a feature with open sauce.. and the bsp poly limit compared to reach or halo 4 is incredibly low.

All in all, id never step into something like that. If such feafures for Open Sauce can be developed then maybe one could organize a team.

Not gonna happen, sonny. You wanna play those levels, go play the actual thing that already exists.

the technical skill that would be needed for such a thing would also bring vastly inflated egos together

that's a recipe for disaster

I don't think DSali really understands why having a bunch of scenery is worse to having a BSP with a bit more triangles to render. I suggest a basic course or tutorial in 3D rendering.

true dat, moot.

Lol, aren't you the same guy who was complaining we should make the IG scenery and not BSP.

does hardware geometry instancing even work in halo CE?

Quote me on that.
It would definitely be easier however...although less performant, obviously.

Depends on how the scenery is rendered. Some games don't even have BSPs. They just have terrain directly rendered as scenery. Everything including scenery has LODs though.
(Note that when I say 'some games', I mean Skyrim. Skyrim has bsps of a sort for the exterior, but everything's basically just objects)

although it's not really important, if the whole map was just scenery it wouldn't be affected by open sauce's motion blur effect.

Why not? Isn't motion blur just a postprocess effect?

OS only blurs the bsp.

You were attacking instanced geometry for Halo 2. You clearly don't understand much about 3D rendering.
Tutorials that are 10 years old are the ones that are applicable towards games from that era.

And even modern tutorials are somewhat applicable towards this.
I've read a good few modern books and tutorials on modern OpenGL. Not the stuff from the 90's and early year 2000. You'll see it soon enough if I release my terrain editor to Halomaps! Inb4 "horrible terrain editor" without even using it :-) Nah man, it uses modern principles, not the primitive fixed rendering pipeline. See, whereas you and co have been wasting your time with trying to figure out how this old engine works, we've been taking control of things ourselves. Never thought I'd be using my bachelor in comp sciences in my hobbies, but boy am I glad I decided to!

I've never made a BSP in my life btw. I've opted for a Quadtree structure personally, with a dynamic LOD system. And no, not those old CLOD ones as those are heavily CPU based.

I bet you have no idea what I'm even talking about here, so just shoo and go on with your H2 ports :-)

fify

I think that both sides have legitimate arguments, but the hostility is unneeded

The issue here is applying modern techniques to a very old engine

Not really. I was merely explaining that you shouldn't break down H2's choice of not using traditional Halo 1 scenery. There's good reasons for it, reasons you don't understand. I was suggesting you read up on some documentation in order to understand it. There's no hostility from my side lol, only the Lestat side. Who immediately sent me an ALL-CAPS PM. Which I did not read. Unfortunately I read the title this time, though.

hey, I just do concept art

In any case, whatever the issue, I think it would be for the best if arguments weren't laced with sarcasm and belittling

Concept art is awesome tbh.

Cheers man, decided to not even read your replies to me :-)
I win!

The bottom line is that, while it is possible to mimic the campaign of the other Halo games, I don't see group here that would be capable of providing the resources, technological knowhow, and dedication that such a thing would require.

now, multiplayer maps on the other hand...

Yup, you can mimic other Halo campaigns all you want, but the result will always be inferior/lacking in some regards. There's just no way around that.

Unless your ability to read is sub-par, you did read his replies without even attempting to.

You do not win in any way. Trying not to acknowledge other opinions in an argument is merely ignorance. I would consider it a failure.

I didn't realize I was bashing ports..

In fact, I often show of you guys's progress, just to prove what people can do with the CE engine

while on the subject, how difficult would it be to port H3 Cold Storage, animated flood and all?

Difficult isn't really the problem, it's just time consuming assuming you got the extraction tools.

why would you need encounters for a MP map?
Edited by SilentJacket on Feb 25, 2013 at 04:29 PM

I ported some Halo 2 maps back in 05/06. Sanctuary, Colossus, Burial Mounds, and later Turf, Terminal, and Tombstone, which was going to be a map pack. It's unfortunate that I did that work for no reason. Though I wasn't really happy with what I was doing either, I guess that's why I never released them.

Personally I think it would be a waste to work on any MP map for Halo. Ever since I came back to the community I find it so annoying to play with the netcode.

I'm keeping an eye set on what 343 is doing with H2V. If they decide to release an update rather then shut down the game i'll be a very happy man.

Look....I know what it takes. I have even played all the games I mentioned. But it is uniquely fun to play such remakes on an older game. I say again, I know what it takes to do it. But it is a step worth doing. If I knew coding and other stuff like that, I would get to work. It's in demand by the public.

you are talking about coordinating a bunch of hobbyists to commit to a project that could take years, for free..

If you think you can do it, more power to you

but I'm not sure you realize just how hard it's going to be

Not when there will always be a better version out there with no work involved on our parts. Also, it would require some talent for a lot of that stuff if you don't plan on 100% rips, or aren't able to use rips yet, such as from Halo 4. Because nomatter how much work they put into it, if the people don't know exactly what they are doing it could be a trainwreck.

example (I hate using this as an example, but nowadays it's true): http://halocereviews.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/narrows4.png
And H3MT went through countless revisions, upgrades, and enhancement. But it died. Hell, we had 3 or 4 assault rifles alone. And I think most of the rest of the weapons set swapped 2 or 3 times as well. H3MT is only alive today by whatever original bits remain of Foundry in Jesse's version, and some of the tags I use. (and possibly the newest Narrows bsp, I might use it) And we never even had an official release.
Edited by Invader Veex on Feb 26, 2013 at 10:08 AM

The sky is a gbx model.

I have played it. Sky's are still gbx models.