Saber did the engine work. 343 did the graphics work. Both were horrible.

Saber did all of it, under 343's guidance (IE the classic mode thing was their idea). 343 had almost no hand in the development of CEA EXCEPT for Terminals because they were working on Halo 4 (This was CONFIRMED in an OXM interview). Certain Affinity did the Multiplayer.
I'm not trying to insult you or anything man, I respect your opinions, just clarifying that 343 had no part in CEA's development (other than the terminal videos)
Edited by clonecam117 on Apr 17, 2013 at 03:24 PM
Edited by clonecam117 on Apr 17, 2013 at 03:26 PM

I thought the only real change was to the graphics, not the game engine itself. If 343 did the graphics, then they did the only change to the game engine that was made, so what did Saber do?

I believe they modified the engine to allow for the updated graphics/models to run simultaniously (along with a lot of reach models, all of the bsps are remodeled). And it is important to note that the .map files are still modified (pc is in little endian while cea is in big endian)

They modified Saber's engine (Saber 3d) to run alongside halo ce's. Saber 3d causes all of the "new grahpic" glitches, like horrid texture loading. Halo cea was good for what it was: a graphic not game overhaul.

reach looked good, so why you say CEA assets look bad is beyond me.

the new mark V could have been done a lot better, though. greeble is lame and lazy and a lot of things received a dumb plastic appearance.

on the topic of halo 4, I find it so funny that the same people that love halo 2 call halo 4 out for using reach assets.
Edited by master noob on Apr 17, 2013 at 08:49 PM