After 5 or 6 years of development... I would say Halo:MCC is 10/10.

[Mr Puggsly]

Azzanation said:

Mr Puggsly said:

Reach doesn't run that bad on 360 even if it has some rough spots. What kinda bugs me about Reach's presentation is they over did it with the post processing effects. The TAA makes this game blurry, has ghosting, and motion blur on top of that is just a bit much. If they brought Reach to MCC we would get 60 fps and they could make some simple tweaks to fix the overall presentation.

If you play MCC and then jump into Halo Reach, the disparity in presentation is jarring. Resolution and performance are partly to blame, but not entirely.

Reach was definilty a very ambition game for the 360. Bungie did a RareWare with this game and threw every thing in it. Massive Open World missions, Extremly Smart AI, lenghty campaign, and one of the richest MP content in the series. Heck they even thrown acouple Spaceship missions in there. I really enjoyed the darker Grittier appoach with Reach.

Though it wasnt very optimised than Halo 4 and not as Polished as Halo 3, Halo Reach opted to go down the path of no limitations and just do it appoach. 4 was cleverly designed to look that amazing with its more Linear design.

Halo 4's missions were more linear, but it still has some large open areas kinda like previous Halo games. The engine was capable, the game just wasn't designed the same.

Halo 3 wasn't exactly polished. I mean it does hold up pretty well, good lighting and great use of color. But its lower resolution than most games on 360 and the character assets never looked great. It has a good art style and if they ever remaster the visuals I hope they don't go too crazy with changes.

Halo Reach is a fun game, arguably the best paced game in the series. That's why I want a X1 port on MCC, it will be even more awesome.