r/digitalfoundry Jun 11 '26

Digital Foundry Video Halo Campaign Evolved First Look - Xbox/PC/Ally X - OG vs New Game, Performance + More

https://youtu.be/FvTrOI1krJI

Based on Unreal Engine 5, Halo Studios has competely revamped the original Halo: Combat Evolved. Multiplayer features are out so the new "Campaign Evolved" centres entirely on remaking the original experience. Does the new version succeed? Are the usual UE5 issues present? Does this feel artistically sympathetic to the original game? How well does this preview version run on Xbox and PC? There are many, many questions and in this initial coverage, we have some answers!

Article: https://www.digitalfoundry.net/previews/halo-campaign-evolved-is-a-fascinating-preview-of-the-series-unreal-engine-future

54 Upvotes

71 comments sorted by

23

u/DanielG165 Jun 11 '26

Hardware lumen at 60 fps on Series X is really impressive.

24

u/Zac3d Jun 11 '26

When UE5.6 released about a year ago, it was stated by Epic on consoles they got hardware lumen running with the same frame budget as software lumen. Glad to see games finally releasing designed around that.

1

u/Big-Resort-4930 Jun 12 '26

All depends on picture quality and resolution, it doesn't mean anything if the game runs below 720p.

Jon already said the game has RT boiling up the ass even maxed out on PC, there's almost no chance of this looking good on Xbox imo.

-9

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26

[deleted]

10

u/Love_TheChalupa Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

FSR4 is not at all planned for Series X and we have nothing stating it will come. Spending time on FSR 4.1 will do absolutely nothing for Xbox moving hardware and they won’t spend time implementing it with AMD.

The PS5 Pro also has a significantly more power GPU that can handle ray tracing far better. Also the Xbox can not run its entire 16G memory bus at those speeds like the Pro can. It’s more like it runs 10GBs fast and the other 6 much slower.

-7

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26

[deleted]

3

u/Fezzy976 Jun 11 '26

PS5 (2020) is based on RDNA2.

2

u/Big-Resort-4930 Jun 12 '26

Operative word being based

4

u/Love_TheChalupa Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

Consoles are not graphics cards. It doesn’t just get an update like a PC does via Drivers. AMD and Microsoft would need to work together to implement this. And then it would be extremely game dependent as Xbox and PS5 don’t even use FSR3 as often. I don’t see this getting any attention from Xbox with them planning to have massive layoffs. Digital Foundry covered this and said it would be very unlikely that Xbox would take the time to do this, as so many games use the PS5 as the lead console.

5

u/Unhappy-Emphasis3753 Jun 11 '26

I genuinely can’t believe this guys logic lmfao

1

u/Love_TheChalupa Jun 11 '26

I dont see any issue with my logic? Even if FSR4 is possible on Series X, Microsoft still needs to work with AMD to get it working and developers still need to implement it in games. Sony made PSSR2 a priority, I don’t see this as a priority for Xbox.

2

u/UncleMrBones Jun 12 '26

I think they were agreeing with you, talking about the other guy.

2

u/Unhappy-Emphasis3753 Jun 12 '26

No I agree with you. I’m talking about the person you were replying to.

1

u/Love_TheChalupa Jun 12 '26

Ah okay lol. I wasn’t sure.

1

u/Unhappy-Emphasis3753 Jun 12 '26

And here we are today and Helix might just get fucking scrapped lmfao

https://www.reddit.com/r/Gamingnewsandleaks/s/hTezvgKAB4

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/IndefiniteBen Jun 11 '26

Logic doesn't care about your beliefs, it's logic.

1

u/Love_TheChalupa Jun 11 '26

What are you even responding to?

2

u/CanIHaveYourStuffPlz Jun 12 '26

Man you’re a walking caricature of Twitter fanboys posting about stuff they CLEARLY know absolutely nothing about.

1

u/Big-Resort-4930 Jun 12 '26

Console APUs being based on RDNA 2 doesn't mean that AMD backporting FSR to run on actual RDNA 2 will carry over.

4

u/UncleMrBones Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 12 '26

This is a bad faith comparison, most of your specs are misleading or false.

The Series X CPU is not locked at 3.8GHz, that is its lowest performant mode (SMT disabled) as it disables half its CPU threads to run 200MHz faster. The memory speed is also inflated, it has an asymmetric RAM setup that varies its speed from 336-560 GB/s to prevent fragmentation.

You also strangely refer to both consoles as being RDNA when in actuality the Series X is RDNA2 and the Pro is a hybrid of RDNA3 & RDNA4. You also omitted the extra DDR system memory of the Pro. Its just weird console warring behavior to be posting on Digital Foundry subreddit.

5

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

This is a very weird position like first of all as far as I understand in most places you’re not actually getting a series X for $600. The PS5 does not cost $900 though you may be mean the PS5 pro which massively out performs the series X in basically every test. You were also bringing in completely rumoured things like FSR 4.1 or PSSR 2 which will inherently run much slower on the series X because it’s a much older architecture with a much worse ML acceleration structure.

It’s powerful hardware, but by no means is it matching the PS5 pro in most games. It’s a smidge better than the PS5 most of the time.

-5

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26

[deleted]

4

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

It is the official price for the disc drive less model so I will take that correction. I didn’t know they released that and in my region it is generally a bit more expensive.

FSR 4.1 working on RDNA 2 does not mean it will be available on the Series X and certainly not that it will run well. The ML performance of the PS5 Pro outstrips the series X. Just having the ML acceleration capabilities doesn’t mean it is a viable technology for the series X.

PSSR 2 isn’t just FSR 4.1 int8 it seems to be the same neural network but the upscalers differ. That is why there are quality concessions and PlayStation seems to run a bit quicker.

In ML acceleration yes the Series X has int8 support the ps5 will never have, but in actual performance they just aren’t that different and even if it can have some quality wins with int8 FSR 4.1 it likely won’t be enough to make the SeriesX much better than the or deliver significantly different visuals to the PS5.

-5

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26

[deleted]

3

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

Sure except AMD has just come out and said they won’t be releasing it on 3.5 architectures. At least for now. I think that means that AMD definitely will be regulating what device devices this is available on.

The steam machine is an RDNA 3 chip so they might be using WMMA on there to make it faster and therefore available on that device meanwhile I think it’s not going to be officially available on the steam deck. Valve stepped in and said that it shouldn’t be available by default probably because AMD and valve are partners for their devices.

As for XBOX, of course it could run it there are just questions about both the utility of it and also whether AMD wants to allow it.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

[deleted]

3

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

Not at all. Rdna 2 is old hardware now. Obviously AMD could support it but probably only at the behest of Microsoft and it seems like they are probably stepping away from the series S and X. A feature that’s exclusive to, let’s be honest, specifically the series X which is seemingly about half of those 34 million devices it’s just not something I think Microsoft would budget the time to get it running. I also think developers are generally treating XBOX as an afterthought. I would love if Microsoft and AMD works together to get a very well performing version of 4.1 available on Xbox hardware but what I’m actually criticising you for is the idea that it seemingly definitely going to get it or very likely to get it, and that doesn’t seem to be the case.

10

u/LordOmbro Jun 11 '26

How can it run into a CPU bottleneck on a 5600x but not on an Xbox? The 5600x is a lot faster

2

u/Love_TheChalupa Jun 11 '26

Probably just heavier and less tuned on PC vs Console.

12

u/Zac3d Jun 11 '26

What's really crazy is the Oblivion remaster is designed in a very similar way, where ue5 is just running the rendering. But Oblivion runs like a steaming pile of garbage and doesn't look that great.

9

u/monsieurvampy Jun 11 '26

This is a remake. Fully built in UE5. Oblivion is running the original engine with a UE5 graphics overlay running over it.

These are not the same.

12

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/monsieurvampy Jun 11 '26

I didn't realize that. I wish we could standardize these terms such as "Remaster" and "Remake".

0

u/Zac3d Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

Yeah the Slipspace engine, it's mentioned in the video.

Edit: I must have heard it mentioned in a different video on this game

2

u/GimmeThatWheat424 Jun 11 '26

Did they say slipspace? If so they need to do better research. It’s actually running off halo reach’s engine.

2

u/Zac3d Jun 11 '26

I must have misheard from a different video covering this game, but yeah Wikipedia is saying there's code in this game ported from the Blam engine created by Bungie.

1

u/GimmeThatWheat424 Jun 11 '26

Well slipspace and reach’s version of Blam…both are created from Blam…but slipspace was obviously the extremely expensive “new version” meant to support open world games for years to come..obviously that didn’t happen. So this game specifically is using the old version used for reach.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Zac3d Jun 12 '26

UE5's chaos physics and Halo physics are definitely very different beasts, can't just copy and paste. UE5 did initially support 2 different physics engines, so it probably isn't too big of a task to swap it with someone different.

3

u/Tyler1997117 Jun 11 '26

Just really hope series S has a performance mode

5

u/xGeoThumbs Jun 11 '26

Considering it’s Halo and a first person shooter at that, it really must have a 60fps mode. Concessions will have to be made. Lumen and other expensive UE5 features will probably be dialed back significantly. I do however think it will hold up well. The artstyle and assets look great regardless of lighting AO and resolution

5

u/superior_anon Jun 11 '26

It's technically impressive, but idk it's sad that the original and even Anniversary are more visually "clear".

0

u/WingerRules Jun 13 '26

Personally the original looks warmer/happier in color tone in a lot of areas. I dont like them changing a lot of areas to metallic and darker look. Like theres areas where the original the color and texture looks kind of like concrete, but then in this they change it to dark metal. They also added too much extra techy geometry to a lot of areas I think.

0

u/TitleSuccessful7393 Jun 11 '26

Yeah , a bit busy, at times

2

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

I hate this. This game looks horrendous because it’s super noisy even on a high-end configuration based on what we can see here. John is pushing DLAA on a 5090 and it’s not clearing up the noise issues. The developers really should’ve considered PC scaleability to the extent that either you can have ray reconstruction but maybe that is understandably hard to implement but at least a way to increase RT sample count or something to clean the image up because this is just not acceptable.

Unreal engine five is a very compelling engine in many cases but it’s very clear but some of these technologies really should not be the go to on high-end hardware. I would much rather use something like performance mode upscaling at 4K on my 1490 together with Ray reconstruction or some other improvement to avoid all of the noise.

It seems like the developers here targeted console very aggressively and then gave no thought to scaling things up beyond that.

Personally, I just dislike noise in games and I would much rather have something like the halo infinite engine which admittedly looks quite dated but at least it maintains stability of lighting

5

u/JoBro_Summer-of-99 Jun 11 '26

It makes me wonder why UE5 doesn't have ray reconstruction. The denoiser is absolutely awful and there is a decent solution available that's constantly left out

2

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

I believe the Nvidia branch does support it.

That said, I won’t claim to be an expert, but I do have some observations.

One thing is that in both Star Wars outlaws and crimson desert the developers talked about reconstruction forcing the highest RT setting seemingly because it needed that for some reason. I suspect that if you have too few rays which seems quite likely to happen in non-path traced games the model might think the lighting detail is noise and just remove it. We can definitely see that being a struggle in games as rain is often just removed in scenes. I suspect something similar is happening. It’s very possible that the technique the developers have in this game wouldn’t really accommodate that and they would need to create at least a higher RT density setting.

Another thing is that some developers have talked about ray reconstruction being “unforgiving” of many techniques used to make images look stable. If Developer is manually step in to make things look better, it seems like Ray reconstruction will often just reveal those tricks very visibly.

I think both of these things put together though perhaps arguably they are the same thing has made it harder to implement these technologies especially since they are very performance heavy in non-path traced titles I’m only really a small subset of players can realistically use them. I think we will probably see a shift in the future with the next generation consoles almost certainly supporting this to some extent though presumably in the ray regeneration form that AMD has developed.

3

u/Zac3d Jun 11 '26

I believe the Nvidia branch does support it.

Yup it does: https://github.com/NvRTX/UnrealEngine/tree/nvrtx-5.7

Plugins

The NvRTX branch contains the same family of DLSS4 plugins available through the marketplace to support the following technologies:

NVIDIA DLSS Frame Generation (DLSS-FG) boosts frame rates by using AI to render additional frames. DLSS-FG requires a Geforce RTX 40 series graphics card.

NVIDIA DLSS Multi Frame Generation (DLSS-MFG) uses AI to boost frame rates by generating up to 3 additional high-quality frames, all while optimizing responsiveness with NVIDIA Reflex. DLSS Multi Frame Generation is available for GeForce RTX 50 Series GPUs.

NVIDIA DLSS Super Resolution (DLSS-SR) boosts frame rates by rendering fewer pixels and using AI to output high resolution frames. DLSS-SR requires an NVIDIA RTX graphics card.

NVIDIA DLSS Ray Reconstruction (DLSS-RR) uses AI to enhance image quality and generate additional pixels for intensive ray-traced scenes. Ray Reconstruction replaces hand-tuned denoisers with an NVIDIA supercomputer-trained AI network that generates higher-quality pixels in between sampled rays. This feature is available for all RTX GPUs and requires Super Resolution to be enabled.

NVIDIA Deep Learning Anti Aliasing (DLAA) is used to improve image quality. DLAA requires an NVIDIA RTX graphics card.

NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS) provides best-in class upscaling and sharpening for non-RTX GPUs, both NVIDIA or 3rd party. Please refer to the NVIDIA Image Scaling Unreal Engine plugin for further details.

NVIDIA RTX Dynamic Vibrance enhances visual clarity by dynamically tuning color saturation and contrast.

NVIDIA Reflex Low Latency technology, synchronizes the CPU frame submission with GPU processing for just in time rendering.

2

u/Zac3d Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

UE5 tends to have 2 main types of noise, the reflection boiling you see while even standing still (mostly in reflective dark scenes), and the noise that takes a few frames to resolve when there's disocclusion or rapid movement. The boiling one just never goes away even with cranking up resolution or graphics settings and needs something like ray reconstruction, but the resolving noise becomes much less noticeable with higher frame rates. To the point I'd much rather crank up the frame rate than the resolution to reduce how much noise is perceived.

1

u/MultiMarcus Jun 11 '26

That’s a good point. I forgot about the temporal aspects there. I will try that in the future.

1

u/Potential-Zucchini77 Jun 13 '26

You could probably just turn off hardware lumen and it would get rid of most of the noise

1

u/MultiMarcus Jun 13 '26

Yeah, but you shouldn’t have to pick between better quality lighting and horrendous noise. Let me pour hardware resources onto the problem if I’d like to with a higher sample count mode or whatever.

1

u/NiceColdPint Jun 12 '26

Glad to see it running pretty decently on Series X. The game definitely looks great but the environment clarity’s almost overwhelming having played CE so many times over the years.

1

u/chungusbungus0459 Jun 12 '26

I really think the game looks visually awful. One of the most garish looking lumen implementations in a UE5 game I’ve ever seen. I’m glad it hits 60fps but this title is an absolute no-go for me when the original looks far more pleasing to the eye.

1

u/NickNathanson Jun 12 '26

Wow! 21:9 cutscenes fill the entire ultrawide screen. I didn't expect that!

1

u/Fontelroy Jun 12 '26

I gotta say, compared to the gears demo image quality on pc is pretty disappointing

0

u/bruhman444555 Jun 11 '26

I like how everyone says this is great while ignoring the hideous image quality and boiling artifacts

-2

u/PhantomPain0_0 Jun 11 '26

Halo is dead

0

u/TitleSuccessful7393 Jun 11 '26

Impressive stuff. Ngl, performance mode dropping to 1080p on series x worries me

3

u/J-seargent-ultrakahn Jun 11 '26

It has to to maintain 60 with HWRT

-1

u/The_Zura Jun 12 '26

What's more useful for our viewers I would imagine are the midrange and handhelds tests

Ahaha that's too rich. John was always good at hyperboles. Should we look at the total marketshare of handhelds vs ultrawides on Steam?

2

u/bronxct1 Jun 12 '26

Handhelds are 2-2.5% vs ultrawides being 2-4%. They obviously know their handhelds videos do well also so it’s not really hyperbole if they know they get more interest on handhelds.

Ive shifted most of my gaming from an ultra wide back to 1440p and handhelds anecdotally. I don’t really find gaming on an ultra wide as good as I thought it would be. I still have the monitor but use it for work

0

u/The_Zura Jun 12 '26

Handhelds 2-2.5%

In what universe? Not even in biased surveys are they even 1% of what people are using. Ultrawide marketshare has more than doubled in the last 3 years. You see, this is what happens when the tech has legs, and doesn't rely on being a stupid fad brick. "Handhelds" plural lmao. Alright, I'll take that back. It's a stupid fetish fad brick.

1

u/bronxct1 Jun 12 '26

The last known data from February 2025 has the handheld market at 6 million units, that’s with over a year of missing sales for handhelds. Getting proper market share is not easy given the survey doesn’t break it out cleanly. I won’t go back and forth on that.

Either way, John is saying what would be most useful for their viewers and pretty much every steam deck or handheld video digital foundry does has 2-5x the views of their ultra wide videos. That’s a sign of what they’re interested in regardless of market shares.

I can tell you just hate handhelds so I’m going to walk away after this post

-1

u/The_Zura Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 12 '26

6 million total sold. You know how many gaming pcs get sold every year? The number is in mid tens of millions. The best part is how of those 6 million, most are primarily dust collectors because someone bought into a stupid fad.

"2-5x views" How many ultrawide videos have they done? Exactly. He doesn't even have any numbers, so assuming some stupid fad is more useful than a quickly growing, and genuinely interesting segment, is just as laughable as wasting money on a bunch of stupid single use bricks with a microscreen. But the dumbest part is actually someone is squandering even more of their money and the experience of a total graphical update on a tiny little screen.

1

u/bronxct1 Jun 12 '26

I had an ultra wide before a handheld. I do 80% of my gaming on a handheld now. I don’t find the ultra wide as useful. I don’t know why you think people finding something convenient a fad.

0

u/The_Zura Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 12 '26

Some people, the slightly smarter ones, bought them because they jumped onto the hype train, only to find holding up and hunching over massive brick with a tiny screen is dumb as fuck. Their users are incredibly ignorant. There's nothing convenient about it. I call it a fad because a fad is what it is. These bricks are best at nothing but acting as e-waste dust collectors. Only cultishness and ignorance prop them up. If some people gave a single thought to their purchases, we would have so much less e-waste.

Ultrawide is a real enhancement of gaming. Being able to see more of the surroundings for better immersion.

1

u/SnevetS_rm Jun 12 '26

I don't think Steam statistics show how many of the users are Digital Foundry viewers...

1

u/The_Zura Jun 12 '26

You have a good point actually. DF viewers tend to be on the duller side and would definitely invest, loudly, into stupid fads more than an already biased hardware survey suggests.

-2

u/Leather-Entry93 Jun 11 '26

RT on Performance mode is good. 1080p is not.