Halo 4

[Rangers]

From the scans, it does show a pretty big leap over Reach in terms of graphics. I can imagine the flying Squid part would be a beautiful sight.

Yeah, with imo Reach already a pretty big leap over 3, it's kind of interesting that the series will see such a massive jump from 3 to 4, on the same generation of hardware. My guess is 3 to 4 might almost look like they are playing on different generations of hardware when side by side.

Also doesn't reflect particularly well on Bungie.

I hope we get a single player footage vidoc before E3. I'm pretty sure that is how the Reach schedule went?

FXAA is a tad disconcerting, hope it's not blurry. IMO usually you need to see FXAA contrasted with MSAA to see the difference though, as in Battlefield 3. So since obviously there's no MSAA option in this, we may not know what we're missing.

 

[Turok]

FXAA is a tad disconcerting, hope it's not blurry. IMO usually you need to see FXAA contrasted with MSAA to see the difference though, as in Battlefield 3. So since obviously there's no MSAA option in this, we may not know what we're missing.

I'm not sure what specific type of post-process AA Halo Anniversary used, but it looked great. I think it had better IQ than Reach, despite the lower vertical res. I'm sure 4 will look fine in that regard.

 

[ultragpu]

Yeah, with imo Reach already a pretty big leap over 3, it's kind of interesting that the series will see such a massive jump from 3 to 4, on the same generation of hardware. My guess is 3 to 4 might almost look like they are playing on different generations of hardware when side by side.

Also doesn't reflect particularly well on Bungie.

I hope we get a single player footage vidoc before E3. I'm pretty sure that is how the Reach schedule went?

FXAA is a tad disconcerting, hope it's not blurry. IMO usually you need to see FXAA contrasted with MSAA to see the difference though, as in Battlefield 3. So since obviously there's no MSAA option in this, we may not know what we're missing.

To be fair if 343 industry made Halo3 back then, I doubt the graphical leap would be as much as it is now. The combined factors of more matured tools, newer techniques "FXAA, light shaft" towards the end of this gen and a labor force of 250 would most likely be the main reason. Not that I'm admiring Bungie for failing to hit native 720p though.
As for FXAA I thought the one used in ME3 looked satisfactory.

 

[dragonelite]

To be fair if 343 industry made Halo3 back then, I doubt the graphical leap would be as much as it is now. The combined factors of more matured tools, newer techniques "FXAA, light shaft" towards the end of this gen and a labor force of 250 would most likely be the main reason. Not that I'm admiring Bungie for failing to hit native 720p though.
As for FXAA I thought the one used in ME3 looked satisfactory.

Wasn't it one of 343i engineer that ported FXAA to 360 and speed it up with 40%.
I saw it on twitter if im not mistaken atleast people said he was a 343I engineer.

Also i read on digital foundry that AssCreed:revelation had a good post processing AA rivaling GOW3 MLAA implementation.
Maybe 343 has something like that but just calls it FXAA variant.

 

[scently]

Yeah it was a 343i engineer. Also the GI article mentioned that the game looked sharp so I don't think that we have to worry about AA. I trust 343i, they do have an all star team with talents from all over the industry. Really looking forward to seeing the game proper.

 

[kagemaru]

what I posted at other forums:


SP sounds great and hopefully will produce that sense of mystery and discovery found in the first Halo. Campaign shots look gorgeous (for scans at least), but they all seem like they are taken from FUD level, I hope the levels open up once you land on the planet.

MP? Not sounding quite as good so far. I'll keep an open mind until I play it but some things do concern me. The random weapon spawn for example, I understand how it can encourage players to explore and use more of the map, but bungie has always balanced power weapons with risk vs reward. Power weapons were generally placed in areas that would leave you open and vulnerable unlike your standard weapons. It's these key points of balance that I hope are not lost. I'm also not happy that firefight isn't returning, curious to see is Spartan ops is a good replacement.

In the end I play halo more for the campaign and co-op so I'm happy with the info for the most part.

Also doesn't reflect particularly well on Bungie.

I hope we get a single player footage vidoc before E3. I'm pretty sure that is how the Reach schedule went?

Well bungie themselves admitted they "grossly under-utilizing the CPU" even on the 360. So I'm sure they realize they came up short in some respects.

Also I'd also love to see some SP, but I read 343i plan to mainly talk about the MP right now. I have a feeling they are keeping it under wraps until E3.

I'm not sure what specific type of post-process AA Halo Anniversary used, but it looked great. I think it had better IQ than Reach, despite the lower vertical res. I'm sure 4 will look fine in that regard.

Yeah HaloCEA definitely has better IQ. Reach's IQ is ok most of the time but then you have those moments (especially in a few cut-scenes) where the TAA should have just been turned off entirely when ghosting was an issue.

Also both Reach and CEA have the same resolution according to Al and the list on these forums.:smile:

 

[Ruskie]

Damn! I just saw the scans and those SP parts look neat. Lighting and character models look great, can't wait to see it in motion.

 

[Devious]

http://www.xbox360achievements.org/...--Change---Some-Dude-Called-Master-Chief.html

^ Starting at 3:07 of the video, Josh Holmes does indeed say that they are holding the campaign stuff back and revealing more of the multiplayer so the campaign can be more of a "mystery" when playing. Hopefully we don't have to wait too long for some campaign bits. Really not interested in the MP at the moment.

 

[(((interference)))]

Well, it certainly looks like a clear step above Reach which seems to confirm that Bungie really weren't making the most of the console.

I like the idea of a completely new faction to fight, should mix things up - maybe we'll see some three way Forerunner, Covenant, Human (and maybe Flood as well) battles.

I wonder what they've changed in the basic MP gameplay, does it play faster like Halo 3 or is it more like Reach? I guess since the BR, needle rifle, and DMR are back it must mean its somewhere between the two since the AR rules in the Halo 3 sandbox.

 

[Kameradschaft]

Well bungie themselves admitted they "grossly under-utilizing the CPU" even on the 360. So I'm sure they realize they came up short in some respects.

They were also kinda unlucky that Reach came out before the FXAA "trend", Reach with FXAA instead of TAA would've been so much better.

Now about Halo 4 it's great to hear that 343i improved the lighting engine and at the same time also upped the resolution to 720p...FXAA is also a very welcome addition, really curious as to how they accomplish that with the EDRAM's limitation and all.

Also bigger levels are almost confirmed since they say that they want to bring the CE feel back, those concept art images on the scans looks really awesome.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Don't let your eyes deceive you too much though. It's perfectly possible to increase the impression of detail without actually doing more in the engine. Characters could use polygon counts similar to Reach and still look more complex, for example by increasing the detail of the high res geometry used for normal mapping. Lighting could look better if they used a more advanced renderer to bake the light maps. And so on, and so on... they could take out Forge, or film recording, or 4-player split screen play as well, even though that'd probably not play well with the community.

So there are many many ways to make more of fixed hardware without doing anything radical in the game engine. Although there's probably room left for more optimizations, too.

 

[Ruskie]

Don't let your eyes deceive you too much though. It's perfectly possible to increase the impression of detail without actually doing more in the engine. Characters could use polygon counts similar to Reach and still look more complex, for example by increasing the detail of the high res geometry used for normal mapping. Lighting could look better if they used a more advanced renderer to bake the light maps. And so on, and so on... they could take out Forge, or film recording, or 4-player split screen play as well, even though that'd probably not play well with the community.

So there are many many ways to make more of fixed hardware without doing anything radical in the game engine. Although there's probably room left for more optimizations, too.

But its not the same engine as Reach.

My main problem with Bugnie was lack of attention to details like facial animations, character models and animations in general. Its certainly achievable to do better than what they've done with Reach, but from DF interview it seemed like they were a bit inexperienced with that. Oh, and motion blur, it was quite bad.

 

[scently]

And all those stuffs you mentioned are in Halo 4.

 

[dragonelite]

Heard that the GI digital magazine Pictures look so good

 

[Ruskie]

Seen it! Looks very very purdy.

 

[scently]

Yeah it looks really nice.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

My main problem with Bugnie was lack of attention to details like facial animations, character models and animations in general.

That's not a question of engine tech, that's content.

They did use motion capture for all the human body animations and it shows IMHO.

I also have my opinions on why they did not have a few really talented character artists to work on the faces. Still, the improvements over Halo 3 were massive.

Character model detail was also massively improved, and the designs were pretty good IMHO.

 

[Rangers]

That's not a question of engine tech, that's content.

They did use motion capture for all the human body animations and it shows IMHO.

I also have my opinions on why they did not have a few really talented character artists to work on the faces. Still, the improvements over Halo 3 were massive.

Character model detail was also massively improved, and the designs were pretty good IMHO.

Halo 3 was my main problem with Bungie, it came out in 2007 well after true next gen games like Gears of War, yet imo was the epitome of a SD game in HD. I thought it was pretty inexcusable given the vast amount of time they had to work on it.

I mean I can literally remember playing Halo 3 back in 2007 wishing to myself "couldn't Bungie at least just have used bog standard UE3? It would have looked much better than this".

Reach I thought looked great, definitely next (current) gen worthy, unlike 3. Yet if it holds up, 4 looks even way better.

I guess, it's position as MS main first party standard bearer holds a lot of import too. It just didn't compare to some of the competition, nor show what the 360 could do, while 4 looks to do all those things (again if it holds up).

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I mean I can literally remember playing Halo 3 back in 2007 wishing to myself "couldn't Bungie at least just have used bog standard UE3? It would have looked much better than this".

You've clearly not realized at the time, and maybe not even today, that it wasn't just graphics that sold games even in 2007.

Halo3 had 4-player split-screen and online coop, film recording and playback, Forge, and a very well developed multiplayer component - way ahead of anyone else. That's how you sell 10+ million copies of an exclusive game, something the PS3 wasn't able to repeat in the 5 years that have passed.

It also wasn't that much behind the curve, just look how aged Uncharted 1 looks today as well when you compare it to UC3.

 

[Turok]

Also both Reach and CEA have the same resolution according to Al and the list on these forums.:smile:

Oh. I remember reading that it was the same res as Halo 3. Guess not.

But its not the same engine as Reach.

It actually is. The GI spread says it a "redesigned version of the tech that powered Halo: Reach."

Halo 3 was my main problem with Bungie, it came out in 2007 well after true next gen games like Gears of War, yet imo was the epitome of a SD game in HD. I thought it was pretty inexcusable given the vast amount of time they had to work on it.

I mean I can literally remember playing Halo 3 back in 2007 wishing to myself "couldn't Bungie at least just have used bog standard UE3? It would have looked much better than this".

http://www.ascendantjustice.com/files/cocop/The Covenant/The Covenant Large/Bowl-large.jpg

http://www.ascendantjustice.com/files/cocop/The Covenant/The Covenant Large/WindingPaths-large.jpg

You can't expect a game of Halo 3's scale to look as good as smaller scale games like Gears 1 or Uncharted 1. It must have really sucked for Bungie to create an engine allowing a significant amount of characters onscreen in conjunction with massive play areas, yet hear nothing but complaining that the game isn't pretty enough.