Halo 3 IQ discussion * - Stay civil and polite folks!
- Thread starter palamede
- Start date
- Status
Well he did vote in the poll that he finished the game in under 6 hours though...
hm...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8010469&postcount=101
Blim said:
There is a tiny bit of aliasing on the jackal's shield, but it certainly does look like AA on the characters there. This may be worth exploring in particular.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7302470&postcount=2990
Frankie said:
Unequivocal? They don't confirm anything to me. :|
Devil's Advocate: So what if there was a public beta available? He could have been thinking 480p, and his words would have a different meaning.
IMHO, it's pretty bad that they won't declare outright the internal rendering resolution of the game when there have been enough times that Epic devs have stated such for Gears of War on their own forums, even SD (4:3) rendering.
i.e.
Why can't they just state it instead of trying to deflect the attention to something else? Oh wow, they were able to put out a beta and people had fun. That doesn't answer the question. It's a simple technical question demanding a simple technical answer.
There was some talking up the graphics in the making of the 2006 E3 trailer video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5vE6tnyqe0
There was a HD version out there somewhere.
Plus, Quaz51 did the step counting on pics he took himself, not on any of the released screenshots or viddy footage.
So it is 640p.
He says he had his tv do 1 to 1 pixel to pixel matching. (1080p)
That shot has so much jpeg compression that would be impossible to see AA used on such small details as the jackal's shield. But having played though the campaign and quite a bit of multiplayer as well, I've yet to see any AA on anything. Shame Bungie's "screenshot" function doesn't have the option to provide actual screenshots, it would make this discussion a whole lot easier.
http://www.gamespot.com/features/61...topslot;title;2&om_act=convert&om_clk=topslot
Forgoing discussion on the native res - this is a nice little feature.
Forgoing discussion on the native res - this is a nice little feature.
That's hardly real hype though. Saying they aiming for targets and whatnot, isn't making promises or really talking up the title. It's also a fuzzy PR area talking about 'game engine' to cover super looking cutscenes alongside ordinary gameplay. Also the E3 2006 trailer came with plenty of caveats at the time - not least E3 trailers are starting to get just plain dodgy!
The amount of misleading done regards Halo 3's visuals to me is no different to the average of titles. Lots of the best footage shown in trailers doesn't appear to the same quality and depth in the actual game. IMO, any disappointment comes more from a lack of salt and scepticism regards developer comments and trailers than anything
I see many people over the past few pages that have recognized the graphics were never to be the selling point of this game as it was never intended to be.
I also see over the last few pages, quite a few people looking to down this title for not living up to something it never intended or claimed to be.
As for why the title has such graphic limitations, same as any other game. Developers make tradeoffs along the way of development.
Personally I think they went a little nuts with the multiple render-targets/shaders/lighting and would have liked to see 720p 4xAA instead.
Last edited by a moderator:
No i did not (really), i was playing (actually more watching than playing ) at my bro's yesterday and it was actually mostly his achievement, but since he's not registered here i entered this for him right away
On topic:
I agree that the lighting in this game is very good and adds to a much more intense experience than for example Gears in this regard, but for me the negatives in its graphics still stand out much more than this although the lighting helps hiding those negative issues alot in some cases.
Overall though, it just doesn 't look very good to me.
Bottom line here is, if the game looks good - who cares what resolution it's rendered at. If it sells...then despite what us elitest snobs think...it's a successfull game, and given that Halo 3 produced 170million dollars on launch day...it's a successfull game despite it's internal rendering method
Some people can go into an Arts program not caring about quantum physics or how molecules interact or how a refrigerator works etc etc. Some people do.
I care because I want to understand behind the scenes what is going on. What limitations did they encounter necessitating a drop in resolution. How can it be fixed in future hardware? I'm curious.
I don't want to take things for granted.
I'll buy it for its gameplay merits first and foremost, not because it renders with infinity billion pixels. But just because I like it, I shouldn't be able to ask for any technical details? Preposterous.
This sums it well for exaggerated expectations. Gears and Bioshock (even more) are about limited enemies on screen and fighting in close areas. There is nothing wrong with that. It obviously worked out well for them.
However, if Halo3 was to have the graphics fidelity of those games then the gameplay would follow suit. *THAT* would not go over well with the existing fanbase, which lets be honest, will be majority of the following.
There's a part on Tsavo highway where a buddy and me in co-op were fighting a crap load of brutes. We were unloading nades/trip mines/bullets and all the brutes were just all over the place. Some using jetpacks. Others using all sorts of guns. It was absolutely CHAOS! it was the sort of chaos that Gears and Bioshock simply cannot provide becuase the scale is limited. During this fight, there were no slowdowns or tearing. Everything was smooth and fluid.
If a graphical compromise needs to be made to bring forth that sort of actions ROUTINELY! throughout a game, I'm all for it.
Another things, the bright outdoors and lighting really magnifies the weaker points. Case in point. There's a level where when you first go through it, it's nice n' bright but something happens and everything turns dark and gloomy (Gears style) Because the lighting gets dim and dark all of a sudden the graphic fidelity goes up because the weaker points are being masked by the lack of bright lights. Hope that makes a bit of sense!
No i did not (really), i was playing (actually more watching than playing ) at my bro's yesterday and it was actually mostly his achievement, but since he's not registered here i entered this for him right away
On topic:
I agree that the lighting in this game is very good and adds to a much more intense experience than for example Gears in this regard, but for me the negatives in its graphics still stand out much more than this although the lighting helps hiding those negative issues alot in some cases.
Overall though, it just doesn 't look very good to me.
Link us your brother bungie.net profile.
I think Quaz has done a fantastic job of proving that the game is indeed 640p. Surely all doubt should be removed at his point.
What I'm still wondering about, is why Gamespot has 720p screenshots that appear to be native resolution with no anti-aliasing or AF. Here is one of the screenshots I'm talking about, and here is a cropped-out section zoomed 400% that clearly shows there's aliasing on the NPC's and level geometry. I have no idea where GS got those screenshots from, but something seems fishy here.
What I'm still wondering about, is why Gamespot has 720p screenshots that appear to be native resolution with no anti-aliasing or AF. Here is one of the screenshots I'm talking about, and here is a cropped-out section zoomed 400% that clearly shows there's aliasing on the NPC's and level geometry. I have no idea where GS got those screenshots from, but something seems fishy here.
scooby_dooby
Legend
I think Quaz has done a fantastic job of proving that the game is indeed 640p. Surely all doubt should be removed at his point.
What I'm still wondering about, is why Gamespot has 720p screenshots that appear to be native resolution with no anti-aliasing or AF. Here is one of the screenshots I'm talking about, and here is a cropped-out section zoomed 400% that clearly shows there's aliasing on the NPC's and level geometry. I have no idea where GS got those screenshots from, but something seems fishy here.
This is the remaining mystery.
Most shots captured by gaming sites are 720p with no AA, IGN, Gamespot etc
This is not a result of the ingame screenshot tool, as they would be 1080p with tons of AA.
So, it must be from their own capture hardware, which indicates the game IS outputting at 720p.
Very strange...
- Status