Halo 4 engine downgrades

[kagemaru]

There is a DF article?
I would sure like to read that, to see if the observations are shared by Richard Leadbetter

edit:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...n-screenshots-dazzle-offer-new-gameplay-clues
"screenshots" < those are not even remotely close to the vidoc2 realtime footage.
edit2: I can't find the DF article, but I can understand that a lot of fans think these are realtime screenshots. If they were, then the developer deserves all the praise indeed, because they severely exceeded the 360 limits in that case.
The anti-aliasing would approach GOW3 levels, which is saying quite a lot.

I haven't seen the link yet, blocked at work, but I imagine if they are press screenshots, they are bullshots. Just like every other set of screenshots released in the industry.

Throw in some aliasing and I'm sure it's very similar to what we'll be playing. Jaggies aren't even much of an issue judging by the vidocs, it's the specular aliasing that has plagued this game from it's first debut.

 

[XpiderMX]

There is a DF article?
I would sure like to read that, to see if the observations are shared by Richard Leadbetter

edit:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...n-screenshots-dazzle-offer-new-gameplay-clues
"screenshots" < those are not even remotely close to the vidoc2 realtime footage.
edit2: I can't find the DF article, but I can understand that a lot of fans think these are realtime screenshots. If they were, then the developer deserves all the praise indeed, because they severely exceeded the 360 limits in that case.
The anti-aliasing would approach GOW3 levels, which is saying quite a lot.

This?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-halo-4-at-e3

 

[zed]

ah takes me back to the good days where some ppl on these forum IIRC said that at the time halo 3 was technically the most advanced game graphically for any console

 

[LightHeaven]

Didn't DF say they also took out SSAO?
Or is it back in now?

Going by the Eurogamer images there's definitely some AO... but it's very subtle and doesn't look much like SSAO, so i guess it's pre baked...

Ie:

http://images.eurogamer.net/2012/articles//a/1/5/1/5/6/7/9/k5jbC.jpg.jpg

You can see contact shadows on the cables on the floor, on the snow around the criogen chambers... But it's very artifact free, if this is indeed a post process than it's really good

 

[antwan]

The latest footage looks absolutely amazing btw

 

[MystWalker]

I used to feel similarly to the OP. Thinking: "It's obvious they made major tradeoffs, but where are the improvements?" As they've shown more footage though, I've seen that the improvements they made are not easily quantified by check-box graphical features. The shading, for example, is head and shoulders better than Reach or H3. This, in itself, adds a great amount of depth and variety to the visuals. I'm thinking they may have moved to some type of physically-based shading model. I'd love to see a tech paper on it someday.

From what I can tell, HDRR also still seems to be there, but the tonemapping may be different and maybe even the encoding.

The static environment seems to be lit via baked GI with what is likely a spherical harmonic based relighting system for dynamic objects. Maybe using irradiance volumes? (I remember reading a couple of things about spherical harmonic lighting with reference to Halo 4, but they were vague)

Collision detection in general also seems to be improved as there is very little clipping.

Animation is also far more refined. Without playing the game I can't tell for sure, but it seems there may be some procedural animation supplementing and be blended with the artist made ones. ala Uncharted or Euphoria
Although not to the same extent or magnitude.

Sure, it is disappointing to lose Bungie's "HBAO-lite," and their object- and camera-based motion blur. As well as the sheer number of real-time lights they were pushing. (Muzzle-flashes and needler bolts in H4 don't seem to cast realtime light or at least the falloff radius is far more constrained) In the end though, I think they went for a more refined graphical look rather than more "check-box features." In my opinion it payed off because visually the game is excellent looking, and better than the previous Halo games.

(Feel free to correct any technical terms I may have used or applied incorrectly. My 3D graphics knowledge is not as great as some of you folks :smile

 

[ultragpu]

You've been corrected about your misconception regarding the geometry in Halo games, just to disappear from the thread, before. Especially everything covenant is fill with curves.

Also you realize every game you listed has it's share of low res textures covered up by detail maps, right?

Now you're just making stuffs up, do link me the quote please where I have been corrected, and by disappear from the thread you mean not to drag the topic down to the drain right?
And I said low poly environment in particular not character models, stop twisting my words around. I find it amazing how desperately some people are trying to defend their favorite console game when anything factual criticism is spoken.

 

[XpiderMX]

Particles looks good too:

 

[Acert93]

Can the op really not see ANY improvements between Halo 3 and 4 other than resolution? If so then the op really isn't qualified to discuss.

Hint: Go look at Halo 3's shadows, not how pixelated they are and how they even disappear outside of 10M or so.

 

[LightHeaven]

Saw this on the Polygon, they have great articles.

Bigger (and more amazing) version:

http://i.imgur.com/Q3Rjg.jpg

 

[Kameradschaft]

Guys isn't it a little premature to say anything about the game when we haven't played the final version on our TV's like Reach and ODST to see what 343 has in store for us? game looks amazing from what we've seen but a lot of things could be better or worse than we think.

 

[warb]

Now you're just making stuffs up, do link me the quote please where I have been corrected, and by disappear from the thread you mean not to drag the topic down to the drain right?
And I said low poly environment in particular not character models, stop twisting my words around. I find it amazing how desperately some people are trying to defend their favorite console game when anything factual criticism is spoken.

You typed "low poly geometry".

I don't think your examples of Gears and Killzone were particularly apt either. I'd say both have similarly simple or squarer environment details than this, though perhaps denser given the greater scope of a Halo game.

 

[antwan]

Can the op really not see ANY improvements between Halo 3 and 4 other than resolution? If so then the op really isn't qualified to discuss.

Hint: Go look at Halo 3's shadows, not how pixelated they are and how they even disappear outside of 10M or so.

What about Halo: Reach though? I am pretty certain that you at one point believed this to be the technical pinnacle of 360 game development as well..

 

[Acert93]

What about Halo: Reach though? I am pretty certain that you at one point believed this to be the technical pinnacle of 360 game development as well..

Newb, you have been here 4 months and have less than 200 posts--you were not even here when Halo 3, ODST, or Reach were released (at least not under your current ID). So do the courtesy of quoting something specific because I know Acert93 and "antwan" have never engaged the topic and I am pretty sure you are distorting things I have said.

What I have said, repeatedly, concerning the technology in the Halo series is that there are a lot of games who simply look at visual check boxes and equate that to technology. There is a lot more to a games technology than such. I have argued that it is a gross distortion to ignore the laundry list of features and technologies found in Halo titles (match making option, a full theater replay mode, map modding, 4 player campaign cooperative play, 4 way local split screen, large sandbox gameplay, solid AI with a fair number of players on screen, etc) as trivial and irrelevant when discussing "technology." Game development is about compromises. It is really easy to comprehend when comparing 2 game's divergent design goals:

Game.A // Game.B
4 player coop // No coop
split screen // no split screen
large open spaces // narrow, smaller game spaces
many enemies on screen // 2-3 enemies on screen
dynamic AI // heavily scripted AI
replay mode // no replay
low load time // frequent load screens

These design choices impact what technologies and resources available. To ignore such and move right into what graphical feature is/isn't available, render resolution, polygons, or whatever as the benchmark of "technology" is niave for some and straight up Halo/Xbox hate by others.

It doesn't mean the choices were good or right or even the best compromises but it is an immediate impasse to intelligent discussion.

The fact you cannot spot a single technological improvement aside from resolution is a pretty telling.

 

[Cyan]

Halo 4 looks A LOT better than Reach

.

Halo Reach looks amazing to me, much better than Halo 3 for sure, but I have to admit Halo 4 looks ridiculously good, to the point I am wondering if 343 Studios aren't tricking people into believing that those graphics are going to make it into the final version.

Halo 4 isn't just showing the tip of the iceberg, it's a large iceberg that broke apart and pieces floated away. :smile:

 

[kagemaru]

Now you're just making stuffs up, do link me the quote please where I have been corrected, and by disappear from the thread you mean not to drag the topic down to the drain right?
And I said low poly environment in particular not character models, stop twisting my words around. I find it amazing how desperately some people are trying to defend their favorite console game when anything factual criticism is spoken.

I'm sorry, you're right, this is a criticism you've voiced a couple times about Halo games in the past, so I got your posts mixed up. Found the thread I was thinking about and it seems that the people in that topic just decided to ignore you after shooting down your silliness earlier in the thread. Though while looking for that post, it's clear you have no idea how to tell what has high geometry and what doesn't so I still think your post was silly. Unless you've seen some tech papers we haven't, poly count quotes, wireframe screens, etc. there is no way your criticism can be "factual". This is the problem with your post, you think what you see is true, so you take it as fact.

Also I've purchased as much, if not more, on the ps3 this year and I'm looking forward to as many, again if not more, ps3 titles than I am on any other platform. You're the last person that should be talking about how others post regarding these platforms.

I just didn't think your post has any merit, especially since the examples you gave were quite poor in supporting your point.

 

[antwan]

Newb, you have been here 4 months and have less than 200 posts--you were not even here when Halo 3, ODST, or Reach were released (at least not under your current ID). So do the courtesy of quoting something specific because I know Acert93 and "antwan" have never engaged the topic and I am pretty sure you are distorting things I have said.

No need for insults, I only made that assumption based on your enthusiastic posts in the Halo4 topic.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Why do people keep insisting everywhere that Halo games use tessellation for water ?

Probably because Bungie themselves said the water used tesselation for Halo: Reach.

http://halo.bungie.org/bwu/index.html?item=268

Regards,
SB

 

[function]

I still think Halo 3 is impressive. 4 player co-op while fighting 2 scarabs with a tank, a warthog, and two hornets (and fighting all the covenant on and around the scarabs) makes everything since look like a bloody corridor shooter.

This gen games have been continually squeezed into smaller play spaces with less going on, but with better textures. No 4 player co-op, with big, busy play spaces? Then Halo 3 looks better in action.

It's really irks me right in the testicles that screenshots are valued more than in-game experiences.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

You typed "low poly geometry".

I don't think your examples of Gears and Killzone were particularly apt either. I'd say both have similarly simple or squarer environment details than this, though perhaps denser given the greater scope of a Halo game.

Aye, Killzone in particular is a good example of "low poly geometry" with the many flat angular surfaces and edges. Most notable with ground detail. This isn't to say that the KZ games don't look good, just that they do indeed have their own tradeoffs.

Regards,
SB