XtremeXpider
Member
Reach (and Halo 3 too) is impressive if you know some details, but if you see an image or even a video, it is not as impressive as KZ games. Halo 4 is eye candy (and technically is really good).
Digital Foundry -- Halo 4 Tech Analysis
- Thread starter adamsapple
- Start date
Reach (and Halo 3 too) is impressive if you know some details, but if you see an image or even a video, it is not as impressive as KZ games. Halo 4 is eye candy (and technically is really good).
Seriously, i can't think of any other series that brings out this much salt.
higherARC05
Banned
Particles didnt take a hit. Shit when bodies disenegrate from Promethean weapons you see loads of particles that interact with anything. Its the same particle tech as Reach. In the 7th mission you see loads more particles in the hallways too. Plasma pistol shots produce more particles than Reach's.
Also this game renders at full 720p vsync and 30fps locked, improved HDR lighting, etc is why people notice a big jump. The poly count is also increased considerably.
And Dat 6th mission. One of the largest levels in HALOs history.
Uno Venova
Banned
People always say this about series they're fans of.
I'll bet they do.
XtremeXpider
Member
Halo threads always bring out console warriors.
Forza/GT has a dedicated console warrior thread on GAF.
Seemingly more people get along in Uncharted threads. But I could be wrong.
Uno Venova
Banned
Yeah that console sim war got so bad it needed it's own thread, and uncharted and Quantic Dream thread get shit up pretty bad too, it's a circle we deal with.
higherARC05
Banned
One time my Warthog sustained damage and the sparks coming from the engine were flying off onto the front left tire. They were interacting with the normal maps on the tire as they did in Reach. Amazing detail.
Back in 2006/07 it was really cool to hate on Halo on Neogaf, at least nowadays even people who dislike Halo recognize the series' battle simulation as a strong and unique point, back then it had no redeeming qualities according to very numerous (and very dedicated) haters. Things got much better, though that's probably partially due to Call of Duty overtaking it as the most popular FPS and attracting a significant group of ever-angry nerds.
TUROK I think its time you jumped off Bungie's back and except that Halo 4 is leaps and bounds better looking than Reach.
Performance alone in Halo 4 is above and beyond Halo: reach, and for me that's a huge plus in my book, regardless of what was compromised, Halo 4 still looks and play's ten fold better than Reach.
Performance alone in Halo 4 is above and beyond Halo: reach, and for me that's a huge plus in my book, regardless of what was compromised, Halo 4 still looks and play's ten fold better than Reach.
CadetMahoney
Member
"Criticizing" Halo tends to be leniently moderated unlike something like an Uncharted Last/of Us which brings out the crazies if you say anything remotely negative, at least now they have to find reasons to say anything critical of Halo.
DJ Lushious
Member
I would also be curious to know if anyone can comment on how Halo 4 performs when installed to a USB flash drive.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
I just don't understand why some people feel such a loyalty to Sony or MS to the point of taking a beautiful exclusive game on another platform so personally. Cause ultimately, thats what its all about with some people. Its as if they have stocks invested in the companies or something. I stopped giving a shit about loyalties. I like Halo, so i play it. I enjoyed it then when it was being called Halo 2.5 and i still enjoy it now that it looks amazing.
At one point, these people will hopefully grow up and realize that your loyalties are meaningless to these corporations. Sony, MS don't care about you, they care about your money. So just enjoy the games.
IIRC from the UC3 thread, other than the changes to the controls, most people were negative on the MP or the thought that it wasn't as good as UC2 (which I agree with). However, I don't recall people shitting up the UC3 tech analysis thread with baseless comparisons while saying the game wasn't that impressive like they are here.
Exactly this. Uncharted, Gears, KZ, Halo, etc. all impress me the same. They are all making their share of trade offs but are all beautiful games that make me happy to own both systems.
I'll never understand why some people get defensive over saying a game looks great. It's the hyperbolic fans that like to crown a "winner" that are the problem IMO. If they knew what they were talking about, they would know no such thing exists these days.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=451179
4th post
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32471769&postcount=4
49th post
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32474218&postcount=49
Jett defending Uncharted 3 like he also did for Halo 4
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32474377&postcount=52
53rd Post
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32474487&postcount=53
UC3 Defense
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32477404&postcount=79
93th Post
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32477881&postcount=93
Hyperbole like in this topic about Halo 4 being the best
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32477913&postcount=95
There's more gems if you keep reading. Console Warriors, keep fighting the good fight.
After watching a few direct feed videos it's pretty clear what Halo 4 does well and what it doesn't. The HDR is great, jaggies aren't too bad, and the frame rate is solid.
Cut corners: Shadow pop in distance is crazy close, lack of SSAO and motion blur (blur isn't a big deal since the frame rate in campaign is solid), relatively weak textures. I didn't notice the Jackal shields acting as dynamic lights but maybe that effect has a close LOD as well.
Cut corners: Shadow pop in distance is crazy close, lack of SSAO and motion blur (blur isn't a big deal since the frame rate in campaign is solid), relatively weak textures. I didn't notice the Jackal shields acting as dynamic lights but maybe that effect has a close LOD as well.
Particles are used in a different way, as you have said. Another example:
Such a sweet gif. I suppose you guys are right. I was thinking of particles in regards to sparks flying off of everything you shoot. Reach really had a lot of that.
Metalmurphy
Member
Good stuff. But you know what I don't see there? People shitting on the competition right on the first few posts.
But you shouldn't remind people of that, your gonna ruin Baconsammy theory.
Not only that... The previous developer was shitted on in the 4th post. lol
Lion Heart
Banned
This shit is nothing. U3 had not one but two dedicated troll threads for its "canonical" 8.0 score/6.0 review albeit one was Evilore trying to get serious discussions (which tend to only stem from ps3 exclusives) on reviews.
Or a post mortem on U3s shittyness. Not to mention 90% of PS3 lttps are always heavily negative among a million more examples. The bulk of Halos criticism has been on its visuals (big deal) not its gameplay.
What am I doing here?
That control thread. That 8/10 thread. Thanks for bringing back the nightmares.
Not being biased. I had to post atleast one thing positive.
To be honest, the craziness from the UC3 threads were stemmed from the fact that UC2 set such a high bar. Bring in the trolls, the detractors, the console warriors, and people who put developers on a unrealistically high pedestal... And it's a recipe for disaster on forums.
Lion Heart
Banned
seventynine
Member
My favourite was the one where OP played all of 90 minutes of Uncharted 3 before posting his LTTP, it of course was negative.
___________
Back to Halo 4, really enjoying the revamped weapon sounds. They have much more punch than the previous games, even the energy weapons.
Uno Venova
Banned
I've been seeing this a lot on the internet, it's kind of fucked up people can toss out an old developer who made this series so much fun for years like that, like 3 days after launch.
It's the old "What have you done for me lately?" condition.
XtremeXpider
Member
Some good quality screenshots:
Lion Heart
Banned
Some good quality screenshots:
I get a Shadow Moses vibe from this, imagine an MGS remake with this engine.
The stuff that was compromised to finally make Halo catch up with this gen, is stuff that never mattered.
Huge draw distances made of "real geometry" means jack shit to EVERYONE and adds literally zero to the game. The AI is still the best in the business (on consoles) and there's still plenty of open battlefields.
Play it on Legendary and it completely changes the whole game, as always.
In summary, 343 have done a phenomenal job, and it makes the wait for Halo 5 on the next Xbox painfully exciting. I assume they're making the next box version, which will be scaled back for 360 and released together.
Huge draw distances made of "real geometry" means jack shit to EVERYONE and adds literally zero to the game. The AI is still the best in the business (on consoles) and there's still plenty of open battlefields.
Play it on Legendary and it completely changes the whole game, as always.
In summary, 343 have done a phenomenal job, and it makes the wait for Halo 5 on the next Xbox painfully exciting. I assume they're making the next box version, which will be scaled back for 360 and released together.
Maybe it'll matter in 20 years and the 2D backgrounds looks bad while playing a 360 emulator at 4000p.
i'm not serious
Baconsammy
Banned
It's not unexpected when the developer has made it sound like for years they were only doing it because they were contractually obligated to do it. To say that 343 breathed new life into the series is an understatement, and also bodes well for the series since these people appear to love the franchise they're in charge of.
gaming_noob
Member
Actually, there's a map that looks like the final area in MGS1 when you fight the Metal Gear...complete with music that sounds like MGS.
HollovVpo1nt
Banned
Give Bungie and Reach more credit. Reach pushed more characters on screen and had bigger environments. I prefer the look of Reach.
Baconsammy
Banned
I dont care how much Reach was trying to do, they should have done less once they realized they couldnt maintain a constant framerate. The very second I got off the Pelican in chapter 1 the framerate went to shit. Beauty and scope mean nothing when the framerate isnt good. It was fine in multiplayer, but the problem with multiplayer was the half-hearted Firefight mode.
higherARC05
Banned
Reach didn't push more enemies than HALO 4. They're about equal. Just on the first Spartan Ops mission you can clearly see that as well as being one of the biggest battlefields in HALOs history. Can't wait to see what next week missions will be
Also, level 6 is a HUGE ass map. All real mountain geometry and all like in Reach.
Only if I had a better camera. But here I found the faces of the NPCs so freaking detailed. The skin shader is great and the detail in the pores and such is astounishing.
Look at em cheeks.
XtremeXpider
Member
The game is really beautiful:
Metalmurphy
Member
Tiny pic is banned. But that shot was posted already.
*edit* nm.
*edit* nm.
XtremeXpider
Member
Yes, I forgot it. re-uploaded to photobucket.
Installing the game to your HD will yield the best performance, mainly with load times. To actually spot texture streaming differences between HD and the disc would be rough. USB works great as well.
However the only real big difference when it comes to performance is all installed and or disc configurations versus users with an Xbox 360 that does not have a hard drive.
TUROK
Member
No it isn't. Some models actually have less geometry than Reach models. Grunts lack arm and leg spines, and the Elites in Reach had teeth that were all geometry, while 4 cuts back on that significantly.
Bullshit. Halo 4's levels don't even come close to Halo 3's levels.Reach didn't push more enemies than HALO 4. They're about equal. Just on the first Spartan Ops mission you can clearly see that as well as being one of the biggest battlefields in HALOs history. Can't wait to see what next week missions will be
Also, level 6 is a HUGE ass map. All real mountain geometry and all like in Reach.
There is nothing in Halo 4 that's this size.
The framerate was solid most of the time. There are a few areas that needed some more optimization, though, like when you're defending Halsey's lab from waves of Covenant.
That thread is uglier than I remember. I don't understand focusing on only the bad when the results still look great. I'm not saying ignore them, IMO the filtering is one of the bigger issues in Halo 4, but there's a wide range of things to discuss.
Yeah, other exclusives have no place in this thread and when I saw that one post on the first page all I thought was "here we go".
That's still no reason to shit on Bungie after all they've accomplished.
TUROK
Member
Lol, I didn't even see this. Never gonna happen. I will always appreciate the absolutely amazing stuff Bungie has done with the underlying tech for their games.TUROK I think its time you jumped off Bungie's back and except that Halo 4 is leaps and bounds better looking than Reach.
Performance alone in Halo 4 is above and beyond Halo: reach, and for me that's a huge plus in my book, regardless of what was compromised, Halo 4 still looks and play's ten fold better than Reach.
This right here is a technical achievement that Halo 4 doesn't come close to touching, pretty Halo 4 lighting be damned, and there was no framerate problems in this level either.
higherARC05
Banned
Those levels aren't that much bigger than what is the first episode of Spartan Ops.
Funny as the battle with the 2 scarabs was awesome, but the map as you see is just like HALO 4s. Beyond that mountain its just a skybox. The second level is just like that in map size.
And the grunts are more rounded, and the armor they wear looks better. They just put the polys for better use.
But the environments, Chief, NPCs, vehicles like the warthog, and such are way more poly pushing. Just look at the interiors of level 7 compared to any of Reach's or 3's interiors. They look so bland and empty.
higherARC05
Banned
Level 6 is the exact same type of mission structure as that Reach mission. And HALO 4's has a WAY larger environment than Reach did for that mission.
Spoiler
http://www.anonmgur.com/up/dd5b83ad7c8207e3c49a4f2fca6486db.jpg
Baconsammy
Banned
No, you're right. I shit on them when they were still in charge. Mostly for not caring enough about a steady framerate. The upside of this is that 343 proved they could make great Halo games, which now means we as gamers will have Halo titles still plus whatever Bungie moves on to.
TUROK
Member
They're much much bigger. Ignoring the skyboxes, there's a lot more play area.
The interiors of 4 definitely look better than the interiors of Reach (when the pop-in isn't noticeable), but that's because Halo 4's levels are divided into sections. They're separated by portals or doors that close shut behind you. They have more leeway with it because they've made them more linear.
Oh yeah, sure, if you ignore that there's only a fraction of the amount of buildings, that most of the horizon is just empty space, and there's no particles on the scale of the rain in New Alexandria, you have a point.
Not to mention that you can land on EVERY building you see in New Alexandria.
Similar threads
- Locked