Halo Report writes, "The latest issue of Edge magazine featured eight pages of Reach goodness and here's the scans if don't have the issue."
Then again, the 360 is a last gen console.
Even MW2 looks better.
those shot's are from before thanksgiving. http://forum.beyond3d.com/s... and the trailer that was first shown wasn't, so what does that mean? it means the trailer is newer.
"this stage in development a lot of it is computer generated. Nothing in game is finish" "the level of scattered detail is higher than Halo3's"
PS3 has and will never have a game this big.
I think it looks incredible. It seems a lot of the detail is lost on some people. I mean honestly, which one do you think looks better? http://n4g.com/ViewComImage... I think the bottom two look better.
LOL @ last place, defeated Droids who try to pretend PlayStation is still popular LoL poor sore loser Droids will be so pwned at E3
Everybody seems to be forgetting about Gran Turismo 5.
like the art style.
Not really, but it looks good. Halo is about gameplay anyways. Who has ever bought halo for its graphics. Still this is what halo 3 should have looked like. I like the more realistic aproach. But i want to see better scans of gameplay. No one really knows what it will look like exactly.
the game is only 70% complete, so lets just wait for the full game before crying doom and gloom about graphics, im sure it will shape up really well, just look at how far god of war has come along since the demo, its looking amazeing, and im sure halo reach will too.
Looking awesome and this is an old build, cant wait to see the new build.
This game is looking amazing, look at the level of detail in the 1st person view screenshot. http://i559.photobucket.com... if is true that this is and 4-5 month old build, i can imagine how this game will look like when is done.
Yeah I like the particular look this game has. It looks really amazing.
You shouldn't be so quick to judge. Scans can make games look worse than they are. Do you remember some of the scans of Killzone 2 we got? Some of those didn't look that good. Remember this: http://item.slide.com/r/1/3... Or this: http://item.slide.com/r/1/6... Compare those to the Halo Reach scans and I would say Halo Reach looks a lot better.
Images are dead on the link unfortunately. Either way they probably won't be final as it's still too early in the games development to get anything near final graphics.
Get out of here! Leave!!
We dnt need you BS about Halo this Halo that!
Your proving yourself a hater!!
Like i said, go look at some of your 2080p vids of Unfarted 2 or GOW3! "Just dont get to horny about it"
Like my grandpa once said, haters always hate on the King!!
Which is why I said "No one really knows what it will look like exactly" But from what we have all seen no one should be impressed, thats all I am saying. We just need some freakin gameplay already.
It looks not better or worse than one could reasonably expect. It's running on hardware that was maxed out years ago. It's foolish to continue hoping for miracles.
Neither console is maxed out. Naughty Dog said Uncharted 2 used the PS3 100% but that doesn't meant that they can't make improvements to how the software uses the hardware. The same can be said for the 360. We will surely see better looking games on both consoles.
the PS3 (Uncharted 2, Killzone 2) and 360 (lots of games) are both maxed out already. The difference is that, unlike the 360's CPU, the Cell benefits tremendously from a little bit of optimization. This means that, unlike the 360's CPU, the Cell has a lot of head-room left while the 360 does not. Uncharted 1 looks better than any game on the 360 (and until Killzone 2) any game on the PS3 and barely touched the Cell. Goal for the sequel: Develop a system to use all the SPUs all the time. Uncharted 2 looks better than any other game, even on PS3, and uses all the SPUs on the Cell processor. Goal for the sequel: Now that we have a good system in place to utilize all the SPUs, let's refine the code so that it's more efficient in how it uses the SPUs.
game is great looking forward to it EPIC APPROVED
If UC2 was a graphical Eva Mendes, then this is more Rosie O'Donnell.
More like Jessica Alba.
thats what she said to you! LOL edit: Thank You Good Sir
I could just edit my comment and counter that.. But i'll give you this win lol.
where are the kz2 graphics aaron greenburg was fan boying about?
To be fair he is gonna say that he is the BIGGEST 360 fanboy around but that's because its his job to say and be the BIGGEST fanboy around. Also who cares?? You think this game is gonna sell on graphics?? Halo 3 certainly didn't.
Honestly tho, can someone PLEASE tell me if it's going to be 720P this time?
Very unlikely. If it's 720p I imagine the first thing to go would be AA. People are comparing this game to KZ2 I don't know what planet they are on. Stylistically I'm sure it can compete with any other game but in terms of hardware it just isn't possible on the 360.
Nonsense. The 360 is just as powerful (if not a bit more powerful) as the PS3. It is easy to see in the screen shots that Halo Reach looks better than Killzone 2 in many ways. Not to mention that Halo Reach will have bigger scale and 4 player co-op.
is really not impressive
Look, people. I don't have an X360 but I think it looks extremely nice. Come on it's not 2006 anymore. You don't have to be fanboys all the time. Or are you all just graphics whores? I doubt it because I haven't seen you complain much about Demon's Souls.
it looks good, i guess....
It doesn't HAVE to look amazing graphically. Demon's Souls, Valkyria Chronicles are the proof
back when the 360 had the "best" graphics no one cared about the gameplay, but all of a sudden graphics don't matter and its all about the gameplay? sure, gameplay makes the game, but that wasn't the case a year or two ago
Everyone awlays cared about the gameplay. People were just being butthurt
@5.2 Halo and Demon's Souls (and many others) don't have to look amazing graphically to be great. Valkyria Chronicles didn't have to to be great either, but I think it did look amazing, especially in terms of artistic merit (best looking modern RPG in my opinion, right there with Tales of Vesperia...I like the style...FFXIII make take their place though).
The lack of any sort of AA is my real concern... This went from a day one buy to a "meh" rental
Bungie stated on their forum that Halo Reach would have anti-aliasing. I also read somewhere that it will indeed be 720p, but I can't seem to find that article now.
well, at least they're trying in the graphics department http://origin.arstechnica.c... http://mitchelldyer.files.w...
Looks good. Seems like Bungie is going for it.
Indeed, the game is going to be epic.
meh...looks the same as every other Halo
Sure it does./s
Of course is NOT impressive... its Halo right? on an Xbox 360 right Biased gamers? But but wait a minute... Mass Effect 2 SUCK, Halo Reach SUCK, Alan Wake SUCK, Brink SUCK, Quantum Theory SUCK, BAD Company 2 SUCK, CoD Modern Warfare 2 SUCK... etc. Why? Because you can play them on an Xbox360 that is why! But but but the Universe of Killzone is damn good, rich and better than Halo right?
plus it will look better in motion. all games do. if you have been a gamer for as long as i have, and played through the atari and nes days, every game game produced this gen looks good. i never was a multi-console owner. i pick one per gen and thats it. i don't have enough time to play games for 3 systems. ps3 this gen. gamers unite.
I don't wanna sound like a GFX whore but I have to say my peace :) Graphics are better every time I look. I think I'm just becoming accustomed to them. Vehicles look great, characters look good, lighting is fantastic, some of the structures look pretty darn good. Stone ground textures look nice. But it's the mountains and the grass that looks just god awful. Halo 3 was the same way, from a distance the ground looks like a blurred mess. Than you look down from the tip of your gun and they are all high res looking ground textures. But their not 3D models, their just pasted on a flat ground. It's a terrible look and something I wish would just die. I'd be ok with it if they threw in some rocks/plants etc SOMETHING to add depth instead of a flat ground that's made to look like grass. Maybe that only bugs me I dunno.
Maybe I'm wrong? If your going to disagree I'm a reasonable enough person and I can handle a rebuttle. At least dignify my post with a response. If you can't, than what are you disagreeing with? I never said Halo 3 looked bad, in fact I raved over Halo 3 and the artistic beauty Bungie created. It's just some of the ground textures I think are ugly and flat sometimes.
I wasn't the one that disagreed with you but I think you are a little off on the ground detail thing. When I look at the shots most of them show nice ground and environmental textures. Look at the ground texture http://n4g.com/ViewComImage... ...that doesn't look bad to me. It actually looks better than a lot of games. Have you looked at the ground in MW2 or Resistance 2?
Ya your right, I may be over exaggerating a little bit.
Halo: Reach is going to be a great Day-one purchase game, HANDS DOWN so there's no need to tear-down other games to raise it up; especially when your assessment isn't entirely accurate. Resistance 2 has multiple stages with abundant ground cover that's 3-D, not just a texture: http://www.indianvideogamer... and even in the flat areas, they have things round: http://z.about.com/d/playst... (neither of these shots are from the final build, mind you). I don't see why anyone has to bring PS3 games in to compare in the first place, but if you do, at least try to be objective.
The ground textures that are shown in Halo: Reach are placeholder textures. Not only were they put there to simply take the screenshots in the first place, but the screenshots themselves were taken before Thanksgiving of 2009. By the time this game releases, these shots will be close to a year old.
@ pixelsword If people are criticizing Halo Reach for incorrect reasons then I think there is nothing wrong with comparing it to other games. The question is, what are you comparing it to? Even the Resistance 2 screen shots you linked to show that Halo Reach has very good ground textures by comparison. The first Resistance 2 screen shot didn't necessarily have a good ground texture, it simply had a lot of vegetation on the ground, the texture underneath the vegetation looked fairly low resolution. The second screen shot didn't show particularly impressive ground textures. We also need to remember that we have only seen a few screen shots from one very small part of the game. We have no idea what kinds of variety of ground textures and vegetation we might see in the full game. It's easy to pick out the best looking ground textures from other games because we have the full games to draw from. All we can say is that based on the small area of the game that we have seen the ground and environmental textures look very good. The screen shots show that they are easily on par with or better than the ground textures in many other shooters. And that is despite the fact that it has many months left of development time.
but the inclusion of dynamic wet surfaces sound cool.
You know that stuff is in and I know it'll be even better than in Halo 3. I just want to see it in motion when the time is right. Although, I don't want to see any gameplay vids until it looks damn near what the final game will look like.
I just want bungie updates on the games progress, like they did for halo 3, halo 3 still looks great imo. http://www.neogaf.com/forum...
I'm sure we'll get the same kind of Vidocs we got with Halo 3 (I hope so at least) And I'm one of the few that will openly agree with you about Halo 3. Very under appreciated in the graphics department.
Yeah Halo 3 is definitely under appreciated graphically.
After a little while Halo 3's graphics grew on me. The game stands the test of time, I'm telling you. People still go by the old Walmart asking for copies of the original Halo 3. "Oh you mean, Halo 3:ODST?", "No, just Halo 3." Quite an under appreciated game graphically, in my opinion.
Bungie has steadily improved the Halo series. Even when the jump from 2 to 3 didn't have the "stellar" improvements the commercials had me to believe, the game made broader alterations in it's feel and scope that once again put the Halo franchise on the top. It's no secret why it's always in the top 10 of most played games on the 360 in terms of multiplayer. As good as Gears can be, Halo will always trump most, if not all, games out there. It's the first "complete" game and one of the few out there on any console... Great story, great single player, great multiplayer, now great co-op, and vehicles. It doesn't get any better than that.
i cant wait to see this running. 2010 easily belongs to REACH followed closely by ME2. ONLY ON XBOX 360.
Man i dont know but this graphics look super, specially the one with the first person view. And this is a 4-5 month old build.
it's a 4 month old build, of a game that's 70% complete.
The pics are from a 4 -5 month old build but the game as of right now is at 70%, Urk said in the Bungie.net Forum, that the new build it's looking much better. http://www.bungie.net/Forum...
Ive read the scans and see a lot of excitement for the technical aspects of this game. However the improvements seem to be bungie catching up with what other developers have been using for some years now e.g motion capture. So far it doesnt seem like the title will be leading other games in terms of technical performance.
i got some disagrees,interested in the persons opinion as to why they disagree.