Have the graphics improved in Reach? Decide for yourself with this Halo 3/Halo: Reach comparison! Courtesy of GameTrailers
lol the waterfall, damm halo 3 was ugly
lets be honest here. there is a significant difference, but still not really that good.
But honestly, not by much...
The change isnt eye catching, but its still there.
The video shows that the cutscenes are vastly improved in Halo: Reach. But the gameplay looks fairly similar. Both waterfalls were ugly, pukeface.
The differences between the two are night and day. Not only are the maps larger, but the environments have much more detail to them. There's a lot more dynamic lighting going on, and the ambient occlusion on certain details such as character faces is phenomenal. Not to mention there's zero aliasing and screen tearing. Normal: http://i162.photobucket.com... x5: http://i162.photobucket.com... x10: http://i162.photobucket.com... The tiniest details shine pretty well in this game.
THe difference is almost a generation worth. Can't believe some guys say it's not that much.,
i dont get it are we being sarcastic
Yeah 3 wasnt exactly a looker in the first place and reach is only a mild massage of the engine, they have had three whole years to improve it so im not exactly blown away. All those high scores for graphics are a bit stupid really, its a nice colourful game but not one of the best looking games this generation. Cut scenes just dont count, because you can lock theier framerate low and add better effects even if they are rendered locally. In gameplay the difference is not dramatic
Significant?? Your mad its not that much plus it just proves that reviewers are biased as Halo 3 got 10s for graphics and since they got beat well.. You cant get better than a 10 right? The comparison vid also proves your practically paying for the same game over again. With a new story which is probably gonna be as bland as Halo 3's was.
a 10 in 2007 is not the same as 2010!!! the game looks better by far. Most the upgrades were to backgrounds and landscape and explosions.
2007 was the same year that Crysis & Uncharted came out. Halo 3 in no way deserved a 10 for graphics then.
came out before them. but its also a style thing too. gears looked better than halo 3 and it came out a year before it.
Rather, the TEXTURES are more DETAILED. Because Halo 3 looks like the Halo: Reach bleached with "Mr. Clean". Regardless, this definitely shows that texture improvement can bring SUCH significance even if if the poly-count is pretty much the same. Throwing in more polygons does not guarantee better graphics (Lara Craft in TR7 has more polys than Nathan Drake in UC1 but guess which looks better). Hopefully more devs can utilize more details like this to save more resources for their games. -End statement
what would you call it? better textures is better graphics. textures are higher more particles, more filters.
Let's put it this way. You can put 1 color in 10,000 poly's or 10 colors in 1,000 poly's. Which one would be more "detailed"? -End statement
depends on what your making. also unless you have the wire frames you don't know weather its the same or not. you said "look better" doesn't really matter how it was achieved. so i don't have a clue what your statement even means. Are you saying just lower polys to get better textures?
the games look night and day to me. i'm having much more fun with reach so far. granted i liked halo 3's campaign until that stupid board with nothing but flood.
It has alot more detail on everything.
Yer I Know...... I noticed the most was that there is more terrain detail/ textures which makes it look better....I would have been surprised if it didn't look better considering Halo 3 came out in 2007
Anyone who's played both on a HDTV will know which the difference though. Reach is leaps and bounds ahead of Halo 3.
It's a facelift, but not a "leaps and bounds" redesign. I'm not very far into the game, but so far I'm a little disappointed. It's not really a new, never-before-seen Halo. It's just more Halo. I guess that's fine if you're a Halo fanatic, but my enthusiasm for this franchise seems to have lessened over the years.
Honestly I've never really liked any of the Halo games since CE. But I love the shit out of this one. Graphics are better and the gameplay is solid. It's mainly the scale of the levels and the texture detail, but I agree that Reach is leaps and bounds ahead of 3.
but I have both the games.
environments in halo reach are enormous
thats nice. What does that have to do with the graphics comparison?
Because graphics normally get compromised for bigger non linear environments maybe?
Not really. KZ2 maps are HUGE, and they still look amazing. Not to mention all the thing going on in the map (dust, storm, etc)
Actually these vids make it hard to tell the huge gaps. Playing Reach and going back to halo3 the difference is night and day. imperator: I didn't know kz2 was a sandbox game.
KZ2 maps are not as big as reach, they really aren't not by a long shot. KZ2 campaign is roughly the size of gears 2 slightly bigger areas.
@lowcarb True, Halo games are more open. I'm not bashing Reach though. Finished the campaign and going to go through it again on Legendary (heard it was really tough this time around). Then I'll go into Forge world and see whats up. I've barely scratched the surface and it's been 3 days. Anyways, all I was saying is that KZ2 maps are pretty big and still look great. Reach looks good to though. Completely different artstyles.
Reach looks better (duh), but let's be honest here; it's not that hard to beat Halo 3 when it comes to graphics lol.
Oh, sorry guys. I forgot that Halo 3 was the graphical king back in the day! It's puts current-day games to shame! Lol.
Halo 3 was one of the top graphical games back in 2007, just like COD4. Today we look at Cod4 and it looks like shit, but in 2007 it was praised for having HDR effects and such. Halo 3 had very good effects. Not the best. Not Uncharted 1.
Uh ya uncharted 1 stops all over halo 3 and cod4. Thats just the truth...look at screenshots. Uncharted 1 still looks pretty damn good compared to most games nowadays
"Halo 3 was one of the top graphical games back in 2007," Uhh what? 2007... 360 was still VERY early, PS3 had just come out, so there wasn't much to compare, but Halo 3 literally looks like a high-res Halo 2 with bloom. And compared to PC games at that time, it looked awful. Even Half-life 2 Episode 1 and the Half Life 2 Lost Coast demo looked better, and that came out waaay before 2007.
2007 saw the release of crysis... why are you all talking about COD4 and Halo when it comes to graphics...
COD4 looked far better than Halo 3 when it was released. And Uncharted 1 is still one of the best looking games this gen. Reach's graphics though are excellent. Kudos to Bungie for actually giving halo decent graphics this time around.
But i will never forget the fanboys saying reach looks better than killzone 2 after the first gameplay footage was released. I have reach and it clearly isnt even close.
That's delusion for ya!
You must of not owned a PS3 in 07 huh?
This comparison doesn't provide the sense of Scale in Reach. Judging just by the video, the improvements look visible but not mindblowing. There's a lot more detail on everything, including the character models, but there are some things in Halo 3 which seem to jump out in a more appealing way than in Reach. But again, with Reach Bungie didn't just improve the visuals. They increased the scale of the game by a magnitude of 5 while still adding 4 times as many polygons as Halo 3. So Forge World looks better than Valhalla while still being many times larger than the Valhalla map.
And yet I still feel their worlds are rather barren and empty. They make it work for their artstyle, but compare it to the density of say.. CoD4? It just feels lacking to me (but again, not bad looking).
I can't judge them too harshly. They're working on 2004 hardware. Reach has a lot of details in the flora and fauna. If the scale of the game were smaller, I'm sure they could have made it look much sharper and impressive, but they decided to make the game more like Combat Evolved, with larger scope. And they're working with DVD. There's a myriad of reasons why this is not Bungie's fault and is more the fault of the hardware.
I'd actually be more inclined to blame it on the engine itself before the hardware. Unless of course their new IP shows the same trademark, then it's just "their style."
Halo reach . Not much to debate over .
one of the funnest games ive played on the xbox. Almost done with the single player campaign. been playing split screen and firefight. so much content to choose from. Great game glad i bought it.
I'll be totally alone here but I think the general design for spartans has decreased since Halo 2. (I like shiny things) H2: http://hce.halomaps.org/ima... H3: http://xbox360media.ign.com... H:R: http://files.g4tv.com/Image...
You might be....I prefer the realistic battered image (obviously in warfare games)
As games become more photorealistic, that bright, stand-out effect is going to diminish. I like the Halo 3 screenshot a lot more than the Halo Reach screenshot, but if the camera zoomed in close to the models, the textures in Reach would be much better.
your pics of halo3 and H:R aren't actual gameplay.
tru-dat smokey...beat me to it!
The Worst Part about Halo is you can't Pick the Game you want to Play.. I only Like Swat but I have to play Hoping the 12 and 13 yrs old pick it when it shows up...
What? Isn't there a section where you choose? Halo 3 had it.
Swat was announced to have its own list, by Bungie, real soon.. ;) Be patient. They've been updating lists since Halo 2, do not fret.
wow - never knew Reach was such an awesome looking game. i would've bought it if i had an xbox.
just from that video some parts of 3 looked better then reach. didnt really see anything to go goo goo over about the same but the rock face did look better on reach. for the most part the same, im still not that impresed with reach, SP to short and i swear i had seen some of the same land scape from 3 in it.
I don't even need to watch that video. I got a new xbox and Reach today and let me tell you WOW! Halo Reach is beautiful guys, very very beautiful. It's definitely looks better at home than it does on the internet. Truly a game that is unique and it has very good graphics. It's not eye popping like UC2, Gears, KZ or GOW but it's REALLY got some great visuals.
i think it looks better than Gears but maybe that's just me
Better textures in Reach. Bigger environs... or at least more convincing. Makes sense, since MS reduced 30MB of memory from the OS, inbetween Halo 3's time and Reach. I'd say that effective 30MB memory boost just about covers the "how" for the improvements, too.
For some reason Halo 3 looks better lol
Brighter and a little more clear but the res was also lower in Halo 3.
I'm a huge 360 and Halo fan. Finished Reach last night, and the graphics are not that great at all. It's the truth. Only defense could be it's more of a sandbox type game. And any 360 fan that says different is in denial. But still .... the co-op campaign was the most fun I've had since Halo 3. And I'll be hooked on the multiplayer for a long ling time.
Local coop = win.
That's funny, I'm a huge fan of videogames and will knock any game on any console. I didn't think Reach looked like a huge improvement. Popped it in today and thought the game had awesome graphics. Everything, E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G in Halo Reach has TONS of detail.
no doubt had a a blast with my kids. Id stay back sniping while he was a melee monster
I argee with you on the visuals. I am not seeing what some fans see when looking at Reach. It doesn't look much better than 3 or ODST. I think overall it's a mixed bag. Some parts look excellent and some not so much. The atmosphere and scope of the game is great but the story is meh. Halo just doesn't feel the same without Master Chief and Cortana. I am near the end of mission 6. Loved the flying mission. Wish there was more of them. This game seems like it's really short because I have only played for a couple hours and I am half way through it already. I like it more than ODST and Halo 3. CE is still my favorite. But on a positive note. The more I play it the more I like it. Don't know how much longevity it will have for me because I am not a big fan of it online. Might try some co op and firefight but that's about it. Going to give the online a try tonight just to see if I can get into it. I hope the next developer (343 or whom ever) uses a different engine though. Can you imagine Halo with Crytek or Rage engine?
"Halo just doesn't feel the same without Master Chief and Cortana" So true. But the story in Reach makes sense especially for a prequel. I especially like the way Cortana, master Chief and Keyes make their cameos. "Can you imagine Halo with Crytek or Rage engine?" And yup .... Imagine that!!
You mind warning us with ***spoilers*** before you give the story away!
Are you talking to me? If so, what did I say that was not posted in articles or written by other members on N4G a 1000 times over?
I'm a huge fan as well, I respect your opinion but Graphics's are good /great out of 10 I would give them a 8.5, The amount of detail they put into the environments on other things are impressive compared to halo 3 espically if you own a HD TV I kind of feel sorry for people that have to play on a regular TV now a days, You don't get the same effect that includes PS3 and XBox360,