Print

[VOlition]

I agree, the halo 3 trailer didn't have any "wow omg" graphics. The enviroment was very bland, and I think that an xbox 1 can generate that kind of trailer off the bat.

[Deftech]

its a scripted trailer, Im not even a fan of Halos but I wouldnt go basing how the game will look from a trailer thats meant to do nothing but garner hype.

and dont expect many engines to surpass that of UE 3, youll be sorely disappointed in the long run. what planet do you come from that says Unreal 3 based games shouldnt look as good as others? Id bet that Halo 3 comes close to matching GoW graphically, I highly highly doubt it will surpass it.

[Deftech]

QUOTE(paranoia4422 @ May 13 2006, 02:44 PM)

im SO glad it doesnt have motion blur, i cant tell you how horrible of an experience it is on interlaced tv's

but you can expect GoW style detail and lighting effects with bungies art style of doing games, but still while i hope halo3 would compare to crysis its not happening

theres a simple solution for that

didnt say it would cheap, but its simple.

[mathias]

the game isn't even close to shipping.... Im telling you now... NOV 07 is when it will be released......



more than enough time..... look at the advancment of GOW from last year to this year....

[Deftech]

QUOTE(mathias @ May 13 2006, 02:57 PM)

the game isn't even close to shipping.... Im telling you now... NOV 07 is when it will be released......
more than enough time..... look at the advancment of GOW from last year to this year....

some say they dont see a difference in Gears, I say they are loony!

[KAGE360]

some quotes about the graphics engine:

QUOTE

We flew them around the environment, flew out over the Forerunner structure, did a close-up of the Chief to show the realtime reflection of the visor (you could see the ammo counter running down in his faceplate) and showed off the unified lighting model we're using - particularly how other surfaces, such as sand, reflect light back up onto his armor. Frame rate was silky smooth, but to be fair, that was basically an empty environment with the Chief in it. However, we're obviously trying to make our finished game silky smooth too

Personally I am fond of the draw distance and the detail PRT lighting on the Chief. But then I'm party to some graphical features that you haven't seen yet, that sort of blow that stuff away.

The sand, dust, smoke and other effects are all from the game engine. They will be used in the game. The landscape you saw is real geometry - the mountains and city in the distance are not a skybox - they are actual geometry that you can go to. Our cut scenes and our gameplay will be very comparable. Also, CJ Cowan, our director of cinematics, says that the texture "pop" seen in Halo 2's cinematics has already gone bye-bye for Halo 3.

http://www.bungie.ne...lyupdatemay1206

QUOTE

"Graphically, the game follows closely in the tradition of Halo 2, although obviously upgraded to take advantage of the Xbox 360's more prodigious visual abilities," reads Bungie's site. "As art director Marcus Lehto explains, 'It was intended to be an understated announce of Halo 3 -- the tone is that of mystery and suspense -- the calm before the storm. I wanted to make sure that we re-introduced the Chief, show that Earth is thoroughly conquered, with Covenant everywhere, and that there is a glorious, ancient artifact buried under the Earth's crust which will provide H3 with the epic journey which we all want.'"

Master Chief stops walking and the camera lowers, pointing up at one of two remaining Spartan soldiers, giving you the chance to eye all of the incredible detail from the new, next-generation super soldier. The lighting system is now global, meaning that the lighting comes from one single source, like us real-life humans experience every day, and you can see how it glimmers off the visor on Master Chief's helmet and the gritty beaten armor. You can see distinct reflections of objects in the visor -- big and small.

http://xbox360.ign.c...7/707241p1.html

i dont know what you guys are smoking but the xbox 1 cant even pull half of the effects that this game is showing off.  honestly though i think this is yet another good example of how much art direction will influence the look of a game.  If you actually understood what you are watching on the screen during this video i dont think you guys would say such things.

while GoW is more impressive to me right now, i have no doubt that this game will match if not exceed GoW when its released.  the game wont come out before fall/winter of 07 so i dont see how this wont be a graphical showcase by then.  

also what does motion blue do to an interlaced TV?  my 1080i TV displays motion blur just fine

[boxrocker]

Dude, you're crazy.  Consider that this is rendered REAL TIME.  Then look at the mirror effects on his visor and all the rest of the stuff.  

Compared side by side to halo 2, this is true HD and looks much better.

I just hope they have a good story line, and some more (better) weapons.

[dgrams2003]

Okay.. its rendered "Real Time"
Using the graphics engine that is going to be used in the game.
We get it.

So what.  This is still considered a 'cut scene', 'cinematic', 'trailer'
whatever you want to call it, but its NOT gameplay.

So it could be the Real Time, or it could be a cinematic.
I ask you.. what the heck is the difference?

They could make a cinematic like this for XBox1.  Games have had awesome pre-rendered
cut scenes.
So now we are at the age where they can make a cutscene using the game engine.
Big deal.
When it comes down to it, it is still just a cutscene, whether it was pre-rendered
and just shown as a video clip, or if it is using the game engine.

[shodanjr_gr]

This being real time means that that's the graphics quality of the gameplay proportions of the game...Thats the reason people value real time graphics so much.


And from what ive read on the bungie site this wasnt real time graphics recorded to video and then played back.

An XBOX 360 debug kit was doing the rendering for the trailer in real time DURING the coference. That says a lot about the optimization and faith of Bungie in their graphics engine to go and display a beta version of it right there in front of the whole press community.


BTW i though the graphics in the trailer looked AWESOME. VERY clear, not over done with motion blur effects and filters(*cough*MGS4 trailer*cough*) that can sometimes hide graphical inadiquaties.

[CAjr45]

QUOTE(shodanjr_gr @ May 13 2006, 07:30 PM)

This being real time means that that's the graphics quality of the gameplay proportions of the game...Thats the reason people value real time graphics so much.
And from what ive read on the bungie site this wasnt real time graphics recorded to video and then played back.

An XBOX 360 debug kit was doing the rendering for the trailer in real time DURING the coference. That says a lot about the optimization and faith of Bungie in their graphics engine to go and display a beta version of it right there in front of the whole press community.
BTW i though the graphics in the trailer looked AWESOME. VERY clear, not over done with motion blur effects and filters(*cough*MGS4 trailer*cough*) that can sometimes hide graphical inadiquaties.

completly agree, things like motion blur make the game look like it needs to hide something

let the game show its beautiful textures

Also. from me looking at the trailer and its said to be the real-time engine, it would have features like self shadowing, soft shadows, HDR, Depth of field (your motion blur right there), volumetric smoke, and fsaa as well as an awesome job of AF.

[twistedsymphony]

Would you guys give it a rest...

It was an ANNOUNCEMENT trailer. Honestly I couldn't care less about the Halo series. The Game isn't just months away but YEARS from release, all the trailer did was say "hey we're working on it officially now!"

Honestly if they had shown a black background with some text that said "Halo 3 is coming in 07" it would have done the same frigging thing.

Just be glad they gave you some eye-candy on top of it. Does it even matter if it was real time or not, the game is so far off from completion I wouldn't be surprised if they just tweaked Halo 2 to make the presentation.

It's like someone drew a picture of a car and said "this is the car I want to build" and you come along and say "that car sucks... it's just a piece of paper"

[amb7247]

I think graphically it will be good. But people are really expecting the storyline to finish the game. Halo 2 ending wasn't very good and I felt like I was left in the dark at the end. I just hope it gives hours and hours of fun gmaeplay.

[CAjr45]

Hey, think about the ps3

when it was announced in what Q1 2005, its been widely talked about for a whole year
even a while after the ps2 (2003-4 i'd say) theres been dreams of it. and they've still a whole half of a year to talk

we all love to talk about halo and maybe we plan to till it comes out

until then ill eat some popcorn    and watch the karate kid  

[Foe-hammer]

Halo 1 had a unique feel to it, and it was the best coop time i've ever had playing a game.  Halo 2 lost the fist ones 'feel', and became more of a regular, "run of the mill" fps for me.  Halo 3 has me exited if only the hope that it will recapture the feel and uniquness (is that a word?) of the original halo 1.

[CAjr45]

QUOTE(Foe-hammer @ May 13 2006, 10:03 PM)

Halo 1 had a unique feel to it, and it was the best coop time i've ever had playing a game.  Halo 2 lost the fist ones 'feel', and became more of a regular, "run of the mill" fps for me.  Halo 3 has me exited if only the hope that it will recapture the feel and uniquness (is that a word?) of the original halo 1.

thats the thing...

you see when halo came out it was the most original game yet ( a truly original fps)

but now ever since halo everyone tries to make "halo" games

 no when halo 2 rolls around. its just a regular game to some since there were so many ripoff's

the only reason it hit the #1 spot was because it was a halo. everyone loved it because they expect that from halo