Print

[Legendary Badass]

Ok, I know it's not news, but heck I had finals this week. Bottom line, I was very dissapointed with the Halo 3 teaser from E3 this year. First of all, I think we all know that the graphics are going to improve to MGS4 levels by the time of the release. However, not a lot of kids out there are going to know that. If they see a trailer for the game, and it looks like it was on the PS2; they're not going to conclude that it will get better. Consider the following. Have you ever seen a Ferrari advertisement on TV in the United States? I haven't, and that's because in Ferrari's mind an ad can't live up to the real experience of their cars. The cars sell themselves. What I would like to see is absolutely no pics or videos on Halo 3 till it is finished. The secretcy will cause more attention than actually displaying them. Keep in mind, this is not a normal game that no one has heard about. Jay Leno made a reference to it on the Tonight Show, it's that well known. Halo 3 doesn't even need TV ads to sell it: it's the Ferrari of videogames.

[VOlition]

The halo 3 trailer wasn't that bad considering it wasn't anywhere near cg. They were just releasing the trailer because they were announcing halo 3 for xbox 360.

[Foe-hammer]

PS2 graphics.  

I take it you did not watch it in 720p.

[s3CKS_c0W]

You sold me!  

but seriously though, first time I've seen the high res screens. . . those are some nice visuals, especially the depth lol

[kezor]

I didn't get excited because there was no in game play footage, but still SOLD since Halo 1 was released

[Legendary Badass]

I watched it in HD off the marketplace just like the rest of you. It looked PS2 stlye on my 26 inch 1080i Samsung CRT. Maybe the marketplace vids don't convert to 1080i the way the games do. Besides that you can't say that Cortana looks more like a real person than she did before. The draw distance didn't impress me because I was looking for the trees below Chief, and they looked jsut like any generic grass mapping. When I get home, I'll test it on my 50 inch SXRD. The point of my statement isn't so much that the graphics are still in the experimental stage, but that no matter what they show, it doesn't live up to playing it; and the fact that they don't have to actually show us anything and we'll still buy it. Note how the subtitle is MARKETING ANGLE and not PS2 GRAPHICS

I have a very picky eye for detail. I use a 1920X1200 laptop, and anything less just doesn't looks quite right to me. Even my SXRD doesn't have that resolution. Those screen grabs cover about a 4th of my screen. I guess I'll only be satisfied with the Dell XPS Renegade.

[boxrocker]

You think a Dell XPS Renegade is top of the line?  Try this.

And how can you think that his game is PS2 level when it's in HD and the PS2 is not?

[lowendfrequency]

Wow, and I thought I was a naysaying, pessimistic, nitpicking graphics whore... but you my friend are a BLIND, naysaying, pessimistic, nitpicking graphics whore.

PS2?!  The PS2 couldn't handle the assualt rifle shown in the H3 trailer, let alone the whole thing.  You need your head checked man. And how can you hope that H3 will improve to the quality of MGS4?  Did you not notice the HUGE graphical downgrade in MGS4 in the shit that was shown at E3? And it was still dropping frames like mad! H3 has already matched if not surpassed the graphics of MGS4.  

It's ok to be a skeptic, but once in a while you have to admit when something looks damn good.

[Ozy]

So I'm guessing in Halo 3 we will not see the 'pop-up' graphics of halo 2? I prefer Halo 1 graphics anyday, no 'pop-ups' and the lighting just seemed so much better.

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Ozy @ May 19 2006, 12:29 PM)

So I'm guessing in Halo 3 we will not see the 'pop-up' graphics of halo 2? I prefer Halo 1 graphics anyday, no 'pop-ups' and the lighting just seemed so much better.

yes the pop-up problem in halo 2 is no more with halo 3 now.  the lighting technique used in halo 1 is entirely different then what was used in halo 2, part one used a lot of prerendered lighting where part 2 tried the more real time approach.

i dont see how anyone can put ANY 360 title in the same line as the ps2.  you have to remember that this was a TEASER trailer and just like the rumors before E3, it was meant to be around 2 minutes in length and no more.  also to compare this to MGS wouldnt be the most accurate way to judge the graphics as their art direction is entirely different.  

i posted some of these quotes in another thread....

QUOTE

 
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
 

this is all that is publicly known about the game/graphics so far.  if you read it, you should realize that the ps2 coudnt even render his visor let alone the whole scene.  I also expect the game to look as good if not better since it wont launch for another year and a half which is a lifetime in game development.

on a side note:  

to anyone that actually KNOWS what they are talking about when it comes to graphics, what is the "PRT lighting" that was mentioned in my quotes?  perpixel lighting?  that is a new term i dont think i have heard yet.

[Ozy]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ May 19 2006, 05:55 PM)

to anyone that actually KNOWS what they are talking about when it comes to graphics, what is the "PRT lighting" that was mentioned in my quotes?  perpixel lighting?  that is a new term i dont think i have heard yet.

What every it is, it sounds good.  

[Hellbeans]

What's the point in all this?

Teasers will be teasers, and we could never judge the game until we SEE and PLAY it.
My main concerns are framerate and physics, but again, wev'e got to cross that bridge
before we go around mentioning the PS2 in next-gen graphics related topics, for the love of monkeys.

[lowendfrequency]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ May 19 2006, 12:55 PM)

on a side note:  

to anyone that actually KNOWS what they are talking about when it comes to graphics, what is the "PRT lighting" that was mentioned in my quotes?  perpixel lighting?  that is a new term i dont think i have heard yet.

PRT lighting stands for Precomputed Radiance Transfer Lighting.   It is a low-cost(computing power-wise) workaround to true Global Illumination and particle based lighting.    In a real GI setup, the light source would emit particles which would be reflected off of surfaces and illuminate the objects nearby, even picking up colortone.  PRT lighting does all of this without having to emit the particles.  So instead of 10million+ particles of light being recomputed every frame, the radience and luminosity is calculated for the entire scene once before the render even begins.  The downfall of this is accuracy with animated objects.  PRT uses the environment to light the character, whereas true GI also uses the reflected radience from the character to cue subtle lighting changes in the environment as well.  Regardless, it's going to produce some of the best outdoor lighting visuals seen yet in this generation of games.

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(lowendfrequency @ May 19 2006, 01:45 PM)

PRT lighting stands for Precomputed Radiance Transfer Lighting.   It is a low-cost(computing power-wise) workaround to true Global Illumination and particle based lighting.    In a real GI setup, the light source would emit particles which would be reflected off of surfaces and illuminate the objects nearby, even picking up colortone.  PRT lighting does all of this without having to emit the particles.  So instead of 10million+ particles of light being recomputed every frame, the radience and luminosity is calculated for the entire scene once before the render even begins.  The downfall of this is accuracy with animated objects.  PRT uses the environment to light the character, whereas true GI also uses the reflected radience from the character to cue subtle lighting changes in the environment as well.  Regardless, it's going to produce some of the best outdoor lighting visuals seen yet in this generation of games.

thanks for the response, so does this mean that the game is planned to use two different lighting systems?  because the fallowing quote also mentions a global lighting technique....

QUOTE

The lighting system is now global, meaning that the lighting comes from one single source, like us real-life humans experience every day

again thanks for any response.

[lowendfrequency]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ May 19 2006, 01:53 PM)

thanks for the response, so does this mean that the game is planned to use two different lighting systems?  because the fallowing quote also mentions a global lighting technique....

 

again thanks for any response.

Well, yes and no.  I should have been clearer in my original response, but PRT lighting IS a global lighting technique, but thats not the same thing as 'Global Illumination', although they achieve very similar results.  Confused yet? PRT lighting does emit from a singular source, and uses the radience reflected off of the environment to light objects and characters within it.

But you are also correct when you ask about multiple lighting systems. Both PRT and global illumination are better at replicating skylight (the cool toned light relfected off the atmosphere), but leave room for desire when it comes to hard sunlight.  Usually the most realistic lighting is achieved with a global light combined with a strong directional light to cast hard shadows.  I'm not completely sure how the lighting is being approached in Halo3, but generally only one global light emmiter is used per scene.  When you have an indoor scene with multiple light sources, then traditional lighting techniques would still be the best option for casting shadows, so it's more than likely that multiple lighting techniques will be used.  However, it sounds as if they aren't going to use object specific light linking anymore... so technically the lighting should still be unified regardless of the scene or techniques used.