Halo 3 photo viewer modes not representative of actual gameplay

What a SHOCKER, right? But I saw a number of threads back in the day and ongoing explaining how the Gamespot/IGN pics or whatever aren't representative of THEIR screenshots that THEY took themselves! Yeeeeee-haw! Lemming pow-wow.

But then I came across this batch of photos from the new map pack for Halo 3 so graciously provided by Gamespot and I'm sure you'll notice the discrepency quickly enough, just like me, when you pull off your rose colored glasses. You'll notice that the images with a HUD and a first person perspective look curiously different from those in third person (presumably photo viewer):

First Person

Third Person

First Person

Third Person

Images mined from:

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/halo3/news.html?sid=6183641&tag=topslot;title;1&om_act=convert&om_clk=topslot

Now, you could give me some crap about how these Gamespot images are non-representative of the product, but allow me to laugh at you for your totally ridiculous attempt at a rebuttal. Given these pics are from the same batch, presumably obtained the same way, and given the best possible explanation for their discrepency is one is photo viewer and one is not, let's assume that and leave it there.

Photo viewer does not equal gameplay.

So how is gameplay? Well, you'll notice there are, in fact, rampant jaggies all over the place, whereas in photo viewer, you have a pristine, smooth image with 0 discernible jaggies on the entire image. Also, photo viewer particle effects appear to be superior as is the filtering. Anyway, feel free to disagree on the particulars, but don't you dare try and pretend that photo viewer doesn't add anti-aliasing, the pictures provided here provide ample proof of that.

all the models and enviroments look exactly the same in both third and first person in those shots...

all the models and enviroments look exactly the same in both third and first person in those shots...

white45e

Sure they do.

Scroll through the images on Gamespot's feature.

I can only put so much in the OP. They look particularly degenerated from some of the third person scaled back shots.

At any rate, you're totally f'ing with me if you seriously think that the photo viewer mode is not improved at LEAST in AA and probably in anisotropic filtering. The particle effects in the second image versus those in the first person image add to my assertion that the particle effects are improved in photo viewer mode as well.

photomode allows first person pics to be taken, so what your pont?wolverine4262

My point, I guess, is obviously going to have to be that the HUD still makes the first person shots legitimate gameplay images....unless photomode replicates the HUD, in which case, the only way we can tell the difference is in anti-aliasing.

My post should have made it more than clear that photomode adds significant antialiasing. It's like night and day. Are you telling me you can't tell the difference between the photomode shots and the gameplay shots in my OP?

[QUOTE="white45e"]

all the models and enviroments look exactly the same in both third and first person in those shots...

BobHipJames

Sure they do.

Scroll through the images on Gamespot's feature.

I can only put so much in the OP. They look particularly degenerated from some of the third person scaled back shots.

At any rate, you're totally f'ing with me if you seriously think that the photo viewer mode is not improved at LEAST in AA and probably in anisotropic filtering. The particle effects in the second image versus those in the first person image add to my assertion that the particle effects are improved in photo viewer mode as well.

its closer and at a different angle and its an image.. in motion the game looks the same

TRY PLAYING IT

Halo 3 looks better on my TV than it does in your 1st person shots, infact it looks more like your photomode shots.

even if there was an improvement in picture quality in the 3rd person shots is that necessarily a bad thing? i thought good graphics meant the game was good to fanboys...my_name_is_ron

Heh. Probably true. Still, that doesn't mean fanboys of different groups (hermits, sheep, cows) have to accept that Halo 3 looks the way some lemmings think it does (or at least are trying to make it seem).

[QUOTE="white45e"]

all the models and enviroments look exactly the same in both third and first person in those shots...

BobHipJames

Sure they do.

Scroll through the images on Gamespot's feature.

I can only put so much in the OP. They look particularly degenerated from some of the third person scaled back shots.

At any rate, you're totally f'ing with me if you seriously think that the photo viewer mode is not improved at LEAST in AA and probably in anisotropic filtering. The particle effects in the second image versus those in the first person image add to my assertion that the particle effects are improved in photo viewer mode as well.

Compare a first person shot to the same shot except in 3rd person.

It looks exactly the same to me. When I play the game it looks exactly the same as when I view it in the theater. The difference? I can choose the best angle to make the scene look as good as it can.

[QUOTE="my_name_is_ron"]even if there was an improvement in picture quality in the 3rd person shots is that necessarily a bad thing? i thought good graphics meant the game was good to fanboys...BobHipJames

Heh. Probably true. Still, that doesn't mean fanboys of different groups (hermits, sheep, cows) have to accept that Halo 3 looks the way lemmings think it does (or at least are trying to make it seem).

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"][QUOTE="white45e"]

all the models and enviroments look exactly the same in both third and first person in those shots...

wolverine4262

Sure they do.

Scroll through the images on Gamespot's feature.

I can only put so much in the OP. They look particularly degenerated from some of the third person scaled back shots.

At any rate, you're totally f'ing with me if you seriously think that the photo viewer mode is not improved at LEAST in AA and probably in anisotropic filtering. The particle effects in the second image versus those in the first person image add to my assertion that the particle effects are improved in photo viewer mode as well.

You'd bet? Can you confirm that?

Can you give me some kind of a confirmation? Does the first person photo mode retain the HUD or remove it? Can you come up with your own first person photo mode screens to prove your argument?

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

[QUOTE="my_name_is_ron"]even if there was an improvement in picture quality in the 3rd person shots is that necessarily a bad thing? i thought good graphics meant the game was good to fanboys...wolverine4262

Heh. Probably true. Still, that doesn't mean fanboys of different groups (hermits, sheep, cows) have to accept that Halo 3 looks the way lemmings think it does (or at least are trying to make it seem).

Congratulations, I don't care either. Enjoy your game, by all means.

[QUOTE="my_name_is_ron"]even if there was an improvement in picture quality in the 3rd person shots is that necessarily a bad thing? i thought good graphics meant the game was good to fanboys...BobHipJames

Heh. Probably true. Still, that doesn't mean fanboys of different groups (hermits, sheep, cows) have to accept that Halo 3 looks the way some lemmings think it does (or at least are trying to make it seem).

yes, but if the graphics have been improved in the picture viewer mode why is that such a bad thing that warrants a thread bashing it? i don't understand what you're trying to achieve...

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

[QUOTE="my_name_is_ron"]even if there was an improvement in picture quality in the 3rd person shots is that necessarily a bad thing? i thought good graphics meant the game was good to fanboys...my_name_is_ron

Heh. Probably true. Still, that doesn't mean fanboys of different groups (hermits, sheep, cows) have to accept that Halo 3 looks the way some lemmings think it does (or at least are trying to make it seem).

yes, but if the graphics have been improved in the picture viewer mode why is that such a bad thing that warrants a thread bashing it? i don't understand what you're trying to achieve...

Um, this is system wars. Are you kidding me? I've seen bashing for lesser stuff, and I've seen the communal clubbing rod picked up at the drop of the hat on this ridiculous website more times than I can count.

I'm just trying to clear up a misconception. I saw a thread where people responded to unattractive Halo 3 screens with photo mode screenshots they got themselves. For pages and pages and pages. And they thought it was how it looked. That or they were all lying together to get the slip on this guy.

Anyway, here's the truth. If you don't like it, go away and stop complaining.

It's true, they made another game engine just for photo mode. Fact.DaysAirlines

Are you being sarcastic? Link if not...

[QUOTE="my_name_is_ron"][QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

[QUOTE="my_name_is_ron"]even if there was an improvement in picture quality in the 3rd person shots is that necessarily a bad thing? i thought good graphics meant the game was good to fanboys...BobHipJames

Heh. Probably true. Still, that doesn't mean fanboys of different groups (hermits, sheep, cows) have to accept that Halo 3 looks the way some lemmings think it does (or at least are trying to make it seem).

yes, but if the graphics have been improved in the picture viewer mode why is that such a bad thing that warrants a thread bashing it? i don't understand what you're trying to achieve...

Um, this is system wars. Are you kidding me? I've seen bashing for lesser stuff, and I've seen the communal clubbing rod picked up at the drop of the hat on this ridiculous website more times than I can count.

I'm just trying to clear up a misconception. I saw a thread where people responded to unattractive Halo 3 screens with photo mode screenshots they got themselves. For pages and pages and pages. And they thought it was how it looked. That or they were all lying together to get the slip on this guy.

Anyway, here's the truth. If you don't like it, go away and stop complaining.

It's true, they made another game engine just for photo mode. Fact.DaysAirlines

Are you being sarcastic? Link if not...

but then what's wrong with using photo mode shots to prove a point on the graphical quality of a game? if users have taken the shots in the picture viewer then where's the harm? it's still the game creating the shots. fair enough, if someone had gone on to photoshop and zazzed them up a notch then it would be a cause for doubt but where's the logic in slating a game for ramping up the graphics in certain areas?

2 pics I just took

here

here

a 3rd I took for comparison

here

I thought most people already agreed that Halo 3's graphics were sub par?Lonelynight

Most people, some people are still in denial. And some have just stepped into the next-gen.

Either way, the 360 hardware is still rendering it in real-time..

interesting...

Either way, Halo 3 looks nice.

when you're playing the game, there's a bit more work the good old box has to do. it has to do all these calculations on the fly, like when someone shoots, it has to calculate where every bullet goes in real time.

when you're playing a replay, it doesn't have to do that, but just plug in pre-timed events into it's game engine. so it has a littl e more power left over to smooth the graphics up.

anyway, that's just my hypothesis.

I thought most people already agreed that Halo 3's graphics were sub par?Lonelynight

Halo isn't the greatest game graphically but it is far from sub par. It has great textures, and I believe the best HDR in a game on consoles.

1. BlackBond picks up controller
2. Turns 360 on
3. Goes into theater mode
4. Watches his back to back Overkill/Extermination Clips
5. Freeze Clip when Melee ensues.
6. Realizes it looks the same in 1st then if in 3rd Person
7. Laughes at TC
8. Goes to eat food

1. BlackBond picks up controller
2. Turns 360 on
3. Goes into theater mode
4. Watches his back to back Overkill/Extermination Clips
5. Freeze Clip when Melee ensues.
6. Realizes it looks the same in 1st then if in 3rd Person
7. Laughes at TC
8. Goes to eat food

Blackbond

Yup. That dude is clueless.

:lol: photo mod looks exactly the same as regular.

if you've never played the game, dont post crap.

What's funny is how you call it "photo veiwer" mode. That proves how little you know about Halo 3. It's called "Theater" mode FYI, and it's where you can watch whole matches andCampaign missions, and with those you can make film clips, and take pictures.

The thrid person pictures are taken with Theater mode. First person pictures are taken with Gamespot's capture cards. And those cards arent reapresenting the real thing. The truth? Halo 3 looks better than the Gamespot pics, but not as good as the theater pics. There you go.

2 pics I just took

here

here

a 3rd I took for comparison

here

wolverine4262

Well all right then. It does have the HUD and it is in first person.

Notably, however, it's in 1080p, which means its upscaled. Moreover, it has full anti-aliasing. Just like you said, it increases the resolution in photo mode and like I said it adds antialiasing.

At the very least we can still determine where the screens came from.

:lol: photo mod looks exactly the same as regular.

if you've never played the game, dont post crap.

amorbis1001

I played the game, thanks, both single and multi in standard def and on my DLP in 720p via component.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

1. BlackBond picks up controller
2. Turns 360 on
3. Goes into theater mode
4. Watches his back to back Overkill/Extermination Clips
5. Freeze Clip when Melee ensues.
6. Realizes it looks the same in 1st then if in 3rd Person
7. Laughes at TC
8. Goes to eat food

-Ninja_Dog-

Yup. That dude is clueless.

Irony much?

My point was that you can differentiate between the two on Gamespot as being photo mode or not on the basis of whether it's first person or third person.

Rather, that wasn't my point. My point is exactly as the title bar reads. Halo 3 photo viewer mode does not represent the actual gameplay. And it doesn't. When worse comes to worse you can still differentiate between photo mode and gameplay by the jaggies, the LOD, the particle effects, and according to that one dude, the resolution of the picture itself (upscaled versus native I presume).

Blackbond, you can't prove me wrong by resorting to theater mode. Try playing gameplay and then watching clips. If you notice a difference, you've proved my point to my satisfaction.

I have no idea how you got those extremely poor screens, but when I play/look at replays of Halo 3 on my tv it looks fantasticMad_Rhetoric

That's exactly my point. If you want to know how I got those screens, read the OP more carefully next time or look on the front page of this website.

I provided a direct link.

The replays look different than the gameplay. Whether either of them look fantastic is not the point. They still look different.

Now refer to the OP. Those screens look exactly like any other, and they look exactly the same as those on IGN. Moreover, in the same batch, you have some that look good and some that don't. That leads me to my conclusion, and an obvious one at that, that some look better because they are taken in theater mode, and others look worse because they were taken in actual gameplay.

Now, in my personal opinion, the Halo 3 screens do not look good when they are gameplay screens. The theater mode screens look great. I've played the game, and I was not impressed at all. If you're easily impressed, that's your own issue.

So you're all comparing images which don't even show the same scene?Nemme

It's not necessary to do that. Anti-aliasing is not dependent on the environment. As long as you're looking at geometry that's even remotely similar, you're getting the same impression. Besides, you're seeing aliasing on the guns in first person mode. If you can't get a smooth figure on the guns when they're literally directly in front of the camera, that's an issue. That's what the term "jaggy" refers to.

And all of these screens are taken from the same series of map packs, many of them from the same map.

As far as being the same scene....what do you want, a direct image comparison? That's not necessary, and if you're looking for that, you've missed the point. You can't determine how much antialiasing or filtering is on a particular frame, so what would it matter what I did? You're asking that I smother your steak in ketchup. You'll never know it's a steak either way, you've got the palate of a young person.

It's actually true that photo mode doesn't properly represent the in-game gameplay. But I think the only real thing photo mode does, which is pretty big anyway, is significantly increase the resolution (which is why you never see any aliasing in those shots, and everything is so crisp and clear). I remember reading that from a reputable place.

Photo mode definitely improves the visual quality, though, and I have Halo 3 and have taken many shots in theater mode. Those shots just don't represent the actual in-game quality. I'm surprised to see people arguing this, because I honestly thought it was already common knowledge at this point and nobody cared.

[QUOTE="Mad_Rhetoric"]I have no idea how you got those extremely poor screens, but when I play/look at replays of Halo 3 on my tv it looks fantasticBobHipJames

That's exactly my point. If you want to know how I got those screens, read the OP more carefully next time or look on the front page of this website.

I provided a direct link.

The replays look different than the gameplay. Whether either of them look fantastic is not the point. They still look different.

Now refer to the OP. Those screens look exactly like any other, and they look exactly the same as those on IGN. Moreover, in the same batch, you have some that look good and some that don't. That leads me to my conclusion, and an obvious one at that, that some look better because they are taken in theater mode, and others look worse because they were taken in actual gameplay.

Now, in my personal opinion, the Halo 3 screens do not look good when they are gameplay screens. The theater mode screens look great. I've played the game, and I was not impressed at all. If you're easily impressed, that's your own issue.

Wow. When I watch a video in Theater Mode, guess what? It lookes EXACTLY the same as when I am playing a match. What do you mean "gameplay screens"? The only way to take screens it to go to Theater mode and hit "take screenshot". And I guess you did not know this: When you take a screenshot in Halo 3 it is automatically uploaded to Bungie.net. And guess what? It is uploaded at a higher res.

Also you obviously don't have the game as you can take screens in First Person, in Third Person with HUD showing, and in Third Person without a HUD.

It's actually true that photo mode doesn't properly represent the in-game gameplay. But I think the only real thing photo mode does, which is pretty big anyway, is significantly increase the resolution (which is why you never see any aliasing in those shots, and everything is so crisp and clear). I remember reading that from a reputable place.

Photo mode definitely improves the visual quality, though, and I have Halo 3 and have taken many shots in theater mode. Those shots just don't represent the actual in-game quality. I'm surprised to see people arguing this, because I honestly thought it was already common knowledge at this point and nobody cared.

Zeliard9

The display resolution does not affect antialiasing.

An image will be aliased regardless of the resolution it is displayed at unless antialiasing is applied.

Play a PC game please.

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

[QUOTE="Mad_Rhetoric"]I have no idea how you got those extremely poor screens, but when I play/look at replays of Halo 3 on my tv it looks fantastichowlrunner13

That's exactly my point. If you want to know how I got those screens, read the OP more carefully next time or look on the front page of this website.

I provided a direct link.

The replays look different than the gameplay. Whether either of them look fantastic is not the point. They still look different.

Now refer to the OP. Those screens look exactly like any other, and they look exactly the same as those on IGN. Moreover, in the same batch, you have some that look good and some that don't. That leads me to my conclusion, and an obvious one at that, that some look better because they are taken in theater mode, and others look worse because they were taken in actual gameplay.

Now, in my personal opinion, the Halo 3 screens do not look good when they are gameplay screens. The theater mode screens look great. I've played the game, and I was not impressed at all. If you're easily impressed, that's your own issue.

Wow. When I watch a video in Theater Mode, guess what? It lookes EXACTLY the same as when I am playing a match. What do you mean "gameplay screens"? The only way to take screens it to go to Theater mode and hit "take screenshot". And I guess you did not know this: When you take a screenshot in Halo 3 it is automatically uploaded to Bungie.net. And guess what? It is uploaded at a higher res.

Also you obviously don't have the game as you can take screens in First Person, in Third Person with HUD showing, and in Third Person without a HUD.

Question: How are gameplay screens for every other game in existence obtained? High quality film?

Another question: why are some images of Halo 3 on this website tragically aliased with a display resolution of 1280x720?

Another question: have you ever tweaked resolution/antialiasing settings on a PC game before? Do you have the slightest idea of what you are speaking?

Hmm halo 3 looks even better in gameplay than in photomode.

Those pics have too much jaggies but i tried playing on both 720p and 1080i and I have seen NONE.

Halo 3 looks awesome on screen