Halo Reach graphical prowess. (look at the description before voting)

  • 129 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Tessellation
Tessellation

9297

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 Tessellation
Member since 2009 • 9297 Posts
[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="Tessellation"] ps3 standards? there isn't such of thing,is only sony fans thinking their games are better looking when they aren't.ThePsTriple

Exactly my point. They still say uncharted 2 looks better then Gears 3 LMAO!

Textures, animations, lighting, environments and character models in uncharted 2 are all superior to gears 3

cool opinion.
Avatar image for Frozzik
Frozzik

3914

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 Frozzik
Member since 2006 • 3914 Posts

[QUOTE="Frozzik"]

[QUOTE="Arach666"] Me too!:PArach666

naughty :roll:

What? Can´t you see that Reach looks at least just as good as Crysis,if not better?:o

Well of course i can see it, i didn't want to admit it though....

Avatar image for worknow222
worknow222

1816

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#53 worknow222
Member since 2007 • 1816 Posts

all i know is reach looks better than killzone 2 and is the best Console looking FPS till rage, crysis 2 killzone 3

Avatar image for Arach666
Arach666

23285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 0

#54 Arach666
Member since 2009 • 23285 Posts

[QUOTE="Arach666"]

[QUOTE="Frozzik"]

naughty :roll:

Frozzik

What? Can´t you see that Reach looks at least just as good as Crysis,if not better?:o

Well of course i can see it, i didn't want to admit it though....

Yeah,me neither...it hurts so much! And to think that I´ve spent almost 10.000€ to play the game and all I can get is around 10fps withough AA...gotta upgrade again to make it playable at least at 15fps...
Avatar image for Iantheone
Iantheone

8242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 Iantheone
Member since 2007 • 8242 Posts

Crysis is a joke. On my $1000 rig it could barely run on high at 1920x1080 with NO AA! And it definatly doesn't look better then reach on high. It shows how bad crytek is at optimising there engine, Reach runs at 30 fps with AA and all on a quater as powerfull console.

roflcopter317

On my $900 PC

Granted this is only 720p, ill get some later on my 1680x1050 monitor.

Avatar image for GTSaiyanjin2
GTSaiyanjin2

6018

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#57 GTSaiyanjin2
Member since 2005 • 6018 Posts

Its a good looking game, but I dont think I put it in the top 5 best looking 360 games. But its definitely a better looking game than Halo 3. I really like the look of the game though, something about the game just makes it pop and make it look better than it should.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts

those pics really aren't that impressive to be honest. there is nothing outstanding in either of them. the hill to the right is pretty bad.

sts106mat
Yeah, they aren't that impressive if you've played modded Crysis at max maybe.
Avatar image for Iantheone
Iantheone

8242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 Iantheone
Member since 2007 • 8242 Posts
[QUOTE="sts106mat"]

those pics really aren't that impressive to be honest. there is nothing outstanding in either of them. the hill to the right is pretty bad.

DragonfireXZ95
Yeah, they aren't that impressive if you've played modded Crysis at max maybe.

Its not at max settings either. Its on CCC mod on high settings. There is still very high. Also I have the AA quite low cause I like being 50+ FPS. Ill put it up to max settings soon and get some real screenshots.
Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="sts106mat"]

those pics really aren't that impressive to be honest. there is nothing outstanding in either of them. the hill to the right is pretty bad.

sts106mat
Yeah, they aren't that impressive if you've played modded Crysis at max maybe.

i dont get what your saying,. i have seen crysis on my brothers gaming PC, i dont know the spec, but it was quad core, had massive 8" fan and was water cooled, he knows his stuff. crysis looked good on that, but not those pics. what is the purpose of those pics in this thread?

You don't know? Every game looks better in motion than in pics.
Avatar image for soulitane
soulitane

15091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#63 soulitane
Member since 2010 • 15091 Posts

Reaches graphics are worse than Halo 3's imo

far behind any PS3 game

Ultizer
Care to explain why?
Avatar image for gpuking
gpuking

3914

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 gpuking
Member since 2004 • 3914 Posts

Reach's graphics is quite average for today's standard and far from the best of PS3 and PC games, LOL @ the Crysis voters. First thing is first, it's sub HD albeit slightly higher than Halo3's res. Now the AA solution isn't anywhere near 4xmsaa, more like temporal 2xaa. It does have HDR, SSAO and perhaps volumetric clouds but the rest aren't anything impressive. No, it doen't feature realtime GI, tesselation, weather cycles, deferred rendering or advanced physics. The whole playing field is barren and lack complex geometry. Textures are good but nothing out of the norm. Gears of war 3 looks better, so does killzone 3, Crysis 2, Rage, Medol of Honor, etc. Now move on.

Avatar image for Iantheone
Iantheone

8242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66 Iantheone
Member since 2007 • 8242 Posts

Crysis is a joke. On my $1000 rig it could barely run on high at 1920x1080 with NO AA! And it definatly doesn't look better then reach on high. It shows how bad crytek is at optimising there engine, Reach runs at 30 fps with AA and all on a quater as powerfull console.

roflcopter317

^This is what I was referring to with those pics. I could max the game and get some really nice pics, but in those pics I have the settings for performance rather than looks. This is a t slightly higher than high settings due to the mod. It is in no way maxed.

Avatar image for GTSaiyanjin2
GTSaiyanjin2

6018

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#67 GTSaiyanjin2
Member since 2005 • 6018 Posts

Halo Reach is no graphics king, but the art style in the game is one of the best. Its a great game, but dont hype the game for its graphics.

Avatar image for emperorzhang66
emperorzhang66

1483

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68 emperorzhang66
Member since 2009 • 1483 Posts
Looks like Cows don't understand the word "technical". If it dosen't look like Uncharted 2 which isn't technically impressive. It ain't good. Its sad Really.... Also, why are you even trying to compare this to crysis. Shogun 2 an game still in development looks better close up to the characters than Any console game. There are also thousands of these characters on Screen at once. That is technically impressive. And so is Reach.
Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Crysis is a joke. On my $1000 rig it could barely run on high at 1920x1080 with NO AA! And it definatly doesn't look better then reach on high. It shows how bad crytek is at optimising there engine, Reach runs at 30 fps with AA and all on a quater as powerfull console.

Iantheone

^This is what I was referring to with those pics. I could max the game and get some really nice pics, but these I took a while ago to prove that it can be played at higher than UC2 settings with a decent frame rate on a sub $1000 PC. This is a t slightly higher than high settings due to the mod. It is in no way maxed.

Like these!

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts
thanks for that, it did look very good on my brothers PC, much better than those pics. in your pics it looksto be at farcry 2's level. sts106mat
K, take screenshots from your bother's PC and post them and we'll judge them.
Avatar image for abuabed
abuabed

6606

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 abuabed
Member since 2005 • 6606 Posts
It must be behind Gears 3, the game has a good/great art direction but it isn't graphically stunning.
Avatar image for gpuking
gpuking

3914

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 gpuking
Member since 2004 • 3914 Posts

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="Tessellation"] ps3 standards? there isn't such of thing,is only sony fans thinking their games are better looking when they aren't.ThePsTriple

Exactly my point. They still say uncharted 2 looks better then Gears 3 LMAO!

Textures, animations, lighting, environments and character models in uncharted 2 are all superior to gears 3

Pretty much, and add to that better shaders such as SSS, Normalmap blanding, more texture variety and better physics.

Avatar image for tastetheacidmil
tastetheacidmil

737

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#75 tastetheacidmil
Member since 2009 • 737 Posts

Reaches graphics are worse than Halo 3's imo

far behind any PS3 game

Ultizer
and yet deluded lems seem to think thier games are on par with ps3s (lol) yeeeeeeah still waitin for that game someone from ms or watever claimed to be on the same level as killzone 2, yet ive seen nothing on 360 that comes close to uc 2, kz 2 etc
Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="sts106mat"]thanks for that, it did look very good on my brothers PC, much better than those pics. in your pics it looksto be at farcry 2's level. sts106mat
K, take screenshots from your bother's PC and post them and we'll judge them.

i think your missing the point, read the post above mine, & understand what he is saying, i am not saying crysis is crap, i am saying the pictures posted dont look that good (which they dont). and what makes you think i want to drive 10 miles to my brothers house to take pictures of his computer, what an absolute ***** i would be to ask him to do that because i need to prove to someone on the internet, that my brother has a PC which runs crysis,. get a life.

Tell you what, why don't you tell him to take some pics himself and send them to you. Because frankly, unless he was running a texture mod, and a higher resolution along with a custom config, it won't look better than those in still pictures.
Avatar image for slipknot0129
slipknot0129

5832

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 slipknot0129
Member since 2008 • 5832 Posts

It may be the best looking 360 game but no way does it compare to pc and ps3 standardsThePsTriple
It doesnt compare because its far beyond better.

Avatar image for SaltyMeatballs
SaltyMeatballs

25165

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#78 SaltyMeatballs
Member since 2009 • 25165 Posts
Best looking 360 game, though it looks behind Gears 3 but that's not even out yet.
Avatar image for Iantheone
Iantheone

8242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 Iantheone
Member since 2007 • 8242 Posts

Right, now no one can tell me that this looks bad. Still at the settings I had it as before, but it runs at about 60-100 FPS in the ship.

Avatar image for deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab
deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab

17476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#81 deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab
Member since 2008 • 17476 Posts

Right, now no one can tell me that this looks bad. Still at the settings I had it as before, but it runs at about 60-100 FPS in the ship.

Iantheone

Can you tell me the config you are using?

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#82 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts
[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="sts106mat"] i think your missing the point, read the post above mine, & understand what he is saying, i am not saying crysis is crap, i am saying the pictures posted dont look that good (which they dont). and what makes you think i want to drive 10 miles to my brothers house to take pictures of his computer, what an absolute ***** i would be to ask him to do that because i need to prove to someone on the internet, that my brother has a PC which runs crysis,. get a life.

Tell you what, why don't you tell him to take some pics himself and send them to you. Because frankly, unless he was running a texture mod, and a higher resolution along with a custom config, it won't look better than those in still pictures.

look, my brother works in computers, he has a very powerful PC (i dunno the spec) he has told me but it goes over my head. i know he has a watercooling system thing and that he was overclocking the cpu's and monitoring the temperature. he was also tweeking things in the setup of crysis itself. all this messing about and adjusting things to get it right and fiddling here etc , is the very reason i play on a console. messing about with mods and configs etc is definitely not of interest to me. i play for fun, my gaming timing is limited because i work and have a family. messing about with installing RAM or graphics cards is a waste of my time.

That's too bad, you sure are missing out. ;)
Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]

Right, now no one can tell me that this looks bad. Still at the settings I had it as before, but it runs at about 60-100 FPS in the ship.

ferret-gamer

Can you tell me the config you are using?

He's using CCC 2.21 I believe he said. Not sure about Rygel texture mod, doesn't look like it, but the screen is kind of small to tell.

Avatar image for JohnF111
JohnF111

14190

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#84 JohnF111
Member since 2010 • 14190 Posts

[QUOTE="Dead-Memories"][QUOTE="ThePsTriple"]It may be the best looking 360 game but no way does it compare to pc and ps3 standardsroflcopter317

PS3 standards are just as far as the 360 from PC. :?

In reality crysis's graphics arn't that amazing. First you need a very expensive gaming rig, second you need mods to make it look awesome (very high looks bland), with mods on it then plays at 20 fps even on the most expensive pc's which is unplayable (without aa too lol). So I don't think crysis is that amazing afterall. The only problem with Reach is that it has no dynamic shadows, but the rest is just breathtaking.

Crysis does look good and by todays standards a $500 machine can pull Crysis off reasonably well.... A $100/£60 graphics card can run it in medium settings so expensive gaming rig? no... maybe when it was only just released it was pretty demanding but not now.

Avatar image for Richymisiak
Richymisiak

2589

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#85 Richymisiak
Member since 2007 • 2589 Posts
when did people suddenly turn against crysis?
Avatar image for Iantheone
Iantheone

8242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#86 Iantheone
Member since 2007 • 8242 Posts

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]

Right, now no one can tell me that this looks bad. Still at the settings I had it as before, but it runs at about 60-100 FPS in the ship.

DragonfireXZ95

Can you tell me the config you are using?

He's using CCC 2.21 I believe he said. Not sure about Rygel texture mod, doesn't look like it, but the screen is kind of small to tell.

Correct, just CCC at high settings, 2xaa and 720p (until I get my 1680x1050 monitor back from my mother). TBH the alien ship thing is really underated graphics wise. If we are comparing linear console fps's to Crysis, shouldt we use a linear part of the game?

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#88 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] Can you tell me the config you are using?

Iantheone

He's using CCC 2.21 I believe he said. Not sure about Rygel texture mod, doesn't look like it, but the screen is kind of small to tell.

Correct, just CCC at high settings, 2xaa and 720p (until I get my 1680x1050 monitor back from my mother). TBH the alien ship thing is really underated graphics wise. If we are comparing linear console fps's to Crysis, shouldt we use a linear part of the game?

Lol, weird, I have an old pic on my Xfire account that I took with my 260 GTX or 9800 GTX+, don't remember which it was, and it was the exact same place you are at in your pic.

Avatar image for deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab
deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab

17476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#89 deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab
Member since 2008 • 17476 Posts

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"] He's using CCC 2.21 I believe he said. Not sure about Rygel texture mod, doesn't look like it, but the screen is kind of small to tell.

DragonfireXZ95

Correct, just CCC at high settings, 2xaa and 720p (until I get my 1680x1050 monitor back from my mother). TBH the alien ship thing is really underated graphics wise. If we are comparing linear console fps's to Crysis, shouldt we use a linear part of the game?

Lol, weird, I have an old pic on my Xfire account that I took with my 260 GTX or 9800 GTX+, don't remember which it was, and it was the exact same place you are at in your pic.

I do too acutally,i forget the settings but i think this was back when i had a crt and taken with a 3870.

and now with dual monitors not quite playable at CCC 2.1 level 4, but that is probably attirbutable to me not turning off anti aliasing on a uber res like that:

Avatar image for Iantheone
Iantheone

8242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#90 Iantheone
Member since 2007 • 8242 Posts
Haha weird. I just thought it was a really impressive room, This is one of the few times that I have been blown away with graphics.
Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26715 Posts

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]

Correct, just CCC at high settings, 2xaa and 720p (until I get my 1680x1050 monitor back from my mother). TBH the alien ship thing is really underated graphics wise. If we are comparing linear console fps's to Crysis, shouldt we use a linear part of the game?

ferret-gamer

Lol, weird, I have an old pic on my Xfire account that I took with my 260 GTX or 9800 GTX+, don't remember which it was, and it was the exact same place you are at in your pic.

I do too acutally,i forget the settings but i think this was back when i had a crt and taken with a 3870.

and now with dual monitors not quite playable at CCC 2.1 level 4, but that is probably attirbutable to me not turning off anti aliasing on a uber res like that:

That's an insane res! Look closely at his and mine though, we are in the EXACT same spot. Gun pointed in the exact same spot. That's too freaky.

Avatar image for Urworstnhtmare
Urworstnhtmare

2630

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#92 Urworstnhtmare
Member since 2008 • 2630 Posts

As usual when the first footage came out of Halo Reach, a tone of fan boys started making these "NEW GRAPHICS KING" threads, claiming the new messiah had arrived... After watching an hour of the play through, I can saw the game looks really big, and has a really large scope. But it still isn't the Crysis graphics killer some hyped it up to be. It doesn't even beat Killzone 2...

Avatar image for Filthybastrd
Filthybastrd

7124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93 Filthybastrd
Member since 2009 • 7124 Posts

Adding a little Crysis: Warhead to the discussion:

These screenshots look better than Reach bullshots do if you ask me. Resizing them kinda killed the quality a bit but I guess the point comes across.

Avatar image for coreybg
coreybg

2608

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#94 coreybg
Member since 2009 • 2608 Posts

[QUOTE="Dead-Memories"][QUOTE="ThePsTriple"]It may be the best looking 360 game but no way does it compare to pc and ps3 standardsroflcopter317

PS3 standards are just as far as the 360 from PC. :?

In reality crysis's graphics arn't that amazing. First you need a very expensive gaming rig, second you need mods to make it look awesome (very high looks bland), with mods on it then plays at 20 fps even on the most expensive pc's which is unplayable (without aa too lol). So I don't think crysis is that amazing afterall. The only problem with Reach is that it has no dynamic shadows, but the rest is just breathtaking.

Heh, more uninformed posts. Why don't you play the game first?

Avatar image for waltefmoney
waltefmoney

18030

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#95 waltefmoney
Member since 2010 • 18030 Posts

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="Dead-Memories"] PS3 standards are just as far as the 360 from PC. :? coreybg

In reality crysis's graphics arn't that amazing. First you need a very expensive gaming rig, second you need mods to make it look awesome (very high looks bland), with mods on it then plays at 20 fps even on the most expensive pc's which is unplayable (without aa too lol). So I don't think crysis is that amazing afterall. The only problem with Reach is that it has no dynamic shadows, but the rest is just breathtaking.

Heh, more uninformed posts. Why don't you play the game first?

Have you played Halo: Reach?

Avatar image for hd5870corei7
hd5870corei7

1612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#96 hd5870corei7
Member since 2010 • 1612 Posts

[x] - Like a 2008 console game.

Avatar image for Supabul
Supabul

4266

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#97 Supabul
Member since 2004 • 4266 Posts

I really hate Crysis, I think pictures of Crysis get posted in every thread no matter what its about.

Avatar image for deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab
deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab

17476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#100 deactivated-5cf4b2c19c4ab
Member since 2008 • 17476 Posts

crysis is how many years old now? how come it cant be topped even by a new PC game?is it so amazing that no-one can come close or say anything bad about the almighty crysis? everyone knows crysis is the current benchmark, but do you seriously believe other games cant compare?, maybe not beat, but to say "nothing compares" thats just blind fanboysim right there cause quite cleary, Killzone 2, Halo Reach etc are being compared daily here.sts106mat
Crytek prides themselves on being the best in class in graphics and they had a 22million dollar budget for Crysis. How much you have to spend on development matters alot.

No console game can come close to crysis that is a fact that console fanboys will just have to accept. However there are PC games that can touch crysis, specifically Metro 2033 many consider to be on par of better than crysis, especially unmodded.

2011 is the year it seem that it will get dethroned by either: Shogun 2, Witcher 2, or even just crysis 2.