Halo Reach Graphics are surprisingly poor.

I seem to be the only person who actually thinks Reac looks good.

It's weird, considering Halo and Halo 2 were considered some of the best looking games when they came out. They dropped the ball with Halo 3. The difference on the new platform was negligable.

I seem to be the only person who actually thinks Reac looks good.

turtlethetaffer

[QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

I seem to be the only person who actually thinks Reac looks good.

mitu123

[QUOTE="cyclops10"]

[QUOTE="RR360DD"]

U Jelly?

RR360DD

Yeah, it looks better. You must be playing on a SDTV if you think the guns do not have that much detail.

It's weird, considering Halo and Halo 2 were considered some of the best looking games when they came out. They dropped the ball with Halo 3. The difference on the new platform was negligable.

dommeus

The art style and nature of the game design pretty much left Bungie unable to really boost the graphics in key areas like global shadowing, which probably would bring the FPS to it's knees, unless they used an eyesore of a shadow LOD system. However Halo Anniversary will be using such a scheme (and probably at the cost of something else). I think Bungie was very adamant in maintaining their quality of game design with mediocre graphics before they went ahead and polished the graphics, though it surprises me how dedicated they were to having their special HDR implementation, which cost them 720p output capability.

It's weird, considering Halo and Halo 2 were considered some of the best looking games when they came out. They dropped the ball with Halo 3. The difference on the new platform was negligable.

dommeus

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

I seem to be the only person who actually thinks Reac looks good.

DarkLink77

Thank you! A game doesn't have to be graphics king in order to be a good looking game!

Reach has an fairly impressive engine actually, on a technical level. SSAO, HDR, deferred lighting, full resolution frame buffer effects (alpha-heavy)(EDRAM bandwidth at work here) also includes Volumetic effects and in heavy doses at times with a fairly wicked particle system, Per object motion blur, MoCap, not to mention a scope that few games challenge.

You name, that game just about has it. I believe to be very impressive. I'd love to see it on a PC with the extra horsepower.

Are you kidding me? The game looks fine.

The graphics are fine, I just wish they had spent more time on building variety and story.

lol the gfx guys kill me.

even after all this time i find it funny that people flipped on what they rooted for.

cows were all omg! gameplay >>>> gfx last gen.

Riverwolf007

No kidding, and this gen lemmings were all about the games when it started. My, how times have changed.

Not to be a graphics whore...and i'm months late, i know. But i just picked this up today pre-owned...and damn. I'm shocked at how ugly this game is. I don't remember Halo 3 being this ugly? I know the Halo games aren't known for mindblowing graphics...but damn...it's just not fun to look at. It looks 5 years old.

cyclops10

The game doesn't look bad at all. You're crazy. It beats Blops and MW2 which are its main competitors.

Not to be a graphics whore...and i'm months late, i know. But i just picked this up today pre-owned...and damn. I'm shocked at how ugly this game is. I don't remember Halo 3 being this ugly? I know the Halo games aren't known for mindblowing graphics...but damn...it's just not fun to look at. It looks 5 years old.

cyclops10

[QUOTE="enterawesome"]lol no. Reach is the best looking 360 game to date, and it has an amazing art style. I like your sig though. :Pcyclops10

The first time I turned on Reach I was sitting down to play with a friend of mine and we were both blown away by the jaggies and pop in textures. We actually went to google some videos and try to figure out what the hell was wrong. The game itself is fun though.

rzepak

[QUOTE="cyclops10"]

[QUOTE="RR360DD"]

U Jelly?

Domin8ters

Yeah Reach looks really good, I think.

[QUOTE="cyclops10"][QUOTE="enterawesome"]lol no. Reach is the best looking 360 game to date, and it has an amazing art style. I like your sig though. :Penterawesome

crysis 2 hands down.

also alan wake

also gears 2 and 3

[QUOTE="enterawesome"][QUOTE="cyclops10"] You crazy man. You crazy.jettpack

crysis 2 hands down.

also alan wake

also gears 2 and 3

No way Alan wake looks better than Reach. The character models looked awful.

I could not agree more! I thought I was the only one that thinks Halo Reach looks bad from a technical standpoint. For a triple A release Halo Reach is about as ugly as it gets.

I seem to be the only person who actually thinks Reac looks good.

The game looks fine. Jesus Christ. You know what has poor graphics? Budget games.

DarkLink77

Agreed, DNF is one of them

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

The game looks fine. Jesus Christ. You know what has poor graphics? Budget games.

cyclops10

bland I know..

I think it looks great. A big improvement over Halo 3.

It's nothing mind blowing, sure. But I enjoy the look of it. Very much so.
Plus, the skyboxes and backdrops look incredible.

U Jelly?

RR360DD

Downressing images makes them look better.

Halo: Reach looks great. Actually it's one of the best looking games this gen.

There is a lot more going on with Reach's engine than most people give it credit for. For instance, read here and here.

[QUOTE="RR360DD"]

U Jelly?

cyclops10

It does. Lightning and effects are some of the best this gen!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGtDQwFZjp4

ya whats up with these fake gamers lol , who dis wii ds 3ds wiiu , lol all because of graphics ,

if graphics where big of adeal i dont think wii ds ps ps1 would have gotten off the floor sorry but graphics is proved to be only a tool

I think it looks pretty good, and those epic backgrounds are still unmatched.

Dark4ever01

Halo: Reach looks great. Actually it's one of the best looking games this gen.

There is a lot more going on with Reach's engine than most people give it credit for. For instance, read here and here.

AcidSoldner

That's because they retooled the crappy engine from all the other 360 Halo's. Bad idea.

Lightning and effects are some of the best this gen!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGtDQwFZjp4

PAL360

I think it looks pretty good, and those epic backgrounds are still unmatched.

Dark4ever01

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]They were perfectly fine in what they were trying to accomplish.. People seriously need to open their eyes and realize that a game does not need cutting edge graphics.. This graphic idolizing is becoming a plague in which that is the number 1 thing people expect in newer gens.. I want to see increased functionality in games, increased creativity and freedom.. The mere fact that people still can classify games like GTA4 as a sandbox game is unsettling at best.Stringerboy

No, but it needs a good art style. Something which Reach seriously lacks.

[QUOTE="AcidSoldner"]

Halo: Reach looks great. Actually it's one of the best looking games this gen.

There is a lot more going on with Reach's engine than most people give it credit for. For instance, read here and here.

navyguy21

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

The game looks fine. Jesus Christ. You know what has poor graphics? Budget games.

IPWNDU2

Agreed, DNF is one of them

[QUOTE="IPWNDU2"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

The game looks fine. Jesus Christ. You know what has poor graphics? Budget games.

DarkLink77

Agreed, DNF is one of them

Halo: Reach looks great. Actually it's one of the best looking games this gen.

There is a lot more going on with Reach's engine than most people give it credit for. For instance, read here and here.

AcidSoldner