It’s not a matter of laziness or incompetence, or anything like that. The fact of the matter is, it’s due to the aging hardware of the Xbox 360.
It just can’t handle processing more than what Reach has already pushed it to (case in point: Frame drops in certain maps).
Further limiting the graphical category is the insane amount of things that possibly have to be rendered all at once, with minimal frame hits. objects flying, particle effects, bodies bouncing everywhere, vehicles. This limits gameplay to 30 frames a second.
In Call of Duty (sure to be brought up for comparison), the maps are completely solid geometry. The only moving things are the players and occasionally grenades. Firefights are usually quick and minimal. If you think about it, there’s very little physics involved in CoD games. This lets it run at 60fps smoothly. So unless you want Halo to cut back to CoD-level simplicity, anything higher than 30fps just isn’t going to happen.
Hope this has educated you on why these two things are not possible.
I also hope you realise COD is running on the same engine since 2003 ( First COD ) of course they can run on 60FPS. 30FPS is fine with me, I can’t really tell a difference unless im on my PC racing game. I mean look at Battlefield 3, Buildings falling, stuff blowing up. Thats 30FPS. I really don’t think that people would care about the FPS as long as it runs smoothly, Im happy
now that I agree with. I like my halo with color. It gives Halo the trademark vibrance it’s know for, and makes it stand out, visually, from the crowd.
If the concept art and cgi trailer were any indication, we can count on 343 on restoring Halo to it’s former glory.
> now that I agree with. I like my halo with color. It gives Halo the trademark vibrance it’s know for, and makes it stand out, visually, from the crowd.
>
>
> If the concept art and cgi trailer were any indication, we can count on 343 on restoring Halo to it’s former glory.
I think they did a good job with the color in Anniversary, so I have faith.
> I’m sorry if i got that wrong but look at Battlefield 3. I think there is still room for improvement.
Yes, that I understand but like Mr Gruntsworthy said, the 360 can’t compete with a high end Gaming PC. Battlefield looks great on a High end PC. But yes it can be improved but only so much because the 360 tech is almost 10 years old. I hope that cleared it up a little
> > now that I agree with. I like my halo with color. It gives Halo the trademark vibrance it’s know for, and makes it stand out, visually, from the crowd.
> >
> >
> > If the concept art and cgi trailer were any indication, we can count on 343 on restoring Halo to it’s former glory.
>
> I think they did a good job with the color in Anniversary, so I have faith.
I didn’t get anniversary edition, but i did buy the maps and they are f***ing beautiful.
Without the HD texture pack, BF3 looks like Halo CE, and even then it doesn’t run at 60 FPS on consoles. The only reason the graphics look nice and don’t affect the frames much with that HD texture pack is because it’s streaming it right from the hard drive, rather than being entirely default, making it easier on the xbox.
If 343 does make an HD texture pack, graphics could possibly improve while keeping a similar performance, but otherwise, don’t expect much.
People didn’t say the same thing for halo 3 to reach or anything. OP there are more things than hardware that can effect how smooth something runs and how much you can improve it. The better the software the less amount of hardware is needed.
> > BF3.
> >
> > Just Sayin.
>
> Without the HD texture pack, BF3 looks like Halo CE, and even then it doesn’t run at 60 FPS on consoles. The only reason the graphics look nice and don’t affect the frames much with that HD texture pack is because it’s streaming it right from the hard drive, rather than being entirely default, making it easier on the xbox.
>
> If 343 does make an HD texture pack, graphics could possibly improve while keeping a similar performance, but otherwise, don’t expect much.
Whats wrong with streaming textures? Lots of PS3 games do it.
The only reason Xbox games don’t is because not all Xboxs have hard drives.
The reach engine is as good as it gets on the 360 TBH.
Id be happy if they just used the reach engine for halo 4, but with fixing the frame drops somehow (which i read was a specific problem with the GPU cache being overfilled by 12% when there are lots of effects, so if they could shave that down it would be great)
I personally think that Halo: Reach is one of the best looking games on the 360. If Halo 4 have just as much details as Reach I’d be fine with that. Maybe a tweak here or there regarding the design (but that doesn’t affect performance). The only think I would really LOVE to have in Halo 4 is a little dynamic lightning, like the ones they have in Halo: CEA. Playing through The Library with a friend gave me chills.
The graphics are just a bonus in halo games. The gameplay is the real magic and i would rather halo keep its unique look then try to look all crazy like gears of war lol
a ridiculous graphics engine and physics engine are terrible for matchmaking
Well of course, technology is always changing. Developers are always finding new ways to improve what they have. Halo: Reach in my opinion was a pretty BIG jump from what we saw from Halo 3. Halo: Reach introduced mo-cap for the first time which made the cinematic animation life-like and way more believable than Halo 3’s cartoon animation. Halo: Reach had a huge amount of dynamic lights and an improved particle system (WAY better than Halo 3’s). Halo: Reach bumped up its native resolution to 1152x720 from Halo 3’s 1152x640 (Halo 3’s ‘sublime’ lighting system was not introduced. So that was a reason Halo: Reach had better resolution). We can go on and on about the technical improvements that Halo: Reach offered from Halo 3.
Where the real magic is, the art. Good art AND tech and go a LONG way. The Halo series has never failed to deliver rich, and colorful art. With people like Corrine Yu on the team backed up with talented artists and engineers, I’m sure Halo 4 will be just eye-candy.
> > > BF3.
> > >
> > > Just Sayin.
> >
> > Without the HD texture pack, BF3 looks like Halo CE, and even then it doesn’t run at 60 FPS on consoles. The only reason the graphics look nice and don’t affect the frames much with that HD texture pack is because it’s streaming it right from the hard drive, rather than being entirely default, making it easier on the xbox.
> >
> > If 343 does make an HD texture pack, graphics could possibly improve while keeping a similar performance, but otherwise, don’t expect much.
>
> Whats wrong with streaming textures? Lots of PS3 games do it.
> The only reason Xbox games don’t is because not all Xboxs have hard drives.
I never said there was anything wrong, but I will say that because they replace the textures on disk, if both the texture pack and disk are installed, the game may have trouble replacing the disk textures with the ones in the pack, sometimes even resulting in missing textures entirely. Otherwise it’s a great idea.
