Ok, i played H3 last night for the first time in about 2 years and the quality of graphics between it and Reach is night and day to me, obviously this is down to newer rendering etc,
but, from what i’ve seen of 4 it looks graphically like 3, so am i seeing it wrong or are the graphics going to be down on Reach??
Its not about the graphics really . Its about the color palette more-like . The colour scheme that Bungie used for Reach were meant to instill a gritty atmosphere to the player , a sense of loss . Halo 4 , being a direct sequel to Halo 3 , aims to live up to its predecessor , which is in fact , Halo 3 , which means 343i is using a similar color palette to H3 for the upcoming game .
Ohhhhh, that kind of graphic question! I thought you were going to ask us about the size of Chief’s fuel rod or something!
Halo Reach used film grain and motion blur to make it feel more gritty and cinematic. Halo 3 doesn’t, and Halo 4 won’t.
> Ok, i played H3 last night for the first time in about 2 years and the quality of graphics between it and Reach is night and day to me, obviously this is down to newer rendering etc,
>
> but, from what i’ve seen of 4 it looks graphically like 3, so am i seeing it wrong or are the graphics going to be down on Reach??
You’re referring to aesthetics, or art direction. Graphics refers to, for the sake of simplicity, the number of polygons. Aesthetics are the visuals, the art direction. Now Reach took a more gritty direction with its aesthetic (one reason why 343 didn’t use the Halo Reach Spartan model for Halo CEA). Halo 4 is going back to an aesthetic that resembles the main trilogy’s.
Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
Honestly compare side by side the halo reach renders of a full body Elite zealot and a halo 4 Elite render and tell me you do not see improvements
> Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
> > Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
>
> Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
thanks to that it artfully dodges the uncanny valley effect
I wonder what the graphics will be like for split screen…
> > Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
>
> Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
That’s because Halo uses vibrant colors. What’s funny is that games that attempt to look aesthetically realistic (e.g. Halo Reach and the first two Gears of War games) often end up using bland, muted colors.
> > Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
>
> Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
Reach eliminated the ‘cartoony’ crap, Halo 4 looks like it’s reviving it.
> Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
I felt Anniversary’s graphics looked like a bit of a mash up anyway, I preferred the original look.
I’m glad H4 is looking more like 3 than Reach, looks like how (in my eyes) Halo should look.
> > > Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
> >
> > Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
>
> Reach eliminated the ‘cartoony’ crap, Halo 4 looks like it’s reviving it.
I prefer Halo 4’s colorful and vibrant look opposed to the dull and gritty look of Reach.
A colorful palette/art direction will grasp the sense of a new and very mysterious world better than a dull and gritty palette that is supposed to represent loss and terrible war.
Halo 4 in Reach’s gritty palette would eliminate some of the spark it has in my eyes. The palette they’re using fits Halo 4 much better in my opinion.
> > > Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
> >
> > Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
>
> Reach eliminated the ‘cartoony’ crap, Halo 4 looks like it’s reviving it.
some people prefer the half realistic half cartoony approach…I do for sure hence why I LOVE games like darksiders
> > > Also, while we’re on the subject of graphics: I’ve never asked this, but did the graphics in CE:A look a little off to anybody else? I sort of got the feeling that they almost looked cartoony?
> >
> > Halo has always been “accused” of having an almost “cartoony” look. And I would agree, it kind of does, but in a good way.
>
> Reach eliminated the ‘cartoony’ crap, Halo 4 looks like it’s reviving it.
And I’m glad that it’s doing so.
Reach’s graphics, as nice as they are look so bland because of the color palette.
Thanks to everyone for clearing that up for me,
Personally i prefer the palette of Reach but i dont suppose it will matter as 4 looks to be a superb game,
A few hours play on 3 will probably have my eye’s re-adjusted before 4 arrives.
> Thanks to everyone for clearing that up for me,
>
> Personally i prefer the palette of Reach but i dont suppose it will matter as 4 looks to be a superb game,
>
> A few hours play on 3 will probably have my eye’s re-adjusted before 4 arrives.
Gameplay is more similar to 3 as well, so it’s a win-win.
If it’s about graphical affects of the game, then I think the answers of my old topic might help. The answers that I got from there are quite useful that explains about the graphics of Reach etc.
Like this one for example:
> You want the truth why Halo: Reach was so blurry?
>
> The temporal Anti-Aliasing system Bungie used in Reach caused ghosting and a lot of softness/blurriness, that’s also why if you look at the AR display while walking it blurs a lot.
>
> Luckily Halo 4 will be using a more modern and sharper widely-used system called FXAA. So things will be as sharp as Halo 3. Only problem with “sharp” Anti-Aliasing is it uses more resources AND you get a thing called “jaggies.” (Google it to see what I mean)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
With Halo 4 being pushed to it’s limits: I’m expecting to see the blurryness and water graphics like Reach.
It’s because Halo 4 uses a similar art style to Halo 3. Reach had gritty style, Halo 4 uses a multi-colour pallet similar to previous Halo games. This is to reflect both of the game’s tones and give players a stronger sense of immersion into the game’s world.