I may have weird eyesight or something but to me it feels like Halo 3 had better graphics than Reach. Its probably just me or something like that
You may have small TV (crt maybe). On bigger screen you could clearly see lower resolution without any AA, edgy characters and skybox made with lo-res textures. Art direction is still cool though…
So when you say “graphics,” are we talking technical impressiveness, or pure aesthetic goodliness? Because they’re used interchangeably, and are completely different questions.
I like art direction in both games. I like realistic characters, dull colors and “dirty” filters as much as colorful, funny ride called Halo 3. However I must admit that Reach graphics are just better. More detailed models makes whole game more believable and simple graphic effects are used with caution: ssao gives picture more depth, more aggresive motion blur makes movement smooth (even if game drops from 30 to 20 or less fps) and higher resolution along with aa makes you forget that you are looking on bunch of pixels. As for an art direction (foggy alien planet vs sunny east Africa) I would give a tie. However Halo 3 wasn’t looking impresive even in 2007…