Anyone notice that the graphics don’t even look better compared to Halo 4? It looks the same, just a slightly different art/animation style for Halo 5. I can’t seem to find any good graphics comparisons between the two games yet.
Meant to put “No improvement at all” but I made this thread at 5am in the morning before I went to sleep so I was tired.
Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
> 2533274847480519;2:
> Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
No they didn’t. Even for the time, Halo 3 and Reach paled in comparison so other games like Gears of War and Crysis.
And considering you havent even played campaign yet, OP. I suggest you give it a try before mocking the graphics.
> 2533274799135257;3:
> > 2533274847480519;2:
> > Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
>
>
> No they didn’t. Even for the time, Halo 3 and Reach paled in comparison so other games like Gears of War and Crysis.
>
> And considering you havent even played campaign yet, OP. I suggest you give it a try before mocking the graphics.
Ok now the campaigns in halo 4 and 5 are amazing graphics. I was talking about the multiplayer idk maybe it’s just nostalgia. Hahaha
i think your playing a different game. The graphics in h5 are way better than h4. u must be playing on a old tubed tv or something
> 2533274847480519;2:
> Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
They didn’t have to develop it to run in such a weak hardware at the time?
Now that I have played some more I am very pissed off. The textures look like complete garbage and it needs better anti analising, Halo 4 had smoother textures than this.
This shouldn’t be a surprise. Developers are limited by the resources they have, and they haven’t changed all too much from Halo 4 to 5, apparently. Halo looks better than 4, but not by too much and that’ alright with me. Both games look very beautiful.
> 2533274799135257;3:
> > 2533274847480519;2:
> > Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
>
>
> No they didn’t. Even for the time, Halo 3 and Reach paled in comparison so other games like Gears of War and Crysis.
>
> And considering you havent even played campaign yet, OP. I suggest you give it a try before mocking the graphics.
Wow. Way to use a model of an extra that was barely in the game to illustrate a Halo 3’s graphics.
How about the amazing lighting, foliage, and water effects at the beginning of Sierra 117? That stuff stands the test of time, son.
3 and Reach’s style, scale, and attention to detail are far superior to 4 and 5.
> 2533274832335336;9:
> > 2533274799135257;3:
> > > 2533274847480519;2:
> > > Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
> >
> >
> > No they didn’t. Even for the time, Halo 3 and Reach paled in comparison so other games like Gears of War and Crysis.
> >
> > And considering you havent even played campaign yet, OP. I suggest you give it a try before mocking the graphics.
>
>
> Wow. Way to use a model of an extra that was barely in the game to illustrate a Halo 3’s graphics.
>
> How about the amazing lighting, foliage, and water effects at the beginning of Sierra 117? That stuff stands the test of time, son.
>
> 3 and Reach’s style, scale, and attention to detail are far superior to 4 and 5.
Halo 3 had terribly low poly counts, even Bungie admitted that during the development of Halo Reach, so while enviornemental textures were decent, they suffered from that by looking flat. The only thing in Halo 3 that looked much better than 4 was the water. And the lighting was purely baked, try stepping into the shade, you’ll notice that it doesnt actually envelop you like real darkness, but rather your model grows darker to represent its in the shade. some filter effects were okay, but it could have looked so much nicer. The e3 '06 demo looked much nicer than the finished product. Hell, CoD4 won more awards for looking more photo-realistic than Halo 3. And as it stands, Halo CEA still looks better than Bungie’s work on environmental textures and lighting.
There’s not a single point in Reach’s campaign where I can look out and watch hundreds of ships dog fight like in the beginning of the first mission in 5. And 5’s verticality and scale is far more numerous than Reach’s.
There really needs to be a graphics update, the textures are smoother in Halo 4 and the anti aliasing is better in Halo 4. The difference is astounding, Halo 4 looks clearer and the graphics in Halo 5 look messy, they need to make the textures better/smoother and improve the anti aliasing.
> 2533274799135257;3:
> > 2533274847480519;2:
> > Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
>
>
> No they didn’t. Even for the time, Halo 3 and Reach paled in comparison so other games like Gears of War and Crysis.
>
> And considering you havent even played campaign yet, OP. I suggest you give it a try before mocking the graphics.
Are you kidding? When Halo 3 came out, it was arguably one of the best looking games at the time.
> 2533274799135257;10:
> > 2533274832335336;9:
> > > 2533274799135257;3:
> > > > 2533274847480519;2:
> > > > Agree. Idk what bungie did but damn their graphics looked amazing. The graphics in halo 4-5 look too 3D and bulky like kinda. And the amor colors look matte no shine to them.
> > >
> > >
> > > No they didn’t. Even for the time, Halo 3 and Reach paled in comparison so other games like Gears of War and Crysis.
> > >
> > > And considering you havent even played campaign yet, OP. I suggest you give it a try before mocking the graphics.
> >
> >
> > Wow. Way to use a model of an extra that was barely in the game to illustrate a Halo 3’s graphics.
> >
> > How about the amazing lighting, foliage, and water effects at the beginning of Sierra 117? That stuff stands the test of time, son.
> >
> > 3 and Reach’s style, scale, and attention to detail are far superior to 4 and 5.
>
>
> 1. Halo 3 had terribly low poly counts, even Bungie admitted that during the development of Halo Reach, so while enviornemental textures were decent, they suffered from that by looking flat. The only thing in Halo 3 that looked much better than 4 was the water. And the lighting was purely baked, try stepping into the shade, you’ll notice that it doesnt actually envelop you like real darkness, but rather your model grows darker to represent its in the shade. some filter effects were okay, but it could have looked so much nicer. The e3 '06 demo looked much nicer than the finished product. Hell, CoD4 won more awards for looking more photo-realistic than Halo 3. And as it stands, Halo CEA still looks better than Bungie’s work on environmental textures and lighting.
>
> 2. There’s not a single point in Reach’s campaign where I can look out and watch hundreds of ships dog fight like in the beginning of the first mission in 5. And 5’s verticality and scale is far more numerous than Reach’s.
At least Halo 3 and Reach actually had textures, whereas half the stuff in 4 and especially 5 look like they’re made of smooth plastic, and both games managed LOD way better.
3 and Reach had huge vehicle/infantry skirmishes across open landscapes, Reach had a near open-world Falcon level and a mission that transitions from a ground assault to a space battle to a boarding action all in one level.
> 2535462471079489;11:
> There really needs to be a graphics update, the textures are smoother in Halo 4 and the anti aliasing is better in Halo 4. The difference is astounding, Halo 4 looks clearer and the graphics in Halo 5 look messy, they need to make the textures better/smoother and improve the anti aliasing.
I’m thinking it’s because they put more enemies on the screen so they had to sacrifice graphical power
I went right from Halo 5 campaign to Halo 4 and could instantly tell how much better 5 is.
Halo 5 campaign graphics are considerably better than Halo 4, even factoring in 60fps and the amount of things that are happening in screen, esp with a lot more enemies.
Arena on the other hand, I’ve noticed a considerable drop in graphics quality but no big deal really
You guys must be blind. The campaign looks so sweet I almost can’t stop myself from licking the screen.
Looks great to me. What kind of TV are you using?
Are you serious? Go look at armor detail in both games and come back.
Judging by your profile, you haven’t even played Halo 4 yet, so I think you should play both and then see what you think. I think Halo 5’s graphics blows Halo 4’s out of the water. It really is a big improvement.
