Reach graphics > Halo 4 graphics???/

Is it me, or does Halo: Reach have better graphics than Halo 4? I like Halo 4’s graphics better, but Halo: Reach’s graphics definately look more detailed, and realistic.

I agree. While the shiny and newness 4 has, does have some appeal. It feels less detail oriented then Reach, unfortunately.

Strangely enough I agree. Halo 4 looks amazing, but when you get close up to structures and other such things, they actually aren’t all that detailed it seems. One thing that I think makes it look so good is the lighting. They made the graphics good on what you see most.

Lol no

> Is it me, or does Halo: Reach have better graphics than Halo 4? I like Halo 4’s graphics better, but Halo: Reach’s graphics definately look more detailed, and realistic.

Yes I sort of agree, some parts in halo 4 look better while some parts in reach look better.

I occasionally have these random thoughts that Reach’s graphics are not as good as other games out there (don’t ask me why).
I guess it’s because i’ve played it so many times.
That kind of makes you feel differently about a game.

Conclusion being, both games have great graphics…
I will admit though that I am sometimes the kinda guy that zooms into a wall to see the design of it with my DMR in the middle of a match. A little weird, but its just cool to see the detail put into games nowadays…hardly a point that’s forgotten.

At the least. reach had better looking Spartans.

I think Halo 4 has better lighting at the expense of texture quality.

Lighting: Halo 4 > Reach
Textures: Reach (and maybe even Halo 3) > Halo 4

I am glad though that they’ve gotten rid of that infernal motion blur that Reach had.

Motion sensor blur? If that’s what you’re talking about I had a hard time believing that’s what it was like after returning to reach a few times after halo 4. And I totally agree with you evil, lighting is a lot which makes things look good…if it has the lighting if reach, I honestly don’t think the envoirments would look that great. Although they’re still great graphics. It’s cool to see a map like Valhalla look so sharp now compared to what it was before…

I actually agree. Sure Halo 4 looks great if you look around from a distance. But if you really look at all the objects you can see the pixels… I also thought that the little cinematic scene, in the first mission when you launch a missile at one of the Covie ships, looked pretty bad.

And I can’t stand the damn lighting in multiplayer maps, especially the DLC maps and at some spots on Ragnarok. It really blinds me and I can’t even see the enemies.

Maybe it sounds weird to others, but I loved how Halo: Reach looked. Much darker than previous Halo’s and I actually loved the grey in Forge, the maps never really looked bad. While the textures on Halo 4’s forge objects don’t really blend well with everything, it becomes way too busy.

Both of those games shows how graphic engine is develop to suits art direction. There’s interesting article about Reach: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-halo-reach-tech-analysis-article and Halo 4:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-halo-4
For me Halo 4 looks better because of Ken Scott’s art direction. I’ve been his fan since Quake 3.
Bungie has always been a bit too conservative.

Ah yes! When I was playing that first mission with my bro he even said that explosion would have been much grander in reach.
And, I like the explosions better in reach too…

> I think Halo 4 has better lighting at the expense of texture quality.
>
> Lighting: Halo 4 > Reach
> Textures: Reach (and maybe even Halo 3) > Halo 4
>
> I am glad though that they’ve gotten rid of that infernal motion blur that Reach had.

I’m pretty sure Halo 4’s textures are more realistic than Halo 3’s. Halo 4 has the best lighting, but Halo: Reach textures looked the most realistic, and I’m not talking about upclose, even far away, Reach looks much more realistic.

Which one looks more realistic?:

Halo: Reach looks more realistic, Halo 4 has the better lighting.

Keep in mind that Halo 4 is in the setting of a forerunner (artificial) planet.
And it doesn’t help second picture is not great quality. But even if it was, reach looks a bit more life like and realistic. I feel like playing custom games after seeing that picture now…

The spartan models in halo reach is WAY better than the halo 4’s ones.

> Ah yes! When I was playing that first mission with my bro he even said that explosion would have been much grander in reach.
> And, I like the explosions better in reach too…

Every vehicle explosion, when the Savannah blows up in Long Night Of Solace, it looks simply amazing! But when the carrier blows up during Dawn in halo 4 the ship comes apart like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. I was disappointed with the explosion the first time I saw it. Reach has much better textures than halo 4, you can zoom in anywhere in any level in matchmaking, firefight, or campaign and they all look great. Something that I love in reach is that map backgrounds aren’t so pretty. When I play a game I don’t want to get distracted at how nice the background looks. Halo 4 looks fancy from far away, but reach is sleek regardless of range.

I definitely agree with you Dan.
Although its not cool, the savannah blowing up was pretty sweet looking lol

Play on the Halo Reach Anniversary Maps… Holy crap the graphics on those maps blew me away… I bet The Future DLC Maps in Halo 4 will look better. Since they will have more staff working on them, a bigger budget to work with, less time restraints, and they will be MUCH more comfortable and familiar with Halo 4’s engine, and the tech to build the maps.

I can’t help but ntoice how detailed the explosions are (namely plasma batteries and grenade explosions).
Now that I think about it, Reach doesn’t have such good lighting (if any, I can’t think of a time when I observed lighting effects).
To me, Reach’s graphics are kind of dull. But that’s probably because I spent so much time playing it.