I don’t think it’s that bad for the most part, but the Phantoms on Spartan Ops are pretty damn low-res.
Are you drunk? Or are you playing on a Low res T.V.?
These graphics are the best of the entire series…
> > There is a portions on Exile that really stand out texture-wise.
>
> I don’t play enough War Games to know what you’re talking about. Do you mean positively or negatively? Could you cite a specific example for me? I want to see.
Negatively. There is a section near blue spawn that is terrible and stays muddy even when I zoom in with the sniper.
> Are you drunk? Or are you playing on a Low res T.V.?
>
> These graphics are the best of the entire series…
No, and I play on a 50" w/HDMI.
They’re the best in the cut scenes and large scale environment. Seriously, go say hello to a dead grunt and see how muddy it is.
> > So do people have a checklist of what hasn’t been complained about yet? I think we got our legs down…any other body parts we want to mention?
> >
> > P.S - Thank god the majority of xbox players aren’t graphic or video designers/editors then, no? I, for one, as a clueless gamer think the graphics are amazing.
>
> The legs were cited as an example of an overall problem - that being the fact that textures are horrible muddy looking when you’re anywhere close to them. In some spots, such as “Reclaimer” and all of the Spartan Ops missions that use that same graphics design, the textures and colors really make the level look, at best, bland, and at worst, horrible. The sky is one big, pixelated, green sprite that completely breaks the immersion with anything more than a cursory glance. Those little white rocks that were breakable in “The Ark” in Halo 3 are also in this level, but they’re grayish-white and horribly pixelated. That’s just to cite a few problems related to that level’s graphics.
>
> And it’s really just a small example of an issue that dominates the game. Halo 4 looks great at a glance, but 343 Industries really dropped the ball on the details. In quite a few spots, it’s extremely noticeable.
>
> Addendum: “As a clueless gamer” is a horribly ignorant place to put yourself. I’m in the same boat. I don’t know anything about the technical aspects of graphics. However, I pay enough attention when I play to note that Halo: Reach has better textures than Halo 4, which looks muddy. If you play a large enough number of games, you’ll naturally and subconsciously make connections about what looks best, regardless of your intentions.
I personally still see Halo 4 as an evolution of graphics compared to a variety of other games. If this game really is as bad as you say, I guess I tend to look at the environment as a whole and not dot on the littler things. I’m speculating that the previous Halos were also not immune to graphical errors. From observation, in my opinion, I feel the only reason they weren’t as big of a deal before is because this forum tends to be unfavorly biased towards 343i. To me, it will still be a game with high quality graphics despite all the problems it may carry. Call me what you will. I will not change what I think because I am a stubborn mule. 
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
TL;DR another pathetic complaint thread
Ummmm… I am too busy killing things to notice stuff that closely. This game looks absolutely amazing and I can’t see nit picking things that are on a system that is looking to be 10 years old soon.
I hope to go into a match against you. While you are pondering the pixels that no one ever sees or cares about, I will be shooting you dead.
Thanks for the free kill
In my opinion, Halo 4 is one of the best games graphically on the Xbox 360.
Lol what? Someone said that Reach has better graphics? Lol…
Reach had worse framerate problems, that game doesn’t had big battles anyway. I won’t say anything about graphics, everyone with eyes or knoledge knows that Halo 4 blows Reach In everysingle way.
Xbox 360 has a 2006 hardware, what are you expecting? It doesn’t have any framerate issues in campaign, even with thad dynamic Lighting, AIs on screen and particles, not counting the large maps…
Every singlething drains GPU/CPU power. Physics, Textures, Lighting, Maps, Scales, Particles, AIs, Vehicles. There’s no such power for Xbox to handle that…
Halo 4 has a better character design, lighting, AIs on screen, particles, bigger battles without a Framerate issues like Reach.
For the guy who said that Mass Effect & Gears have better graphics, come on kid, Don’t even compare a Hall based game to a Semi-Sandbox game 
I think you guys need to chill out. 343 is just starting out with halo 4 and they did make mistakes. But they did WAY more good then bad.
> Now before I go into this, I’d like to clarify that Halo 4 is a beautiful looking game. When I play a game I notice the little things that make a huge difference.
>
> Let me begin by saying this is looks great… from a distance. It’s only when you get close up to things it starts to get ugly. It’s a shame for the curious few who like to examine the inside of a Hog or Ghost, or check out the dead body of the Elite you just shotgunned to the face… thing. Here goes:
>
> Texture quality - My god is it appalling during gameplay, next time your in game, look down at your legs, look at the Covenant AI’s, look at the vehicles SO. MUCH. PIXELATION. The only times you use the full resolution textures is for the HUD, the weapon you’re holding and cinematics. Now before people reply with “Ohhhh but the cinematics are rendered and not from gameplay!, Ofc they will be better!” Halo 3’s, Reach’s, ODST’s, cutscenes were all in-game animations… As are Halo 4’s. So graphics are just temp upscaled for the movies, this cannot be done in game because it would take longer to load and will make the gameplay lag. This is true, go look at the Halo 4 vid docs, there is a shot of the inside of a Hog… All high definition and beautiful but in the actual game it looks like they’ve plonked a Halo 2 Texure on it.
>
> Just a note 343: You gave us a second disk to install MP, didn’t it occur to you that it could be used to install the HD textures?
>
>
> The lighting system - For environmental purposes it is amazing, it light flickers as leaves and particles float around. But in first person it is extremely poor. For example, when entering a dark room/area that has been forged your armour stays tremendously bright as it would do outside, bringing up forge stuff… Your strange new lighting system makes a game with 8+ people lag… A LOT.
>
> Motion blur - The game has none, and without it looks horrible and a little laggy to those who notice such things. I’ve just been playing Reach today and the motion blur is what makes Halo’s low FPS into a much smoother and fluent game feel, without the motion blur on Halo 4 it’s low fps is visible, seriously it must be running at 24fps. Reach did, but had motion blur and made it look beautiful. Also, it makes in-game animations very unrealistic. Even Halo 2’s were smoother for Blam sakes, and did it Have motion blur? Nope.avi
>
>
> Explosions
> The most disappointing portion and biggest let down of this potentially fantastic game. Seriously, i get more exited over party poppers.
>
>
> I’m not mad, just disappointed.
Are you aware at THIS present point int time there is a thread above you wanting to change Halo back to the ‘cartoon’ like state it was in Halo 3. Now that was heavily pixilated.
I feel horrible for saying this but this community can’t be tamed, i hope 343i don’t listen to us too much.
The one thing that really bothers me about Halo 4’s graphics is how they pushed important gameplay aspects to the back seat in order to make the game look pretty. Having drop weapons and body’s despawn at such a fast rate in order to keep processing power up is a damn shame, and is made even worse by the fact that have two or more explosions going on-screen (most noticeable in BTB games) will cause a significant drop in frame rate.
Sure, Halo 4 looks great, but that means diddly-squat when its hindering gameplay features.
I didn’t know that graphics/textures make the game. It hardly affects gameplay and is even less noticeable.
When did gamers start caring about something so trivial?
> I think you guys need to chill out. 343 is just starting out with halo 4 and they did make mistakes. <mark>But they did WAY more good then bad.</mark>
That’s debatable.
> > > So do people have a checklist of what hasn’t been complained about yet? I think we got our legs down…any other body parts we want to mention?
> > >
> > > P.S - Thank god the majority of xbox players aren’t graphic or video designers/editors then, no? I, for one, as a clueless gamer think the graphics are amazing.
> >
> > The legs were cited as an example of an overall problem - that being the fact that textures are horrible muddy looking when you’re anywhere close to them. In some spots, such as “Reclaimer” and all of the Spartan Ops missions that use that same graphics design, the textures and colors really make the level look, at best, bland, and at worst, horrible. The sky is one big, pixelated, green sprite that completely breaks the immersion with anything more than a cursory glance. Those little white rocks that were breakable in “The Ark” in Halo 3 are also in this level, but they’re grayish-white and horribly pixelated. That’s just to cite a few problems related to that level’s graphics.
> >
> > And it’s really just a small example of an issue that dominates the game. Halo 4 looks great at a glance, but 343 Industries really dropped the ball on the details. In quite a few spots, it’s extremely noticeable.
> >
> > Addendum: “As a clueless gamer” is a horribly ignorant place to put yourself. I’m in the same boat. I don’t know anything about the technical aspects of graphics. However, I pay enough attention when I play to note that Halo: Reach has better textures than Halo 4, which looks muddy. If you play a large enough number of games, you’ll naturally and subconsciously make connections about what looks best, regardless of your intentions.
>
> I personally still see Halo 4 as an evolution of graphics compared to a variety of other games. If this game really is as bad as you say, I guess I tend to look at the environment as a whole and not dot on the littler things. I’m speculating that the previous Halos were also not immune to graphical errors. From observation, in my opinion, I feel the only reason they weren’t as big of a deal before is because this forum tends to be unfavorly biased towards 343i. To me, it will still be a game with high quality graphics despite all the problems it may carry. Call me what you will. I will not change what I think because I am a stubborn mule.
You’re talking about art design, and not graphics. I like to think of it like this: art direction is what the designers are trying to communicate to you visually, and graphics are how they communicate it to you. That’s obviously vastly oversimplified. But it speaks volumes to Halo 4’s art design that you can tell things should look great. It’s just when you look too hard, it falls apart considerably faster than what I am used to. And I like to look too hard.
> > Now before I go into this, I’d like to clarify that Halo 4 is a beautiful looking game. When I play a game I notice the little things that make a huge difference.
> >
> > Let me begin by saying this is looks great… from a distance. It’s only when you get close up to things it starts to get ugly. It’s a shame for the curious few who like to examine the inside of a Hog or Ghost, or check out the dead body of the Elite you just shotgunned to the face… thing. Here goes:
> >
> > Texture quality - My god is it appalling during gameplay, next time your in game, look down at your legs, look at the Covenant AI’s, look at the vehicles SO. MUCH. PIXELATION. The only times you use the full resolution textures is for the HUD, the weapon you’re holding and cinematics. Now before people reply with “Ohhhh but the cinematics are rendered and not from gameplay!, Ofc they will be better!” Halo 3’s, Reach’s, ODST’s, cutscenes were all in-game animations… As are Halo 4’s. So graphics are just temp upscaled for the movies, this cannot be done in game because it would take longer to load and will make the gameplay lag. This is true, go look at the Halo 4 vid docs, there is a shot of the inside of a Hog… All high definition and beautiful but in the actual game it looks like they’ve plonked a Halo 2 Texure on it.
> >
> > Just a note 343: You gave us a second disk to install MP, didn’t it occur to you that it could be used to install the HD textures?
> >
> >
> > The lighting system - For environmental purposes it is amazing, it light flickers as leaves and particles float around. But in first person it is extremely poor. For example, when entering a dark room/area that has been forged your armour stays tremendously bright as it would do outside, bringing up forge stuff… Your strange new lighting system makes a game with 8+ people lag… A LOT.
> >
> > Motion blur - The game has none, and without it looks horrible and a little laggy to those who notice such things. I’ve just been playing Reach today and the motion blur is what makes Halo’s low FPS into a much smoother and fluent game feel, without the motion blur on Halo 4 it’s low fps is visible, seriously it must be running at 24fps. Reach did, but had motion blur and made it look beautiful. Also, it makes in-game animations very unrealistic. Even Halo 2’s were smoother for Blam sakes, and did it Have motion blur? Nope.avi
> >
> >
> > Explosions
> > The most disappointing portion and biggest let down of this potentially fantastic game. Seriously, i get more exited over party poppers.
> >
> >
> > I’m not mad, just disappointed.
>
> Are you aware at THIS present point int time there is a thread above you wanting to change Halo back to the ‘cartoon’ like state it was in Halo 3. Now that was heavily pixilated.
>
> I feel horrible for saying this but this community can’t be tamed, i hope 343i don’t listen to us too much.
Your comment reminded me of Miley Cyrus’ song, “Can’t be tamed! Can’t be tamed!”
@dude527: To be honest, I don’t like getting into arguments over things of which I have no expertise on and it gets worse when I get into a heated debate with someone else who doesn’t either (I don’t mean you don’t but on occasion, it may happen). In the end, it just makes both of us look like idiots. I just wanted to give my input on this whole situation that I do like what i see in game even with the flaws. Maybe you’re right and it’s the art design not the graphics I like but the way 343i put it together just makes it look amazing and very detailed compared to some other games.
> I didn’t know that graphics/textures make the game. It hardly affects gameplay and is even less noticeable.
>
> When did gamers start caring about something so trivial?
It can actually also be a huge factor in gameplay. For example: In Campaign and Spartan Ops, weapons despawn sometimes the instant you let go of them in order to make room for the graphics. Previous Halo games generally weren’t subject to weapon despawns that erratic. They generally had a method about them. Weapons would despawn, but Bungie regulated it. For example, if you’ve held the weapon and you drop it, it doesn’t despawn. If you’re looking at the weapon, it doesn’t despawn. It will only despawn after a certain length of time.
In Halo 4, weapon despawning goes unregulated. There are no constraints, and if there is enough strain on the system at a certain moment, an enemy you just killed won’t even drop a weapon. I’ve seen that happen and got very frustrated by it.
I completely agree. I was finishing up Spartan Ops yesterday and just glanced, I repeat, glanced at a phantom and was just appalled. Halo 3 even has better looking phantoms. It’s quite obvious the trade-offs they had to make in order to get and actual dynamic lighting system for the first time in a Halo game.
hmm this reminds me halo 4 won best graphics of 2012 and black ops 2 was 2nd but if you go up close to textures in each game you will notice black ops 2 has the exact same pixelation as in halo 4 the game isnt meant for going up to walls and staring at textures same with any other game
> Lol what? Someone said that Reach has better graphics? Lol…
>
> Reach had worse framerate problems, that game doesn’t had big battles anyway. I won’t say anything about graphics, everyone with eyes or knoledge knows that Halo 4 blows Reach In everysingle way.
>
> Xbox 360 has a 2006 hardware, what are you expecting? It doesn’t have any framerate issues in campaign, even with thad dynamic Lighting, AIs on screen and particles, not counting the large maps…
>
> Every singlething drains GPU/CPU power. Physics, Textures, Lighting, Maps, Scales, Particles, AIs, Vehicles. There’s no such power for Xbox to handle that…
>
> Halo 4 has a better character design, lighting, AIs on screen, particles, bigger battles without a Framerate issues like Reach.
>
> For the guy who said that Mass Effect & Gears have better graphics, come on kid, Don’t even compare a Hall based game to a Semi-Sandbox game
I personally don’t notice framerate issues, unless it drops jarringly low. In my opinion, Halo: Reach never drops that jarringly low. When you talk about character design, you’re talking about art direction, which isn’t necessarily the same as graphics. I agree with you on character design, and I think Halo 4’s art direction as a whole is better than Halo: Reach’s.
With that said, Halo: Reach simply looked better in many ways. Speaking graphically, Halo: Reach actually arguably had better characters. As I remember, the textures didn’t look grainy and muddy when you got close to a dead AI. They looked pretty well just as good up close as they did from afar. Halo 4 is not the same. When you get up close to other characters, you’ll notice the grain pretty fast - the textures are just plain bad.
On a related note, they added some sort of film over the Elite skins that you only really notice when they’re dead. It makes them gleam green, and for some reason makes their colors appear really washed out and dull. It looks bland compared to most of Halo: Reach’s eye-poppingly colorful Sangheili.
Framerate isn’t everything. I would rather have detailed environments and textures that I can admire up close with a bad framerate occasionally than at-a-glance pretty graphics that completely fall apart because they simply aren’t that detailed or lively.