The price of 60fps was too high

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

60 FPS is great and all but did we lost too much for it? Not just split screen but a lot of other things as well. Lets be honest, Halo 5 doesn’t look like a Halo game. Every time when I see concept art of Halo 5 it just looks so much better than the actual game. Take the upcoming Warzone map for example; the concept art looks nothing like the in-game screenshot. The same goes for Campaign, while i do have to admit that Sanghelios looked great the rest just felt too out of place and uninspired. 60 FPS pushed the classic art style of Halo to the side and replaced it with dull and flat textured structures. The game ends up looking cartoonish and that just impacts the experience as a whole, even more so than the frame rate would. Many people would argue that graphics should never be placed before gameplay while not realizing that the art style of Halo is fundamental for the game itself.

I completely understand why people want 60 FPS. It fits the fast paced combat of Halo 5 and it is just something that should be a ‘‘thing’’ in this day and age. However i also have a feeling that 60 FPS was shoehorned in to appeal to the E-sports crowd which is find frustrating as it shows that 343 values competitiveness more than Halo itself. Is 30 FPS acceptable today? Probably not, but neither is sacrificing core elements of Halo to achieve 60 FPS.

Halo 6 won’t go back to 30 FPS, that’s for sure. But will it have split screen, a good art style and and the effects work? (Scarab explosion in Halo 3 vs phantom ‘‘explosion’’ in Halo 4/5)

2

I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS

3

> 2533274891097288;2:
> I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS

Me neither but I guess 30FPS is better because I miss the feel of Halo too (texture pun)

4

> 2533274796410651;3:
> > 2533274891097288;2:
> > I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS
>
>
> Me neither but I guess 30FPS is better because I miss the feel of Halo too

If you can’t tell the difference, that’s your problem but Halo moving to 60 fps was absolutely the right thing to do. Play Destiny and then hop on to Halo 5, you can easily tell the difference in frames

5

> 2533274796410651;3:
> > 2533274891097288;2:
> > I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS
>
>
> Me neither but I guess 30FPS is better because I miss the feel of Halo too (texture pun)

Its weird how halo got worse as graphics got better

6

> 2533274923675030;5:
> > 2533274796410651;3:
> > > 2533274891097288;2:
> > > I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS
> >
> >
> > Me neither but I guess 30FPS is better because I miss the feel of Halo too (texture pun)
>
>
> Its weird how halo got worse as graphics got better

But halo 5 is better than 4 don’t get me wrong on that!

7

I’m puzzled by the whole “doesn’t look like a Halo game” thing. Are you saying that it looks too good? Too detailed? I mean, which Halo game exactly are you comparing it to? Which older Halo title looks better? From the stand point of art direction or resolution?

And for anyone having trouble seeing the difference between 30 frames/second and 60, assuming you’re using a TV capable of displaying the difference, just put in Reach. At 30fps it looks like you’re playing while wearing glasses that were rubbed with sandpaper. Resolution (crisp edges) is bad enough, but frame rate (objects in motion as you move through the environment) is so atrocious it makes me wonder how anyone ever played any of the older games competitvely. I really can’t imagine taking a step backward in this regard just for the sake of being able to host another player on the same screen. For me it wouldn’t even remotely be worth the cost.

8

60 fps only effected split screen far as I know, it has no effect on art design. If you feel the art design sucks, then that’s on the art team, they’re the ones who make the details on everything involved with looks. 60fps is supposedly supposed to make a game look smoother which draws the lag down (I think) and it allows more details. Like one has said, compare destiny to h5, your eyes will have to adjust because they’re much different. You can even compare halo mcc to h5, you’ll see a big difference. The art design in mcc can still be better even at lower fps, fps don’t touch how well a structure is made. If the correct guys did h5 you’d see 60 dos would make it trounce most games that aren’t 60, it’d also help if h5 had it stable but it goes all over the place from what I hear.

9

> 2533274923562209;8:
> 60 fps only effected split screen far as I know, it has no effect on art design. If you feel the art design sucks, then that’s on the art team, they’re the ones who make the details on everything involved with looks. 60fps is supposedly supposed to make a game look smoother which draws the lag down (I think) and it allows more details. Like one has said, compare destiny to h5, your eyes will have to adjust because they’re much different. You can even compare halo mcc to h5, you’ll see a big difference. The art design in mcc can still be better even at lower fps, fps don’t touch how well a structure is made. If the correct guys did h5 you’d see 60 dos would make it trounce most games that aren’t 60, it’d also help if h5 had it stable but it goes all over the place from what I hear.

It has an effect on graphics, in campaing they downgraded graphics in certain missions to kepp 60fps.

10

> 2533274923675030;5:
> > 2533274796410651;3:
> > > 2533274891097288;2:
> > > I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS
> >
> >
> > Me neither but I guess 30FPS is better because I miss the feel of Halo too (texture pun)
>
>
> Its weird how halo got worse as graphics got better

that is most of today’s games…

11

> 2533274891097288;2:
> I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS

You could, especially if you ever played on PC and framerates drop. Switching games on a console won’t be an easy way to compare FPS.

12

> 2533274968894951;1:
> Lets be honest, Halo 5 doesn’t look like a Halo game. Every time when I see concept art of Halo 5 it just looks so much better than the actual game. Take the upcoming Warzone map for example; the concept art looks nothing like the in-game screenshot.

Well, of course concept art looks better than the actual game! Hand drawn art looks better than pretty much anything that’s made with numbers and code. Concept art is supposed to be a visual representation of what the game’s art should look like in an ideal world.

> 2533274968894951;1:
> 60 FPS pushed the classic art style of Halo to the side and replaced it with dull and flat textured structures. The game ends up looking cartoonish and that just impacts the experience as a whole, even more so than the frame rate would.

The frame rate has nothing to do with the art style of Halo. When Halo 4 on Xbox 360 was 30fps, did the art style feel like Halo? No.
When Halo: Combat Evolved, Halo 2, and Halo 3 were all 60fps on the Master Chief Collection, did the art style somehow not feel like Halo anymore? No.

In fact, I’d argue that higher frame rates make games look better. There are some people that can’t tell the difference, which makes no sense to me, but with a higher frame rate, the game flows smoother, colors pop, and it the experience is enhanced.

If you don’t like Halo 5’s art style, it’s because of decisions made by the art team to make the game look a certain way. Not because the frame rate somehow muddled the textures or whatever.

> 2533274968894951;1:
> I completely understand why people want 60 FPS. It fits the fast paced combat of Halo 5 and it is just something that should be a ‘‘thing’’ in this day and age. However i also have a feeling that 60 FPS was shoehorned in to appeal to the E-sports crowd which is find frustrating as it shows that 343 values competitiveness more than Halo itself.

Why 60fps has this reputation as some sort of fad among some people is beyond me. It used to actually be a standard in the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube days. With the arrival of the 360 and PS3, developers suddenly valued “better gwafiks” over a smoother game, and now people are realizing that higher frame rates are important. It isn’t just the performance-hungry, PC master race, E-sports crowd that values frame rates. 60fps is becoming more of a standard, and that’s a good thing. Right now, developers for consoles are coming out of an era where graphics > frame rate. Now, they really need to struggle to obtain both.

The bottom line is, either the Xbox One is an under powered piece of garbage, or 343 still needs to figure out how to develop games for it. Both are likely true. Maybe with Halo 6 we’ll finally see that vision for a true Halo successor on the next gen.
Just remember, if a Halo game’s artstyle doesn’t feel like Halo, then it’s because of decisions made by the art team.

13

> 2533274873843883;7:
> I’m puzzled by the whole “doesn’t look like a Halo game” thing. Are you saying that it looks too good? Too detailed? I mean, which Halo game exactly are you comparing it too? Which older Halo title looks better? From the stand point of art direction or resolution?
>
> And for anyone having trouble seeing the difference between 30 frames/second and 60, assuming you’re using a TV capable of displaying the difference, just put in Reach. At 30fps it looks like you’re playing while wearing glasses that were rubbed with sandpaper. Resolution (crisp edges) is bad enough, but frame rate (objects in motion as you move through the environment) is so atrocious it makes me wonder how anyone ever played any of the older games competitvely. I really can’t imagine taking a step backward in this regard just for the sake of being able to host another player on the same screen. For me it wouldn’t even remotely be worth the cost.

I’m mostly referring to Halo 3 when I talk about Halo’s art style. Halo 3 looked very natural and was easily the most distinguishable in the Halo series. And yes, i see the obvious difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS. The point I was trying to make is that the game itself took a step backward with the focus of 60 FPS. Bland textures and pop-ins and 30FPS enemies aren’t the only thing. 60 FPS overall is a very limiting factor for Halo 5. Warzone could’ve been much more engaging without static bosses that just sit in a spot. I am curious to see how Warzone Firefight will play out with having a -Yoink- ton of AI on screen. Don’t be surprised if 343 sacrifices something else just to get that running smoothly.

14

I agree with the OP, that was my first thought when I saw my friend playing the game. The FPS is awesome but all the walls and floors seem lackluster, flat, smooth. I’ve noticed it more on the BTB maps, a lot of the 4v4 size maps look pretty good. Love the underwater one and the one that’s in space.

15

> 2533274968894951;1:
> 60 FPS is great and all but did we lost too much for it? Not just split screen but a lot of other things as well. Lets be honest, Halo 5 doesn’t look like a Halo game. Every time when I see concept art of Halo 5 it just looks so much better than the actual game. Take the upcoming Warzone map for example; the concept art looks nothing like the in-game screenshot. The same goes for Campaign, while i do have to admit that Sanghelios looked great the rest just felt too out of place and uninspired. 60 FPS pushed the classic art style of Halo to the side and replaced it with dull and flat textured structures. The game ends up looking cartoonish and that just impacts the experience as a whole, even more so than the frame rate would. Many people would argue that graphics should never be placed before gameplay while not realizing that the art style of Halo is fundamental for the game itself.
>
> I completely understand why people want 60 FPS. It fits the fast paced combat of Halo 5 and it is just something that should be a ‘‘thing’’ in this day and age. However i also have a feeling that 60 FPS was shoehorned in to appeal to the E-sports crowd which is find frustrating as it shows that 343 values competitiveness more than Halo itself. Is 30 FPS acceptable today? Probably not, but neither is sacrificing core elements of Halo to achieve 60 FPS.
>
> Halo 6 won’t go back to 30 FPS, that’s for sure. But will it have split screen, a good art style and and the effects work? (Scarab explosion in Halo 3 vs phantom ‘‘explosion’’ in Halo 4/5)

Erm… sorry but this is entirely incorrect. Halo doesn’t look like a Halo game? Lol! This is the best looking Halo game ever, on the most powerful Xbox to date. The way it looks has absolutely nothing to do with 60 fps in this context. Sure, they’d have to cut a few corners to get a stable frame rate, but that won’t affect the artwork.

And 60fps means smooth gameplay, it’s great. Not just for E-sports, but for anyone who plays it. I think they’ve done an amazing job with the engine, and managed to get the most out of the Xbox One. Although it’s the most powerful Xbox ever, it pales in comparison to current PC graphics cards.

What “core elements” do you think have been sacrificed to achieve 60fps?

16

> 2533274827321356;4:
> > 2533274796410651;3:
> > > 2533274891097288;2:
> > > I cant tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS
> >
> >
> > Me neither but I guess 30FPS is better because I miss the feel of Halo too
>
>
> If you can’t tell the difference, that’s your problem but Halo moving to 60 fps was absolutely the right thing to do. Play Destiny and then hop on to Halo 5, you can easily tell the difference in frames

It would be the right thing to do if you can get it to function properly before the game came out. A lot of things aren’t 60fps for the content of the game unfortunately.

17

I’m sorry, but if you’re saying that 60 fps killed the style of Halo, you’re an idiot. While I do have some mixed feelings about the art style Halo has been going in under 343 (mostly the weird -Yoink- armors that just feel out of place), having 60 fps doesn’t affect the game’s art style at all. That falls solely on the art team. The only problem with Halo 5’s 60 fps is that the game’s physics engine is tied to the game’s frame rate, so it can only function properly at 60 fps, which is why we couldn’t get 30 fps split-screen. That is most certainly 343’s fault for designing the engine like -Yoinking!- idiots, but they are also most certainly in the right when they prioritize gameplay and frame-rate over graphics.

18

> 2533274899577089;17:
> I’m sorry, but if you’re saying that 60 fps killed the style of Halo, you’re an idiot. While I do have some mixed feelings about the art style Halo has been going in under 343 (mostly the weird -Yoink- armors that just feel out of place), having 60 fps doesn’t affect the game’s art style at all. That falls solely on the art team. The only problem with Halo 5’s 60 fps is that the game’s physics engine is tied to the game’s frame rate, so it can only function properly at 60 fps, which is why we couldn’t get 30 fps split-screen. That is most certainly 343’s fault for designing the engine like -Yoinking!- idiots, but they are also most certainly in the right when they prioritize gameplay and frame-rate over graphics.

Yeah I agree with most of your post, but split screen wouldn’t need to be 30fps. If they lowered the resolution and detail, they could have gotten 60fps split screen.

19

> 2533274899577089;17:
> I’m sorry, but if you’re saying that 60 fps killed the style of Halo, you’re an idiot. While I do have some mixed feelings about the art style Halo has been going in under 343 (mostly the weird -Yoink- armors that just feel out of place), having 60 fps doesn’t affect the game’s art style at all. That falls solely on the art team. The only problem with Halo 5’s 60 fps is that the game’s physics engine is tied to the game’s frame rate, so it can only function properly at 60 fps, which is why we couldn’t get 30 fps split-screen. That is most certainly 343’s fault for designing the engine like -Yoinking!- idiots, but they are also most certainly in the right when they prioritize gameplay and frame-rate over graphics.

As a man of art, I respectably disagree with fram rate over graphics, it’s a huge turn off to people like me when things get dulled down in any way just to bring up another aspect, and unfortunately it feels like 60 fps did that in a few ways. Not saying I don’t want 60 fps, but I would be fine with less, (at the least 24 fps) as long as the game looked nice. But honestly, I would rather we just have both things.

20

> 2533274847563380;19:
> > 2533274899577089;17:
> > I’m sorry, but if you’re saying that 60 fps killed the style of Halo, you’re an idiot. While I do have some mixed feelings about the art style Halo has been going in under 343 (mostly the weird -Yoink- armors that just feel out of place), having 60 fps doesn’t affect the game’s art style at all. That falls solely on the art team. The only problem with Halo 5’s 60 fps is that the game’s physics engine is tied to the game’s frame rate, so it can only function properly at 60 fps, which is why we couldn’t get 30 fps split-screen. That is most certainly 343’s fault for designing the engine like -Yoinking!- idiots, but they are also most certainly in the right when they prioritize gameplay and frame-rate over graphics.
>
>
> As a man of art, I respectably disagree with fram rate over graphics, it’s a huge turn off to people like me when things get dulled down in any way just to bring up another aspect, and unfortunately it feels like 60 fps did that in a few ways. Not saying I don’t want 60 fps, but I would be fine with less, (at the least 24 fps) as long as the game looked nice. But honestly, I would rather we just have both things.

This reply shows me that you don’t really know what you’re talking about. 24fps is a movie frame rate, not a first person shooter frame rate. 30fps is considered the bare minimum to even be playable, and it’s been that way for many years. 60fps is better, but there are still benefits from going even higher.

As a man of art, perhaps you could tell us exactly what is wrong with Halo 5’s graphics? And remember that the art design is one thing, whereas stuff like textures and resolution are another.