Which game has better graphics?

Games Halo Infinite
21

I think you’ll get a kick out of this.

https://you tu.be/v6Rjx2PiA4g

(remove the space between u and t)

Exactly. Which is why I don’t like things sticking out of the helmets. I get you like the cat ears but from a spartan suit design perspective it doesn’t make sense.

Sure Halo 5 didn’t do it perfect but they stayed within the spartan model. They didn’t venture outside of it.

What I see is a lot of grey Spartans. Un edited. And a lot of people with cosmetics. Nothing really in-between because you can barely get anything for free in halo infinite.

Halo should have armour that would realistically be made in actual combat. Armours that make sense and are logical. Even you point out that Halo 5 failed at this and it did but its also mostly because they just wanted to fill the game up artificially.

Overall I think there were some great designs in halo 5. Yes a lot were ugly but it wasn’t as overboard as glowing mohawks which I could see in the game sunset overdrive. Not Halo

2 Likes
22

Halo has always had a goofy-fun-unrealistic thing as a small option.

  • Halo 3 Hayabusa Katana
  • Halo 3 Flaming Helm
  • Halo Reach Haunted Helm
  • Halo Reach Armor Effects

The occasional goofy thing is better than EVERYTHING being unironically goofy and strange.

Spartan armor is angular with VERY few curves.
Most of the armors I listed in my comment earlier is made up of all curves and very few angles.
Or it is just entirely made up of angles like some kind of Forerunner design, even though the only Forerunner designed armor out of that list was Prefect.

A point everyone dislikes.
We miss the days when devs actually let you EARN cosmetics.

The glowing Mohawk is an armor effect that is entirely optional to be applied. Just like how in Reach you could have hearts and flames and thunderstorms around your head.

A visual effect.
Not an armor piece that tries to seriously be Spartan armor and claim that it is in the lore.

1 Like
23

The material and texture work in the tank game look rather dated to me. Is that last gen?

2 Likes
24

343 said the community wanted the “classic Halo” art design. I have yet to actually see someone ask for it though. I think truthfully Infinite’s graphics are a direct result of open world game being built for older consoles.

1 Like
25

I have asked for it.
All the popular Halo Youtubers ask for it.
The amount of people that like their videos on the topic have asked for it.
Go through the internet timeline to find the old Halo Waypoint forums and you will see people complaining and hating on the changed art style that Halo 4 and Halo 5 introduced and continued on with.
You will see people rejoicing when Halo Wars 2 brought back the classic art style as well as an interesting enemy faction.

26

The art style is fine and better than Reach, in my opinion.
I’d say:
Infinite > 3 > CE > Reach > 2 > 4 > 5

Also, Halo 5’s armor sets look like action figures more than Infinite’s.

Maybe as a spin-off.

In Infinite, Banished designs aren’t very different from UNSC designs, which was really disappointing.
Covenant designs seemed a lot more unusual.

As long as they aren’t too farfetched, and they fit the style, I don’t mind nonsensical armors.

It actually was that bad.
Most of the armors in Halo 5 are unrealistic and awful, even ignoring the helmets (some of the helmets look better than the armors though).

Also, some of the armors basically have cat ears and mohawks.

If they’d kept the Halo 5 art design, I probably would’ve skipped Infinite.

1 Like
27

Halo infinite is defiantly not the visual benchmark for games going forward, so there’s no reason why it should be so taxing with todays hardware. @GusTank04 what hardware are you on? Your first Halo screenshot says 32fps and what are your graphic settings?

28

Really your only argument is armour. Aside from armour the artstyle was just fine. The campagin set pieces were incredible. Not all the armours looked like that either.

1 Like
29

The game itself is fairly old (launched back in 2012) but the graphics have kept getting better

Definitely not great I would have to check though. I will get back to you later today on that

Minimum graphics

30

TBH, I find it odd to compare games at minimal graphical settings for the fact that it’s disabled most of the graphical features.

31

Thing is, War Thunder isn’t at minimal settings, that is medium, I can even run high graphics on War Thunder with better FPS than Infinite.
And even then, it doesn’t matter if they were both minimum graphics, multiple people in this thread have said that (at those settings) they look fairly similar, so why am I only getting half the FPS on Infinite that I get on WT.
And I do believe War Thunder looks better at max settings than Infinite

32

You’re only getting half the FPS in Infinite because it’s a different engine that renders differently. It’s completely different tech doing the rendering. Two games at similarly named settings, using different engines, really aren’t all that comparable. Low in one game might do something different than low in another game. But, whatever, enjoy War Thunder I guess?

1 Like
33

Different engines doesn’t matter if one game is more demanding and you still haven’t explained why Infinite is more demanding than the War Thunder

34

Not exactly a great comparison, but as someone who has played both of those games, War Thunder has massively better graphics, and framerates, on much larger scale maps with a lot more going on than Halo Infinite does.

Slipspace is not a well optimized engine, and it shows, especially when you see the performance vs the graphics (enabling dynamic resolution causes the game to fall to essentially 720p at all times because of an engine bug, and is the only way to get even 60fps…on an RTX 3070. Native 1080p falls to 40fps.)

I can play War Thunder’s 40+ player battles in huge 4km detailed maps, with the complete max settings (movie+), at an almost completely locked 60fps at 1080p on my i5-8400+RX 580 8GB and 16GB DDR4 RAM@3200MHz.

Halo Infinite has me running at sub-20fps at basically 800x600 lowest possible settings with DRS on somehow, on an already graphically worse game.

(For those who are coming to say it’s “just me”)
Yes, I’ve tried updating drivers, yes I’ve tried reinstalling the game, yes I’ve tried reinstalling Windows, yes I’ve tried upgrading from Windows 10 to Windows 11, uninstalling the HD textures, forcing a higher value for DRS, using the MS Store version, and if you can think of something else, I’ve tried that too.

YouTube™ Video: Halo Infinite PC Performance - it’s not pretty…

Views: 42,646

Today we’re back with another extensive benchmark video, this time we take a close look at the Halo Infinite campaign. Dominic benchmarks a total of 29 GPUs, looking at Medium and Ultra settings over…

(RTX 3070/2080 Ti falling below 60fps at 1080p, Source: Kitguru)

I didn’t test the 3070 personally, that gpu specifically was tested by Digital Foundry, Hardware Unboxed, and Kitguru who all got those same results during the campaign, they all played 1080p ultra settings without DRS enabled. I know a few friends of mine who have top-end builds as well and had similar performance drops

My own findings were on the following hardware:
Build 1: i5-8400+RX 580 8GB+16GB DDR4@3200MHz

Build 2: i5-8400+GTX 1050 Ti+16GB DDR4@3200MHz (just a gpu swap)

Build 3: R9 5950x+Nvidia A4000 (RTX 3070 equivalent with 16GB VRAM)
edit: This build also had a 2070 Super for a very small amount of time but don’t have the average framerates from then, it was around 30fps average

Build 4 (Not mine, just know someone who uses it): R9 5900+RTX 3090+64GB DDR4

Build 5 (Friend of mine, same as above really): R9 5800+RTX 3070+32GB DDR4@3000MHz

All these tests were in Outpost Tremodious, Ultra 1080p
Build 1 got 18 - 27fps

Build 2 got 20 - 29fps (WTF? I don’t get this performance change from any other game other than Infinite, it’s the opposite everywhere else from my 580)

Build 3 got 35 - 52fps

Build 4 got 59 - 74fps

Build 5 got 47 - 57fps

Which seems in-line with Kitguru’s benchmarks.

That’s from the steam thread I asked the same question

35

Different engines very much do matter. The whole rendering pipeline is implemented differently in different game engines. Infinite runs differently because the Slipspace engine is rendering things in a completely different way than the Dagor engine. The things that each engine puts on CPU vs GPU is going to be different, the things and the way they store data in RAM and VRAM is going to be different, and the way they fetch data from disk is different.

Infinite is very heavy on PC, we know this (and I as a PC gamer have complained about this), but why is something we can’t see anything about by looking at how War Thunder performs. The performance delta is due to the engine used, and the fact that they render differently.

36

Never asked you to, lol

If an engine renders something so differently that a better looking game runs better, then that engine needs some love

37

Well, whether something looks better or not is generally subjective, so War Thunder being better looking will be dependent on who you ask. However, yes, Slipspace on PC needs love. It runs more poorly than it should. On a 3090 and 11700k I can’t hold 4k60 in campaign without DRS, which is silly. Even if it is Ultra settings, the graphical feature set in use is pretty normal and nothing crazy. If they don’t optimize it, their ray tracing patch is going to be laughable in terms of performance.

1 Like
38

For the art style, yes, but if someone said Infinite (graphics quality, not art style) looked better than CE, that really isn’t subjective

39

That’s all I needed to hear. It just amazes me how I can run other games with 60 FPS with middle level graphics yet I can’t even break 30 on minimum with infinite

40

“Cartoony” is an art style not necessarily graphical fidelity. Infinite’s not so much “cartoony” as it is “stylized”, kinda like Bungie’s Halo’s were, and to a lesser extent 4 and 5 when 343 dipped more into the realistic side of things.

“Graphics” has always been a very generalized term used to convey how a game looks on screen rather than focusing on the details that encompass the details that make them appear the way they are. You can make Fortnite and Minecraft look absolutely stunning graphically despite the low poly art aesthetic, and you can make Battlefield look like three day old school lunch leftovers despite the focus on photorealistic fidelity.

Bricky does a good job differentiating the two:

https://YouTube.com/watch?v=ro7U4oYAH54

1 Like