Notification

Icon
Error

123Next >»10 Pages
Halo 3 chugged, Halo Reach chugged, COD runs smooth as butter.

Why? 60fps. In the PC world it was unheard of that a shooter would run at 30fps. Why on earth has Bungie not even attempted to push the game to 60fps? It makes such a huge difference. Sometimes I wonder if they slowed the game down so much because of this....

Halo 4 must be 60fps end of story. There is no way this franchise can regain it's supremacy on top of the Xbox Live charts without this core component. It's 2011, if you can't get your game running 60fps, or at least close to it then what are you doing wrong!?!?!?!?!??

I hope to god the next gen of systems all games will run at 60fps, minimum 50fps but noting less. As for Halo 4 though... it must be pushed beyond it's mediocre frame rates that it currently employs.
COD has Yoink! graphics that's how it can run at 60frames.

Halo has always been fine with 30frames.
bac06;346234 wrote:
COD has Yoink! graphics that's how it can run at 60frames.

Halo has always been fine with 30frames.



But it hasn't... it chugs. It's awful for anyone that has played shooters on 60fps.
The splitscreen (up to 4 players) is the thing keeping it at 30 FPS. Unless 343 did some magic with the code Halo 4 will still be at 30. Of course they could get rid of splitscreen support, but that is a bit unlikely, no?
Smoothness starts at 24frames.
And like I said halo has better graphics so it can't be at 60frames
o0MrCheesy0o;346239 wrote:
The splitscreen (up to 4 players) is the thing keeping it at 30 FPS. Unless 343 did some magic with the code Halo 4 will still be at 30. Of course they could get rid of splitscreen support, but that is a bit unlikely, no?


who said it was the split screen? do you have a quote for that? I'd hack it if that were the case but i don't think it is. They could easily make split screen lower in frame rate if they needed, even if it made the graphics suffer who cares.

majority of their fan base plays on xbox live without split screen. It's time to make this game run at 60fps.
Birdy Man Bird;346241 wrote:
o0MrCheesy0o;346239 wrote:
The splitscreen (up to 4 players) is the thing keeping it at 30 FPS. Unless 343 did some magic with the code Halo 4 will still be at 30. Of course they could get rid of splitscreen support, but that is a bit unlikely, no?


who said it was the split screen? do you have a quote for that? I'd hack it if that were the case but i don't think it is. They could easily make split screen lower in frame rate if they needed, even if it made the graphics suffer who cares.

majority of their fan base plays on xbox live without split screen. It's time to make this game run at 60fps.

It was in an article long ago, before Reach was released. Look for it if you care, but I do not.

Having non-splitscreen run at 60 and splitscreen run at 30 was just something Bungie didn't want to do, I guess. Understandable, really.
bac06;346240 wrote:
Smoothness starts at 24frames.
And like I said halo has better graphics so it can't be at 60frames


It'd be hard pressed to find people that would say Halo's graphics are better than what is out there right now. I don't know what you're looking at but Halo's graphics have been dated.

Reach was a decent looking game but a lot of it gets negated by the fact that most of the maps people play on are Forge created maps. Still, Reach doesn't compare to practically any of the shooters that have been released in the last year.
Birdy Man Bird;346241 wrote:
o0MrCheesy0o;346239 wrote:
The splitscreen (up to 4 players) is the thing keeping it at 30 FPS. Unless 343 did some magic with the code Halo 4 will still be at 30. Of course they could get rid of splitscreen support, but that is a bit unlikely, no?


who said it was the split screen? do you have a quote for that? I'd hack it if that were the case but i don't think it is. They could easily make split screen lower in frame rate if they needed, even if it made the graphics suffer who cares.

majority of their fan base plays on xbox live without split screen. It's time to make this game run at 60fps.



The basic design for the next gen was to have better graphics than the xbox original.......60frames games are Yoink! graphics engines made by a lazy studio
And let's not forget that the 360 has 6 years now.
bac06;346250 wrote:
60frames games are Yoink! graphics engines made by a lazy studio

Yea, no. Id would like a word with you now.
o0MrCheesy0o;346246 wrote:
Birdy Man Bird;346241 wrote:
o0MrCheesy0o;346239 wrote:
The splitscreen (up to 4 players) is the thing keeping it at 30 FPS. Unless 343 did some magic with the code Halo 4 will still be at 30. Of course they could get rid of splitscreen support, but that is a bit unlikely, no?


who said it was the split screen? do you have a quote for that? I'd hack it if that were the case but i don't think it is. They could easily make split screen lower in frame rate if they needed, even if it made the graphics suffer who cares.

majority of their fan base plays on xbox live without split screen. It's time to make this game run at 60fps.

It was in an article long ago, before Reach was released. Look for it if you care, but I do not.

Having non-splitscreen run at 60 and splitscreen run at 30 was just something Bungie didn't want to do, I guess. Understandable, really.


Yeah well.. they're ridiculous in their stubbornness. Bungie road the wave of goodwill built from Halo C.E and Halo 2 way into Halo 3 and Halo Reach. Clearly, what we are seeing is that good will evaporating quickly.

Halo hasn't been dominating the charts since the beginning of Halo 3.

Their know it all stubbornness caught up to them.
bac06;346250 wrote:
Birdy Man Bird;346241 wrote:
o0MrCheesy0o;346239 wrote:
The splitscreen (up to 4 players) is the thing keeping it at 30 FPS. Unless 343 did some magic with the code Halo 4 will still be at 30. Of course they could get rid of splitscreen support, but that is a bit unlikely, no?


who said it was the split screen? do you have a quote for that? I'd hack it if that were the case but i don't think it is. They could easily make split screen lower in frame rate if they needed, even if it made the graphics suffer who cares.

majority of their fan base plays on xbox live without split screen. It's time to make this game run at 60fps.



The basic design for the next gen was to have better graphics than the xbox original.......60frames games are Yoink! graphics engines made by a lazy studio
And let's not forget that the 360 has 6 years now.


Huh?

ok, you don't know what you're talking about so i will not engage in further conversation with you.
60 FPS is a want, not a "must" or a "need" for Halo 4.

Halo has done well enough so far at 30 FPS. Battlefield runs beautifully at 30 FPS.

If you want Halo to run at 60 FPS, then something must be taken from it for that to be done.
I'm not a code-writer or video game programmer for a multi-million dollar franchise (and nobody in this thread sounds like one), but I'll just leave some common-sense here:

While designing Halo, Bungie always put an emphasis on detail-rich environments and stunning visuals, hence the need to free-up RAM by making their game run at 30 fps. Don't you think, if it were humanly possible on 6 year-old technogy, that they would have made their game run as fast as possible while still being able to maintain said visuals that they would have? Having a lot of rich details needs to draw memory from some place (it would seem to me that having such detail is inversely propotional to frames per second--extremely complex explosions=lower frame rates needed: watch some of Reachs we docs where they give LECTURES to university students on how to program such things. If they're being paid to do it, they're probably good at it).

Anyone who says CODs graphics (I'm talking graphics: motion-captured enemies and PCs, environment, textures, explosions, etc., not the speed or smoothness awkward figures run around at) is high. Detractors of Halo running at 30 fps while maintaining stunning visuals and environments seem to think Halo's creators did this on purpose.

There's a reason they did it--Xbox 360 doesn't perform the way they want in order to maintain the quality of visuals. They aren't lazy. They werent rushed into making the game. They are infinitely smarter with computers than you, because they made millions off these games. Stop complaing Stop trying to play programmer and go rot your brain out on some more Xbox. If you hate the framerate Halo runs at, I dare you to do better.

/thread
CuRRRR;346323 wrote:
I'm not a code-writer or video game programmer for a multi-million dollar franchise (and nobody in this thread sounds like one), but I'll just leave some common-sense here:

While designing Halo, Bungie always put an emphasis on detail-rich environments and stunning visuals, hence the need to free-up RAM by making their game run at 30 fps. Don't you think, if it were humanly possible on 6 year-old technogy, that they would have made their game run as fast as possible while still being able to maintain said visuals that they would have? Having a lot of rich details needs to draw memory from some place (it would seem to me that having such detail is inversely propotional to frames per second--extremely complex explosions=lower frame rates needed: watch some of Reachs we docs where they give LECTURES to university students on how to program such things. If they're being paid to do it, they're probably good at it).

Anyone who says CODs graphics (I'm talking graphics: motion-captured enemies and PCs, environment, textures, explosions, etc., not the speed or smoothness awkward figures run around at) is high. Detractors of Halo running at 30 fps while maintaining stunning visuals and environments seem to think Halo's creators did this on purpose.

There's a reason they did it--Xbox 360 doesn't perform the way they want in order to maintain the quality of visuals. They aren't lazy. They werent rushed into making the game. They are infinitely smarter with computers than you, because they made millions off these games. Stop complaing Stop trying to play programmer and go rot your brain out on some more Xbox. If you hate the framerate Halo runs at, I dare you to do better.

/thread


This.

Halo <> CoD, it's much more
CuRRRR;346323 wrote:
I'm not a code-writer or video game programmer for a multi-million dollar franchise (and nobody in this thread sounds like one), but I'll just leave some common-sense here:

While designing Halo, Bungie always put an emphasis on detail-rich environments and stunning visuals, hence the need to free-up RAM by making their game run at 30 fps. Don't you think, if it were humanly possible on 6 year-old technogy, that they would have made their game run as fast as possible while still being able to maintain said visuals that they would have? Having a lot of rich details needs to draw memory from some place (it would seem to me that having such detail is inversely propotional to frames per second--extremely complex explosions=lower frame rates needed: watch some of Reachs we docs where they give LECTURES to university students on how to program such things. If they're being paid to do it, they're probably good at it).

Anyone who says CODs graphics (I'm talking graphics: motion-captured enemies and PCs, environment, textures, explosions, etc., not the speed or smoothness awkward figures run around at) is high. Detractors of Halo running at 30 fps while maintaining stunning visuals and environments seem to think Halo's creators did this on purpose.

There's a reason they did it--Xbox 360 doesn't perform the way they want in order to maintain the quality of visuals. They aren't lazy. They werent rushed into making the game. They are infinitely smarter with computers than you, because they made millions off these games. Stop complaing Stop trying to play programmer and go rot your brain out on some more Xbox. If you hate the framerate Halo runs at, I dare you to do better.

/thread


All of this gets negated by the fact that a majority of the things they spent so much time making look good are negligible to the actual gameplay. They spend so much time making the skies look good even though 90% of the time you're playing in that same day light blue sky.

Halo looks like a toy compared to some of these new shooters. I'm not saying they should have gone all grey and grainy but Yoink! at least make the game look next gen... it looks dated.

60fps is a must. The silky smooth feeling you get from 60fps can not be matched in a 30fps game. Ya just can't.

Outside the Halo hardcore fan base a majority of gamers regard Halo's graphics as subpar. You need to understand this, get out of the bubble, get outside the walls, and open your eyes.

Things need to change and one of those is going from 30fps to 60fps.

I've played CoD and its "legendary" 60 fps gameplay, and honestly, I hardly notice a difference between it and Halo 3. Halo and Battlefield play great on 30 fps.

60 fps isn't that big a deal to me, and I hate CoD so much that I could hardly care about its 60 fps madness. It's soo smooth that I used to lag every damn game I played on MW2 and I'm not even bothering with MW3.
I don't think i know of any games that run at 60 fps as well as having 720p (correct me if i'm wrong). Perhaps whenever a new console comes out we'll see some incredible improvements. Hopefully :P
Wait until next gen consoles come out...
30 frames is fine with me, it's the reason has the look it does to many frames messes with some of the graphics.
123Next >»10 Pages