-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Halo 4 looks technically impressive for a late-gen Xbox 360 game.
- Thread starter Protoman200X
- Start date
Yeah, it was definitely an impression I held about the game at the time it released -- just in absolute awe at how good it looked.
OP
OP
I agree with the redesign of the Pelican, but I'm one of those idiots who missed the Starship Trooper's design for the Marines in Halo: Combat Evolved before going "21st Cenutry Military in Space" for later instalments. I can't agree with the more muted colour pallet being a negative, however. (Though that's more of a personal preference.)
I think my biggest issue with the Marines was just that they were an uglier version of this:
Which kinda describes Halo 4 as a whole. It tries to so hard to be anything but a Halo game. Which is quite frustrating, haha. Game is technically fantastic but it could have fit the 10+ year already established Halo aesthetic so much better if they had bothered to even try.
OP
OP
I think my biggest issue with the Marines was just that they were an uglier version of this:
Which kinda describes Halo 4 as a whole. It tries to so hard to be anything but a Halo game. Which is quite frustrating, haha. Game is technically fantastic but it could have fit the 10+ year already established Halo aesthetic so much better if they had bothered to even try.
If it helps, it seems they've taken your (and what seems to be a common) criticism to heart and basically taken a similar approach with how they handled Halo 2: Anniversary with Infinite's art direction. Chief's armour in particular looks like his stocky self from Combat Evolved, but has some of the H2/H3 flair thrown in. Game's colour pallet also looks much more vibrant (from the teaser and the promotional poster), so here's hoping they can find a happy medium with taking the established aesthetics from Bungie's games and going from there.
I still don't understand why people think Forza Horizon 2 is something special on Xbox 360. Compared with other open world racers on the platform it's rough. Sumo Digital did the best they could and It's perfectly functional, so in that respect it's commendable but emulating the scope of the Xbox One version with an ill-fitting engine and hardware did not do it any favours when it comes to graphics. Forza Horizon 1, where the technical limits are better understood, is a more impressive late generation Xbox 360 open world racer I think.
Love the art style in this game and the changes to the different factions. Halo 4 did a great job of showing how things had changed over time in that universe and that humanity hadn't been standing still as reflected in the new armour and ship designs.
343 pulled off some visuals that I didn't think would be possible on the Xbox 360, even though my time with Halo 4 was short (Did not like MP). I absolutely enjoyed my time with the campaign and the visuals. Probably one of the top 3 best looking games that gen.
Halo 4 was proof that 343i wouldn't have trouble being competitive in presentation among other first party games. It really did bring back feelings of playing Ninja Gaiden for the original Xbox where back then (granted, I was real young), but back then it felt like I was playing a CGI cutscene.
I am pumped to see the enhanced version on PC later this year. Going to look good with those lods pushed way out and the frame rate unlocked
That and 343i's art style was too visually busy compared to the cleaner and simpler visuals of the Bungie games.
Last edited:
Definitely beautiful and pulled off some impressive visual tricks for a console long in the tooth, but it was boring as fuck. Didn't expect to bounce off it as hard as I did. I used to be wayyyyy into Halo.
As others said, I didn't really care for some of the new character designs. Including the Chief. But that's a preference thing.
As others said, I didn't really care for some of the new character designs. Including the Chief. But that's a preference thing.
It definitely is one of the best looking games of the 360 era, but its fidelity came at a cost, as others have mentioned. Environments generally felt more restrictive than in prior games, and the game very aggressively culled dropped weapons from memory, which led to many complaints about a lack of abundance in ammo. Even graphically, it still had some aspects that were lacking compared to Reach - water was worse, texture quality was worse, there was no ambient occlusion, there was a stark lack of dynamic lights (which were used very heavily in Halo 3/Reach) and particles were very lacking compared to prior games. It was still undoubtedly a looker, but the sacrifices were clear.
I loved the visual leap but as I played through the campaign I lamented the loss of details and features of the sandbox.
The Halo games overall have aged really well, even with the old graphics.
Technically impressive I guess, but
So I didn't really like what I was seeing except fir the odd landcape here and there
So I didn't really like what I was seeing except fir the odd landcape here and there
Better than late cross gen games like FH2 and Rise of the Tomb Raider?
This game hass always been a stunner, and still looks incredible at 4k60 on Xbox One X. It blew me away back on release, it was awesome to see Halo finally recieved art and tech at the top of the industry again. I'm also one of the people who loved the art style, it was like a next-gen Doom 3 x Halo.
The game overall just had a crazy amount of quality content too. The campaign was quite good, there were quite a few cool MP maps and it played quite good after they patched it, and it was nuts how many levels were eventually released for Spartan Ops, even if that mode didn't grab me in the same way Firefight did.
To be honest, Halo 5 also looks pretty incredible for an X1 game, especially considering it often runs close to 1080p 60fps. Dynamic resolution was perfect for it, since it allowed them to finally have huge scale battles and environments closer to Halo 1 as well, while still being a big leap over Halo 4.
The game overall just had a crazy amount of quality content too. The campaign was quite good, there were quite a few cool MP maps and it played quite good after they patched it, and it was nuts how many levels were eventually released for Spartan Ops, even if that mode didn't grab me in the same way Firefight did.
To be honest, Halo 5 also looks pretty incredible for an X1 game, especially considering it often runs close to 1080p 60fps. Dynamic resolution was perfect for it, since it allowed them to finally have huge scale battles and environments closer to Halo 1 as well, while still being a big leap over Halo 4.
Couldn't agree more. That's why Halo 5's graphics were disappointing on xbox one. Halo 4 looked next gen on the 360 and it was way ahead of any other last gen game. I would argue that it was the best looking game to come out on last gen consoles.
mostly in agreement but can't hate too much on H5 due to 60fps
Definitely not true. I could buy saying this about 3->4, but Halo Reach has a lot of the same draw distance/LoD issues.
Will definitely play the Halo series before Infinite launch. Halo 4 looks great from these screens. Also hope 343 can knock it out of the park with the next Halo game. It seems people were still quite happy with 4 even if 5 wasn't all that great. If Infinite captures that sandbox feeling, it could really be a special game.
The game truely is a visual marvel, and together with a few other games, one of the top 5 lookers of last gen. I cant wait to experience this in 4k/60 once its released on PC.
Also, not to take a dump on H5, which looks good as well, but Halo 4 looked so good that the jump from H4 to H5 was not that great.
Also, not to take a dump on H5, which looks good as well, but Halo 4 looked so good that the jump from H4 to H5 was not that great.
I think it's really cool to see what the 360 was capable of, but I don't feel the cost was worth it. Levels were very linear, enemies and weapons despawned quickly, textures didn't always stream in right, draw distances wasn't as high, AI was really really bad....
I really wish I could agree with your point, and I do in general. But...worse versions of that? How can anything look worse than that? That is already the worst version of that. That looks so dorky and awkward. Fuckin bazillion double chins ass.
I think my biggest issue with the Marines was just that they were an uglier version of this:
Which kinda describes Halo 4 as a whole. It tries to so hard to be anything but a Halo game. Which is quite frustrating, haha. Game is technically fantastic but it could have fit the 10+ year already established Halo aesthetic so much better if they had bothered to even try.
I really wish I could agree with your point, and I do in general. But...worse versions of that? How can anything look worse than that? That is already the worst version of that. That looks so dorky and awkward. Fuckin bazillion double chins ass.
Yeah, the jump from Halo 3 to 4 was nothing short but a generational leap, but still happened on the same console.
It was an incredible feat.
Playing Halo 4 today in 4K/60/HDR with the MCC on Xbox One X also makes it on par, if not surpass many times, what they did with Halo 5.
It was an incredible feat.
Playing Halo 4 today in 4K/60/HDR with the MCC on Xbox One X also makes it on par, if not surpass many times, what they did with Halo 5.
Yeah and Reach's water was worse than 3's. 3 actually had water tessellation or whatever it's called. I don't think Reach's did. Not as dynamic anyway. I could be wrong though.
Viva Pinata weirdly did the same thing. The first game had really beautiful water that responded to objects moving through it, and then TiP was much less dynamic. I really don't understand why given it's not like there was any big difference in graphical fidelity.
Iirc, the music is way quieter, and they physically couldn't make it louder.
Which probably explains why I listened to the soundtrack and was like, huh some of these are pretty good...I don't remember them at all from when I played.
I really liked the art style but not the aggressive change to MC armor. If they had kept it as it was in H3 and changed it midtime during campaign I would have really appreciated it more.
Halo 4 on MCC on original xbox one hardware looks straight up better than Halo 5 because of the increased IQ
Imagine hopping in a time machine and showing people Halo 4 back at the Xbox 360 launch in 2005. Same goes with GTA5, Rise of the Tomb Raider and Forza Horizon 2.
This is the same generation:
mmmm except Perfect Dark didnt launch looking like that. Its arguably still one of the best looking launch games on the system
I adored Halo 4, graphically stunning and the story was the exact thing it needed to be after how grandiose the previous trilogy tried to be. Also, the music had some stellar moments. This track is fantastic.
Imagine hopping in a time machine and showing people Halo 4 back at the Xbox 360 launch in 2005. Same goes with GTA5, Rise of the Tomb Raider and Forza Horizon 2.
This is the same generation:
This looks good technically but i don't like how master chief now looks like a Gundam.
Yep, it was the first halo game that i had played. I understood what all the hype was about after this game. one of my favorite games of all time. Art direction was great for its time
Halo 4 uses loads of dynamic lights, far more than Halo 3 does, it's just that they're generally small point lights with no specular reflections. Halo 3 is effective at using lights to highlight key gameplay events, and the lights look quite nice, but there really aren't very many of them.
Reach is sort of in-between. There are loads of lights, and unlike Halo 4, it still uses spotlights for things like vehicle headlights and the "flashlight" component of the night vision. But there are many lights that had specular reflections in Halo 3, that lack them in Reach.
Reach's water mostly supports similar graphical features to Halo 3's, including the dynamic tessellation with waves that respond to gameplay interaction. But whereas Halo 3's on-map water is very high-quality basically everywhere, patches of water in Reach vary in what graphical features and interactivity are enabled. So water in Halo 3 is more consistently vibrant and expressive, but Reach can get away with using on-map water considerably more often throughout its campaign.
Actually, Halo 4 also has on-map water that geometrically reacts to gameplay phenomenon. It's used sparingly, though, and in some cases is very low-quality; drive a warthog around in the water pool in the first combat area on Requiem, it looks pretty funny.
