The grunts look good.
If you're expecting the RT patch to replace a substantial portion of the renderer you may be disappointed.
Console warriors never cease to amaze.
Speaking of the pillars, it not the pillars that's problem. It's foliage and mountain formations around the pillars that look bad imo.
It's very clearly missing really basic effects and graphic options.
What's with the white haze all over the original screenshot? Is it a color space problem?Can they go from this to the one on the right in 4 months?
I believe they can do it and it will look much better.
This logic would work if we weren't shown Hellblade 2.
I'm tackling the "most powerful console" part.
We have no idea how long until any campaign expansion would come out, and definitely don't know how long any campaign expansion might be. It could be smaller ODST-style chunks for all we know.
They wore breathing apparatus' in all games until 343 takes over. It's not that I hate the design in Halo 4 but it was always a weird decision to me. It's the same thing with the Jerry cans attached to the back of Warthogs. Whyyyy are those there? Has anyone from 343 ever answered that question?
How can you not see Infinite's design influence?
Good catch, yeah, it looks like the types of missions.I posted in the OT but not here, has anyone talked about this?
so I was watching the trailer again on my phone and I noticed the map screen flickers, I went frame by frame on my computer and snapped this screenshot
OKRO VAGADUUN is an assassination mission, that seems cool
ECHO & GOLF BASE, maybe safe spots to reload ammo and stuff?
MARINE RESCUE K, oh yeah baby give me that filler open world side stuff
THE TOWER, is locked. Indicative of the backtracking they talked about?
I think the ''Towers'' are going to be the bases, they will be dominated by enemies and then become safe spots after you clean the area.
Happy to see some discussion on the actual game changes. On Unlocked, Miranda mentioned the broken sections of the map are areas that will slowly reconnect based on your progress, they may act as indicators of opportunities for upgrades and rewards. Perhaps you will reset dislodged sections back to its original self? Sounds brilliant to me.I posted in the OT but not here, has anyone talked about this?
so I was watching the trailer again on my phone and I noticed the map screen flickers, I went frame by frame on my computer and snapped this screenshot
OKRO VAGADUUN is an assassination mission, that seems cool
ECHO & GOLF BASE, maybe safe spots to reload ammo and stuff?
MARINE RESCUE K, oh yeah baby give me that filler open world side stuff
THE TOWER, is locked. Indicative of the backtracking they talked about?
Gaps I see in this line of thought:
yeh, its not fair to compare, but during the warthog section, everything looks so lifeless on the warthog, the gun turret is just locked in place, the gas cans too, ND wouldve animated the turret to wobble along with the ammo clip and have the cans wiggle a bit, its small details that add up.
I posted in the OT but not here, has anyone talked about this?
so I was watching the trailer again on my phone and I noticed the map screen flickers, I went frame by frame on my computer and snapped this screenshot
OKRO VAGADUUN is an assassination mission, that seems cool
ECHO & GOLF BASE, maybe safe spots to reload ammo and stuff?
MARINE RESCUE K, oh yeah baby give me that filler open world side stuff
THE TOWER, is locked. Indicative of the backtracking they talked about?
Seeing 'The Tower' and 'Conservatory' give me hope that the game still has enclosed linear story missions. That's what I'm hoping for; a nice open world that isn't too littered with bullshit (a-la AC...) with branching linear campaign missions that are more focused with great level design!
People really need to stop. Halo has never been a game series that defined the Xbox hardware because of it's cutting edge graphics.
With the exception of Halo 4 and possibly Reach, while Halo has never been a bad looking game, they never had the ebst visuals on their respective hardware. Halo 1 had a clean and simplistic art style with great use of colour, but it was not the best looking game. Even Halo 2 had issues with some unfinisged texture work in some levels and really bad graphic pop-in.
Halo 3's saving grace was it's lighting system, but it was massively criticized online for being cartoony and not gritty/realistic enough. That was the Gears of War effect.
Bungie even took shortcuts by using matte paintings in cinematics instead of rendering physical objects.
Halo Reach sacrificed alot of colour in order to acheive it's visuals and it's lighting at times is even less advanced than what was in Halo 3. With Halo 4 alot was sacrificed to get it to look as graphic ally impressive as it does. Environment textures look rough in areas, levels are more linear, lighting took a hit, AI was downgraded, weapons despawn faster, lighting was even more downgraded, ect.
Halo 5 looks pretty much the same as Halo 4, it doesn't have any noticable graphical improvements other than resolution, even then splitscreen, blood splatters and even lighting was downgraded from the Beta in order to achieve a solid 60fps.
Halo has enevr had the most cutting edge graphics, or atleast not without sacrifices. But what it did well by taking advantage of Xbox hardware was in regards to it's implementation of AI, level design, weapon sandbox, game options, audio, ect. Halo Infinite's graphics will improve from here. I'm not expecting the best graphics in the industry, but it's already looking great especially with what 343i are trying to achieve with the campaign and giving fans what they want especially in regards to splitscreen and couch co-op. Alot of the comparisons to other games just don't work as they either don't offer what Halo does or they are more scripted. If graphics are such an important factor, then why do games with less impressive visuals like Minecraft and Fortnite command such a wide audience?
People really need to stop. Halo has never been a game series that defined the Xbox hardware because of it's cutting edge graphics.
With the exception of Halo 4 and possibly Reach, while Halo has never been a bad looking game, they never had the ebst visuals on their respective hardware. Halo 1 had a clean and simplistic art style with great use of colour, but it was not the best looking game. Even Halo 2 had issues with some unfinisged texture work in some levels and really bad graphic pop-in.
Halo 3's saving grace was it's lighting system, but it was massively criticized online for being cartoony and not gritty/realistic enough. That was the Gears of War effect.
Bungie even took shortcuts by using matte paintings in cinematics instead of rendering physical objects.
Halo Reach sacrificed alot of colour in order to acheive it's visuals and it's lighting at times is even less advanced than what was in Halo 3. With Halo 4 alot was sacrificed to get it to look as graphic ally impressive as it does. Environment textures look rough in areas, levels are more linear, lighting took a hit, AI was downgraded, weapons despawn faster, lighting was even more downgraded, ect.
Halo 5 looks pretty much the same as Halo 4, it doesn't have any noticable graphical improvements other than resolution, even then splitscreen, blood splatters and even lighting was downgraded from the Beta in order to achieve a solid 60fps.
Halo has enevr had the most cutting edge graphics, or atleast not without sacrifices. But what it did well by taking advantage of Xbox hardware was in regards to it's implementation of AI, level design, weapon sandbox, game options, audio, ect. Halo Infinite's graphics will improve from here. I'm not expecting the best graphics in the industry, but it's already looking great especially with what 343i are trying to achieve with the campaign and giving fans what they want especially in regards to splitscreen and couch co-op. Alot of the comparisons to other games just don't work as they either don't offer what Halo does or they are more scripted. If graphics are such an important factor, then why do games with less impressive visuals like Minecraft and Fortnite command such a wide audience?
If this type of stuff is still there in 2-4 months then you are free to worry.
They have 2-4 months, are looking to launch across ~5 platforms (PC, Series X, Series S, X1, X1X), and are in the middle of an epidemic. I'm salivating at the gameplay they showed yesterday, but I'm absolutely free to start worrying right now given the pressures and how time poor 343i are.
I agree and disagree, indeed Halo was never (only) about the visuals, but the hype, this time, was made on top of that.
If this were a normal year yes.
People really need to stop. Halo has never been a game series that defined the Xbox hardware because of it's cutting edge graphics.
With the exception of Halo 4 and possibly Reach, while Halo has never been a bad looking game, they never had the ebst visuals on their respective hardware. Halo 1 had a clean and simplistic art style with great use of colour, but it was not the best looking game. Even Halo 2 had issues with some unfinisged texture work in some levels and really bad graphic pop-in.
Halo 3's saving grace was it's lighting system, but it was massively criticized online for being cartoony and not gritty/realistic enough. That was the Gears of War effect.
Bungie even took shortcuts by using matte paintings in cinematics instead of rendering physical objects.
Halo Reach sacrificed alot of colour in order to acheive it's visuals and it's lighting at times is even less advanced than what was in Halo 3. With Halo 4 alot was sacrificed to get it to look as graphic ally impressive as it does. Environment textures look rough in areas, levels are more linear, lighting took a hit, AI was downgraded, weapons despawn faster, lighting was even more downgraded, ect.
Halo 5 looks pretty much the same as Halo 4, it doesn't have any noticable graphical improvements other than resolution, even then splitscreen, blood splatters and even lighting was downgraded from the Beta in order to achieve a solid 60fps.
Halo has enevr had the most cutting edge graphics, or atleast not without sacrifices. But what it did well by taking advantage of Xbox hardware was in regards to it's implementation of AI, level design, weapon sandbox, game options, audio, ect. Halo Infinite's graphics will improve from here. I'm not expecting the best graphics in the industry, but it's already looking great especially with what 343i are trying to achieve with the campaign and giving fans what they want especially in regards to splitscreen and couch co-op. Alot of the comparisons to other games just don't work as they either don't offer what Halo does or they are more scripted. If graphics are such an important factor, then why do games with less impressive visuals like Minecraft and Fortnite command such a wide audience?
People really need to stop. Halo has never been a game series that defined the Xbox hardware because of it's cutting edge graphics.
With the exception of Halo 4 and possibly Reach, while Halo has never been a bad looking game, they never had the ebst visuals on their respective hardware. Halo 1 had a clean and simplistic art style with great use of colour, but it was not the best looking game. Even Halo 2 had issues with some unfinisged texture work in some levels and really bad graphic pop-in.
Halo 3's saving grace was it's lighting system, but it was massively criticized online for being cartoony and not gritty/realistic enough. That was the Gears of War effect.
Bungie even took shortcuts by using matte paintings in cinematics instead of rendering physical objects.
Halo Reach sacrificed alot of colour in order to acheive it's visuals and it's lighting at times is even less advanced than what was in Halo 3. With Halo 4 alot was sacrificed to get it to look as graphic ally impressive as it does. Environment textures look rough in areas, levels are more linear, lighting took a hit, AI was downgraded, weapons despawn faster, lighting was even more downgraded, ect.
Halo 5 looks pretty much the same as Halo 4, it doesn't have any noticable graphical improvements other than resolution, even then splitscreen, blood splatters and even lighting was downgraded from the Beta in order to achieve a solid 60fps.
Halo has enevr had the most cutting edge graphics, or atleast not without sacrifices. But what it did well by taking advantage of Xbox hardware was in regards to it's implementation of AI, level design, weapon sandbox, game options, audio, ect. Halo Infinite's graphics will improve from here. I'm not expecting the best graphics in the industry, but it's already looking great especially with what 343i are trying to achieve with the campaign and giving fans what they want especially in regards to splitscreen and couch co-op. Alot of the comparisons to other games just don't work as they either don't offer what Halo does or they are more scripted. If graphics are such an important factor, then why do games with less impressive visuals like Minecraft and Fortnite command such a wide audience?
