How Halo: Reach Graphics Are Real-Time (And Borrow from Killzone 2)
Filed under: Game Reviews and Opinion 69 ResponsesBy Ravi Sinha
If you haven’t seen the world premiere of Halo: Reach at the Spike TV Video Game Awards 2009, then, well, it doesn’t make much difference. It wasn’t the lackluster “That’s it?” of the E3 2K9 reveal but it wasn’t the awesome testosterone fest of Halo 2’s (ultimately watered down) New Mombasa gameplay reveal at E3 2003. That said, Halo: Reach looks far better than any Halo to date. Queries have been arising as to whether the game is running on a new engine or not, but we can confirm one thing: Yes, Reach is running in real time.
Well, at least after the 0:34 mark in the premiere trailer. Sorry fans but those parts, featuring a Warthog drive through a morose atmosphere with Pelicans overhead, are decidedly not real time. Kudos to Bungie for preparing a good transition to the actual graphics but it’s still noticeable. Many factors, as noticed in the high definition trailer, can be observed.
The character models all have a level of shading, almost shadow-like, which could be argued to offset the lack of proper shadows. It’s hard to believe, but Reach actually uses a lighting system seen in Guerrilla Games’ Killzone 2 for the Playstation 3.
Though ably melding hard light and soft light together, KZ 2’s lighting system had a flaw. Realistic lighting dictates that even if the light in front of you cannot be seen, the light itself is still somewhat visible when you’re looking away from it. Imagine a dark room with a single lit computer screen. If you turn away from the screen, you would still see the light from the screen on other objects. Killzone 2 and now Halo: Reach do not have that.
This could be a major reason why the models in Reach are more detailed than previous games in the franchise. Shadows take up a considerable amount of graphical processing, and by using this little “cheat” to a greater degree (since the 360 hardware is more limited), it’s possible to showcase greater detailed texture models and a good looking, though by no means perfectly realistic, lighting system.
The PS3 and Xbox 360 both have a common limiting factor in their texture quality, but being less powerful, it’s more noticeable on the 360 in one particular area: Environment, particularly ground, textures. The ground textures have a slightly blurred characteristic to them, not looking totally sharp, but still of acceptable quality and a huge-step up from previous Halo’s mundaneness.
Stay tuned for some more analysis on the latest premiere trailer. Who knew one piece of footage could showcase so much? Keep in mind however that the game is still a year off from release, and we’re yet to see any battles on the scale of franchise predecessors.
(Images courtesy of Burn360)
69 Responses to “How Halo: Reach Graphics Are Real-Time (And Borrow from Killzone 2)”
sorry
the entire trailer was CGI. stupid indians look at the grass at the beginning of the video. Bungie doesnt have the talent to do that ingame. had they been really talented then ODST and HALO 3 wouldnt have looked and played like dogshit. stcik to snake charming shit faces not video gaming
@larrty:
Funny. We noted that the portions before the 0:34 mark are not in-game. Yet apparently you’re even less literate than us “shit-faces” and couldn’t notice.
Also, if you’re gonna be racist, we expect some slurs on us being no-good, lazy, BPO-building, US-aping beggars. But I guess that’s beyond the extent of your 6th grade education.
OK wait wait, so Killzone 2 comes out and I don’t read one article from you on how they “cheated” with the graphics to make them look better. All we here from the media and fanboys is that Killzone has the best graphics ever, and it can only be done on ps3.
Fast forward to Reach, a game on 360 that has clearly matched and possibly surpassed the graphics that “could only be done on ps3″ and what do we get from the media, oh they were just cheated with KZ2 graphics, and the 360 is only able to do it too because they are copying the ps3 and cheating as well. WOW nice try, but like yoda said “see through you we can” LOL!
Oh sorry, my point is, if you didn’t write an article about GG cheating with in graphics before or after KZ2 launched, don’t write one about Bungie cheating, because that is the very definition of biased.
Discard all this if you actually did write one on KZ2 graphical cheats at some point and i failed to find it
Good analysis split-screen. Don’t be dissuaded by the haters. You guys run a well put together site. I’m pretty impressed by the trailer myself, graphical tricks or not :-p Consoles in general are underpowered compared to most gaming PC’s so I suppose we should all get used to these kinds of techniques. Regardless of whether the console generation extends another year or years, games will continue to look better. Definitely a good thing. In relation to Halo Reach, I would be impressed if the frame rate was 60 fps…alas, its probably is locked at 30.
but by the time REACH comes out pPS3 will have blown it away as well. xbox360 might be able to compare to say killzone2 what 2 years later,n but nothing now.
Actually, the entire cinematic was using the in-game engine and was done real time. Bungie has confirmed this.
other pages did reports about how GG did this “cheat” with KZ2 and just because they didn’t report it here it doesn’t make them fanboys.
this article isn’t even insulting towards Halo, it’s getting compared to one of the best graphical games on the PS3.
people that get there 360 ego offended by this article are the true fanboys, just enjoy the game, it looks way better than the last 2. XD
I thought the video looked amazing. But obviously I wanted more. Gameplay is what makes Halo better than all, so with out gameplay footage… I was disappointed. AND for LARRTY – you are a dink you said Bungie doesnt have the talent to do that ingame. You’re a dink. Honestly have you ever played any on the Halo games, probably not so go play Little Big Planet with your little sister and say hi to your mom for me.
Anyone that seriously thinks any of that is close to Killzone 2 in graphics quality seriously has to get their eyes checked.
Darkie, are your parents brother and sister? Killzone 2 has ALREADY been surpassed by Uncharted 2. That’s the difference you silly spastic, your 360 no – graphics games can only compete with a game that came out 18 months after them, while PS3 is constantly moving forwards. Halo: Reach looks outdated already.
wtf!? “Sorry fans but those parts, featuring a Warthog drive through a morose atmosphere with Pelicans overhead, are decidedly not real time.”
that was the best looking part of the whole trailer and it didn’t even look that good, uncharted 2 has better graphics than that part… im kinda dissapointed
David you make no sense, the 360 and PS3 are not living beings, they are dumbed down computers, they either can or cannot do certain things, WHEN, they do them is irrelevant.
People like you claimed 360 could NEVER do Killzone like graphics, well Killzone has now been surpassed on 360, as always you were wrong. You have no credibility, the fact is PS3 is no more powerful than 360, just different. Anyone who believes otherwise is just swallowing Sony marketing rhetoric.
Hey Darkie… it doesn’t take much to make a top notch presentation trailer when there isn’t any action going on screen. You could make a CGI -level graphics game if all you had were two people walking around. This demonstrates hi-poly charcs that already exist at this level of detail on most games. It doesn’t mean ANYTHING.
hahahaha this is big lie 2009 ,the graphics downgrade,but im take this shit ,calm bungie ,not one greaty job but the fan accept
@Darkie, Bungie has a lot of hard work to Reach surpass Killzone 2 in graphics terms.
The Reach footpage’s still below Killzone 2.
Anyway I’d better wait the game out.
what hapen man,this graphics is ps2
why did you made an article about this?
for fark sake!???
Bungie already said the trailer is all in-game!
and Larry STFU!
I am sorry but whoever says the graphics from this video are as good as killzone 2 they need their eyes checked. THey are better then halo 3 for sure but they aren’t the huge leap that people are saying it is. I am still gonna play it to death but I am not going to delude myself by saying the graphics are the greatest.
Anyone saying that thinks from this trailer that Halo:Reach is better than Killzone 2 deserves to be shot.
In-engine and in game are completely different things, and until you’re playing on a retail console, you need to STFU.
Developers like to use little tricks to get better graphics performance, wait till you’re watching that on your own TV with the game you bought with two wraiths, 30 enemies and a a scorpion on the screen and you can talk, but anyone else who’s already comparing them just needs to grow up.
LOSERS passing judgement on a game that isn’t even close to being released. “My ps3 is sooo much better….” or “KZ2 and U2 looks sooo much better…..” blah blah blah. Annoying shithead fanboy rhetoric. Why can’t you little twats ever shut your whiny prepubescent mouths for more than one game release at a time?
wow… graphics are nice but are by no means a deciding factor.. gameplay is what matters.. last generation i stuck with ps2 because the system had better games even though the xbox had better graphics.. this generation the 360 offers a more complete package (games, live, xbla) than does the ps3 even though ps3 has better graphics.. i enjoy the 360 experience better this generation due to a number of factors.. my ps3 has some good 1st party exclusives, but having said that i clock more time on my 360 primarily due to the better online experience and games made for both systems still tend to be better on 360. In addition my #1 game for next year is mass effect 2, with god of war III a close second and halo reach probably third.
This is embarrassing journalism. Like most trailers shown last night, the Reach trailer was all CGI. Now Halo fans are welcome to fantasize on the game having great graphics if you like… but you only give the PS3 fanboys ammunition when the ACTUAL gameplay is shown.
Hopefully we’ll see something around GDC… definitely by E3. But none of that was in-engine… we’ve been around long enough to know how developer marketing works.
Exactly Daithi.
There are two different types of in-game.
Like Uncharted 2, the models face close up to Drake looks so damn cool, but in gameplay you don’t see the exact same crazy lightening effects
This Halo Reach video is just a cutscene running on the game engine. That doesn’t mean the actual in-gameplay will load the wide scale map like you see in the trailer.
It’s exactly the same with Racism/Resident Evil 5. Look at those official pictures, see how dark and realistic the game looks. And compare it to the final product and it doesn’t even compare to those HD screen shots.
these graphics at least to me look only a little better than halo3 not much improvement in the graphics area. i was disappointed but im guessing its from all the hype surrounding the games graphics. and for people who say this looks better than kz2 ty i just fell on the floor lmao. anyways why do people care so much about graphics halo will still kick ass. i honestly dont think there are any bad looking games this gen coming from ps2 to this gen.
larrty = MORNIC IDIOT!
This site needs to stop it’s fanboyism, FACT the GPU in the 360 is more powerful!
Just look at the PSturd supporting pages such as this, complete garbage and it is a shame I won’t get back the 2 min’s I wasted here, won’t make that mistake again!
Uh, I don’t know how you came to the conclusion that before :34 was not real-time. The whole cinematic was in real time. Bungie has publicly announced this. Its not like they are just blatantly lying.
I don’t know about the rest of you but I am more concerned about game play than graphics. To me as long as the frame rate doesn’t lag during the glorious parts, I am happy. For example if you have a lady with a sexy face and a tight body, but is a freaking bitch, I don’t want nothing to do with her. Now if you have a girl that is a 8/10 face and a somewhat tight body but is awesome to be with….. I am sure you get the picture.
Quite frankly, some of the stupidest Sony fanboy drivel I’ve ever read, and the stupid bastard who wrote this has no clue what the hell he’s talking about. Please, someone kick him in the nuts.
And please spare me the Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 nonsense. There is absolutely nothing great about those games on a technical level. They are so linear that they’re practically on rails, and damn near everything in them is scripted. Not to mention they’re incredibly small scale.
Halo is doing far more than either of those games, with a much bigger scale, much bigger battles, and nowhere near as linear and scripted. Not to mention far greater draw distance and better AI to boot.
Sorry but this is really the most stupidest ps3 fanboy argument ever made. Maybe if you actually knew your information on CG and real-time rendering, could you have made a valid argument. Killzone 2’s lighting systems are completely done by illuminate labs. See here: http://www.illuminatelabs.com/ So saying that bungie is actually using illuminate lab’s lighting in halo’s rendering system? I don’t think so. Second of all, the real time character lighting systems is done by a shader process called Point Lighting. The effects of point lighting can be seen here. http://brooknovak.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/ppl1.jpg
Something that bungie has mastered since halo 3. Killzone 2’s real-time lighting systems uses the oldest form graphics computing on a count of ps3’s limited graphical processing. And guerrilla games seem to enjoy covering them up with a barrage of pixel shaders to make things seem “pretty”. As for your argument on the blurry textures. It is a method called dithering. All ps3 games have this too. And killzone 2 has an extremely large amount of blurry textures, that are covered up by having grainy noise textures and vignetting. Snap out of this ps3 fanboy act of yours and learn your shit before you start spitting out this crap.
**FACE PALM of EPIC PROPORTIONS**
The only things we know for sure is that this is part of the opening cinematic of REACH, and it is NOT CG. I repeat IT IS NOT CG. All together now, IT………..IS…………NOT……………..CG.
On top of that we also can confirm it looks PHENOMENAL, and the HATERS ARE ALL IDIOTS and their king is Ravi Sinha.
I think I will give the author of this article the benefit of the doubt and believe him/her instead of the people who can’t use complete sentences, punctuation, or the multitude of slurs that make those people seem like bad fanboys or fangirls. Oh, and yes in terms of pure processing power the PS3 is MORE powerful than the 360. However, pure processing isn’t everything a game needs.
LOL The haters first proclaimed the trailer was CGI, then were proven wrong, so now they say it doesn’t look good at all…LOL
how can you guys think this is CGI? Bungie have confirmed time and time again that it is 100% in-game-engine footage.
Killzone 2, and yes i own it, only looks good from a distance and in motion. up close you notice the horrible texture work, the poor character models, and the tricks used to make it look better than it really is. uncharted 2, well apart from the graphics it couldve been done on the original playstation – its an on-rails game………..and its made by the people who basically invented the ‘on-rails, but made to look like youve got freedom to move’ genre with Crash Bandicoot.
Wow, do any of you plan on moving out of your mom’s house, or do you plan on bloging listening to your dad tell you to take out the garbage before you play those video games. It’s a freaking game and it will probably be a really good game. Graphics aside a game’s greatness is not decided on how good it looks, its how fun and entertaining it is……….jeez get a freakin life.
meh, not impressed at all.
you wana see a good graphical game running on the 360?
i think splinter cell conviction, alan wake, RAGE, BRINK and crysis 2 will all blow halo reach out of the water.
come on.
bungie have been using the same god dam engine for 8 years.
same old crappy sub HD engine retooled to reach (no pun intended) closer to HD but its still sub HD.
come on, they could not be fucked to do a proper engine for halo 3, they could not be fucked doing one for ODST, they could not be fucked releasing a proper game, 5 hours DOES NOT warrant 100 AUD price tag.
so what makes you think they will for reach?
how about this.
if halo reach comes out and matches killzone 2s graphics i will eat my hat.
What a load of horsecrap.
First of all, it’s not 2 pelican flying.
Second, the 00:34 portions are not real time….because?
Third, lights and shadows are two separate things. You can have an object NOT cast a shadow when put in d/v light.
funny thing is the 360 has only been running on half power until microsoft sent out new dev kits with more ram to work with.
we will soon see a huge leap in 360 graphics and with the new engine they will only look better because microsoft has not updated its engine for a while .
who said ps2 to graphics get some dam glasses i can tell you now that is nowhere near as crap as ps2 graphics.
So so funny how people deny stuff, lol. You guys bashing 360 shud just quit it, bungie says this is the in-game graphics, then wait till you see gameplay before you can even begin to start poking holes at stuff. Killzone 2 looked good generally but there were point where it didnt look as good as you thought it should.
Halo Reach trailer close to Killzone 2 graphic quality? WHAT? Are you on crack? Are you blind? Have you at least seen a Killzone 2 trailer or something on youtube, gametrailers, gamersyde or something?
Seriously, Killzone 2 has so many things happening on screen at the same time while sustaining these amazing graphics, animations and insane particles effects like smoke, fire etc. it’s just incredible. The attention to detail and the huge amount of high res textures even on the floor and walls foun in the game are just impossible on the X360 thanks to its crappy DVD9 storage media.
http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14276699/halo-project/images/Halo_REACH_video_still_1260697195.html
For god sake just look how crap the floor and mountains look on Halo Reach, they don’t have any kind of high res texture or detail in general. Everything in the trailer is covered by smoke or too much bloom effect because they can’t even get HDR right. What Halo Reach does have is amazing art direction and long draw distance but nothing that impressive from a technical stand point like Killzone 2 or Uncharted 2. Not even close.
PS3 FTW
http://psnow.es/uploads/images/ps3/heavy_rain/img007-1056.jpg
http://psnow.es/uploads/images/ps3/heavy_rain/img001-1056.jpg
I find this article irrelevent since Bungie already confirmed this is an in-engine cutscene from the begining on the game. I have been a Bungie fan for a few years now, and while they have been known to cut corners or make a few mistakes, I see no reason they would have to lie in order to sell a game.
How many copies of Halo 3 sold on the fist day again? How about ODST? And ODST didn’t even have the hype of previous titles.
As for the PS3 vs. Xbox argument:
PS3 does have some good feaures, but it has many flaws as well. Unlike the PS2, the PS3 has no games I find even remotely entertaining. While they may be visually realistic and stunning, the gameplay sucks.
Or visa versa.
Xbox 360 is the best selling console, the most played, and the console with the highest range of games available.
Don’t believe me? Google it.
Facts are facts. Stop bickering over it, you’re not 5 year olds.
Well, this is the internet, I suppose you could be.
Hyokin out.
Nice, jellos sony fanboy. REACH was ingame engien. Not CGI not how u wil play it, But an ingame CUT SCEN. stupid fuckers. This is why i jhate sony fanboys. IGNORENT FUCKERS who doesent deserve to be called gamers
And for WWII. KZ2 does nto have great graphics. Well okey yes it does, but thats only the naimations/the guns. If u take a good look at the textures on the ground in game u will see the same in kz2 and uncharted 2 and in everyother game out there. UL and GG.
Seriously, you guys must be born yesterday caring so much about the graphic. If you were older than 15 and had experienced the Snes and N64/ps1 era you would understand. Grow up guys; graphic doesn’t make a good game.
Halo reach will probably be a great game wether the grapic is better than kz2 or looks like halo 1.
I can’t figure out why there still are fanboys, both consoles have been out for ages and their prices have been cut to oblivion so everyone should be able to afford buying each console to experience the great games released on both platforms.
Ps3 fanboys, get a 360 and buy halo 3 and reach when it comes out.
360 fanboys, get a ps3 and get kz2 and uncharted 2.
There’s alot of vaild points in this article… except the fact that most of them arne’t true. Just to begin with, you’re calling a new veichle which has never been seen before in the Halo series a Peilican. Just that makes me feel like you hvane’t lokked at all of this clearly enough, even if that just could be a typo.
Secondly, the first bit being CG? You can still see jaggies and shizzle, and frankly, I can’t tell the difference between that part and what comes after in terms of graphics. And I have watched this trailer in HD many times.
And third, the lighting. This engine probably still uses HDR as Halo 3 and ODST did. Where can you confirm that it’s SOMETHING NEW? That’s just assumptions.
Actaully yes it seems like Bungie has also choosed Deffered shading. But textures thats a different question they must be definitely using texture streaming now also MS studio are using it so that alone can make good texture.
Halo 3 had no texture streaming. What impressed me there where the weather effects and sound effects where also awesome.
Darkie – this game’s graphics are not as good as Killzone 2’s and even if the finished product CAN match K2 it won’t beat PS3 games like Gran Turismo 5 or Heavy Rain.
Like i said, 360 is only just doing now what PS3 has been doing for more than a year. How long will it take for a 360 game to match Heavy Rain? 2013? LOL, by that time ANOTHER PS3 game will have raised the bar again. Xbox 360 graphics are years behind PS3.
The trick is, Killzone 2 makes extensive use of confined environments and constrained enemy counts. The Halo series, meanwhile, famously uses vast, open levels with huge areas and larger enemy counts, as well as much better AI. If you want those things- and personally, I do- you have to sacrifice something, and in Halo’s case, it comes with the visuals which, whilst never bad, clearly don’t rival the likes of Killzone 2. Plus, remember as well that the Halo games allow 4-player split screen… Killzone 2 can’t even manage 2-player.
The PS3 is clearly a graphical powerhouse, but it just takes so much for developers to harness that power. When you look at Uncharted, Killzone 2, Gran Turismo, yes they look fantastic- but they’ve had extensive hand-holding from Sony in order to be able to achieve that. The 360, meanwhile, is much simpler to program for, so its easier for developers to get more out of it with minimal effort.
And on a side-note: Heavy Rain’s graphics actually aren’t all that incredible, though the character faces do look spectacular.
larrty you are so incredibly stupid
Wow, a lot of this is lies and oddly slanted. haha, calling it a “cheat.” It looks better and you are jealous. More code behind it? That’s not the point of graphics. The point is to make it look good. And unfortunately for your sore butts, it does.
finally the 360 has matched killzone 2..
but killzone 3 has an updated graphics engine.
so keep dreaming xbots..
Who Cares? Killzone already got beat by Uncharted 2 in graphics LOL. Halo is catching up to what already got beat, graphically speaking.
@ John
By looking at your spelling and grammar i assume your literary standard is that of a poorly educated 10 year old. How old are you because you are making a fool of yourself with your misinformed and poorly communicated drivel:
“Nice, jellos sony fanboy. REACH was ingame engien. Not CGI not how u wil play it, But an ingame CUT SCEN. stupid fuckers. This is why i jhate sony fanboys. IGNORENT FUCKERS who doesent deserve to be called gamers
And for WWII. KZ2 does nto have great graphics. Well okey yes it does, but thats only the naimations/the guns. If u take a good look at the textures on the ground in game u will see the same in kz2 and uncharted 2 and in everyother game out there. UL and GG.”
I think its funny that you call people ignorant yet you don’t even know how to spell the word – sort of makes you seem the ignorant one.
As for what you are saying about the Halo: Reach trailer being made using an ingame engine; although this may be true it doesn’t say if they completely use the ingame engine or if they have also used CGI and other processes in collaberation with it to create the trailer. Despite this i think the point some people are making is that what is going on in the trailer on screen is very little which is why the graphical quality is to the standard that it is. It is incredibly questionable whether the developers will be able to maintain such graphics ingame with lots of things going on at once, especially in a console like the 360 which doesnt have a cell processor worth a damn.
Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 have such great consistantly good graphics because of the cell processor in the PS3 and the blu ray disk space. Games like these can’t be done on the 360 simply because of the PS3 being way ahead hardware wise. GPU doesn’t come into it as even if the GPU is better in the 360 (i heard from some its better and from others that in comparison between 360 and PS3 the GPU’s are much of a muchness) there isn’t enough space on DVD9 disks nor is there a CPU powerful enough to create such graphical and cinematic experiences in games – FACT.
First off, don’t be racist. Second, get a computer or PS3 and stop screwing around with the pre-teen 360 piece of immature junk.
You sad sad fanboy.
The effect you mention in this turd piece of article and is supposedly “borrowed” from Killzone 2 is called Global Illumination, and was also present in Halo 3 long before Killzone 2 was out. And the funny thing: it was more advanced than what you see in Killzone 2.
What made Killzone 2 impressive was the deffered rendering engine, which has different stengths(tons of filters and post processing). If you don’t know anything technical – please save us the bother of reading this miserable load of horseshit and quit writing alltogether.
It seems most of you have ignored my explanation. The xbox does have a faster GPU processor then the PS3. This is absolute fact. But the PS3 wins in cpu. The xbox 360 can in fact process GPU graphics faster with better algorithms then the Ps3. Seeing that the xbox has Direct X 9.5 with Direct 10 features. Just so you guys know, the best looking game out there, Crysis, uses Direct x 9 and direct x 10. I do not see why the xbox would not be capable of calculating graphics as good as uncharted, but it is what the CPU is left to process that causes most things to be bottle necked. Thinks like physics, AI, and other things that arent graphic related are calculated using the xbox’s Tri core CPU. While the PS3 only has 1 Cell processor with 7 SPEs cores. No the PS3 does not have 8 cores. The 7 spe cores are memory management cores due to the need to manage such assets quickly on such a small amount of RAM that the PS3 has. Also the reason why most ps3 games require you to install most of the games assets on the ps3 because of how the CPU cannot even keep up with blu-ray’s read speed. So in reality, the PS3’s blu-ray cd feature is probably where the bulk of where the money you are paying for is at. While the rest of the PS3 is using tech from almost 2 generations ago. A stratagy that sony has attempted by refining the old technology we had instead of developing new ways of processing data. Sure, the xbox overheats sometimes, but it is indeed faster then the PS3 at processing graphics because it uses a new modern NM technology then the PS3, it is bound to have some problems with it. And seeing that it uses Direct x, it has the FULL potential of handling the greatest graphics known in this generation. And as I said earlier, the best looking games in the world even today, use Direct X 9. Crysis especially. Now all of you ps3 fanboys that are trying to use any excuse you can to make this game suck, grow up. You can’t seem to realize that there is a game of great quality on a console other then the PS3.
And all of you trying to relate this to killzone 2. Killzone 2’s lighting and graphics were all done by ILLUMINATE LABS. meaning the company that made it,Guerilla Games, only had to fork over a large sum of money to Illuminate labs for them to make up its lighting engine. Nearly no effort actually took place in Guerilla Games’ development for its graphics. Also, illuminant labs took nearly 7 years to conjure up a lighting solution that a bunch of companies began grabbing at, while bungie made everything in house and made an even better lighting system in a period of 5 months. Bungie did a 7 year job in nearly 5 months, the game looks awesome, and it isn’t even out yet. So even it you think it looks better or worse then killzone 2, it will look even better from here on out. And with GDC coming up as well, new methods of lighting will be adopted and its graphics may even make a breakthrough for the next generation of games. And with Microsoft on their side, nothing is stopping this from happening.
This guy actually has no idea what he’s talking about. The first 30 seconds are clearly in game, you can see mip-mapping on the grass and the draw distance is pretty short. Not to mention the only things on screen are a warthog and two helicopters… Just because the scene is large in size does not mean it is more difficult to render, a large empty valley is much easier to render than a crowded room full of bad guys.
The lighting is “stolen” from KZ2? I actually have no idea what you’re talking about. The light bouncing effect you mentioned is done by radiosity/photon mapping, but it’s impossible to do in real time since it’s very very slow, so static lighting is pre-compiled by a huge powerful machine BEFORE the game is played, meaning that the lighting has NO effect on in-game performance. Every FPS out there since Quake 2 has been using pre-baked lights, so no, it’s not Killzone 2’s creation.
I’ve never heard of this website until I read this article, and I know I’m never going to read anymore uneducated BS written by this author.
Come now children, can’t we all just play nice? This childish game of my consoles got a bigger dick than yours has truly gone on long enough. So what if one game looks better than something else. Let’s take halo for example, it was never meant to look ‘photo real’ it had vivid colour schemes right from halo CE that’s just the way they wanted it. Like a cel shaded game, it’s not meant to be realistic, it’s a graphical style the same way an animated movie looks different to another. It’s truly time you all wake up, change your panties and stop sucking on the proverbial teet of wankerdom.
Let’s not forget this game is almost a year away which only means the graphics will improve and be refined. The games not killzone 2 so quit with the comparisons, killzone certainly isn’t the be all end all of graphics. And as for uncharted 2, that’s a completely different game in virtually
every sense. You stoogey fan boys are all the same
regardless of what side you’re from, do us all a favor and go play in traffic.
Okay, calm down everyone. Some of you need to go back and check your facts about video game programming again. Some of you need to shut up entirely because your jealousy is leaking out that maybe your special game is not so special anymore since there are games coming out now that are basically kicking there ass now. The rest of you need to sit down and read what I have to type.
Someone here mentioned that Bungie is using the same engine. WRONG, SIR, WRONG!!! The engine for each Halo game has been different each time game that has come out. That means, if you have done your research, that the Halo 3 engine is not being used in Halo: Reach. Nor is any other engine from past games. It is in fact, an custom engine Bungie built themselves. They even confirmed this themselves. If you think just because the game uses the same HUD automatically means it uses the same engine then you need to look at Valve who have been using the same engine for 5 years. Remember the Source engine? Left 4 Dead 2 is using the same engine as Left 4 Dead 1. In fact, it has been using the same engine since Counter Strike: Source.
As some have said, the game is not done yet. It is still months away from completion and trust me when I say there is A LOT they can do in 9 months. Not saying it will take 9 months, but if given that chance they could polish it to almost realism.
Finally, listen you PS3 fanboys. NOT EVERY GAME NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE UNCHARTED. I am so tired of hearing this argument from PS3 fanboys that Uncharted has the best graphics ever when you clearly neglect one little detail. It’s a little thing we call “style.” If Halo or any other game looked and played like Uncharted do you think it would be as good or Uncharted be as special now? No, since all the games look the same, the games would flop on graphics scale. What would be the point? If Halo looked like Uncharted, then it wouldn’t be Halo, just another Indiana Jones rip-off.
there are a few things that PS3 fanboys have been stating that simply aren’t true so I’m simply going to sort them out.
1) the game is currently in ALPHA stage, so cut Bungie a little slack if it doesn’t exactly match up to already released games yet.
2) EVERYTHING IN THE TRAILER IS REAL-TIME, not one second was CGI.
3) Bungie is using an ENTIRELY NEW ENGINE, they’re not simply reusing or upgrading the Halo 3 engine. (which is different to Halo 2’s engine, despite what somebody said)
it’s unbelievable how many idiot fanboys are in this discussion. shut up and enjoy your system, stop blabbing on about how amazing it is.
Cheers to Clownshoe. He’s got a real good point. You all have a great console to play with, and I don’t see why you need to bicker around like a bunch of kids to prove that your console is the best. Accept that both the PS3 and XBOX360 are 2 good consoles with its own pros and cons.
Halo Reach is lookin’ good I must say though
Who the fuck gives a shit about the graphics it’s about the gAmeplay and having fun not looking at the fucking grass to see if every blade is rendered correctly
who gives fuck about the graphics as long as they make it action packed and keep the flood out of the game it will be awesome
all you guys seem to do is whine about the graphics. so what if they’re not the best, you buy a game to have fun not sit there looking at the brass to check each blade is correctly rendered to perefection
games are about fun not making a fucking mona lisa equivalent picture
Darkie your such a tool get off microsofts nuts for a sec.Theirs already talks about KZ3 fully destructable environment oh and 60 fpsWith upgraded visuals. So b4 u go and say 360 has the ps3 beat just keep your mouth shut.
Lekgolo ,Only thing we saw so far from halo reach is Cutscenes.The simple fact is the ground textures still look like crap.The women looks lifeless compared to UC2 and Killzone 2, in game models.You can make a game look great but to get it to run great with all the bells and whisles is another story.I wouldn’t be surprised if bungie scaled things back.The fact is halo 3 and odst suffer from framerate drops when the effects got turned up.Its a new game engine so we will see..
Why does this site have so much fanboyism?
Quick facts check:
1. Bungie themselves has already In-engine for the entire clip, pretty sure they don’t want another e3 2005 fiasco.
so I am inclined to believe them on this and not you.
2. You consistanly state that the x360 isn’t as powerful as the ps3. Well you’re wrong here too. Too many times developers have said that while the cell cpu in the ps3 is incredible the systems as a whole are evenly matched. This is repeated over and over by independent companies that make games for both.
3. The gpu in the x360 IS more powerful than the nvidia based gpu in the ps3, but I have to give it to the cell it is more powerful than the cpu in the x360.
4. CPU’s don’t render or rastersize graphics GPU’s do for all the power of the cell, in the ps3 it’s usually doing what the gpu should be doing, geomery, physics, animations,compiling textures. The gpu in the x360 isn’t faster than the 1 in the ps3 it’s just more efficient with double the shader capability. And a turbo-chargered ram chip for anti-ailasing.
5. The GPU in the x360 is the main chip and the cpu acts as a co-proccessor.
6. Everybody knows about folding at home and that the cell was used with great delight and cheaply, Very few people know that another team attempting to accomplish something similair used the gpu in the x360 with better results. Why did they have better results? Well they needed massive amounts of parallel proccessing and while the cell cpu is way better than the average cpu with its 8 spu’s it was nothing compared to the gpu in the x360 which has 48 unified cores.
7. If you are one of those people that think a cpu can do the job of a gpu try this experiment; go home remove the video card that contains your gpu on it and replace it with one from 2 years before your computer was bought then go and get the fastest cpu you can find and try run crysis or any other GRAPHICALLY intensive game, when the system chokes because it will, remove the new cpu get one thats the best from 2 years before that then go and buy the best GPU that you can find and try and run the same games, when it works and it will. Remember this is the difference between the x360 and the ps3 one has a better cpu the other a better gpu.
8. Most of you people on here are saying the x360 was out first it should have better graphics and you’re right, but lets look at the whole picture. Microsoft only entered the console game arena in 2001 where sony handed them and nintendo there own butts on a platter, nobody agrues that the original xbox was a better and more powerful piece of hardware than the others last gen, but its problem wasn’t power it’s problem was 3rd party games. Something that microsoft has solved and then some. Every major franchise now appears on the x360 and it all needed to happen quickly, so most games used middlware i.e UE3 engine great engine if you know its quirks and are given support, but its still middleware and not made spcifically for the x360, so when it began to show its limitations and age everyone of you said that these were x360 limitations and it was maxed out, far from it.
9. What very few people outside the development community acctually knew was that Microsoft had been holding the x360 back. How? By not allowing developers to use all of the ram in the x360 or all of its directx and hardware capabilities. The gpu in the x360 was delivered on directx9 with capabilities of direcx10 and beyond build into the hardware but not active. The new development kits that just went out in mass in april unlocked the x360 directx10 and 11 capabilities and gave 100 mb worh of programming space back to developers, and before any of you start that how can they make a gpu thats directx proof? Easy microsoft is the primary dictator of what goes into the directx api. Can you imagine what games will look like now on the x360 with 100mb more worth of ram to deal with and harware tasselation capabilities…pretty, very pretty games are coming and Halo Reach is only the beginning.
10. One more thing for the ps3 guy that are touting blu-ray as a huge benifit, it’s not! Everyday PC players play games on DVD that look better than any game on ps3 including UC2, and how do we do this we don’t have a cell proccesor or a blu-ray drive. Easy the 1 or 2 DVD’s act as huge zip files that we install to our harddrives then uncompact. And guess what Microsoft has said that they will allow developers to do for the first time on the x360 starting in 2010? Ahh you guessed it “REQUIRE THE HARD DRIVE” ooh I can’t wait to see what those games look like, And before you say they can’t do this they already have…look it up….and what about all those arcade buyers…..well they appear to be approaching that 2 ways 1 most people actually have hard drive’s over 85% the original sales split was 80% pro units 10% arcade and 10%elites now its like 70% elites and 30% arcade with 50% of them buying a harddrive with in 6 months…. Basically the old 60gig and 120gig hard drives will get cheap next year with the introduction of the slim model that will come with a 250gig standard.
Also, just so you guys know.
The best looking game out there(crysis) runs on direct x 9 and 10. And the xbox 360 has direct x 9.5 with direct x 10 features.
Leave a Reply