I did see that too, nice to point it out Moody! BTw, Am I the only one who thinks "Gears of Halo"?
Except with worse graphics... They better tighten this up before release. I probably won't get it anyway though. Didn't get ODST and I don't know enough about this to know why everyone is so excited. It's also kind of annoying that they're carrying on Halo with these new characters in the same exact gameplay after they said "Halo 3 is it." They know it will sell so they keep making them instead of coming up with something new. Guess they'll keep doing it until they stop selling.
Yeah, the embiggened shots look better. You can see they have some pretty massive open spaces as well, which is probably driving the look of the outdoor stuff.
Yeah, it's pretty disappointing to see it's the same old Halo, just in a different setting.
Heh, Halo fans think this is far to dark and gray in its looks, totally loosing the mood.
And just how do you know how the game plays? You're on the beta or what?
I'd give the guys a chance to prove stuff in a gameplay movie before I make up my mind about the game...
The Spartan's are pretty much on par with the COGs in Gears IMHO, very nice hard surface modeling. Sure it's not overkill in the details like some of the Locust, but I actually like it this way... And environments look biiig, so you can't really compare the two there.
how do you know how the game plays? You're on the beta or what?
Because it's Bungie...and Microsoft. There's no reason for them to innovate. Halo IMO would greatly benefit from a real cover/fire system - even something as strangely "snappy" as Gears of War's. I really don't see Bungie taking that kind of initiative though, because they're too damned scared of the fans not liking it. Sometimes you need to do things the fans don't unanimously agree on, in order to make progress.
As it stands, I'm guessing this is nothing more than Halo 3 in a different graphical shell, just like ODST was. ODST brought nothing new at all - it was master chief in a different suite of armor and the same old gameplay.
Halo fans do not want the gameplay to change. They want to mess with new weapons, new maps, and new story... that's it. And that is what bungie is doing. Whats wrong with that?
It seems like non halo fans want bungie to do some crazy change to the gameplay and maybe then they will consider buying the game. Truth is its still gonna sell millions of copies, its still gonna cater to the competitive gaming crowd(even though only .01% of Halo players are semi pro status), and its still going to be Halo... halo halo halo...
In the end, bungie is not gonna come to Polycount and see what people are saying, they have enough with the thousands of people over at bungie.net
/Rant
As far as the art goes. Characters are better then ever, environments are still the same. And I hope that texture stretching is sitting in someones to do list. The only thing that let me down about halo 3 was the campaign, especially after I played the COD4 campaign, omg that game blew my face.
Well duh, master. Like I said, they have no incentive. It's rehash, with better graphics. I likely won't be buying it, as ODST was a huge let down for me.
That art progression to me, is kind of depressing. Look at all of the color just leak right the hell out of the artwork in each revision, hah!
Infinity ward got an entire PC community raging due to its incompetence about dedicated servers and Bungie is scared to do a stunt in changing gameplay. Didn't bungie sort of do that with ODST?
lololol how so? By making you a ODST? Shit, they were just as stupidly powerful as Master Chief. You could smack a brute 2 times from behind and kill them (on legendary)...you could still take tons of incoming fire...you could still jump crazy high.
If humans were that strong, they'd have destroyed the covenant without need for spartans.
Infinity ward got an entire PC community raging due to its incompetence about dedicated servers and Bungie is scared to do a stunt in changing gameplay. Didn't bungie sort of do that with ODST?
They did. What people don't understand that this is still a Halo game and so the gameplay is going to remain largely unchanged. Also, cover mechanics just won't work with a game like Halo. People are going to hate, and will hate, especially Odium whose only incentive is to down playing the game. There is a larger difference between Halo ODST and Halo 3 than CoD 4 and CoD MW2. I would think there would be a lesser amount of Halo haters on a game development forum but that is deemed false.
Also, people who work at Bungie visit this board and you guys commenting so harshly on it doesn't make them feel happy and what makes it worse that some of you guys are judging the game before it comes out.
people who work at Bungie visit this board and you guys commenting so harshly on it doesn't make them feel happy a
And I talk to most of them. I never said I had an issue with the artwork. I think Reach looks stunning (aside from the growing lack of color). Either way, they are all adults and perfectly well accepting of criticisms, as are most artists on this board. Lots of people complained about issues with Forza 3 when the demo came out, but I wasn't upset, or feeling unhappy - I was damned proud of the work I did! :P You can't please everyone so you have to take it with a grain of salt.
Your opinion on ODST being more different over Halo 3 than MW2 was over MW1 is just WHACK, I have to say. The only real interesting thing in ODST was the new firefight game mode (which rocks ass!). The gameplay itself however, was exactly the same as Halo 3. Exactly. Run, shoot, jump, run, shoot, jump. No interesting weapons, no new gameplay mechanics, nothing. The outline "hud" didn't really offer anything and playing with it disabled made the game so ungodly dark you couldn't see anything.
Now MW2 on the other hand, added customizable killstreaks, controllable killstreaks (ie predator missiles and chopper gunner), all new customizable weapons and new attachments, new perks, deathstreaks, new online and offline game modes and new prestige challenges. Which one added more? Hmmm....
I think MW2 is a good example of not changing the basic formula but still adding a LOT of new stuff. I'd love Halo if it had cover, but it never will and that's fine. It's still a fun game. But I still want more than a graphical rehash of the previous installment. I want new gameplay.
I don't understand why people always feel critics are a bad thing or negative. If I criticize your work it means I already feel that its cool and has potential, and that I just want it to be the best work it can be. Nothing personal.
I want Halo 3, with new art. 120 Bucks for collectors edition? Yeah I'll take that too... Thanks! /Sarcasm
Thats how I see it, and millions of others too.
ODST was never made to be something new, it was conceived as an expansion and grew to what it is now. Thats why its called "Halo 3:ODST" I understand where you are coming from though, because most people feel the same way. All in all, we just have to wait and see what bungie has to offer when the game is out. I'm more intrigued to know what their other project is, since its supposed to be non Halo related.
@Vassago, a bit off topic but grats on the Forza work. Haven't played much since I got to level 50, I was discouraged to see that I had only racked up a bit over 2 million credits and the Daytona is 10 Million credits I love that damn car...
just to touch up on what vassago said here concerning originality and innovation from bungie...
when i was in the seattle ca.org workshop, they brought up bungie reps to stand and give a lecture on character design for vgames. so these too peeps start talking about how important it is to be innovative and make something that stands out, etc etc... and their example was a green space marine. i mean, come on, r u kidding me? someone has their heads up their asses
don't get me wrong, the halo space dude is very well done and it stands out as an iconic figure, obviously. but these guys actually think its innovative, apparently
mind you, ive never played halo but ive seen it a couple of times, over-the-shoulder style (after playing quake online with a mouse, really, halo doesn't seem very exciting)
didn't bungie innovate the whole shooter genre with the recharging shield and limited weapon slots?
much like blizzard, they believe in taking everything thats good and polish the hell out of it, they deserve riding their own success, they've made a great game series, and they do itterate away on it with new features.
I'm also on the MW = MW2 train ( but I like both games aswell ) but much like them haters, I might be missing the point that there actually has been new features in each new sequel.
i played over 25000 matchmade games in halo2
i played around 10000 matchmade games in halo3
I DO NOT WANT the game to flip around 180 degrees and create some gears out of it, or make it play more like MW because another group of people seems to like that.
Halo is its own style, if you do not wish to roll with it.. too bad.
Bungie is scared to do a stunt in changing gameplay.
I wonder why everyone assumes that the gameplay won't change.
Making the player a part of a team with such obvious differences in skills and equipment suggests a more team oriented single player campaign already, we also know stealth will be an option with silent kills, then there are new types of equipment and they're emphasizing "sandbox" all over the place.
And yeah, ODST had free-roaming enemies (in the nighttime city) that could spot you and engage whichever direction you've approached them, and that without any significant engine re-tooling.
I personally got the impression that they're really trying to mix things up this time...
As for MW1 and 2, the single player campaigns are little more then rail shooters. Enemies spawn in the same position in front of you every single time so you can shoot them blindly, encounters are always the same as well, and so on.
Don't get me wrong, the pacing and scripting are top notch and make you feel like you're in an action movie. But it's as rigid as a frozen piece of rock, whereas every Halo game had a lot more flexibility and every battle played out differently each and every time. I enjoy them both but prefer the emergent sandbox style gameplay a lot more, ever since the Ultima Underworld games.
You know, I don't actually mind the gameplay... Granted there are a few annoying things, plus they REALLY need to sort out the odd center crosshair...
The only issue I have so far is the enviros looks dull as a dullard and, well, 3 years old. COMPARED to everything else in the game. Lets not forget guys this is MS's likely last HUGE game for the 360, a title that should be showing the system off, but so far all signs point to it being another 600p bloomfest...
Environments are supposed to be pretty big and interactive, and the enemies are patrolling around and stuff. A lot more open world type then the previous Halo games, and Bungie also says they want to go back to the exploration feel of the first Halo. Well at least that's what they're promising... need gameplay movie now.
they REALLY need to sort out the odd center crosshair...
I thought that's what they did and that's why it's off-center. Since the likelyhood of being attacked from below at any time is tiny, having the crosshair lower than the vertical center of the screen increases your field of view upwards, where you are more likely to spot enemies. It takes some getting used to, but it's one of those things I wish more games copied.
I'm looking forward to Reach. Not longing for it like I did Halo 3, but I'm not hoping for any big innovations, either. I just want a more sandboxy game than Halo 2 and 3 delivered, more similar to the first game, with some randomized enemy and obstacle placement and things like that, coupled with online coop and better graphics... I certainly would buy that game. Both Halo 2 and Halo 3 disappoint me when I compare them to the first game. I remain hopeful that Bungie can bring back what I liked about the first game. I know they can do better.
I love how every other time this has happened critiquing a studio's work has been demonized as mean, demotivating, and bridge burning; but time and again as long as it's about Bungie saying "Shit's fucked up and you talk like a fag!!11" is 100% jawsome healthy critique and we should all be so lucky to be blessed by hearing it.
Some people need to get a grip and realize the breadth of hypocrisy in their views. I'm all for harsh blunt critiquing, but it has to be driven by actual specific observation not "this sucks" "learn to innovate" retard generalizations.
Simply bashing a studio for not making the game that you want to play (or think you want to play), or deeming a game unforgivably unattractive from several pre-alpha screens is pointless and embarrassing.
Bungie has the talent, and the resources to hire any talent they don't have, to do well; and they're also pretty driven to put out their best Halo in this - supposedly - last game of their biggest franchise they make (at least for a long time).
They may not succeed in that, but belittling their effort in advance really is a bit too much.
BR is being replaced with the single shot DMR(Dedicated Marksman Rifle) You can hear the new sound clips in their update. That mystery weapon sounds like a laser guided missile strike...
"really shouldn't" doesn't mean a whole lot if you simply dont have the texture budget to uniquely unwrap everything and still get the desired pixel density at your required texture resolution.
In a perfect world with 2048's to spare sure, it's easy to mirror very selectively or not at all and keep a good density, but with how many weapons Reach has, on top of how many characters (which seem to have some very high resolution textures) and vehicles all have to be loaded into memory at the same time (not to mention good ol environment texture budget) it's really asking a lot to avoid mirroring at all times.
As long as text can be floated and no shenanigans occur due to the mirroring (ugly seams, broken shading, flipped text, etc) then I can hardly understand the point in nay-saying it as some general rule.
Now, I obviously dont know for sure what their texture budgets are, but it seems like pretty reasonable speculation to me.
I just want Halo1 with the new sandbox gameplay. You're on rails now whereas that game was mad open. Did they even have invisible walls anywhere at all?
Text usually is floated in decals, they were in a rush I think, so that's why it happened.
Well you shouldn't mirror big assets, but it happens alot. I'd rather mirror something and get decent res, then not mirror or use tilers and get shittier res.
It depends on the game though, a game like FEAR 2 seems to have alot of unique things and high res textures, but that's because theres not much going on most of the time. It's also a PC game foremost, but you get the idea. Same thing with Crysis, it looks amazing, but the AI is retarded, and you're usually alone or in a small squad of people, so they can get away with some of that.
We re-use decals, so it's not that wasteful. Also cutting up the mesh to get certain parts to be unique is fine in some circumstances, but that adds more seams, and more verts as well. Well and the decals will produce crisper text instead of a blurred mess on the 1/1 texture, unless it's a huge texture or that section gets more texel density.
There are pros and cons to both, but we pick and choose for each asset as needed.
We do have some pretty handy universal decal sheets that work well and are usually loaded since were sharing. Anything else I usually don't have a problem fitting it on my maps to get just a little more textel density.
anything flipped will get fixed. =p
I love that level as well Per. I cant say much other then I'm stoked to be a part of this and cant wait to play the finished product. = )
Replies
Except with worse graphics... They better tighten this up before release. I probably won't get it anyway though. Didn't get ODST and I don't know enough about this to know why everyone is so excited. It's also kind of annoying that they're carrying on Halo with these new characters in the same exact gameplay after they said "Halo 3 is it." They know it will sell so they keep making them instead of coming up with something new. Guess they'll keep doing it until they stop selling.
Tiny Grunts are tiny.
Heh, Halo fans think this is far to dark and gray in its looks, totally loosing the mood.
And just how do you know how the game plays? You're on the beta or what?
I'd give the guys a chance to prove stuff in a gameplay movie before I make up my mind about the game...
The Spartan's are pretty much on par with the COGs in Gears IMHO, very nice hard surface modeling. Sure it's not overkill in the details like some of the Locust, but I actually like it this way... And environments look biiig, so you can't really compare the two there.
I remember in skate 2 there was a curb that looks like it was just planar mapped and the sides were all streaked.
Because it's Bungie...and Microsoft. There's no reason for them to innovate. Halo IMO would greatly benefit from a real cover/fire system - even something as strangely "snappy" as Gears of War's. I really don't see Bungie taking that kind of initiative though, because they're too damned scared of the fans not liking it. Sometimes you need to do things the fans don't unanimously agree on, in order to make progress.
As it stands, I'm guessing this is nothing more than Halo 3 in a different graphical shell, just like ODST was. ODST brought nothing new at all - it was master chief in a different suite of armor and the same old gameplay.
I'm hoping that Reach will be better.
It seems like non halo fans want bungie to do some crazy change to the gameplay and maybe then they will consider buying the game. Truth is its still gonna sell millions of copies, its still gonna cater to the competitive gaming crowd(even though only .01% of Halo players are semi pro status), and its still going to be Halo... halo halo halo...
In the end, bungie is not gonna come to Polycount and see what people are saying, they have enough with the thousands of people over at bungie.net
/Rant
As far as the art goes. Characters are better then ever, environments are still the same. And I hope that texture stretching is sitting in someones to do list. The only thing that let me down about halo 3 was the campaign, especially after I played the COD4 campaign, omg that game blew my face.
COD Campaign>>>>Halo 3 Campaign
That art progression to me, is kind of depressing. Look at all of the color just leak right the hell out of the artwork in each revision, hah!
lololol how so? By making you a ODST? Shit, they were just as stupidly powerful as Master Chief. You could smack a brute 2 times from behind and kill them (on legendary)...you could still take tons of incoming fire...you could still jump crazy high.
If humans were that strong, they'd have destroyed the covenant without need for spartans.
Also, people who work at Bungie visit this board and you guys commenting so harshly on it doesn't make them feel happy and what makes it worse that some of you guys are judging the game before it comes out.
And I talk to most of them. I never said I had an issue with the artwork. I think Reach looks stunning (aside from the growing lack of color). Either way, they are all adults and perfectly well accepting of criticisms, as are most artists on this board. Lots of people complained about issues with Forza 3 when the demo came out, but I wasn't upset, or feeling unhappy - I was damned proud of the work I did! :P You can't please everyone so you have to take it with a grain of salt.
Your opinion on ODST being more different over Halo 3 than MW2 was over MW1 is just WHACK, I have to say. The only real interesting thing in ODST was the new firefight game mode (which rocks ass!). The gameplay itself however, was exactly the same as Halo 3. Exactly. Run, shoot, jump, run, shoot, jump. No interesting weapons, no new gameplay mechanics, nothing. The outline "hud" didn't really offer anything and playing with it disabled made the game so ungodly dark you couldn't see anything.
Now MW2 on the other hand, added customizable killstreaks, controllable killstreaks (ie predator missiles and chopper gunner), all new customizable weapons and new attachments, new perks, deathstreaks, new online and offline game modes and new prestige challenges. Which one added more? Hmmm....
I think MW2 is a good example of not changing the basic formula but still adding a LOT of new stuff. I'd love Halo if it had cover, but it never will and that's fine. It's still a fun game. But I still want more than a graphical rehash of the previous installment. I want new gameplay.
I want Halo 3, with new art. 120 Bucks for collectors edition? Yeah I'll take that too... Thanks! /Sarcasm
Thats how I see it, and millions of others too.
ODST was never made to be something new, it was conceived as an expansion and grew to what it is now. Thats why its called "Halo 3:ODST" I understand where you are coming from though, because most people feel the same way. All in all, we just have to wait and see what bungie has to offer when the game is out. I'm more intrigued to know what their other project is, since its supposed to be non Halo related.
@Vassago, a bit off topic but grats on the Forza work. Haven't played much since I got to level 50, I was discouraged to see that I had only racked up a bit over 2 million credits and the Daytona is 10 Million credits
when i was in the seattle ca.org workshop, they brought up bungie reps to stand and give a lecture on character design for vgames. so these too peeps start talking about how important it is to be innovative and make something that stands out, etc etc... and their example was a green space marine. i mean, come on, r u kidding me? someone has their heads up their asses
don't get me wrong, the halo space dude is very well done and it stands out as an iconic figure, obviously. but these guys actually think its innovative, apparently
mind you, ive never played halo but ive seen it a couple of times, over-the-shoulder style (after playing quake online with a mouse, really, halo doesn't seem very exciting)
much like blizzard, they believe in taking everything thats good and polish the hell out of it, they deserve riding their own success, they've made a great game series, and they do itterate away on it with new features.
I'm also on the MW = MW2 train ( but I like both games aswell ) but much like them haters, I might be missing the point that there actually has been new features in each new sequel.
i played over 25000 matchmade games in halo2
i played around 10000 matchmade games in halo3
I DO NOT WANT the game to flip around 180 degrees and create some gears out of it, or make it play more like MW because another group of people seems to like that.
Halo is its own style, if you do not wish to roll with it.. too bad.
I wonder why everyone assumes that the gameplay won't change.
Making the player a part of a team with such obvious differences in skills and equipment suggests a more team oriented single player campaign already, we also know stealth will be an option with silent kills, then there are new types of equipment and they're emphasizing "sandbox" all over the place.
And yeah, ODST had free-roaming enemies (in the nighttime city) that could spot you and engage whichever direction you've approached them, and that without any significant engine re-tooling.
I personally got the impression that they're really trying to mix things up this time...
Don't get me wrong, the pacing and scripting are top notch and make you feel like you're in an action movie. But it's as rigid as a frozen piece of rock, whereas every Halo game had a lot more flexibility and every battle played out differently each and every time. I enjoy them both but prefer the emergent sandbox style gameplay a lot more, ever since the Ultima Underworld games.
The only issue I have so far is the enviros looks dull as a dullard and, well, 3 years old. COMPARED to everything else in the game. Lets not forget guys this is MS's likely last HUGE game for the 360, a title that should be showing the system off, but so far all signs point to it being another 600p bloomfest...
Halo 3 made my eyes bleed..which was a shame because the aliasing really ruined the great visuals.
I thought that's what they did and that's why it's off-center. Since the likelyhood of being attacked from below at any time is tiny, having the crosshair lower than the vertical center of the screen increases your field of view upwards, where you are more likely to spot enemies. It takes some getting used to, but it's one of those things I wish more games copied.
I'm looking forward to Reach. Not longing for it like I did Halo 3, but I'm not hoping for any big innovations, either. I just want a more sandboxy game than Halo 2 and 3 delivered, more similar to the first game, with some randomized enemy and obstacle placement and things like that, coupled with online coop and better graphics... I certainly would buy that game. Both Halo 2 and Halo 3 disappoint me when I compare them to the first game. I remain hopeful that Bungie can bring back what I liked about the first game. I know they can do better.
Some people need to get a grip and realize the breadth of hypocrisy in their views. I'm all for harsh blunt critiquing, but it has to be driven by actual specific observation not "this sucks" "learn to innovate" retard generalizations.
Simply bashing a studio for not making the game that you want to play (or think you want to play), or deeming a game unforgivably unattractive from several pre-alpha screens is pointless and embarrassing.
They may not succeed in that, but belittling their effort in advance really is a bit too much.
im actually really digging the architecture now.
Linky
In a perfect world with 2048's to spare sure, it's easy to mirror very selectively or not at all and keep a good density, but with how many weapons Reach has, on top of how many characters (which seem to have some very high resolution textures) and vehicles all have to be loaded into memory at the same time (not to mention good ol environment texture budget) it's really asking a lot to avoid mirroring at all times.
As long as text can be floated and no shenanigans occur due to the mirroring (ugly seams, broken shading, flipped text, etc) then I can hardly understand the point in nay-saying it as some general rule.
Now, I obviously dont know for sure what their texture budgets are, but it seems like pretty reasonable speculation to me.
Flawless Cowboy.
Well you shouldn't mirror big assets, but it happens alot. I'd rather mirror something and get decent res, then not mirror or use tilers and get shittier res.
It depends on the game though, a game like FEAR 2 seems to have alot of unique things and high res textures, but that's because theres not much going on most of the time. It's also a PC game foremost, but you get the idea. Same thing with Crysis, it looks amazing, but the AI is retarded, and you're usually alone or in a small squad of people, so they can get away with some of that.
Now i have to play it AGAIN...
i never could resist to fast press x and hop back into the pelican, ride that baby along till magic death,
and see the opener once more, hmmm.
[ame]
[ame]
.. there goes my sleep.
It's that epic bright high-scifi yet militaristic atmosphere it has.
There are pros and cons to both, but we pick and choose for each asset as needed.
We do have some pretty handy universal decal sheets that work well and are usually loaded since were sharing. Anything else I usually don't have a problem fitting it on my maps to get just a little more textel density.
anything flipped will get fixed. =p
I love that level as well Per. I cant say much other then I'm stoked to be a part of this and cant wait to play the finished product. = )
also some more information on the game mechanics
linky