By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sales2099 said:
curl-6 said:

Having slept on it and re-watched the Halo segment, I will say that while the show as a whole missed the mark, Halo Infinite actually exceeded my expectations.

Yeah, it doesn't look next gen graphically, but I quite like the art style and the gameplay looks like a fantastic mix of classic Halo with newer games like Doom 2016/Eternal. While I won't buy a console for just one game, Infinite looks good enough to keep the Series X on my radar as a "wait and see".

That's just not true, Halo 1 and 2 were graphical powerhouses in their day and high end visuals were a big selling point for them.

CG trailers tell us fuck all about how a game is actually going to look and play, hence they are pretty much useless to me as a gamer.

Both this and Sony's show suffered from this, not enough actual gameplay shown and far too much cinematic BS.

Halo 1 and 2 were the result of Xbox simply being a beast of a console compared to PS2 and GameCube. I get your stance, but most Xbox exclusives were by default graphical powerhouses. Halo 3 at release had those poor character models that haven’t aged well at all and weren’t ideal even at release. Reach was prettier but not cutting edge either like Halo 4 was. 

And cmon the end of the Avowed trailer pretty much tells you  how the game would look as a first person action rpg. Even as CG the implications of gameplay field of view are more then enough for imaginations to run wild. 

The Xbox being powerful didn't mean games on it would necessarily leverage all that power. Halo 1 and 2 though put a great emphasis on graphical fidelity and were up there as some of the most advanced games on console at their time of release, so it's simply incorrect to say "the IP has never been about pushing graphics" because that was indeed a big part of their DNA from the very beginning.

And choreographed CG doesn't cut it. As a gamer I want to see actual gameplay.