By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - First Halo:Reach ViDoc!!

leo-j on 13 February 2010
Strategyking92 said:
Dare I say it?...

Better looking than KZ2 AND it has lighting

....

I need to stay away from halo reach threads..

@BenV

no actually you are VERY wrong



 

mM
Around the Network
BenVTrigger on 13 February 2010

@leo-j

how so please explain? Perhaps its not THE best engine. I think God of War 3's is incredibly impressive, lots of enemies, large scale battles etc. same with Uncharted 2. But Reachs is top 5. Please elaborate in terms of power. And no coming in here with a screenshot war does nothing. I'm talking about power here no number of pixels per square centimeter or whatever.

Edit:  actually Leo-J please dont elaborate, this is the very reason I left Vgchartz.  Known PS3 biased fans will run into stuff that in the 360 forums and start raging their opinions and derail the thread.



Mendicate Bias on 13 February 2010

@Ben

Does Heavy Rain even have any AI?

@Leo-j

How is he wrong? What other games give you split-screen with four player co-op, 30 enemies on screen not including another 20 AI controlled vehicles on massive maps with no scripted events?



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

Badassbab on 13 February 2010

Remember all the 'no fps will ever look as good KZ2 on 360' comments and then MW2 came along and now this. I laugh in their face!






huaxiong90 on 13 February 2010
Badassbab said:
Remember all the 'no fps will ever look as good KZ2 on 360' comments and then MW2 came along and now this. I laugh in their face!

Red: I strongly, very strongly, disagree.



Rockstar: Announce Bully 2 already and make gamers proud!

Kojima: Come out with Project S already!

Around the Network
Badassbab on 13 February 2010

Ok fair enough, on MW2 (360 version) vs KZ2 I don't think there's an obvious winner.

KZ2-

Pros-
720p
Excellent lighting
Excellent animation
QAA
Excellent character models
Nicely animated explosions
Superior shadows

Cons-
Frequent sub 30 fps dips
Lots of low res textures
Low res alpha effects
The QAA method means every texture is blurred

MW2

Pros-
60fps
MSAA + antistropic filtering
Dynamic bloom
Higher res textures
Hi res alha effect
Excellent lighting
Fast

Cons-
600p
Blocky shadows

For me at least the superior texture mapping, 60fps, extra post processig effects and my preference of MSAA over QAA (I just don't like the blurry, dull look it gives games though I do like the AA ) helps MW2 give KZ2 a run for it's money. I think a lot of PS3 fans are afraid to admit they massively over hyped the graphics of KZ2 and so must defend it at all costs. Not to worry though as Uncharted 2 is the graphical king on consoles and I doubt any game will beat it apart from perhaps Uncharted 3. It's in a world of it's own in just about every respect, it's motion captured facial animations are leagues ahead of anything else. In fact I suffer from the 'Uncharted' effect where I'm mostly underwhealmed by graphics now unless it can rival UC2. So far this year only Bayonetta has come close.

As for Halo Reach....I'm a big Halo fan, was a bit disappointed by ODST, didn't wow me enough and it's graphics engine had aged. I hope this can make up for it and so far from what I can tell from the latest ViDoc it's shaping up to be real special though MS are good at generating hype (much better than Sony this gen) they did the same thing with ODST.






Aion on 13 February 2010

Yeah great vid, can't wait till next one.



 

   PROUD MEMBER OF THE PLAYSTATION 3 : RPG FAN CLUB

 

Wagram on 13 February 2010

MW2 better looking than KZ2? Hilarious...lol.



slowmo on 13 February 2010
BenVTrigger said:
@slowmo

sorry dude but if you think that the reach engine isn't one of the most technically impressive engines out there....well then you don't really no your stuff. Too many people when they think graphics or engines only think about how "shiny and pretty it is". In terms of power and processing the Reach engines is lightyears ahead of Heavy Rains and Alan Wakes. Sorry thats not even debatable. In terms of just prettyness sure Heavy Rain and others games are gorgeous but their engines would NEVER be able to render what Reachs does.

Heavy Rain is a VERY confined game in terms of assets on screen and active AI. Showing a single room with perhaps 3 people in it all while playing out in pretty much predetermined fashion by a set group of choices is hardly impressive in terms of processing power. Is Heavy Rain gorgous? Hell yes one of the best looking games out there. Notice how I said looking though and not one of the most impressive engines.

Reach has HUGE environments, up to 20 vehicles, 30, enemies, 6 allies, thousands of reacting particles, 200 independant light sources, all while maintaning these while in split screen. Sorry at this point its not even debatable that the Reach engine is top 5 in the industry. Is it the "prettiest" perhaps not but that doesn't mean the engine as a whole is FAR more advanced than almost anything else out there. Fact.

What is so special about the Reach engine then, enlighten me with the technical details, I'm afraid you'll have to do better than it puts a lot more on screen and the environments are big.  Stop pretending you know more than you do, there is a reason the environments and draw distances are so huge, it's a simple trick but then you should know this being an expert.

What I can say that is absolute FACT is that you've not seen the engine running on a retail 360 yet.  I'm not saying the engine is sub par in any way, I'm merely showing some common sense by not praising it as the second coming without more proof.  For the record from a technical viewpoint, Cryengine will wipe the floor for scalability and flexibility over the Reach engine, that's not even up for debate.  One simple question for you by the way, does this engine even support Tesselation because I'm pretty sure others will very soon and that technology is far more impressive.



JaggedSac on 13 February 2010
slowmo said:
BenVTrigger said:
@slowmo

sorry dude but if you think that the reach engine isn't one of the most technically impressive engines out there....well then you don't really no your stuff. Too many people when they think graphics or engines only think about how "shiny and pretty it is". In terms of power and processing the Reach engines is lightyears ahead of Heavy Rains and Alan Wakes. Sorry thats not even debatable. In terms of just prettyness sure Heavy Rain and others games are gorgeous but their engines would NEVER be able to render what Reachs does.

Heavy Rain is a VERY confined game in terms of assets on screen and active AI. Showing a single room with perhaps 3 people in it all while playing out in pretty much predetermined fashion by a set group of choices is hardly impressive in terms of processing power. Is Heavy Rain gorgous? Hell yes one of the best looking games out there. Notice how I said looking though and not one of the most impressive engines.

Reach has HUGE environments, up to 20 vehicles, 30, enemies, 6 allies, thousands of reacting particles, 200 independant light sources, all while maintaning these while in split screen. Sorry at this point its not even debatable that the Reach engine is top 5 in the industry. Is it the "prettiest" perhaps not but that doesn't mean the engine as a whole is FAR more advanced than almost anything else out there. Fact.

What is so special about the Reach engine then, enlighten me with the technical details, I'm afraid you'll have to do better than it puts a lot more on screen and the environments are big.  Stop pretending you know more than you do, there is a reason the environments and draw distances are so huge, it's a simple trick but then you should know this being an expert.

What I can say that is absolute FACT is that you've not seen the engine running on a retail 360 yet.  I'm not saying the engine is sub par in any way, I'm merely showing some common sense by not praising it as the second coming without more proof.  For the record from a technical viewpoint, Cryengine will wipe the floor for scalability and flexibility over the Reach engine, that's not even up for debate.  One simple question for you by the way, does this engine even support Tesselation because I'm pretty sure others will very soon and that technology is far more impressive.

In case anyone was wondering, the Viva Pinata engine does tesselation.  Quite neat actually.  If developers want to use tesselation on the 360, the GPU supports it.  Rumor has it that Forza 3 used it.  I have no idea if Reach uses it.