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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - NEW Halo Infinite 4k/60 official trailer

4K

60FPS

Open world

And yet...



Around the Network

I’m cautiously optimistic the graphics will receive some improvement. God knows the memes lit a fire under their asses. But as a Halo fan I’m just happy the gameplay, story, music is done right.

If those were messed up at the demo, then we be in a much worse position. It would be a “beautiful mess”.

Last edited by sales2099 - on 27 July 2020

Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

You know you messed up when Dominoes UK twitter pitches in on a trend.


Pemalite said:
The game doesn't look next-generation sadly. It does look clean.

But the pop-in, flat lighting, the sprite-work that sticks out... Doesn't leave me with much faith.

In saying that, it also doesn't look bad, so as long as they nail the gameplay it might be okay, unfortunately though, first impressions last and the first impression is always going to be a visual one... Even this trailer doesn't really show the visuals in the best light.

But some of the new gameplay toys look fun.

Its more than that.

Tree's/grass is static, doesnt move at all, its lifeless.
Characters, talk without animations (face doesnt move).
When they die (the brute that dies in the air), its just frozen in animation as it drops down, from the moment it died in the air.
You toss a grande onto a enemy (those that stick onto enemies) they dont panic and run around in panic and spout their lines, like in old halo games.

When master chief throws out the shield, the animations show his hands are empty, until its flying through the air.
The "ship" (not sure what its called) is clearly on the rails, and jaggy in movements... at one point you find its just "dead" in the air, waiting until line of sight notices it from the player, before it starts moveing on its rails again.

Theres guns that shoot, without muzzel flair, but with reflections on the gun.
Theres guns that shoot, with muzzel flair, but without reflections on the gun.
Sometimes theres reflections on the armor of his hands, but not the gun.

Theres so many inconsitancies with this.
Some enemies have shadows, some that should dont.

The list goes on and on.
Heres a video about it:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXRICIMfFCI

Meanwhile DF is out saying,  "dont worry, ray traceing will help the lighting issue abit".

Halo Infinate looks rushed.
Thats the best way to explain it.... I know supposedly they have had years to do this, but it doesnt look like it.
Its lacking polish and consistancy.

edit:

Also The Cherno's take:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWtEcbiuLBQ

Particle effects from explosions, have animations that are so short, that you notice the frame they disappear.
Normally embers, and glows/sparks would fall to the ground before disappearing.... in halo infinate their burning bright still in air, and just dramatically from 1 frame to the next, dissappear. 

Theres horrible texture work, at even mid range.... fade of texture quality. Some things that should be clear and sharp, look like texture soup.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 27 July 2020

@JRPGfan 

That guy is a massive PS fanboy. Though he does make some good points.

This is a more in depth technical video for those in are in the know about what was wrong. There a lot more than needs fixing that just the lighting and some pop ins that Digital Foundry covers they gloss over a lot.

NX Gamer covers gives his impressions on the Xbox conference and analysis including Halo Infinite. He doesn't even think Slipspace is a new engine.



Around the Network
hinch said:
@JRPGfan 

That guy is a massive PS fanboy. Though he does make some good points.

This is a more in depth technical video for those in are in the know about what was wrong. There a lot more than needs fixing that just the lighting that Digital Foundry covers.

NX Gamer covers gives his impressions on the Xbox conference and analysis including Halo Infinite. He doesn't even think Slipspace is a new engine.

Yes he does.
He points out its much much more than lightning issues, and shows it with video proof.  
(when theres video proof, your first line of reply is unnessary)

The video you posted by NX Gamer, talks about much of the same stuff btw.

Whats your take on The Cherno's video? Hes a Game engine dev, that likes Microsoft, and loved old halo games.
He was trying to be nice about it, and said this:

"Looks like a current gen game. That's being generous." - The Cherno.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 27 July 2020

All I can say is I don't think he could have made it though the 8 minute demo. His reaction says it all.

But yeah, he usually tries to be really nice and tried to find good things but he struggled to find anything good about it from a technical perspective. Echos a lot of what others are thinking that there must have been massive dev issues with the game.

Last edited by hinch - on 27 July 2020

Shaunodon said:
Pemalite said:
The game doesn't look next-generation sadly. It does look clean.

But the pop-in, flat lighting, the sprite-work that sticks out... Doesn't leave me with much faith.

In saying that, it also doesn't look bad, so as long as they nail the gameplay it might be okay, unfortunately though, first impressions last and the first impression is always going to be a visual one... Even this trailer doesn't really show the visuals in the best light.

But some of the new gameplay toys look fun.

I'm curious for your take on this: What can they possibly do with the time they have left, and would it be worth delaying 6 months or possibly even a year?

They could implement Voxel based Global Illumination.

The assets are actually high quality, some of the specular highlights (I.E Brutes teeth) and texture maps were exceptionally good.

hinch said:

Its the complete lack of decals that's jarring. No mud on tyres on the Warthog. No steps on wet mud. No blood on floor. No bullet holes, no scorch marks left after explosions.

Shadows or lighting just looks flat. Hardly any hard shadows left by well anything even under flood lighting for the Elite inside the small base. Little to no SSAO on enemies. Guns missing lighting from muzzle flash. Explosions and grenades don't emit any light.

Even smaller minute details like grenade teleporting because MC never had it in his hand before thown and ship clipping through tree. Then then you have inconsistent resolution on textures and some enemy animations stuck in last gen. Foliage is completely static.... Everything just looks a little too clean and lack imperfections etc etc.

I mean its not even standard stuff, its quite shocking that they thought it was okay to show that build off (apparently was an old build of the game)

Saying that, the game does look quite fun to play. Which is the main thing and graphics can be updated. I would say they should delay it until its ready but that's just me.

Don't forget the lack of alpha transparencies, they saw fit to use allot of non-transparent effects, it does save allot of bandwidth, which fits in with the base Xbox One's capabilities...

Azzanation said:

To be fair, the game was never intended to be a next gen game, it was designed with base X1 hardware in mind at 60fps with an open world design.. which is quite ambitions for base X1. 

To also be fair... That is also not our problem, once Microsoft starts pushing the narrative that it's a next-gen title, then expectations will obviously shift to match... Microsoft needed to match those expectations.

Halo was always a graphical showpiece for the console it releases on.

Azzanation said:

I get the feeling too many gamers are too graphic focused these days. Halo was never a Crysis when it comes to visuals, Halo always carried great art styles and offered top of the line gameplay for its genre. Halo 4 and 5 was where 343 tried to go for the more realistic route and focusing on visuals over gameplay which was some of the major criticisms for those games at the time. Infinite seems to be focusing on what made Halo great in the first place, unfortunately that comes at a cost.

I disagree.
Halo was always pushing the graphics envelope until Halo 5 came along when 60fps got prioritized.

Halo 1 and 2 were pushing some impressive shader and parallax effects back in the day, Halo 3 was pushing a HDR lighting pipeline in conjunction with things like Tessellated water.
Halo 4 had subsurface scattering and screen space ambient occlusion.

They were some of the most visually impressive games on their release using some of the latest technologies.

Yes the good art was an additional layer on top, but Halo was a technical showpiece for Xbox, lets not kid ourselves.

You can have great art and the latest and greatest rendering effects, one doesn't come at the cost of another.

Azzanation said:

Fingers crossed we will see improvements with added Ray-Tracing if they offer it. If they don't, it doesn't bother me, i play Halo for the story and gameplay foremost so i am more interested in seeing what the game offers in those terms.  

I am hoping they use the Ray Tracing for improved lighting rather than reflections or shadowing, it's the lighting that lets it down the most.

And like you, I play Halo for the Gameplay and Story, but... I also want it to be a game that leads the industry on the technology front like it used to, so constructive criticism on it's visual representation isn't a bad thing, one thing Microsoft tends to do is listen to community uproar. - Although in this instance that doesn't seem to be the case, Halo 5 was a dropped ball on the visual front as well. (Plus gameplay and story was pretty average.)

JRPGfan said:

Its more than that.

Tree's/grass is static, doesnt move at all, its lifeless.
Characters, talk without animations (face doesnt move).
When they die (the brute that dies in the air), its just frozen in animation as it drops down, from the moment it died in the air.
You toss a grande onto a enemy (those that stick onto enemies) they dont panic and run around in panic and spout their lines, like in old halo games.

Agree. The grass though I think is fine. They seem to be very high quality assets.
The tree's though remind me of Halo: Combat Evolved assets, they likely wanted to harken back to that art style... But the static nature of those assets makes the world seem uninteresting...
And that sucks, because the new Zen processors should open up a TON of possibilities in allowing for more micro-details in simulation quality.

The A.I stuff, it's hard to tell the A.I routines from such a short video, but there are some new A.I scripting that seemed impressive, like a Brute throwing a Grunt, need to see more gameplay to really get an idea on the extent of the new A.I routines.

JRPGfan said:

Theres so many inconsitancies with this.
Some enemies have shadows, some that should dont.

Indeed. And I agree. The shadowing is likely a result of the lighting model they opted for, which just isn't a good fit for the game.

JRPGfan said:

Halo Infinate looks rushed.
Thats the best way to explain it.... I know supposedly they have had years to do this, but it doesnt look like it.
Its lacking polish and consistancy.

I don't think it looks rushed, it just looks incomplete, it just needs some more time in the development pipeline... I would personally be okay if they delayed it for 6-12 months in order to fine tune everything.

I would rather a late good game than an early shit game.

Plus they did some game engine swaps which would have restarted development.

hinch said:

NX Gamer covers gives his impressions on the Xbox conference and analysis including Halo Infinite. He doesn't even think Slipspace is a new engine.

 Probably because it isn't.
Like most game engines, developers/publishers don't discard the old and start again from scratch, they build upon and rewrite parts of the engine and rebadge it as something new.

Case in point... The Creation engine from Skyrim Bethesda marketed as a "new" game engine, but in reality it's still based on Gamebryo which in turn is still based on Net Immerse from the 90's.

Call of Duty still has snippets of code from the Quake Engine, Source still has snippets of code from Quake as well, they don't discard everything and start from scratch, they improve on already established foundations, it's cost effective and allows for faster development time.

To me Slipspace has a very clean look as it lacks heavy post-processing, which reminds me of Quake, but some of the shader effects reminds me of the Halo engine aka. Blam!
So I will go out on a limb and say they took the old Halo Engine and overhauled it from top to bottom, which comes with it a heap of old and new nuances.









--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

hinch said:
Pemalite said:
The game doesn't look next-generation sadly. It does look clean.

But the pop-in, flat lighting, the sprite-work that sticks out... Doesn't leave me with much faith.

In saying that, it also doesn't look bad, so as long as they nail the gameplay it might be okay, unfortunately though, first impressions last and the first impression is always going to be a visual one... Even this trailer doesn't really show the visuals in the best light.

But some of the new gameplay toys look fun.

Its the complete lack of decals that's jarring. No mud on tyres on the Warthog. No steps on wet mud. No blood on floor. No bullet holes, no scorch marks left after explosions.

Shadows or lighting just looks flat. Hardly any hard shadows left by well anything even under flood lighting for the Elite inside the small base. Little to no SSAO on enemies. Guns missing lighting from muzzle flash. Explosions and grenades don't emit any light.

Even smaller minute details like grenade teleporting because MC never had it in his hand before thown and ship clipping through tree. Then then you have inconsistent resolution on textures and some enemy animations stuck in last gen. Foliage is completely static.... Everything just looks a little too clean and lack imperfections etc etc.

I mean its not even standard stuff, its quite shocking that they thought it was okay to show that build off (apparently was an old build of the game)

Saying that, the game does look quite fun to play. Which is the main thing and graphics can be updated. I would say they should delay it until its ready but that's just me.

One of the best breakdowns I've read of why the visual quality seems lackluster. Even current gen TLOU2 has almost every one of these thing you've mentioned.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Pemalite said:
Shaunodon said:

I'm curious for your take on this: What can they possibly do with the time they have left, and would it be worth delaying 6 months or possibly even a year?

They could implement Voxel based Global Illumination.

The assets are actually high quality, some of the specular highlights (I.E Brutes teeth) and texture maps were exceptionally good.

hinch said:

Its the complete lack of decals that's jarring. No mud on tyres on the Warthog. No steps on wet mud. No blood on floor. No bullet holes, no scorch marks left after explosions.

Shadows or lighting just looks flat. Hardly any hard shadows left by well anything even under flood lighting for the Elite inside the small base. Little to no SSAO on enemies. Guns missing lighting from muzzle flash. Explosions and grenades don't emit any light.

Even smaller minute details like grenade teleporting because MC never had it in his hand before thown and ship clipping through tree. Then then you have inconsistent resolution on textures and some enemy animations stuck in last gen. Foliage is completely static.... Everything just looks a little too clean and lack imperfections etc etc.

I mean its not even standard stuff, its quite shocking that they thought it was okay to show that build off (apparently was an old build of the game)

Saying that, the game does look quite fun to play. Which is the main thing and graphics can be updated. I would say they should delay it until its ready but that's just me.

Don't forget the lack of alpha transparencies, they saw fit to use allot of non-transparent effects, it does save allot of bandwidth, which fits in with the base Xbox One's capabilities...

Azzanation said:

To be fair, the game was never intended to be a next gen game, it was designed with base X1 hardware in mind at 60fps with an open world design.. which is quite ambitions for base X1. 

To also be fair... That is also not our problem, once Microsoft starts pushing the narrative that it's a next-gen title, then expectations will obviously shift to match... Microsoft needed to match those expectations.

Halo was always a graphical showpiece for the console it releases on.

Azzanation said:

I get the feeling too many gamers are too graphic focused these days. Halo was never a Crysis when it comes to visuals, Halo always carried great art styles and offered top of the line gameplay for its genre. Halo 4 and 5 was where 343 tried to go for the more realistic route and focusing on visuals over gameplay which was some of the major criticisms for those games at the time. Infinite seems to be focusing on what made Halo great in the first place, unfortunately that comes at a cost.

I disagree.
Halo was always pushing the graphics envelope until Halo 5 came along when 60fps got prioritized.

Halo 1 and 2 were pushing some impressive shader and parallax effects back in the day, Halo 3 was pushing a HDR lighting pipeline in conjunction with things like Tessellated water.
Halo 4 had subsurface scattering and screen space ambient occlusion.

They were some of the most visually impressive games on their release using some of the latest technologies.

Yes the good art was an additional layer on top, but Halo was a technical showpiece for Xbox, lets not kid ourselves.

You can have great art and the latest and greatest rendering effects, one doesn't come at the cost of another.

Azzanation said:

Fingers crossed we will see improvements with added Ray-Tracing if they offer it. If they don't, it doesn't bother me, i play Halo for the story and gameplay foremost so i am more interested in seeing what the game offers in those terms.  

I am hoping they use the Ray Tracing for improved lighting rather than reflections or shadowing, it's the lighting that lets it down the most.

And like you, I play Halo for the Gameplay and Story, but... I also want it to be a game that leads the industry on the technology front like it used to, so constructive criticism on it's visual representation isn't a bad thing, one thing Microsoft tends to do is listen to community uproar. - Although in this instance that doesn't seem to be the case, Halo 5 was a dropped ball on the visual front as well. (Plus gameplay and story was pretty average.)

JRPGfan said:

Its more than that.

Tree's/grass is static, doesnt move at all, its lifeless.
Characters, talk without animations (face doesnt move).
When they die (the brute that dies in the air), its just frozen in animation as it drops down, from the moment it died in the air.
You toss a grande onto a enemy (those that stick onto enemies) they dont panic and run around in panic and spout their lines, like in old halo games.

Agree. The grass though I think is fine. They seem to be very high quality assets.
The tree's though remind me of Halo: Combat Evolved assets, they likely wanted to harken back to that art style... But the static nature of those assets makes the world seem uninteresting...
And that sucks, because the new Zen processors should open up a TON of possibilities in allowing for more micro-details in simulation quality.

The A.I stuff, it's hard to tell the A.I routines from such a short video, but there are some new A.I scripting that seemed impressive, like a Brute throwing a Grunt, need to see more gameplay to really get an idea on the extent of the new A.I routines.

JRPGfan said:

Theres so many inconsitancies with this.
Some enemies have shadows, some that should dont.

Indeed. And I agree. The shadowing is likely a result of the lighting model they opted for, which just isn't a good fit for the game.

JRPGfan said:

Halo Infinate looks rushed.
Thats the best way to explain it.... I know supposedly they have had years to do this, but it doesnt look like it.
Its lacking polish and consistancy.

I don't think it looks rushed, it just looks incomplete, it just needs some more time in the development pipeline... I would personally be okay if they delayed it for 6-12 months in order to fine tune everything.

I would rather a late good game than an early shit game.

Plus they did some game engine swaps which would have restarted development.

hinch said:

NX Gamer covers gives his impressions on the Xbox conference and analysis including Halo Infinite. He doesn't even think Slipspace is a new engine.

 Probably because it isn't.
Like most game engines, developers/publishers don't discard the old and start again from scratch, they build upon and rewrite parts of the engine and rebadge it as something new.

Case in point... The Creation engine from Skyrim Bethesda marketed as a "new" game engine, but in reality it's still based on Gamebryo which in turn is still based on Net Immerse from the 90's.

Call of Duty still has snippets of code from the Quake Engine, Source still has snippets of code from Quake as well, they don't discard everything and start from scratch, they improve on already established foundations, it's cost effective and allows for faster development time.

To me Slipspace has a very clean look as it lacks heavy post-processing, which reminds me of Quake, but some of the shader effects reminds me of the Halo engine aka. Blam!
So I will go out on a limb and say they took the old Halo Engine and overhauled it from top to bottom, which comes with it a heap of old and new nuances.




This is true. Halo 1's visuals sold me on an OG Xbox back in 2001. A game like that just wasn't possible on the PS2. Halo Infinite has failed to deliver that " I must buy this console, just for this" type of reaction out of me. I am sticking with my Xbox One X for now.