Bungie Confirms: Halo 3 Doesn't Run Natively in HD

[Raptor]

From teamxbox.com:

The latest Bungie Weekly Update has Luke Smith confessing that in fact, Halo 3 doesn't run natively at 720p like all other Xbox 360 games:

"Halo 3 uses not one, but two frame buffers - both of which render at 1152x640 pixels. The reason we chose this slightly unorthodox resolution and this very complex use of two buffers is simple enough to see - lighting. We wanted to preserve as much dynamic range as possible - so we use one for the high dynamic range and one for the low dynamic range values. Both are combined to create the finished on screen image."

Full Story: teamxbox.com | bungie.net

[fevernova]

i wondered why it looked so bad

[Anakin]

The jaggies are a joke in Halo 3.

[{{909}}]

what is the real reason for this then? they already said there was no AA, which would explain the jaggies but with a game in development for so long and to run like this seems unusual.

I have heard that MS are now re badging all game boxes to say the games run in 1080p now they have the ability to upscale them in the new dashboard too. Load of bollocks.

[Anakin]

1st PGR3 and now Halo 3, is this gonna be the trend for 360 games. Some levels of Halo 3 were stunning but one in particular that I laughed at was the level with the snow, it did not look any better than Halo 1.

[Presuming Ed]

having been playing Bioshock for the last few weeks the big surprise was just how bad Halo 3 looked in comparison.. I guess the resolution thing goes some way to explaining that.. but it plays bad too - that underground bunker level at the start of the game, what gives there? I spent ages getting lost running around drab brown corridors - it felt like being transported back 10 years!! I guess I'm used to better sign-posting in games these days.. and better graphics.

[HELPERS]

yeah cod4 makes halo 3 look like toddlers game

fuck off bungie and learn to make 1080p

[ZX7R]

Personally, I'm not that bothered about this HD lark (in this particular case) as I am finding the game to be really fun. The smooth frame rate, shit loads going on, multiplayer and the editor mode alone keeps me more than happy with this title. So thanks Bungie. :-)

[EvilBoB]

I'm playing Halo 3 on a 1080p screen but only in 1080i (Pannys do a nice deinterlace) and I think the game looks great and plays fantastically.

Comparing Halo to Bioshock is a bit silly. Bioshock doesn't have anywhere near as much going on onscreen as Halo 3 does.

[Mario87]

Comparing Halo to Bioshock is a bit silly. Bioshock doesn't have anywhere near as much going on onscreen as Halo 3 does.

There's parts where Halo 3 has nothing going on, on-screen, other than the scenery! And there's parts like that in BioShock too...and BioShock still looks MILES better! So its not silly to compare!

And Halo 3 has been in development for a fair bit longer too! Bungie had no reason to make it look worse than BioShock....yet the still managed too! Even the water looks crap in Halo 3! The BioShock team went all out with water effects and hired a whole team of fluid dynamics experts to help them make it look as good as possbile....and it worked! Why didn't Bungie do that??

IMO...its cos they cant be assed to make a good game! They had pelenty of time to make it, so there's no excuse for it looking how it is!

[mysterym]

There's parts where Halo 3 has nothing going on, on-screen, other than the scenery! And there's parts like that in BioShock too...and BioShock still looks MILES better! So its not silly to compare!

And Halo 3 has been in development for a fair bit longer too! Bungie had no reason to make it look worse than BioShock....yet the still managed too! Even the water looks crap in Halo 3! The BioShock team went all out with water effects and hired a whole team of fluid dynamics experts to help them make it look as good as possbile....and it worked! Why didn't Bungie do that??

IMO...its cos they cant be assed to make a good game! They had pelenty of time to make it, so there's no excuse for it looking how it is!

Play the game in split screen and you rearlise where all the power has gone, halo has always been a game that can play in split screen, and i can't help but think they've cut the graphics fedelity from the game to ensure that the split screen performance stays sweet (which it does).

Comparing a single player game engine to one designed with a multiplayer co-op in mind is not really fair. If COD 4 can support split screen mode in the single player game then i will be impressed.

As to bungie not being able to make a good game, yeah whatever, the gaming press certainly love it as do millions of fans.

Also when comparing to bioshock, you are comparing a game that set inside in small isolated locations against one which plays in a vast arena. Apples and Oranges.

The only thing that matters is that they are both on the 360, and both play awesome. No point taking the mickey out of a game for the hell of it, i don't question its greatness and i paid for it.

[Chubbs]

I like the way this is annouced after launch

[ant3b]

who cares.. plays good looks good.. never ending fun.. im there!!! i even bought this game

[Mario87]

Play the game in split screen and you rearlise where all the power has gone, halo has always been a game that can play in split screen, and i can't help but think they've cut the graphics fedelity from the game to ensure that the split screen performance stays sweet (which it does).

Comparing a single player game engine to one designed with a multiplayer co-op in mind is not really fair. If COD 4 can support split screen mode in the single player game then i will be impressed.

*cough* GoW....*cough*

As for the rest of your post, you do have some valid points. GoW isnt isolated, and the co-op in that looks better than Halo 3!

I just dont see anything that Halo 3 offers that other games cant!

[{{909}}]

wasnt there a news story a while ago that MS were forcing bungie into making the game 1080p, even tho bungie insisted that to keep a solid frame rate it had to be 720p?

Seems like bungie got their way, and then some.

[Chubbs]

wasnt there a news story a while ago that MS were forcing bungie into making the game 1080p, even tho bungie insisted that to keep a solid frame rate it had to be 720p?

Seems like bungie got their way, and then some.

I hope Rockstar do the same to non-hard drive owners then and don't have to compromise for them, against M$ wishes.

[EvilBoB]

And Halo 3 has been in development for a fair bit longer too!

Halo 3 has been in development longer than the Unreal 3 engine? hmmm.. not too sure about that

[MsDG]

Actually they are closer together than I remember. I know it isn't totally accurate guide but UT2004 was released in March 04 and Halo 2 in Oct 04.

So going on the basis that they start on the next game as soon as the last one is released then Halo 3 is 6 months less time spent on it.

[EvilBoB]

So 6 months less development time and I can guarantee that the Unreal dev team was a whole lot bigger as it's cross platform and has already been used in a few games...

Also bear in mind that they would have wanted H3 to still look similar to the previous 2 episodes so as to keep continuity.

I still think the game looks great. Indeed it might not be as spectacularly great as some other games out there but when it's kicking off in Halo 3 there is still a LOT going on onscreen. Some of the sequences with the flood have ridiculous amounts of enemies/friendlies onscreen.

[{{909}}]

i agree you cant really compare Halo and GoW/Bioshock. Halo3 has alot of wide open areas with huge draw distances, i presume it still has those flying vehicles too. GoW and Bioshock are both contained to small rooms with alot of detail hidden in the darkness.
It would make more sense to compare halo with UT2008 or whatever its called, that will have similar gameplay and if it looks anything like the movies ive seen, the graphics absolutely pee on Halo3.