Xbox 360 Fanboy

Have fun and play the game you nerds , you name one next generation game that can do what h3 does with multi player campain and vehicels.

Reply

ya i played it on a 50" samsung plasma (from 4 feet away) and i could not tell the difference... in fact the first thing i noticed was the amazing HDR effects.

Reply

To the guy that talked about the lighting being "horrible":

You're an idiot. The end. The lighting is the best I've seen in any console game.

Reply

I don't really swallow this excuse for the lower quality. Is the dynamic lighting really that powerful and worth it? Cause if that's true, than maybe the 360 is more limited graphically than we thought. Though with Halo 3 being far from the standard for the 360's graphics (Gears of War and BioShock put Halo 3 to shame), I have to wonder if this is more Bungie's fault.

********

Michael C. Sherrin
http://www.prodigeek.com/

Reply

It's no GEars or Bio, but it looks great, no issues with it here. My vote would be for the HDR lighting over the higher res any day.

Reply

Bioshock didn't impress me at all as far as graphics go, and Gears had 8 people on screen max with no vehicles and SMALL levels all around. Halo 3 far surpasses both these games in not only graphics but gameplay, and gameplay is all that matters in the end anyway.

Reply

Truthfully, I actually noticed that it had more jaggies than I had seen in other games before all this hoopla started happening, but I really didn't care. Now that I know why, I'm really glad they made that choice. I loves me some HDR lighting.

It still looks much better that my Wii on my 50". I have a hard time playing it because the jaggies are too bad...

Reply

This sucks! With 1152x640 you get 20% less pixels than if it were running at 1280x720.

Reply

"Everyone is all up in arms about it because this generation is all about "True HD" etc and consumers feel cheated out of their 80p."

Not sure about "everyone" but ps3 fanboys sure "feel cheated" about it, and people far more concerned about _stats_ or _specs_ than about games.

The game looks great and is loads of fun. Thats all I need to know or care about. I couldn't give a shit about 80 more or less lines and upscaling.

Reply

I don't care about this at all, it looks really good imho, and that is all that matters.

Reply

Idiots and Know-it-all's are the only ones saying that they can "Tell" the difference. As long as it's not 8-bit Atari 2600 graphics I could give a flying fuck about what the Rez is on any game for any system.

Reply

Not to be a hater but jaggies on 360 are starting to piss me off. Anytime a line is supposed to be diag it always ends up giving me the jaggies same thing oin forza. GEARS and bioshock kept it to a minimum but halo had them in the 1st cutscene. I have 47inch 1080p samsung. so i doubt that its the tv.

Reply

Still looks amazing!

Reply

The geeks that care can yell and bitch at us to stop playing and having fun so they can count pixels.

Definition of lame.

Reply

I'd rather not start down the slippery slope of vendors making up things to put on the back of the box, even if it is close. The next guy may render at 800x600 and have 30 buffer pages. Does it render nativly to 1080? No. So why lie? It's not an issue with Bungie really, this is a MS licensed game, MS is mostly accountable for this kind of thing. The issuing of the license should mean that the game is up to all MS standards including having the correct icon indicators on the back of the box.

Reply

I've seen so many uneducated comments I had to pipe in.

1) The game is in HD. Most all HD plasma panels never have EXACT 1280x720...they are 1024x768 and up. Do these sets display HD? YES. There are MANY HD resolutions that you probably have never even considered..especially for broadcast. see http://www.smpte.org/home for more info.
2) The back of the box is correct. The game SUPPORTS the resolutions, it NEVER means the game natively outputs in this resolution. Ex. 1080i/1080p. A majority of games do render in 720p natively, never 1080i. That resolution is always on the box to. Can you imagine how hairy the back of boxes would get if devs put every ACTUAL spec on the back of the box instead of what it actually supports? Come on.

Get over it and enjoy the game for what it is.

Reply

I hate the whole OMG ITS ONLY 80 PIXELS argument and it's such a copout for fucks like the person who wrote this blurb. Get rid of HDR, up the resolution, enjoy true HD.

Reply

Dustin, you got it all wrong dude.

It's not that they ran the game at 1152X640 so they can do HDR. This is WRONG.

What they did, in lay terms, is to run a frame buffer at 1152X640 with HDR (High Dynamic Range light effects)and ANOTHER EXTRA frame at 1152X640 with LDR (Low Dynamic Range light effects).

So at every frame, HALO 3 has 2 images of 1152X640 that are combined and upscaled by ANA/HANA to whatever resolution you set you 360 (480i/p,720p,1080i/p or VGA resolutions).

That means that at every single frame you see the 360 rendered it TWICE at 1152X640 (a total of rendered pixels per frame of a 2304X1280 image.

For the regular mortal people, that means that if Bungie wanted go "soft" on all Dynamic light effects (High and low) and do a mediocre looking game in terms of lighnting, they could easily run the game at 1920X1080 progressive scan and have it's frame rate way above the 30's all the time.

Reply

640p is a lower resolution than I used to play FPS games at back in 1998 (1024x768). You have about 79% as much data on screen as you do with 720p.

What really hurts, however, is that Halo 3 *is not HD*. I thought the 360 was all about HD? What gives -- their flagship game doesn't even run an HD resolution?

Reply

Speaking as a PS3 owner (soon to be 360 owner) I think people got worked up over nothing....I mean as far as graphics go, the specs list isn't all that important, at the end of the day it only matters what your eyes are telling you. I play Halo3 at my friends house and my eyes were telling me the game looked great.

Reply