Halo 3 Natively runs at 640p?

[michaels]

http://www.n4g.com/xbox360/News-70713.aspx

 

[blurredvision]

I hate sites like that! Where in the hell do you click to get to the forum post? Regardless, who cares if it runs native in 640p? It looks absolutely gorgeous running at 1080p at my house, I don't care what other people think it looks like .

EDIT: In reading some of the comments on that site, it seems like some random guy tried counting pixels on the edge of an in-game object or something? Either way, this is far from anything considered noteworthy.

 

[jhbball]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
I hate sites like that! Where in the hell do you click to get to the forum post? Regardless, who cares if it runs native in 640p? It looks absolutely gorgeous running at 1080p at my house, I don't care what other people think it looks like .

EDIT: In reading some of the comments on that site, it seems like some random guy tried counting pixels on the edge of an in-game object or something? Either way, this is far from anything considered noteworthy.

Upscaled HD 4tl.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: jhbball
Upscaled HD 4tl.

If it looks "next-gen" with no conversion artifacts, why does it matter?

 

[RaiderJ]

Isn't the point of a console that you don't have to worry about stuff like internal resolutions and such? Plus, anyone who is really that concerned about graphics should be more focused on the PC, maybe the PS3.

 

[MikeyLSU]

if you weren't worried about graphics you would still be playing XBOX or PS2 or maybe even PS1

 

[PricklyPete]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
if you weren't worried about graphics you would still be playing XBOX or PS2 or maybe even PS1

meh... what was the last good game that came out for the Xbox...PS2? New games come out on new platforms.

I think it is stupid to be worried about what resolution a game is rendered at as long as the output looks good.

Halo 3 doesn't have the best graphics...its that simple. It has very nice graphics...just not the best. The gameplay kicks ass though IMHO.

 

[michaels]

"maybe the PS3"

Joke post?

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: PricklyPete

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
if you weren't worried about graphics you would still be playing XBOX or PS2 or maybe even PS1

meh... what was the last good game that came out for the Xbox...PS2? New games come out on new platforms.

I think it is stupid to be worried about what resolution a game is rendered at as long as the output looks good.

Halo 3 doesn't have the best graphics...its that simple. It has very nice graphics...just not the best. The gameplay kicks ass though IMHO.

Yeah, I played last night and honestly didn't even think "Oh wow, it is so noticeable that this is running at less than 720p." I could kind of notice in PGR3 because of jaggies but the only time I really noticed jaggies last night was on a cliff at Halo 0.

 

[randay]

how are the screenshots so nice though? surely they are higher then 640p?

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: randay
how are the screenshots so nice though? surely they are higher then 640p?

Screenshots have AA added to them

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: randay
how are the screenshots so nice though? surely they are higher then 640p?

Screenshots have AA added to them

Yep, as long as the game is in motion, I don't notice the jaggies. When I stop, I'll notice them. That's when I noticed the jaggies on the cliff I mentioned above. I had just happened to stop for a minute at that spot.

 

[RaiderJ]

Originally posted by: michaels
"maybe the PS3"

Joke post?

The PS3 can output some pretty impressive graphics, arguably better than the 360. Plus, if you actually buy a PS3 for $500+, I could see complaining about <720p output.

I have a Wii, and as long as the game is fun, graphics aren't that important. Of course, I grew up on the NES.

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: RaiderJ
I have a Wii, and as long as the game is fun, graphics aren't that important. Of course, I grew up on the NES.

I grew up on the NES and do not like the Wii and regret buying it.
That being said, I agree with your "if the game is fun" sentiment because this is really a non-issue just like the Bioshock widescreen hub-bub.

Haters will hate, lovers will love, and I'll be somewhere in between.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: RaiderJ

Originally posted by: michaels
"maybe the PS3"

Joke post?

The PS3 can output some pretty impressive graphics, arguably better than the 360. Plus, if you actually buy a PS3 for $500+, I could see complaining about <720p output.

I have a Wii, and as long as the game is fun, graphics aren't that important. Of course, I grew up on the NES.

I agree with your point about as long as a game is fun. It can look pretty all it wants, but if its not fun to play, why play it? And in regards to the PS3 - it won't even upscale a game to 1080i if your tv only supports 480p, then 1080i/p. Each console has it's limitations. H3 looks pretty damn good as it is, upscaled or not.

 

[gtsing]

meh... what was the last good game that came out for the Xbox...PS2? New games come out on new platforms.

FYI the PS2 is still fully supported by Sony and games are still coming out for it.

I think it is stupid to be worried about what resolution a game is rendered at as long as the output looks good.

The good-looking output image depends on the resolution...unless you're just a noob and can't tell the difference between 480i and 720p/1080p.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: gtsing
The good-looking output image depends on the resolution...unless you're just a noob and can't tell the difference between 480i and 720p/1080p.

Most everyone can tell the difference between 480i and 720p. Telling the difference between 640p and 720p is a little more difficult unless you take pictures and start counting pixels like Beyond3D did.

They obviously dipped the resolution a bit to make sure the frame rates stayed solid.

 

[CP5670]

wrong thread.

 

[EvilComputer92]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: gtsing
The good-looking output image depends on the resolution...unless you're just a noob and can't tell the difference between 480i and 720p/1080p.

Most everyone can tell the difference between 480i and 720p. Telling the difference between 640p and 720p is a little more difficult unless you take pictures and start counting pixels like Beyond3D did.

They obviously dipped the resolution a bit to make sure the frame rates stayed solid.

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: gtsing
The good-looking output image depends on the resolution...unless you're just a noob and can't tell the difference between 480i and 720p/1080p.

Most everyone can tell the difference between 480i and 720p. Telling the difference between 640p and 720p is a little more difficult unless you take pictures and start counting pixels like Beyond3D did.

They obviously dipped the resolution a bit to make sure the frame rates stayed solid.

Not at all. when using the battle rifle at long range I did notice conversion artifacts and something did seem a little off. Especially on the rocks in certain levels when viewing them from long range, they become heavily pixelized. It also seems to dramatically amplify the lack of AA, due to it being upscaled to 1366x768 on my TV. I thought thats what the EDRAM chip was for? What happened to the whole free AA thing?

Regardless, the game is still loads of fun. However, Bungie and MS flat out lying that their game supported full 720p without upscaling, well it's nothing good. The game's art direction and level design is amazing, but it's clearly being hampered by the engine it's running on.

You do NOT need to take photos of your TV screen and measure pixels to notice that the game was not running at 1280x720 internally.

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: jhbball
Upscaled HD 4tl.

If it looks "next-gen" with no conversion artifacts, why does it matter?

but it DOES have conversion artifacts, the simple fact that your upscaling from a lower resolution introduces blurring. Whether you can notice it or not is an entirley different matter. That's why it matters whats being rendered internally. The game is only kept next gen graphically with it's amazing level design.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: gtsing

meh... what was the last good game that came out for the Xbox...PS2? New games come out on new platforms.

FYI the PS2 is still fully supported by Sony and games are still coming out for it.

yup there have been a lot of good games that came out for ps2 this year, while the xbox has like 3 games that came out this year. ps2 continues to have releases on the horizon and xbox seems to have been completely phased out.

 

[RaiderJ]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: RaiderJ

Originally posted by: michaels
"maybe the PS3"

Joke post?

The PS3 can output some pretty impressive graphics, arguably better than the 360. Plus, if you actually buy a PS3 for $500+, I could see complaining about <720p output.

I have a Wii, and as long as the game is fun, graphics aren't that important. Of course, I grew up on the NES.

I agree with your point about as long as a game is fun. It can look pretty all it wants, but if its not fun to play, why play it? And in regards to the PS3 - it won't even upscale a game to 1080i if your tv only supports 480p, then 1080i/p. Each console has it's limitations. H3 looks pretty damn good as it is, upscaled or not.

That resolution limitation on the PS3 is pretty ridiculous. It's ironic that as forward thinking as Sony was including HD media support, 7.1 surround, HDMI, and whatever else, they totally bungled up PS2 and resolution - the very things that are important now.

Microsoft did right by setting a baseline of 720p + 5.1 audio. 1080p is a bit too aggressive for this generation, and 480p is definitely showing it's age. They also did a fantastic job with their Live service. Completely blows anything Sony and Nintendo have out of the water.

 

[BDawg]

I hate that my PS3 doesn't upscale 720p to the 1080i my TV supports. However, not having proper scaling may be better than MS allowing developers to cheat by not using real HD resolutions.

 

[blurredvision]

Here is Bungie's official comment on the whole thing:

You Owe me 80p!

One item making the interwebs rounds this week was the scandalous revelation that Halo 3 runs at ?640p? which isn?t even technically a resolution. However, the interweb detectives did notice that Halo 3?s vertical resolution, when captured from a frame buffer, is indeed 640 pixels. So what gives? Did we short change you 80 pixels?

Naturally it?s more complicated than that. In fact, you could argue we gave you 1280 pixels of vertical resolution, since 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.

This ability to display a full range of HDR, combined with our advanced lighting, material and postprocessing engine, gives our scenes, large and small, a compelling, convincing and ultimately ?real? feeling, and at a steady and smooth frame rate, which in the end was far more important to us than the ability to display a few extra pixels. Making this decision simpler still is the fact that the 360 scales the
?almost-720p? image effortlessly all the way up to 1080p if you so desire.

In fact, if you do a comparison shot between the native 1152x640 image and the scaled 1280x720, it?s practically impossible to discern the difference. We would ignore it entirely were it not for the internet?s propensity for drama where none exists. In fact the reason we haven?t mentioned this before in weekly updates, is the simple fact that it would have distracted conversation away from more important aspects of the game, and given tinfoil hats some new gristle to chew on as they catalogued their toenail clippings.

That is from their weekly update posting on their front page this morning. Gotta love the bolded part!

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
Here is Bungie's official comment on the whole thing:

You Owe me 80p!

One item making the interwebs rounds this week was the scandalous revelation that Halo 3 runs at ?640p? which isn?t even technically a resolution. However, the interweb detectives did notice that Halo 3?s vertical resolution, when captured from a frame buffer, is indeed 640 pixels. So what gives? Did we short change you 80 pixels?

Naturally it?s more complicated than that. In fact, you could argue we gave you 1280 pixels of vertical resolution, since 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.

This ability to display a full range of HDR, combined with our advanced lighting, material and postprocessing engine, gives our scenes, large and small, a compelling, convincing and ultimately ?real? feeling, and at a steady and smooth frame rate, which in the end was far more important to us than the ability to display a few extra pixels. Making this decision simpler still is the fact that the 360 scales the
?almost-720p? image effortlessly all the way up to 1080p if you so desire.

In fact, if you do a comparison shot between the native 1152x640 image and the scaled 1280x720, it?s practically impossible to discern the difference. We would ignore it entirely were it not for the internet?s propensity for drama where none exists. In fact the reason we haven?t mentioned this before in weekly updates, is the simple fact that it would have distracted conversation away from more important aspects of the game, and given tinfoil hats some new gristle to chew on as they catalogued their toenail clippings.

That is from their weekly update posting on their front page this morning. Gotta love the bolded part!

Glad they cleared it up

 

[EvilComputer92]

80p? Another way to say it would be that they shorted us 184320 pixels. Of course Bungie won't say it like that, as it would have "distracted coversation away from more important parts of the game." And yes, it IS noticable in game without peering into your tv screen. At least they admitted it though. It should also be noted that the problem gets worse as the 1152x640 image is scaled to fit a 1366x768(as almost all non 1080p LCD TVs are) or a 1920x1080(1080p TVs) display. Honestly there is no reason to downplay this issue, just admit that it exists and enjoy the other excellent aspects of this game.