Halo 3

[Jedi2016]

On a completely different topic (hence the separate posting), how do you get screenshots that you've taken? I read somewhere that it requires a Gold Live account to upload screens to Bungie.net. Is that true?

 

[Solid Fro]

The discussion was started here: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=43330&page=12 , not Sony Defense Force.

1138x640 is not HD and will never be HD. If you guys want to spin this into a fanboy diatribe, go right ahead.

 

[Azuremen]

The discussion was started here: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=43330&page=12 , not Sony Defense Force.

1138x640 is not HD and will never be HD. If you guys want to spin this into a fanboy diatribe, go right ahead.

Actually, it is. Since HD is defined as anything beyond traditional NTSC, which is what, 480?

So get off your soap box and go back to the Sony room.

 

[G.T]

You know, I wouldn't be surprised if Halo 3 is like that. It definitely looks lower res in some parts, but I'm no techy so I'm not 100% sure it's true. But I wouldn't go as far as saying it isn't HD though.

 

[Sprite]

Put it this way, it looks stunning in parts and the resolution means zilch when it looks this good. Anyone who complains about Halo not running 720p is doing so just to cause a **** storm not to prove anything.

I have the PS3 and 360 running on the same TV (Sony KDL-46X2000 1080p) both running HDMI, and they both look great not matter what the res be it 720p or 1080p.

Im happy with both systems and Halo looks the muts nuts, nuff said.

 

[Solid Fro]

Actually, it is. Since HD is defined as anything beyond traditional NTSC, which is what, 480?

So get off your soap box and go back to the Sony room.

Not, it is not. High Definition begins at 1280x720, period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television

I am not saying Halo 3 looks bad. I am saying that another 360 game is not outputting to a HD resolution. And I bet it says HD on the Halo 3 box.

 

[G.T]

I am not saying Halo 3 looks bad. I am saying that another 360 game is not outputting to a HD resolution. And I bet it says HD on the Halo 3 box.

It goes as far as saying 1080p on the box...

 

[Jedi2016]

The discussion was started here: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=43330&page=12 , not Sony Defense Force.

1138x640 is not HD and will never be HD. If you guys want to spin this into a fanboy diatribe, go right ahead.

It's them making the fanboy diatribe about it, not us. I'm saying that their methodology is flawed, and that all of the tests that I'm capable of performing indicate the game, in fact, runs at 720p.

Hell, the image at the bottom of the page you listed isn't even a photo.. it's a screengrab. I can spend ten seconds in Photohop and get an image to look exactly like that.

 

[Azuremen]

Not, it is not. High Definition begins at 1280x720, period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television

I am not saying Halo 3 looks bad. I am saying that another 360 game is not outputting to a HD resolution. And I bet it says HD on the Halo 3 box.

Errm, read the first line next time...

High-definition television (HDTV) is a digital television broadcasting system with a significantly higher resolution than traditional formats (NTSC, SECAM, PAL)

 

[Solid Fro]

Errm, read the first line next time...

Read the whole article next time...

Three HDTV standards are currently defined by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU-R BT.709). They include 1080i (1,080 actively interlaced lines), 1080p (1,080 progressively scanned lines), and 720p (720 progressively scanned lines). All standards use a 16:9 aspect ratio,

1138x640 is not even close. At that resolution, the image has to be upscaled and fitted to match 1280x720 or 1920x1080. That is why you see jaggies at that stair-step effect in the pictures at Beyond3D.

 

[Azuremen]

Those are HDTV standards. Just because something is not a standard does not mean it is not HD.

Learn what words mean in the future and read more than just what things get labeled. By your argument, 1920 by 1200 is not HD because its not a standard for HDTV.

HD and HDTV are different.

 

[Solid Fro]

If we never had standards, we would never have HD, because we would have all of these ridiculous resolutions such as the one Halo 3 is being rendered at. If it is not at least 1280x720, then it is not HD. Spin it however you want.

 

[Azuremen]

If we never had standards, we would never have HD, because we would have all of these ridiculous resolutions such as the one Halo 3 is being rendered at. If it is not at least 1280x720, then it is not HD. Spin it however you want.

Standards are just there for ease. HD is High Definition, which is anything notably beyond 480. Your argument is similar to saying a 1:1 display is not a monitor because its not 4:3 or 16:10, the standards.

I'll take this response from you as you realizing you are mistaken but not wanting to admit it. Thank you.

Thus, Halo 3 is HD, even if it runs at that "ridiculous resolution"

 

[Jedi2016]

But the game is 1280x720.



That's a 1280x720 screenshot taken from IGN. As you can clearly see, the jaggies on the edge are precisely one pixel wide. If the image were actually 640p, then there would be some blending between them, but there's not.

Bear in mind that the "proof image" that you posted on B3D is also a direct screenshot, just like mine. We can't both be right.

And, before you say it, screenshots taken from within Theater mode are rendered at 1920x1080, and are fully anti-aliased with no jaggies whatsoever. Which makes this a live in-game image.

 

[Solid Fro]

But the game is 1280x720.



That's a 1280x720 screenshot taken from IGN. As you can clearly see, the jaggies on the edge are precisely one pixel wide. If the image were actually 640p, then there would be some blending between them, but there's not.

Bear in mind that the "proof image" that you posted on B3D is also a direct screenshot, just like mine. We can't both be right.

And, before you say it, screenshots taken from within Theater mode are rendered at 1920x1080, and are fully anti-aliased with no jaggies whatsoever. Which makes this a live in-game image.

Is that similar to Photo mode in GT4? Of course it can render a still image at a HD resolution such as 1920x1080. Is the actual gameplay being rendered at that resolution?

 

[Azuremen]

Is that similar to Photo mode in GT4? Of course it can render a still image at a HD resolution such as 1920x1080. Is the actual gameplay being rendered at that resolution?

Read the last sentence of his post...

Which makes this a live in-game image.

 

[Jedi2016]

Is that similar to Photo mode in GT4? Of course it can render a still image at a HD resolution such as 1920x1080. Is the actual gameplay being rendered at that resolution?

It's irrelevant, because the image that I posted does not come from Theater mode, it's an in-game screenshot.

 

[Solid Fro]

I would have to say bullshot on these IGN images. I cannot tell if it's in-game or even if it's the final retail build. The pictures at B3D are what users are experiencing on their TVs.

 

[CDailey]

Who gives a ****. It looks good, its fun, everyone STFU.

 

[Tornado]

I would have to say bullshot on these IGN images. I cannot tell if it's in-game or even if it's the final retail build.

Ah, yes. Because I'm sure Bungie toned down the game from its previous incarnations, and it in fact looked significantly better than it does now.

The pictures at B3D are what users are experiencing on their TVs.

Which could mean anything from their TVs themselves upscale images to 720p from 1138x640 or that they simply don't know what they are talking about.

 

[Solid Fro]

Whatever man. I remember when games were fun, but those days are long gone.

I rather not STFU, even with those in this thread who want me to.

It's not about if Halo 3 looks bad, it's obviously the opposite. However, you would have to question why Bungie decided to choose the non-HD resolution that it did and for what benefits? Why does Halo 3 not render at 1280x720 in-game and rely on the 360's hardware scaler to scale the game to a standard HDTV resolution? This is not the first time a 360 (or PS3) game has done this. Lazy developers, developers being rushed, hardware under-performing?

 

[Tornado]

Whatever man. I remember when games were fun, but those days are long gone.

Hilarious. I remember when games were fun too. It was when I popped in Test Drive Unlimited yesterday. Maybe had you said "when games were polished" or "when games were original" you would have had a better case. But you didn't, and I'm sure that was just a limp-wristed fallback play to dig yourself out of your hole, because saying that is a statement of pure ignorance if it is meant by its actual meaning. The fact that Halo 3's graphics do indeed run at 640p (which is still high definition) has nothing to do with how fun the game is, and it has exactly the opposite effect that "remember when games were fun" argument implies.

I rather not STFU, even with those in this thread who want me to.

You came into this thread with the strict intent of pissing people off, and you expected otherwise?

 

[Jedi2016]

The record has been cleared, and it seems I was wrong. The images on IGN were, in fact, bullshot from one of Bungie's dev boxes. The buffers on the game are, in fact, only 640p. There are, however, two of them operating simultaneously in order to handle the HDR effects. This is directly from Bungie, in response to the B3D thread.

Now, since Solid Fro is going to come out here in a few minutes and start waggling "I told ya so" in my face (despite him likely not having the faintest clue what the folks on B3D are saying, but happily going along with it because it's "bad for Xbox"), I'm going to ask this one question of Solid Fro: Do you own an Xbox360?

I'd also like to reiterate my question from above, on how to retrieve captured screenshots from Theater mode.

 

[Solid Fro]

'm going to ask this one question of Solid Fro: Do you own an Xbox360?

No, I do not. I will NEVER be afraid to say that, unlike Bungie and there missing 80p. Bungie can keep their tinfoil and toenail clippings.

 

[Tornado]

I will NEVER be afraid to say that, unlike Bungie and there missing 80p.

Even more hilarious, as it was Bungie who came out and set the record straight, when they could have more easily covered it up, fobbed it off or ignored it.

 

[Solid Fro]

I think it's deceiving and that goes for any developer, not just Bungie.

 

[Jedi2016]

No, I do not. I will never be afraid to say that...

I wasn't implying that you were. I was simply asking a question, in order to determine a simple fact.

So, in light of this... why are you here? As a non-Xbox owner, why would you ever bother reading news about an Xbox-exclusive title? And why would you feel compelled to come to the Xbox boards and talk about something you don't even have? You're in no position whatsoever to supply an opinion about anything Xbox-related, because you have no basis for such an opinion.

You know what I do with consoles I don't own? I ignore them. I haven't read a single piece of news or reviews of any game regarding the Wii, and I haven't visited the Nintendo boards here since the Gamecube days. Because I don't own one.

Apparently that viewpoint doesn't carry over to everyone else. Especially where bad news is concerned. I don't suppose you would have posted such a link if the news had been positive? No? I didn't think so.

If your purpose on these boards is to incite flame wars, which is precisely what you achieved, by the way, then I suggest you find somewhere else to post, because I don't think I'm the only one who doesn't want to hear the ramblings of someone who doesn't even own the console and/or game being discussed.

 

[Jedi2016]

I think it's deceiving and that goes for any developer, not just Bungie.

Somehow I get the distinct impression that you wouldn't be saying that if it were a Playstation developer who was caught in the act like that. Say, Konami on MGS4, or Polyphony Digital on GT5? I've encouraged the folks on B3D to examine those titles, and others, with no restrictions of console.

 

[Zrow]

Today's the first day that I've really gotten a chance to sit down and play as much as I wanted, and I've been working my way up on the multiplayer for a lot of it. I can't beleive it's already 8:00 - it's eaten up most of my day.

I'm at level 8 now (Corporal), just doing Lone Wolf for now, and it's been a blast. I think team battles are a lot more fun with people you know, so I'm gonna wait a few days until some friends of mine to pick it up to do that.

Also, after spending some more time with the multiplayer, I definitely agree that the Assault Rifle is a badass weapon. I still prefer the Battle Rifle, but I'm more than satisfied with the AR if that's what I have.

 

[McLaren]

I think it's deceiving and that goes for any developer, not just Bungie.

How is it decieving when Bungie came out about it?