Don't Expect A Halo 'Inside Infinite' Blog Update This Month

The bar has just been raised too. Last year, Halo was being compared to some of the best games of last gen - Ghost of Tsushima, Last of Us 2 etc in terms of environmental detail, lighting, character models etc etc

Now, I feel that Halo will be compared to Horizon: Forbidden West, Ratchet & Clank, and whatever other graphically impressive titles are shown.

I don't expect H:ZD to be 'native' 4k and 60fps, but even if its running at 1080p equivalent and using some temporal reconstruction or 'Fidelity FX' (can't be DLSS LOL) to boost the perceived image quality, Halo will still be compared.

I know its a very different game at its core, but they do still offer areas for comparison - both have Flora and Fauna, both have sandy areas, both have big open areas, Character models, skin/hair, explosions etc etc.

I know Graphics are just a part of the overall package that can really enhance or 'break' the immersion and game-play, story etc also play a big part, but I still think the Bar has been raised a lot since we last saw Halo. Halo is supposed to be one of MS's flagship titles and needs to be up there with the 'best' - and I include Graphics as part of that. H:FW looks stunning and no doubt has good game-play and story (like the first), so its not too much to expect this from MS's biggest franchise too...

@BAMozzy But why should Halo be visually on par with HFW. Halo has its own unique look and art style, they have never strived for realism. For Halo the fluidity of controls, the sandbox, the multiplayer and the core mechanics are more important the other Graphical showcases.
Most gamers know this…they just make the comparison anyway.
Especially when they said they would go for a less noisy design, for different puproses ( competition is one of them ). It is not gonna be ultra realistic, but its own art-style, which is a good thing.
Its more of a timeless artstyle. Thats the reason people still love the Original Trilogy even though the graphics are mediocre. Even new players who have just got into the series say the same thing. The whole feel of the game is different. The way the gameplay, the music, the mechanics and the story harmonizes together makes it something special which is timeless.
The last thing I want Xbox to do is to make games look a certain way just because they need to win the internet over and get brownie points on screenshot wars.

I agree with both of you if that's possible. The bar has been raised visually and people will naturally compare the two. At the same time Halo fas it's own style and it's the gameplay and whole immersion that sucks you in. I've only played Reach, a bit of ODST and I'm almost done CE and i gotta say CE is miles ahead of the others on immersion and story.

I'm really looking forward to playing infinite and going by the screenshots we've seen it looks freaking amazing....and will be 60-120 fps as well.

@Senua as someone that came to halo relatively late (purchased an Xbox 360 during the psn hack having exclusively played PlayStation) I really didn’t care for halo 1-3 and ODST which looked and felt incredibly dated to me. Halo 4 was my first launch day halo which was considered by many to be one of the best looking games on the 360 at the time, I loved the story, visual design and the gameplay. I followed this with halo 5 guardians on Xbox one, which again looked pretty impressive and for me had the most enjoyable halo gameplay with the Spartan abilities despite having an awful story. It’s also the first halo multiplayer that I’ve sunk a sizeable amount of time into and enjoyed.

The old caveat of halo games (original bungie trilogy and ODST) having gameplay over graphical prowess and players accepting and being fine with that is absolutely fine if you’re only looking to appeal to the nostalgia of those that played and enjoyed the original games on their respective launch platforms. Unfortunately if you’re looking to drive subscriptions to gamepass or sell consoles graphics sell, particularly to the mainstream audience. It’s very easy to market the look for something using visuals rather than the feel - it’s a large reason why the majority of games on previous generations have targeted 30fps and resolution/visuals over frames.

The people that played halo back in the day are in their mid to late 20s and 30s, most work full time jobs, some with families and most with commitments outside of video games. They’re unlikely to be the driving force behind infinite’s “sales”.

The vast majority of backlash from infinite’s reveal last year stemmed from the graphics. Whether we like it or not visuals are important and as mentioned before infinite is going to be compared to horizon and ratchet and clank, and the vast majority of sales (the casual market) will be made based on the new showing in June. Infinite needs to compete graphically with the exclusive games available on Sony’s platforms. They were able to do this with halo 4 so I don’t see why they can’t or shouldn’t with infinite.

As a new player with my halo experience limited to experiencing 4 and 5 at launch, I was incredibly disappointed with infinite’s showing last year. It single handedly killed all my hype for my most anticipated, at the time, Xbox exclusive.

@Senua Its NOT about artstyle, its about graphics as a whole and overall presentation. The last time we saw Halo for example, the long grass was 'static' - not moving in the breeze or with any animals running through, the trees too were static. The grasses were popping in a few feet away in front of you.

That alone is something that can compared - even if the 'game' is different. Ghost of Tsushima and Last of Us 2, both PS4 versions, both different games with their 'own' art style too didn't have static foliage or terrible pop-in.

These 4 (Ghost, Halo, H:FW & LoU2) all have their own art style. All are quite 'open' games offering some extensive views with a lot of vegetation. However, all but one has more dynamic environments with little/no visible pop-in, far more impressive level of detail, animations, lighting, skin, deformation of ground (footsteps, tyre tracks etc), Character models etc etc etc.

Go back and rewatch the 'first' reveal trailer for Halo: Infinite. The one they said was 'in-engine'. There is a lot of Grass in that and we see it swaying in the wind, something ALL those other games I mentioned do. Its NOT just 'Sony' exclusives either, but the latest Horizon raises the bar. Far Cry 5 (a first Person shooter like Halo and in a open world has incredible environments), AC: Valhalla, Battlefield, Battlefront and Call of Duty all have significantly better environments and character models.

Ghost of Tsushima is heavily stylised - especially compared to Uncharted for example that goes for more realism. I could add Breath of the Wild too as that has more impressive 'dynamic' environments with less obtrusive pop-in running on a Switch.

Gears of War 4 looks better than Halo: Infinite did the last time we saw it. That had better characters, better animations, better and much more dynamic environments etc etc. I could go on. Its not about the artstyle, its about how flat, how static and how dated everything looked. Doom Eternal blows it away on Xbox One - another 'stylised' game.

I am not criticising the 'artsyle' but the 'graphics'. Its not about the choice to go for a more stylised art style instead of ultra-realism, its about the overall presentation. The bar has been raised...

@Craigthulu Actually, when they first revealed Halo Infinite, people lost their minds with the more realistic look and the 'big' open expanses that evoked memories of playing Halo - hoping that Halo Infinite would return to that game-play style with these 'new' graphics.

After several years and internal issues, they decided to adopt a more 'nostalgic' look too - which after the impressive 'in game engine' trailers, looked absolutely terrible and dated - so they got 'backlash' for it. Up until that point, the only 'nostalgic' thing the player base wanted was a return to the more open and large scale maps Halo had been famous for.

Anyone who says Halo wasn't trying to go for 'realism' needs to go back to the first games under Bungie. I know it 'wasn't' ultra realistic by todays standards, but they went for a 'realistic' world with realistic 'human' characters.

Halo 3

Halo Infinite

Says it all really....

@BAMozzy
You are spot on with the graphics and the perception. HZDFW has just been very well received for its looks. Generally if it is not full native 4K or 60fps general gamers don’t care as it looks the part.
This is where Microsoft need to learn and not reduce graphical effects etc just so they can say native 4K at 60 or 120fps. It’s does no good for the mass market and general public perception.
The public will look at HZDFW and go wow, then look at Halo Infinite and go, that don’t look as good. Then bang, Sony sell loads and Halo doesn’t. Sorry, but it is as simple as that when trying to sell to the general gamer and public millions of consoles and games.

@BAMozzy
You are so spot on again.
You need full weather effects and the whole lot nowadays and the environment looking lush and interactive with the weather.
Halo Infinite last time out looked lifeless and dull.
Just look at assassins creed, far cry the list goes on. Let alone Sony exclusives.
I did hear there are no weather effects in Halo Infinite a while ago.
If that is the case this game apart from the faithful will be dead on arrival after seeing other open world games with full weather effects systems.

Just watched the farcy 6 game play.
Microsoft that’s how you create an open world environment and weather effects and interaction and wind effects etc.
If Halo Infinite is not to at least this to environmental standard and should be above as an exclusive then I bet anyone the cost of any games console farcry 6 will sell more than the so called mighty Halo Infinite exclusive.
And also we can add HZDFW to that as well selling lots more than Halo Infinite.

@Craigthulu
This is pointed at Halo Infinite and what have heard and seen so far.
And the standards of its world environments and weather effects etc, not that halo is getting any weather effects. That’s is dam poor after last generation games and the games we are seeing game play of recently. That’s includes Hive Busters with some great weather effects.
Halo should be the graphical master piece for the series x, it’s and exclusive for god sake.
No weather effects and environmental weather effects, what a joke. I will be playing farcry 6 that is for sure.

@Craigthulu
I heard halo Infinite did not have a weather system at all. It has a day night cycle though.
I want Halo to look like Halo but at it’s best environmental settings graphically it can be with Halo style weather and environmental effects.
Halo is loved for being Halo I respect that.
Bit that does not mean it cannot be and should be a graphical master piece that shows why we purchased a 12tflop beast of a console.
I have a feeling and I hope I’m wrong it is not even gonna to look as good as farcry in its own Halo style let alone HZDFW.
With no weather effects it’s already off to a poor start and after the last showing.
Anyway we shall see June the 13th.

@Craigthulu
I stand corrected and apologies when I’m wrong and I’m wrong, yes it does have wind and fog weather system.
The only annoying bit is they are on about adding rain storms and snow later, they have had an extra year it should be there at the beginning, you must agree with that.

There a lot not odd simulation games out there, heard that a pressure washer one just launched, but this thread sure is thirsty for a 4K120FPS weather man simulator. Can't we just kill some aliens and get along...not with the Aliens clearly.

@Craigthulu It shouldn't matter that the image was from the MCC edition - its still Halo 3 at its core and I would expect a game built from the ground up for a 'new' generation hardware to surpass a 'remastered' 360 game - especially one nearly 14yrs old now.

The MCC edition still takes the original design and artstyle and 'enhances' what was already there. Therefore, that should be the 'minimum' to expect. That holds up to a lot of games last gen visually and makes Halo Infinite look like a big step back.

When Halo launches, its likely to be competing with CoD and Battlefield too in that FPS genre. I am fed up with fanboys defending 'mediocre' at best, just because its 'exclusive'. We all know if a multi-platform AAA dev launches a game that looks 'bad', the gaming community will be extremely critical. Graphics greatly enhance a game and issues can take you out of that immersion. That has nothing to do with 'art style' - whether they go ultra realistic, Cell shading or more cartoon - but about the 'graphics' as a whole.

This will get compared to R&C too - a cartoon art style, but the 'detail', the environment, animations, character models, lighting etc are significantly better. Ori is stunning too - that's not realistic but the details, the lighting, the animations etc all work to create a stunning looking image in motion. Graphics isn't about the choice of art style, but the entire visual presentation in motion. That's animations, that's lighting and everything associated with it, that's 'physics' of that world (not necessarily ultra realistic to 'Earth' but grass doesn't suddenly pop in when you get close to it and doesn't move when wind blows or objects move through it) it doesn't clip through. Objects don't suddenly have 'texture' but move an inch back, its a soupy mess. It doesn't matter what 'style' or colour of grass used, its still the same principal. It doesn't matter what art style a 'crate' is for example, the 'texture' on it doesn't suddenly jump from a low quality blurry mess to a more detailed and higher quality version. Objects like rocks, bushes, taller clumps of grass, flowers etc etc don't 'suddenly' appear or disappear depending on whether you closer or further away. Objects don't suddenly have better shadows or even some shadows in the case of more distant objects. These are aspects of 'Graphics' that are hugely important and have nothing to do with what 'art style' a game has. You can't tell a games Graphics from a Screenshot. You get an idea of art style and level of detail they are going for, but Graphics is how 30+ screenshots a second look. A game can look amazing in a Screenshot but be full of graphical issues that detract from the experience.

@Craigthulu I wasn't comparing Halo 3 to an 'unfinished' Halo 5 as if that's the finished product, I used Halo 3 to show that Halo has always gone for a more realistic artstyle from day 1 - albeit with the limited capabilities of hardware so we expect a certain 'realism' within Halo 5 too. The initial trailers pointed to a realistic artstyle too - not some 'cartoony' visuals.

I know its unfinished and that they have taken the time to work on it. All I said is that the 'bar' has been raised by other games since they last showed it in action and the screenshots released tell me very little about whether or not the visuals will hold up to scrutiny.

Whether you like it or not, that will reflect on MS, 343 and MS gamers. We know they have taken time to work on the game but the bar of expectation for what they do has been raised...