Man, I am really curious as to what happens with 343 going forward if Halo Infinite doesn't come together in time for release
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
NXGamer: What went wrong with Halo Infinite & Can it be fixed? | Let's Talk
- Thread starter chandoog
- Start date
60fps and split screen on all versions of the game are a huge part of this imo. I agree completely that the base XB1 version should be 30 in SP but 60 for MP.
The video explicitly lists out and discusses each of the subpar aspects of the demo's visual presentation, as well as offers some educated guesses as to why these aspects are in the state that they are in. What about that is weird?
Uhm he is trying to explain the state of the game, as we saw it. One could say its unnecessary, but the rest of the video is about the technology and is not speculation.
The game, frankly, looked like it needed at least another year in the oven, to me. And I just don't know what they can do at this point. If the game comes out and is underwhelming, I worry about the future of 343, the future of Halo, and to some extent, even the future of Xbox.
Really don't care about graphics, it looks good enough for an openworld game I'm always more interested in gameplay and that part doesn't look like it needs fixing
The delay could actually be about them finishing up the SP, removing tons of bugs, making MP stable and balanced.
Reworking of the visuals may not even be a big focus [especially if they don't have time for it].
Or you know, an actual 60 fps graphical juggernaut like Gears 5 from MS own studio...
If I was developing this game, I sure as fuck wouldn't waste my time posting here.
Digital Foundry videos are very popular, sometimes they speculate on what a game does, what tech is used. One thing that comes to mind is their look at Dreams (PS4). They got stuff wrong in their speculation, but it was still interesting to see what they thought was going on.
Speculation Video about dreams? For my Video on dreams I just quoted a tech Design Brief their lead Programmer sent me about how dreams function at launch as the old siggraph presentations were out of date and no longer reflected the way the game did its rendering.
I don't think NXG ever claim otherwise. Even the description says he's just expressing his thoughts on the matter, following many requests to do so. I don't see what's "weird" about it.
Besides, who doesn't like to speculate? No harm in it as long as it's presented as such.
It was very interesting that NXG brings up the "tech debt" on account of his observations. Not only that, but today's article from Brad Sams corroborates the over-reliance on contract work and also the disconnect between studio management and the team/progress on the project, that are mentioned in the Glassdoor reviews.
No, I doubt it was technical or graphics related. The mouse and keyboard thing I think, it's been a while. I remember that one sticking out as MM already said they used controllers (including Move) to make their levels, especially since they were designing a game engine for players with controllers at the same time.
If I found one of theirs to be a bunch of speculation I would post the same thing if it was titled like that. And if I found it weird I would say the same. Just as people do here with all of ours, including my own when it gets posted.
But what does DF have to do with this video? I am now more confused than normal lol. Just cause its tech? Or did they call them out or something?
I didn't say it was bad. You guys need to calm down around this stuff lol. I just said it was weird is all. The title and the content didn't match.
I don't think it's bad either, but that's what I look at them for. Just like the Ex EA dev that react to game videos. The Cherno, he speculate too and get stuff wrong sometimes, miss things as well, but so what? It's interesting.
Just finished the video, found it more informative and far more detailed than Digital Foundry's analysis, providing a better and deeper insight into the many reasons why the game looked as disappointing as it did.
Enjoyed seeing the multiple comparisons to other games (inc past Halo titles) for the many different graphical features, materials, use of lighting, probes, effects etc, that have done these things much better with current gen games, some on the Xbox One no less.
It really highlighted exactly how and why Halo Infinite felt or looked so flat beyond lumping it on predominantly a poor choice of lighting conditions, giving specific comparative examples, be that in the lack of dynamism or movement in foliage, the poor draw distances or LOD switches, lack of light sources, the complete lack of/overly short lived illumination from lasers, gunfire, explosions, the static effects, the less successful use of probes, specific lacking elements contributing to guns etc looking less realistic or more plastic, lack of decals in mud or from the Warthog, lack of per object motion blur and so on. Appreciate DF touched on many of these things too, but I felt they were better explored, explained and compared here.
Enjoyed seeing the multiple comparisons to other games (inc past Halo titles) for the many different graphical features, materials, use of lighting, probes, effects etc, that have done these things much better with current gen games, some on the Xbox One no less.
It really highlighted exactly how and why Halo Infinite felt or looked so flat beyond lumping it on predominantly a poor choice of lighting conditions, giving specific comparative examples, be that in the lack of dynamism or movement in foliage, the poor draw distances or LOD switches, lack of light sources, the complete lack of/overly short lived illumination from lasers, gunfire, explosions, the static effects, the less successful use of probes, specific lacking elements contributing to guns etc looking less realistic or more plastic, lack of decals in mud or from the Warthog, lack of per object motion blur and so on. Appreciate DF touched on many of these things too, but I felt they were better explored, explained and compared here.
Last edited:
What? I didn't say it was wrong. Just that the title didn't fit the content.
What the hell is a Cerno? You mean Mark Cerny?
I was actually surprised by this clip in NXgamer's video. it makes halo 5 look very dated and cartoonish while making Halo Infinite look like a serious upgrade.
It's far closer to RDR2 than Halo 5, let alone Halo 4. I think the issue is with the combat sections which are missing some of the post processing effects NX gamer touched on. they look very dull with the new lighting engine and focus on little more realism. And I think ray traced lighting and reflections will enhance the look of those combat encounters, but having the enviornment get lit by explosions and other effects.
I'm not seeing what you are seeing from this gif. Halo 5 is the one that looks better than Infinite from that gif; Infinite looks so bland, static, and lifeless.
No, a game engine developer that has a youtube channel where he talk about engine development, and sometimes watch game videos since they are popular.
Pretty much none of the terrain in that 5 clip is something you can actively go play on, and the game animates at flip book speeds unless the enemy is right near you. It's not even comparable and why it continues to be stupid when people say 4 and 5 look better than Infinite.
So if I am understanding all his points correctly, his suggestions here were:
- Limit old base X1 version to 30fps and put the extra headroom to use, so that their baseline graphical effects are sturdier, and those benefits will scale up to the XSX at 60fps.
- Animate the environment more, rely less on static billboards. More foliage, more density, more animation. Mentions good examples like Ghost of Tsushima and Horizon Zero Dawn.
- More light sources. There are barely any point lights or directional lights. Weapon/laser fire is totally flat & dead, no interaction with the world. Mentions Doom Eternal as a good example of how to handle projectile lighting.
- Better utilize material based lighting to differentiate surfaces from each other. Infinite seems to use old lighting methods and is even missing effects from prior Halo games. Brings up Metro Exodus as good use of materials on base X1.
- More interaction with the world. For example, the warthog leaving tracks and kicking up more mud or water. In general having more of an impact on the world around the player.
- Improve per-object motion blur. Use more post processing to add depth to the image.
- Regardless of graphics, it simply wasn't a good demonstration of the game either. It didn't show off the game well, it was boring.
Halo Infinite looks nowhere near Halo 5 in terms of graphics, and it's not even a discussion.
Halo Infinite looks bland, flat with sub-par special effects and models. And it's even worse when NX Gamer does a comparison with base Xbox One games like Metro, Modern Warfare's Multiplayer and Doom Eternal...
Halo 5 isn't open world or even close to running a constant 60 FPS either.
They are committed to Halo: Infinite long term, so I wonder if they'll do what Bungie did with Destiny, and drop last gen support at some point. It's a shame the game is suffering because they want to support a 7 year old system that's been struggling on a technical level since it launched.
Cool video, still need to finish watching it, but I agree about the game looking the way it does because it is essentially an xbox one game. An xbox one game that is open world and has to run at 60 FPS, that by itself explains why the game looks the way it does on a machine thats multiple times more powerful. Look at a game like Gears 5, it looks great on both the xbox one, and xbox one X, the difference in gears is that on xbox one, that game ran at 30 FPS, and 60 FPS on xbox one X. If gears 5 was 60 fps on xbox one, the game would look very different I think.
I do agree that the base Xbox One should be aiming for 30fps this time around. There are just too many compromises to get the game to 60fps that the new hardware can't take advantage of other than ray tracing. Multiplayer could still be 60fps but have that in smaller tight corridors and the Series X can play at 120fps.
I thought in some ways what they showed in July actually did look good - the Master Chief model in particular looked great, as did the PBR on the suit (which is weird, because he's probably the character you'll see the least in the actual campaign, haha).
But once he got out in the world, there were just a lot of things that screamed "this isn't fully cooked yet, why are you showing it?".
I'm just glad they decided on the delay. It's too important for the franchise and platform to be a game remembered only for Craig (as much as I love Craig!). With that launch day pressure now removed, give it the time it needs - because I actually thought the gameplay itself looked nice.
It's just such a weird twist, because graphics were always the thing 343 were good at, but everything else divided the fanbase. Now Halo fans seem to generally agree the gameplay looked good, but the graphics were a letdown.
But once he got out in the world, there were just a lot of things that screamed "this isn't fully cooked yet, why are you showing it?".
I'm just glad they decided on the delay. It's too important for the franchise and platform to be a game remembered only for Craig (as much as I love Craig!). With that launch day pressure now removed, give it the time it needs - because I actually thought the gameplay itself looked nice.
It's just such a weird twist, because graphics were always the thing 343 were good at, but everything else divided the fanbase. Now Halo fans seem to generally agree the gameplay looked good, but the graphics were a letdown.
Seeing that Halo 5 footage near the start of the video reminded me of how disappointed I was in the visuals for that game. Yes, 60 fps is great, but the sacrifices made to get there were a constant distraction for me. Draw distance and LOD were especially poor.
Really? From what I remember it was completely locked at 60fps at a dynamic resolution.
edit: yeah, it was a pretty constant 60fps:
I would say it's more likely than the opposite, given 343's previous comments about Halo 5 being UNABLE to run at a lower framerate, hence the dynamic resolution solution. I need to find that quote again...
But it also certainly looks like a game targetting 60 fps on an Xbox One. And people keep saying it's open world, but 343 is being pretty coy and hinting that it's not exactly a full scale open world game either.
His points about tech debt are interesting. Tech debt is a constant battle across all software development. There are entire paradigms in project management and development centered around dealing with it effectively. It's a constant battle between saving time by reusing what you've got and dealing with the limitations or spending time to redo/redesign things. The right decision is rarely clear even in smaller projects, let alone AAA video games.
That seems like a list of pretty obvious stuff that was probably already planned for release.
Some of that stuff, I highly doubt wasn't already going to be in, even if the delay didn't happen.
Last edited:
