- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
It's easy, Halo was always known for it's saturated colors and visual flair. Purples and greens were bright, the sky was blue etc.
Not to mention that the landscapes and textures were phenomenal. Pause in any level in Reach and just look at the various graphical features in the levels.
Halo 4 has gone the modern shooter route. Great overall visuals and realism added by toning down colors. I'm sure you've noticed the new "brown" that's in Halo that never existed before. And how red vs blue looks more like washed out red vs washed out blue.
If you pause the game in Halo 4 and look closely, you'll see cardboard cutouts in the distance, poor textures, painted landscapes. It's very Mass Effect-ish to me.
In multiplayer, look at Valhalla for example. You think it looks better, until you see the water physics are poorer, that green and grass have been removed for flat brown surfaces. Plus every level feels like it has a "ceiling". Play a level in Reach like Spire or any map on the forge world. It feels like you are small people on a huge stage. Play a map in Halo 4 and it feels like you are as big as a level sometimes. It's hard to explain. I don't know what I necessarily prefer.
Halo 4 is visually stunning, but once you dig deeper, you see the flaws and how they achieved it. Besides, digital foundry had a great article on it. A lot of the guys who work at 343 Industries had roles in developing DX11. Not to mention that Halo 4 is perhaps the most expensive game Microsoft ever made and that they had nearly 3+ years to make it. Bungie made Halo 3 in 2007, numerous map packs, they then released ODST in 2009, and then Reach by 2010. Imagine if they had 3-4 years, and close to an unlimited budget. That's why I am so excited for Destiny.