Tech Analysis: Halo 3: ODST

By Richard Leadbetter Published 16 October, 2009

Bungie's latest deconstructed, and what it means for Halo: Reach.

Page 1 of 3

The recent arrival of Halo 3: ODST brought Microsoft's tentpole franchise back to the forefront, and collected another impressive 8/10 from Eurogamer, despite the fact the game was sculpted from scratch in just 14 months by a Bungie team left project-less after the much-vaunted Peter Jackson collaboration crashed and burned.

In the wake of the ODST's premiere at E3 this year, we talked about the game's possibilities based on the available media, combined with in-depth knowledge of the Halo 3 engine, backed up with a range of performance metrics based on the existing game. We speculated on how the existing tech could be repurposed to produce a game undoubtedly inferior technologically to Guerrilla Games' Killzone 2, but competitive in other respects, by playing up to the engine's core strengths uncopied by the competition.

Killzone 2 is a beast of a game with a graphical engine that exerts a huge amount of the PS3's raw power, to the point where even its hardware limitations are taken into account, and integrated into the game's artistic look and the engine's overall performance. The Halo 3 tech on the other hand is all about versatility. It can do the more usual FPS corridor shooting (though the results don't tend to look state-of-the-art), but it really comes into its own with vast, open levels and numerous intelligent AI presences. In order to be competitive with the best of the rest, Bungie needed to think smart, leveraging its existing tech with minimal upgrades. The result is a first class shooting game state-of-the-art in many ways, but never freeing itself from the shackles of what is basically the firm's three-year-old technology.

Originally announced as an expansion pack before it was upped to full retail status with a bonus multiplayer disc, ODST's origins are reflected in the final size of the actual game code. Disc one installs in its entirety to your Xbox 360 hard disk and consumes a mere 3.5GB of space, up against the nigh-on 3.2GB of the second multiplayer disc. In terms of basic data storage, this could have been a single DVD product, but this could have caused issues in terms Achievement allocations, plus of course there's the additional marketing value of releasing a two-disc package.

Over and above that, a hard disk install install does improve performance on the ODST campaign side of things, in contrast to Halo 3, where streaming data from the hard disk added significantly to the loading times. However, the advantage is nullified on the "legacy" multiplayer disc, which still runs more speedily from the DVD.

Returning to the core technology at work in ODST, the basic limitations of Halo 3's engine are not resolved. It's still rendering at 1152x640 and it still has no anti-aliasing. Levels sometimes feel lacking in geometry, making those jagged edges stand out even more than they should. The wide open areas we predicted did make it in to the game to various extents, but this comes with a cost. The further away an object is, the fewer pixels it has available for its definition, and the more impact the sub-HD resolution has on the overall image quality.

The fact that most of the game is set at night-time mitigates this somewhat, as does the inclusion of a grain filter, which works with the motion blur, ramped-up HDR and bloom to produce a relatively smoother effect. Bungie's SIGGRAPH 09 presentation reveals that the firm has a good grip on time-of-day lighting and emulating atmospheric conditions within the engine (something we expect to see expanded upon in Halo: Reach) and this manifests itself in ODST: muted colour schemes and interesting use of layered alpha textures (i.e. smoke) also helps in smoothing off the scene.

With one or two exceptions, the overall look of the game in terms of setting and lighting works well in disguising limitations inherent in the Halo 3 engine.

However, the daytime scenes, including the game's climax, inadvertently showcase the resolution limitations in a fashion that undoes a lot of the good work elsewhere. The look is harsh and undetailed. Were it not for the sheer volume of opponents being thrown your way, the overall appearance of some of these scenes would feel last-generation, even. While there is evidence that the texture filtering and alpha draw distance has been improved (grass doesn't just appear out of nowhere now), it's still not fantastic, and shadow draw distance remains disappointing.

We were expecting ODST to play to the engine's strengths in terms of open battle arenas with a large amount of opponents, but the concept of the game with its enclosed cityscapes doesn't generally lend itself to this sort of arrangement. In truth, it's in Halo 3 where we see this to its fullest extent and perhaps the best example of what Bungie is capable of while maintaining a solid frame-rate with the current tech.

However, the new city environment in ODST does have an interesting effect on the Bungie AI. This is one element of the Halo tech that remains state-of-the-art, and while it hasn't seen much improvement in ODST, it's almost as if the new setting lets the AI code "breathe" more, with more of its potential realised even on the default difficulty level.

While AI in ODST is much the same tech-wise as that found in Halo 3, the new environments bring about different behaviours during combat.

This subtle alteration in AI behaviour is perhaps more evident towards the end of the game, where the Brutes react differently or even retreat depending on the weapons you're deploying against them. In Halo 3, most of the open levels were vehicle-based, and as such, you didn't feel as though the AI had as much room to manoeuvre when compared with the up-close and personal combat that is the core essence of ODST. Over and above that, the very make-up of the city levels themselves opens up more behaviour avenues for the AI, due to the additional cover offered.

Page 1 of 3

Comments (65) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Pro_Gamer #1 2 years ago

    Game of the year IMO. The physics and depth to this shooter is without a doubt ahead of its time.

    BRING ON HALO 4!!!!!

  • Eraysor #2 2 years ago

    Not really sure how to follow that one.

  • Erebu #3 2 years ago

    An where exactly is the tech analysis?

  • Mongoose #4 2 years ago

    I struggle in Firefight because the lack of anti-aliasing makes me think there are invisible-brutes (not sure of their proper name...) about to attack when it's just the walls of the level moving! And then I ignore them when they really are there. The gameplay's great though, and the graphics are still better than most other games of this gen.

  • Pro_Gamer #5 2 years ago

    @ Mongoose,

    It's cause you SUCK. N00b.

  • Badassbab #6 2 years ago

    Great game, agree with the tech analysis, the sub HD and no AA hurt it and the 'open world' night scenes could do with being a lot more sandboxy. 90% of the doors were locked. If it was HD with AA it would really look great. It's packed with special effects.

  • Darren #7 2 years ago

    Nice art design and lighting, not so impressive everything else. Those jaggies and the lack of texture filtering make the game look like a last gen Xbox game at times in the video I watched but when they're not so noticeable it's a nice enough looking game. It's never going to win any awards for its graphics though, it really isn't a showcase for what the Xbox 360 can do IMO. I guess it's fair to say Halo 3 ODST is all about gameplay not visuals.

  • Nephirion #8 2 years ago

    It's a shame Bungie haven't managed to push the tech a bit more in terms of anti-alaising, If I play Gears of War 2 it looks like a totally different gen to Halo 3

  • womble #9 2 years ago

    Cue all the PS3 fanboys with their downgrading of comments scores...

    Anyway, the technical analysis could have talked about the lighting much more. The lighting in ODST is state-of-the-art, and deserves at least as much mention as the AI.

  • zztopp #10 2 years ago

    ODST looks much sharper and cleaner than Halo 3, the lighting is fantastic (beyond Killzone 2), materials textures are top notch and the arenas are as vast as ever with rarely any framerate hitches. Sure, anti aliasing could be better but I didn't find the environments 'boxy and lacking in detail' as stated here. Bungie may opt for a 60fps framerate for Reach, but that might come at a cost.

  • GamesConnoisseur #11 2 years ago

    People still judge everything by graphic alone, ie some who never even played odst but gave judgements based on the video.

    Fair enough if that is the point you are making, but what about what makes a game aside from visual front, ie AI? Article did refers to it but wondered if DF do an AI anaylsis or even the head to head comparasion of how AI works in say KZ2 and ODST?

    Just to see how both games differ, operates and the trickery used.

    Just to prove how much graphic whores we all are and makes the fact that a darned lot of gamers are playing on SD TV all the more astounding perhaps?!

    The game is darned fun!

  • Scimarad #12 2 years ago

    @GamesConnoisseur

    I think most of the comments ARE talking about the technical side rather than the gameplay itself. Well that's how I read it, anyway.

  • Geordiemp #13 2 years ago

    Talk about the fun gameplay or the good coop, maybe.

    There is a reason most of the levels are made at night, Bungie are embarrassed with their old engine looks. Maybe M$ bullied them into doing ODST which was an expansion as they really wanted a new engine / experience ?

    Why do a tech analysis on a really old engine ? and then talk about if enemy is running towards or away from you and about the story, thats hardly a tech analysis...
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 08:33

  • waggy79 #14 2 years ago

    Rich you need a wider vocabulary. How many times can a writer can say 'over and above' in an article?
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 08:37

  • Pirotic #15 2 years ago

    I'd be very surprised if Halo Reach is using the same tech. I don't think Microsoft own the tech itself, only the franchise.

  • deathdealer619 #16 2 years ago

    Goy? Was untill uncharted 2 came along!

  • flanker22 #17 2 years ago

    the ps3 stealth trolling in these comments are just down right disgusting. its not enough to just like your console's exclusives but you have to bash on xbox games for reassurance... ugh

    the article is about ODST if you didnt like it why did you even bother to read the article?

  • Goffee #18 2 years ago

    the word is "using" note "leveraging" - this isn't a business PowerPoint presentation!

  • Pasco #19 2 years ago

    I stopped reading at the second mention of Killzone 2.

  • iago71 #20 2 years ago

    @GamesConniseur

    That would be an interesting read I think. I have both ODST and KZ2. A properly considered comparison of both games AI etc would be great.

    Of course it would most likely only cause a shit storm on here but for those of us mature enough to want to make a fair comparison of two great games and the way they work it would be interesting.

    Playground mentality would no doubt be running amok as a result but Im sure some of us would get something out of an article with that kind of coverage.

    How about it DF?

    EDIT : When I say comparison I dont mean this ones better than that one or indeed my Dads tougher than your Dad - I mean an actual look at the differences and what makes them good within their own environment etc.
    Edited by 2 at 17/10/09 @ 10:38

  • JohnnyHeaven #21 2 years ago

    I like Halo ODST, it has a fantastic score, wonderful voice acting and the kind of gameply that made me fall in love with Bungie's original.

    as for the graphics? my only criticism would be player models and jaggies. clean those up and im set

  • the_dudefather #22 2 years ago

    I said it before and I'll say it again:

    Both Halo 3/ODST AND Killzone 2 are overrated

  • patchbox360 #23 2 years ago

    nice halo odst review ... you forgot the 7/10 though

    when killzone 3 is shown hopefully around the time Reach is coming out, Bungie will be truely exposed.

  • Freek #24 2 years ago

    Tricia Helfer in particular is absolutly butchered in the cutt scenes. Characters keep talking about how atractive she is, wich is completly the oposite of what's actually on screen

  • des #25 2 years ago

    The worst thing that Bungie could do is to push some super-duper tech so that console warriors can trump chests-bu bu bu its the best looking console game,doing that they would have to sacrifice open-world sandbox gameplay,one of the main reasons why people adore Halo.
    If you want to play fully scripted,totally linear,packed with on-rails section games play something else,plenty of choices there.

    That said,i am still waiting for someone to make a game that has no characters and game world=one small room,so that internet can proclaim it as the best looking game ever.

  • Freek #26 2 years ago

    Reality lies somewhere between having great visuals and great gameplay. Crysis for example is a stunning technical showcase and also a big open world sandbox of toys to blow up.
    Exactly how good it looks depends on your set up.

    Burnout Paradise another great example, large space, solid framerate and verry pretty.

    You can't even fault Killzone 2. It's a more linear experience, yes, but it does it verry well, creating some verry cool set pieces.

    Or in short:
    Good graphics and good gameplay aren't mutally exclusive.
    Edited by 2 at 17/10/09 @ 11:44

  • Geordiemp #27 2 years ago

    For consoles, you have to do a tech comparison of graphics against the best reference, hence for FPS its arguably KZ2. So thats sort of logical. Still cant see the point of the need for a tach analysis of an old Halo engine, why not do one for Valves source as well, hell lets do one for Doom 3 LOL.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 11:53

  • Badassbab #28 2 years ago

    Wow where did all these jealous PS3 trollers come along? I bet you're all a bit more impressed with the tech than you admit to. HDR lighting, large scale levels, massive draw distance, bloom, smoke, particles, alpha textures, smart AI, distance calculation sound effects,

    And did someone mention Killzone 3? What for the PS4? Lol. Only 2 million copies of part 2 sold. ODST sold more in one week. If Killzone 2 had come out on 360, it would've sold a lot more as we appreciate great games more and buy them not just watch movies on our system....

  • Badassbab #29 2 years ago

    Svpamm1 -

    Your talking out from where the sun don't shine. You do realise what you say is absolute crap right? Because if you don't than I feel sorry for you. Just cause the Halo engine is sub HD doesn't make all other game engines so. Have you ever read any of the Eurogamer face offs? 360 wipes the floor, even with the best looking multi plats like Batman and Resident Evil, 360 beats the PS3 technically. They are both HD games.

    Now go in the corner and eat some humble pie.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 12:21

  • Retroid #30 2 years ago

    I've long thought that the Halo 3 tech was great at rendering technology, rubbish with people. Helfer and Fillion look really quite poor with their helmets off but their armour looks quite nice. Very odd.

  • Retroid #31 2 years ago

    And sadly even though this is a less-than-perfectly complimentary summary of the Halo 3 tech some people still seem intent on inferring a strange agenda.

    /Sigh

    This is, pretty much, the Halo 3 engine. Perhaps with some tweaks but not many. It's a stop-gap product essentially. Hence the mention of Reach and hopes for upgrades, as that was never an 'expansion' as ODST was.

  • Nephirion #32 2 years ago

    I love fanboys their undying loyalty to a series no matter how poor it becomes is awesome

    * Fetches popcorn

  • Geordiemp #33 2 years ago

    Got to admit, its a bit sad the only exclusive 360 game to analyse is an old Halo 3 engine. M$, get your finger out.

  • TRUTH #34 2 years ago

    The opponents onscreen, the Ai, the freedom of choice to battle the way you want, the way the ai react and adjust in battles, the open areas, the use of freedom of vehicles by both you and opponents, the weapons and changes needed both by you even the enemy that change techniques (drop weapons, pick different ones, run, use vehicles or turrents etc), the mistake the enemy make in heated battles eg: misthrow grenades or mis there attended target killing there own allies, the amount going onscreen battles is what makes Halo one of the best console fps (HL 2 is cool too) - with no respawning out of screen trickery (killzone 2)...It may have an old engine revamped from Halo 1 but it sure still looks good and battles against ai is still the best.

    Replayed Halo 3 recently and still is great fps...The ai always impressive esp on harder levels.
    Edited by 2 at 17/10/09 @ 13:39

  • Alkeno #35 2 years ago

    I have always felt a little bad for Bungie after Halo 3. They made a great engine but it seems a pretty hard sell. It does many things so well, but are things that are hardly noticed by most, so the general consensus is that it looks like crap :-(

    Many comments so far have been quite extremist and that is the result of Bungie's decision. Killzone 2 was developed to look good, Halo 3 was developed to play good. From the start it looks rather meh and only after playing a lot you start realizing that it is a compromise made so that huge levels could be made (a 1,5km ship hovering just for the sake of storytelling!!!), that there could be 20 enemies at the same time each running it's own AI (some enemies attacking the player upfront, others engaging the AI ODST, other taking cover...).

    Only people that get to understand all those little details will appreciate Halo 3 / ODST and that is a very brave design decision from Bungie, they knew their game would look dated from day one (Gears of War made Halo 3 look almost as if Bungie had used their Halo 2 engine unchanged...) and still went for it so that they could give us a different kind of FPS. The truth is that it turned out pretty well, Halo 3 and ODST sold like popcorn and keep selling.

    I liked the inclusion of AI in the analysis, but still, AI is tough to understand. Developers sure made a lot of prototyping (an arena, the player and a set of AI enemies... and repeating the scenario many times so as to tweak the AI) but users cannot recreate those isolated and controlled scenarios, just replay the game and each time see it evolve in a different manner. Take the meatshield example from the article, there is no clear way to know if that was good AI or just fluke, you can only keep playing the game and hope to see that happening again...

    All in all, Halo Reach should be 720p and 2xMSAA. We don't want Bungie to screw the game or turn it into another-corridor-scripted FPS, but still, I hope they can get to keep the general Halo 3 feel and optimize it so that it doesn't look a jaggiefest. That would be a winner.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 14:03

  • fisherpot #36 2 years ago

    Halo reach/4 will be on a new engine as halo 3/odst used the same engine or there abouts! Heres an idea if you don't like the halo series then stop moaning saying that KZ2 is better and so on(bumming bumming bumming)! I have never played KZ2 as I don't have a ps3 but its getting really boring listening to people slag off a game they don't like! If you don't like the game or the console then go to a comments page you have positive feedback for! I enjoyed odst and will be playing it again in the near future! For game of the year I'm waiting for MW2 next month as nothing has blown me away this year!

  • Buran #37 2 years ago

    Halo Reach would be probably better if Bungie delays the game a year and adquires the CryEngine 3 license to build the game.

    Probably it will not be ble to run with AA, but at least the polygon count, the density of the vegetation and the light engine will be massively improved. Another viable choice would be the id Tech 5. Sign down my post if you want, but you known that both Crytek and Id technologies will help a lot more the visuals in the Halo franchise that a proprietary engine.

  • helo555 #38 2 years ago

    It is hard to make a good engine with old tech such as the 360 and PS3. Call me a graphics whore, if you will but the look of console games ruins the immersion of a game for me. Plus the fact that lazy developers usually port their games to pc with very few bells and whistles with the exception of higher resolution and maybe aa.

    I just hope pc gaming does not go to far to the wayside because of consoles, it will totally stifle graphic and physics innovation in the future.

  • drumbaby #39 2 years ago

    Why does the PS3 having the better looking fps game bother EG so much that they need to try and feel better about it somehow with weird articles like this?

  • HermitArcader #40 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • Retroid #41 2 years ago

    drumbaby: "Why does the PS3 having the better looking fps game bother EG so much that they need to try and feel better about it somehow with weird articles like this?"

    /Facehand

  • Collymilad #42 2 years ago

    "It is hard to make a good engine with old tech such as the 360 and PS3. Call me a graphics whore, if you will but the look of console games ruins the immersion of a game for me. Plus the fact that lazy developers usually port their games to pc with very few bells and whistles with the exception of higher resolution and maybe aa.

    I just hope pc gaming does not go to far to the wayside because of consoles, it will totally stifle graphic and physics innovation in the future."

    I'll call you an EXTREME graphics whore. Seriously, "ruins the immersion"? There are some amazing looking console games out there, and yes I have seen the latest PC games. While console graphics undoubtedly are inferior, they are still more than above the level needed to maintain immersion.

    ODST/Halo 3 are nowhere near the top of the scale when it comes to what the 360 (or PS3) can do.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 18:40

  • zztopp #43 2 years ago

    ODST vs. Resistance 2, and not ODST vs KZ2, is a more apt comparison.

    Both ODST and Resistance 2 go for scale. And in this comparison ODST comes out the winner quite handsomely. Resistance 2, while looking good, has too many muddy textures and boxy environments compared to ODST. Also, ODST features far superior lighting. In the end, both Resistance 2 and ODST maintain good framerates and response times for their multiplayer modes.

  • El-Dev #44 2 years ago

    If these articles really impact your enjoyment of gaming you should probably not play games at all.

  • bmxbandit #45 2 years ago

    ODST looks terrible compared to Killzone 2 ... what the hell is this?

  • Geordiemp #46 2 years ago

    zztop do you have a Ps3 ? I have Halo3 but not ODST, so I know the engine graphics and its a bit old but great gameplay...

    Resistance2 coop is much better graphics than halo3, and great when one is spec ops and one medic. R2 levels are huge in coop, the only downside is there is no LAN option, but Lag has been OK.

    You will be saying UC2 is poor graphics next, pleae bring out some good Xbox 360 exclusives, its getting sad....
    Edited by 2 at 17/10/09 @ 20:08

  • zztopp #47 2 years ago

    @Georgdiemp

    Yes I have a PS3 and a 360. We can swap psn/live ids if you want to have a go. And yes, Resistance 2s textures can be quite horrid at time but I do like its multiplayer and its my fave multiplayer game on the PS3 right now.

  • womble #48 2 years ago

    How did this tech analysis almost completely miss Firefight mode, and its networking?

    If you've ever done any kind of network programming, you'll know that Firefight's network code is amazing. It's state of the art, and, afaik, unique. It requires all 4 players to have OK connections but given that, it works, and works amazingly well. The engineering behind it is awesome.

    I don't think ODST is a "full game", not by a long shot. And yes, the engine is showing its age, especially in terms of raw resolution and AA (jaggies are prevalent). Character models in particular are VERY weak.

    BUT -- and this is a big one -- the game is huge amounts of fun. Firefight is a blast and anyone who says different hasn't played it.

    Halo 3 tries for things that most games don't even attempt. Truly massive environments with real geometry you can interact with. Vehicle combat that works. Great AI that works across missions and gametypes. Huge, huge draw distances.

    And above all.. VARIETY. Halo doesn't give us level after level of the same monotonous color scheme and textures.


  • penhalion #49 2 years ago

    @womble

    If you've ever done any kind of network programming, you'll know that Firefight's network code is amazing. It's state of the art, and, afaik, unique.

    What the heck are you talking about? It's simply peer to peer. Have you even played Gears of Wars Hoard mode?

  • Badassbab #50 2 years ago

    Semitope-

    I trust you own a 360 and have played all the Halo games start to finish plus the critically acclaimed MP to have made up your mind about it (you seem to not think much of it).

    Cleary you're not a big fan of the core Halo gameplay mechanic that has ensured it's success over the years. It ain't gonna change anytime soon so just move along.

    http://uk .xbox360.ign.com/articles/103/1... - typically great Halo vids- loads more on Youtube. Can't say that about most games especially since 2007. Bungie knows how to help build and support a fantastic online community.

  • womble #51 2 years ago

    penhalion dribbles:

    "What the heck are you talking about? It's simply peer to peer. Have you even played Gears of Wars Hoard mode?"

    You don't know what you're talking about.

    "Peer to peer" has nothing to do with it. The underlying lockstepped networking system guarantees seamless co-op play up to about 250ms or so (in my estimation). After that, you'll get pauses.

    That is truly remarkable. We're not talking about a matchmaking style system here, with update packets from a host. We're talking about SYNCHRONISED games across all machines, flawlessly.

    IF you understood the difference, you'd know what a feat of engineering Bungie's system is.

    BTW, it's "Horde" mode, not "Hoard". And Gears of War's mode works ENTIRELY differently from Firefight. Please do some basic research before committing your thoughts in future.

  • womble #52 2 years ago

    "halo has variety? More so than other games? "

    Yes, far more.

    Sniper action, across a dozen different terrains and settings. Mass vehicle combat with a range of vehicle, some flying. One-on-one BR battles. AI-assisted team combat.

    There's a reason why millions of people play Halo every single day.

    Haters can come up with all the excuse they like, but the simple fact is that Halo is fun, and part of that is due to the variety on offer.

  • Quixz #53 2 years ago

    Its so funny with this generation of consoles noobs can now go around and bitch about AA and resolution in games..

  • Diomedes #54 2 years ago

    So sub-HD resolution ,no AA at all ,30 fps ,jaggies and so on.If this was a PS3 game or port it would have been heavily critized by DF.

    Killzone 2 is a great game.Great graphics ,great multiplayer ,great campaign ,great playability .....that said I dont see the reason to mention it next to Halo ODST .....apples and oranges really.

    For Halo Reach lets hope Bungie can at least create a new engine and lift the visuals to 720p/60fps with some AA.That would be a reasonable jump in visual fidelity ...it wouldnt be at KZ2 level still but closing a bit the gap.

    Halo games are more about playability and multiplayer really ,but some improved graphics would be a great addition.

  • Retroid #55 2 years ago

    Diomedes: "For Halo Reach lets hope Bungie can at least create a new engine and lift the visuals to 720p/60fps with some AA.That would be a reasonable jump in visual fidelity ...it wouldnt be at KZ2 level still but closing a bit the gap."

    Well, for a start KZ2 isn't 60fps so I don't know why you mention that.

    As for mentioning KZ2 at all, isn't it supposed to be the 'PS3 FPS game' just as the Halo games are the "Xbox FPS games"? If so, why not mention it? And no-one in their right mind is going to say that the Halo engine looks anywhere near as good as the KZ2 engine. But then, they're doing different things, and I don't think anyone would suggest either ODST or Halo 3 itself are the best-looking 360 games.

  • Badassbab #56 2 years ago

    Semitope-

    So taking what you've said into account I conclude the following-

    1. You've played ( or not played) Halo 3 and ODST (and Gears for that matter) for 2 hours max. You questioned Halo's gameplay, variety and A.I on 2 hours play. Btw do you know what difficulty Bungie recommend Halo be played in?
    What game do you actually enjoy on your 360 (presuming you own one)? You say you might go back and play it again till the end. What game were you talking about. It can't be Halo as I don't believe you would want it part of your gaming collection.

    2. You believe you're in a minority of gamers who appreciate good games and most people have crap opinions because they don't match yours. What a pretentious state of mind. I suggust you get off your high horse and learn to accept we all have different tastes in what makes a game enjoyable. By your reasoning the best selling games on the PS3 are rubbish. Unless you've made convenient exceptions to the rule.

  • Negotiator #57 2 years ago

    I like Rich Leadbetter, but check your facts baby. Halo Reach will use a brand new graphics engine, not the one used for ODST, so why talk about Reach using a graphics engine that dates back to 2007. Bungie know they have to compete with the best engines out and one's coming like Crysis 3, Tech 5 etc. Harold Ryan from Bungie has stated that Halo Reach is using a new engine built by Bungie, and that the graphics difference from Halo 3 to Reach, will be the same as from Halo 2 to Halo 3.

  • DjFlex52 #58 2 years ago

    1. "I just dont want to waste my time on games that dont really offer much. i wont argue too much about killzone 2 being same old... but when you have graphics like that it does not feel "done". "

    2. "All the ps3 exclusives seem unique to me and feel like proper gaming instead of new graphics tacked on to old game concepts. Its all my personal preferences so w/e."

    @semitope

    1. What you're saying is that you're a PS3 graphics whore but if the PS3's AAA titles were more about gameplay, you'd be singing a different tune. So last generation.....did you also love the Xbox & Gamecube over the PS2 since their superior graphics could overcome "same old" gameplay?

    2. Aren't the Resistance, Motorstorm & Killzone games really just new graphics tacked on to old concepts? Sounds like your Sony bias rearing its ugly head again.

  • womble #59 2 years ago

    "ps3 exclusives seem unique to me"

    Killzone 2 is unique? Really, dude?

  • muscleblade #60 2 years ago

    @semitope

    If you really own a 360 how come theres no gamertag on your EG profile? Is it secret or something? Idiot!

  • masterson #61 2 years ago

    Just played through ODST in co-op mode over the weekend. Not very impressed to be honest - the whole flashback deal was a neat contrivance, but not enough to make the game feel especially unique. I would rather play through vanilla Halo3 co-op for the umpteenth time before wading through this again in all honesty.
    As for the technical aspects - as mentioned the Halo engine seems to render large scale outdoor battles very well, but constrained to a dingy, cramped city locale it was far less impressive. The enemy AI was superb as always, but there just seemed to be a lot less going on in commparision with the epic battles of Halo 3. The "open world" aspects were also very over stated I felt - lots of closed doors and the only routes you could take seemed to be "back the way you came" or "the right way".

  • Xerx3s #62 2 years ago

    It's funny to see that the very people who are constantly moaning that '360 fanboys' invade every ps3 thread, are acting like the biggest trolls and idiots they can be in here.

  • Gecks #63 2 years ago

    semitope does not own an xbox 360. someone with his level of intellect and charm cannot possible acquire the funds or love from his parents to sustain two consoles. gamertag or it didn't happen.

    ODST is no great looker, and nor was halo 3, but technically it is a polished, utterly complete engine. there's literally no bugs/glitches in halo 3/odst. none. every object is solid and consistent. not since Black on the PS2 have i seen an engine that compares, but i probably won't be framing any screenshots.

  • Shpeshal_Ed #64 2 years ago

    Part of this article fails for the fact that Reach is running on a new engine.

    You don't need a BETA for a game running on a 3 year old engine that has been thoroughly tested for 2 years already.

    Reach will be using a new engine, or at the VERY least a HEAVILY upgraded/modified Halo 3 engine. Pretty sure Bungie already all but confirmed this.

  • womble #65 2 years ago

    @semitope,

    dude, check your attributions. You've quoted me saying things that I never said.

    I think Killzone 2 is a fine technical achievement, but that's about it. Game-play wise, it's quite stale. Visually, it's monotonous and derivative (much like Gears of War 2). The story is also like Gears in that it's juvenile, and the writing is just plain poor.

    For my money, Halo has a very large advantage in terms of variety. It'd have to be a pretty hard-nosed gamer that can't have fun chasing people over a map in a warthog, splattering people along the way.

    I'm hoping that Halo Reach does in fact have a substantially improved graphics engine. In particular, they really, really need to use better character models and animation.

  • womble #66 2 years ago

    "resistance 2 looks better than halo, is just as large scale or bigger"

    Now you're just trolling.

    The playable area of the typical Resistance 2 map is much smaller than a typical Halo 3 map. You're confusing skyboxes and environments with being able to actually play in that environment.