Halo Reach

GriftGFX

Since 7349 Days

While Bungie has remained mum on Halo Reach, it seems that someone out there in cyberland has spiled the beans, as images and details have cropped up.

The pictures, bearing a distinctive hand-drawn "Tom Morello" watermark, and gameplay details cropped up on the MLG Forums, according to NeoGAF poster Dani.

Assuming the posts are to be believed, it appears that Reach will feature squad-based combat and the addition of perks Three examples were given: sprinting, a radar-jamming cloak, and a hologram used to confuse enemies.

However, the shots also indicate that Mr. Morello was only able to play the single-player portion, so the changes made to multiplayer are unknown.

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/61150

Discuss.

In reply to

[img]http://i34.tinypic.com/iqv6tg.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i37.tinypic.com/1zntr3d.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i33.tinypic.com/taldzk.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i34.tinypic.com/e8k12a.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i34.tinypic.com/2z6gm5g.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i38.tinypic.com/2r3ed8y.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i33.tinypic.com/2q9vwgn.jpg[/img]

[quote]While Bungie has remained mum on Halo Reach, it seems that someone out there in cyberland has spiled the beans, as images and details have cropped up.

The pictures, bearing a distinctive hand-drawn "Tom Morello" watermark, and gameplay details cropped up on the MLG Forums, according to NeoGAF poster Dani.

Assuming the posts are to be believed, it appears that Reach will feature squad-based combat and the addition of perks Three examples were given: sprinting, a radar-jamming cloak, and a hologram used to confuse enemies.

However, the shots also indicate that Mr. Morello was only able to play the single-player portion, so the changes made to multiplayer are unknown.[/quote]

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/61150

Discuss.

roxwell

Since 7297 Days

Reach should be an all out battle for survival in my book (and there's), not enough enemies in those pics for my liking.
I'm still on the fence.

In reply to

DLC is the work of the Devil

GriftGFX

Since 7349 Days

I can't believe people are bitching about the engine, already. Come on people, it's damn early and they're shitty off screen images.

It's also funny that people are whining about the perks. It's only natural that Halo would adopt some of Call of Duty's mass appeal. Call of Duty has been adopting concepts from Halo since COD2.

In reply to

dcdelgado

Since 7209 Days

holy frack!!! and is that 4 squad members i see in the bottom left hand corner?

In reply to

** Yes We CAN!! **

Kaz Hirai - Sony

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do" LOLOLOLOL!!

blmbox

Since 6680 Days

Sweet mother of Bungie... those look epic (if true).

Sure, you can tell that it's nowhere near being finished, but the groundwork is very much there. I mean, the fourth and sixth screens look frickin' insane(ly beautiful).

In reply to

KORNdog

Since 6753 Days

definately a lot of placeholder assets in there (look at those N64 mountains...lol) but otherwise i think it's looking pretty good for such an early build. as long as they have indeed upgraded their engine substantially for this game (shit seriously needs to compete if not surpass the best of the best so far this gen), then already i'll be more then happy (unlike ODST which looked and played like shit imo)

i also really like the look of how the game's progressing gameplay and style wise (from what you can tell), the idea of having a squad (should make for far more interesting gameplay), and having a slightly more gritty and grounded warzone to fight in gets me way more exctited then any of the past games did combined. hopefully this will be the saving grace for the series for me.

In reply to

GriftGFX

Since 7349 Days

Posted by KORNdog

shit seriously needs to compete if not surpass the best of the best so far this gen

No, it really doesn't. The best shooters this generation are all behind the curve of technology. There's absolutely no reason that Halo Reaches technical prowess needs to greatly exceed Halo 3's.

Every game doesn't need to look like Crysis.

In reply to

Ronsauce

Since 7334 Days

For me, it seriously needs to do away with some of the animations that have held over from Halo:CE(flying through the air w/ arms flailing, getting killed while in a vehicle, etc...). It'd also be nice if they could find a way to make human environments not suck complete ass. In Halo 3, I dug all the jungle/Flood/Covenant levels from a visual standpoint, but human levels lacked detail and were very bland.

In reply to

Zapp Brannigan: If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate.

KORNdog

Since 6753 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

No, it really doesn't. The best shooters this generation are all behind the curve of technology. There's absolutely no reason that Halo Reaches technical prowess needs to greatly exceed Halo 3's.

Every game doesn't need to look like Crysis.

for such a "big cheese" studio like bungie, it really does. there was a time when they actually pushed themselves to create great looking games. (when halo 2 had loaded it's textures it looked GREAT on the xbox) but then they got a little too comfortable behind the huge halo name and seemed to just stop trying. for me, reach should turn out as one of the best looking titles of this generation. anything less and they'd pretty much be admitting they're behind in the times. (and thus become yet another RARE/ free radical)

i mean, this is halo we're talking about, sure it's going to sell well even if it looked like a freshly squeezed out pile of shit, but it's still halo, one of the biggest franchises EVER in videogames. for it to look middle of the road would be incredibly dissapointing...at least for me, clearly you'd be fine with mediocrity...props to you....but i'm not.

In reply to

[quote=GriftGFX]

No, it really doesn't. The best shooters this generation are [i]all[/i] behind the curve of technology. There's absolutely no reason that Halo Reaches technical prowess needs to [i]greatly[/i] exceed Halo 3's.

Every game doesn't need to look like Crysis.[/quote]

for such a "big cheese" studio like bungie, it really does. there was a time when they actually pushed themselves to create great looking games. (when halo 2 had loaded it's textures it looked GREAT on the xbox) but then they got a little too comfortable behind the huge halo name and seemed to just stop trying. for me, reach should turn out as one of the best looking titles of this generation. anything less and they'd pretty much be admitting they're behind in the times. (and thus become yet another RARE/ free radical)

i mean, this is halo we're talking about, sure it's going to sell well even if it looked like a freshly squeezed out pile of shit, but it's still halo, one of the biggest franchises EVER in videogames. for it to look middle of the road would be incredibly dissapointing...at least for me, clearly you'd be fine with mediocrity...props to you....but i'm not.

blmbox

Since 6680 Days

Well the signs - if those screens are indeed genuine - look pretty promising, so we can't really do anything except wait, see and, inevitably, speculate.

In reply to

SimonM7

Since 7372 Days

Well, Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 has upped the visual bar considerably on consoles, never mind Crysis. It's true that neither of those games hold up as well when pitted against the sheer gameplay quality of a Halo game, but just in terms of what Halo represents - a flagship MS franchise - they should very well try to match the efforts poured into Sony's key titles. I mean risking sounding like a bunch of hyperbole, what Uncharted 2 is doing in terms of presentation and visuals really does evoke the feeling of a generational jump, and eyes are left scanning for a contender to show that MS is still in the game purely from a graphics standpoint.

I'm not saying it HAS TO, I agree that it by no means has to. Especially when you do get the gameplay quality associated with these games it's far from a necessity. It's just that if there is a Microsoft franchise that has the ball in its court right now it's pretty much this one. Who knows what's going on - if anything - on the Gears 3 front. Also, in my opinion there's a more prosperous visual "economy" in the Halo universe than in the ruins, caves and temples of brown and gray offered by Epic's franchise.

In reply to

Well, Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 has upped the visual bar considerably on consoles, never mind Crysis. It's true that neither of those games hold up as well when pitted against the sheer gameplay quality of a Halo game, but just in terms of what Halo represents - a flagship MS franchise - they should very well try to match the efforts poured into Sony's key titles. I mean risking sounding like a bunch of hyperbole, what Uncharted 2 is doing in terms of presentation and visuals really does evoke the feeling of a generational jump, and eyes are left scanning for a contender to show that MS is still in the game purely from a graphics standpoint.

I'm not saying it HAS TO, I agree that it by no means has to. Especially when you do get the gameplay quality associated with these games it's far from a necessity. It's just that if there is a Microsoft franchise that has the ball in its court right now it's pretty much this one. Who knows what's going on - if anything - on the Gears 3 front. Also, in my opinion there's a more prosperous visual "economy" in the Halo universe than in the ruins, caves and temples of brown and gray offered by Epic's franchise.

http://modeseven.blogspot.com | Dominic and Simon - dyanamic games blog duo!

dcdelgado

Since 7209 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

No, it really doesn't. The best shooters this generation are all behind the curve of technology. There's absolutely no reason that Halo Reaches technical prowess needs to greatly exceed Halo 3's.

Every game doesn't need to look like Crysis.

Exactly no it does not!, as long as it looks great, Bungie can continue to do what they do best and that's kick ass in the gameplay/story and action department and i have no doubt they will be ratcheting up all 3 through the roof.

In reply to

** Yes We CAN!! **

Kaz Hirai - Sony

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do" LOLOLOLOL!!

Phaethon360

Since 7195 Days

ODST reminded me how terrible characters in some scenery look in the Halo 3 engine. The aliasing is terrible in that, so there are some very basic things that need to be improved. I love the re-designed weapons though. But I'm not even going to think about casting judgment till I see some direct feed gameplay.

In reply to

Don't you know who I am? I'm the goddamned Banman.

http://couchcampus.com

scoobs0688

Since 5984 Days

Posted by SimonM7

Well, Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 has upped the visual bar considerably on consoles, never mind Crysis. It's true that neither of those games hold up as well when pitted against the sheer gameplay quality of a Halo game, but just in terms of what Halo represents - a flagship MS franchise - they should very well try to match the efforts poured into Sony's key titles. I mean risking sounding like a bunch of hyperbole, what Uncharted 2 is doing in terms of presentation and visuals really does evoke the feeling of a generational jump, and eyes are left scanning for a contender to show that MS is still in the game purely from a graphics standpoint.

I'm not saying it HAS TO, I agree that it by no means has to. Especially when you do get the gameplay quality associated with these games it's far from a necessity. It's just that if there is a Microsoft franchise that has the ball in its court right now it's pretty much this one. Who knows what's going on - if anything - on the Gears 3 front. Also, in my opinion there's a more prosperous visual "economy" in the Halo universe than in the ruins, caves and temples of brown and gray offered by Epic's franchise.

Are you kidding me? Uncharted doesn't hold up in the gameplay department?? Wow, thats completely asinine.

In reply to

[quote=SimonM7]Well, Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 has upped the visual bar considerably on consoles, never mind Crysis. It's true that neither of those games hold up as well when pitted against the sheer gameplay quality of a Halo game, but just in terms of what Halo represents - a flagship MS franchise - they should very well try to match the efforts poured into Sony's key titles. I mean risking sounding like a bunch of hyperbole, what Uncharted 2 is doing in terms of presentation and visuals really does evoke the feeling of a generational jump, and eyes are left scanning for a contender to show that MS is still in the game purely from a graphics standpoint.

I'm not saying it HAS TO, I agree that it by no means has to. Especially when you do get the gameplay quality associated with these games it's far from a necessity. It's just that if there is a Microsoft franchise that has the ball in its court right now it's pretty much this one. Who knows what's going on - if anything - on the Gears 3 front. Also, in my opinion there's a more prosperous visual "economy" in the Halo universe than in the ruins, caves and temples of brown and gray offered by Epic's franchise.[/quote]

Are you kidding me?  Uncharted doesn't hold up in the gameplay department??  Wow, thats completely asinine.

Currently playing: Killzone 2, MGS4, Mass effect (6th playthrough yep!)

icemanufc

Since 6015 Days

whoah even though there crappy quality screens, i can see some crazy detail in the pics, drools!

In reply to

szaromir

Since 7106 Days

You have to wonder why during 10Mpixel cameras' and broadband era these leaks are always shitty photos in 640x480 that had to be done with 2003 cell phone. Not to mention the ridiculous "watermark".

But yes, Reach has to kick ass in the graphics department. Not necessarily the best out there, it'd be pretty much impossible on a 5 years old hardware, but really really good. They have this obligation for 10M gamers who bought Halo 3 and are likely going to buy Reach to do everything that could possibly be done to have the most impressive results possible. It's a space opera, not some Nintendogs or whatever.

In reply to

"That just happened 'cause that was awesome" - Randy Pitchford, Gearbox

SimonM7

Since 7372 Days

Of course it holds up, on its own its fine. What I mean is that you prolly wouldn't spend a whole lot of time with Uncharted if it looked like ODST. Its core gameplay just isn't compelling enough to carry an entire game on its shoulders. It has formidable presentation, set pieces, characters and visuals to make it proper successful.

That point pertained to whether Halo needs to match those production values and that presentation to be a successful game and I reckon it doesn't. Uncharted on the other hand would lose a lot of its impact and momentum if it wasn't for its cinematic qualities.

If you disagree with that that's fine, no need to derail the thread.

In reply to

http://modeseven.blogspot.com | Dominic and Simon - dyanamic games blog duo!

Tomarru

Since 6421 Days

Reach DOES have to hold up to the best of the best visually, too often flagship titles on the 360 have been let off the leash with less visual splendour than they should really command. Halo 3 is a mixed bag, some stuff looks great, other stuff looks poor, most models are sub standard and the environments are hugely sparse. ODST again fell short with the same engine.

Those "shots" above are a bit of a mixed bag, the gun models look stunning, they look metallic, they look big and chunky and solid. The rest of the stuff...im not sure, need better quality to pick any faults really, the rocks in the first screen look very flat and generic, wouldnt look out of place in borderlands tbh.

In reply to

Tinks

Since 7279 Days

Well it certainly looks like Halo...

In reply to

Archaos

Since 7330 Days

I spy with my little eye..

In reply to

Gentlemen.

Acert93

Since 7320 Days

Class based squad shooter, sprint = win! :P

In reply to

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

LEBATO

Since 7471 Days

Looks great, I think you can tell right away that the weapon detail is a massive improvement, and that night shot looks legendary. I hope they are legit and that there is more to come. More so I hope bungie puts it together this time. ODST is lackluster to say the least.

In reply to

Mods, stop changing my SIG! I'm going to end up banning you!

GriftGFX

Since 7349 Days

Posted by KORNdog

for such a "big cheese" studio like bungie, it really does. there was a time when they actually pushed themselves to create great looking games. (when halo 2 had loaded it's textures it looked GREAT on the xbox) but then they got a little too comfortable behind the huge halo name and seemed to just stop trying. for me, reach should turn out as one of the best looking titles of this generation. anything less and they'd pretty much be admitting they're behind in the times. (and thus become yet another RARE/ free radical)

i mean, this is halo we're talking about, sure it's going to sell well even if it looked like a freshly squeezed out pile of shit, but it's still halo, one of the biggest franchises EVER in videogames. for it to look middle of the road would be incredibly dissapointing...at least for me, clearly you'd be fine with mediocrity...props to you....but i'm not.

And yet, Halo 2 wasn't even close to the pinnacle of technology in its own generation. There are plenty of Xbox games that surpass it by leaps and bounds.

Bungie has never pushed the envelope. Marginal improvements over Halo 3's visuals are completely acceptable if they deliver on the kind of experience that is expected of them.

Several of the best shooters this generation are Source games, and they all look and play amazingly well. If you're so hung up on graphics that you can't enjoy some of the best games out there.. than kudos to you! Halo 3 is still the best console shooter this generation.

In reply to

[quote=KORNdog]

for such a "big cheese" studio like bungie, it really does. there was a time when they actually pushed themselves to create great looking games. (when halo 2 had loaded it's textures it looked GREAT on the xbox) but then they got a little too comfortable behind the huge halo name and seemed to just stop trying. for me, reach should turn out as one of the best looking titles of this generation. anything less and they'd pretty much be admitting they're behind in the times. (and thus become yet another RARE/ free radical)

i mean, this is halo we're talking about, sure it's going to sell well even if it looked like a freshly squeezed out pile of shit, but it's still halo, one of the biggest franchises EVER in videogames. for it to look middle of the road would be incredibly dissapointing...at least for me, clearly you'd be fine with mediocrity...props to you....but i'm not.[/quote]

And yet, Halo 2 wasn't even close to the pinnacle of technology in its own generation. There are plenty of Xbox games that surpass it by leaps and bounds.

Bungie has never pushed the envelope. Marginal improvements over Halo 3's visuals are completely acceptable if they deliver on the kind of experience that is expected of them.

Several of the best shooters this generation are [i]Source[/i] games, and they all look and play amazingly well. If you're so hung up on graphics that you can't enjoy some of the best games out there.. than kudos to you! Halo 3 is still the best console shooter this generation.

Optimusv2

Since 7241 Days

Whoa, actually looks like it might be the real deal :o

In reply to

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

Seeing it in motion on your HDTV, will blow your mind!!

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of the greatest books ever.

pssh! more like electronic g

Acert93

Since 7320 Days

While it would be nice for Halo Reach to have "best of class" graphics, cleaning up their problem areas first and keeping the strong points (gunplay, AI, coop, online options, strong balance between foot soilders and vehicles, etc) even better would make a great game greater. Sacrificing anything for sheer graphics would be a mistake. Yes, animations need to be fixed. Texture fidelity really needs to be addressed. Aliasing stinks. etc. But which of these would you swap for worse AI?

Btw, I was expecting hoaxes, but those look real. But I wouldn't call them earlier either--don't set yourselves up!

In reply to

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Kirby Air Riders

Metroid Prime 4: Beyond

Resident Evil Requiem

Our video of Angry Video Game Nerd 8-bit

MOTORSLICE is looking promising

Our Switch 2 video of Pokemon Legends: Z-A