Hell yes! I'm pretty sure that's a Battle Rifle too, thank god, the DMR was a terrible idea.

@Abash
Oh yeah, I remember that cgi trailer from E3... everyone was so excited, but I think everyone should know by now that first in game screens and trailers are not something to go by to determine the final product of a game.

I posted 3 other pics below!

looks like halo 3 CGI cutscene
and guess what
i bet this is Halo4's CGI cutscene

Cutscene or not, these screenshots are mighty purty.

I just can't wait for the multiplayer. If there was any game who got the balance of weapons right, it has been the halo series.

only douchebags look at a game and say "it's graphics aren't good, therefore it must not be good"... I could care less about the graphics.

Um Reach was far from Incredible... hell many of the scenes dipped in frame rate...

Im hoping this game will use a totally new engine.

For anyone wanting to see halo 4 in action

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Here ya go!

@FriedGoat

Wow thank you. Great find. I love you.
This looks so Freaking sick lol cannot wait. And the BR! thank god its back!

Cause the focus on these pics is suspicious.

Halo Reach is FAR from an incredible looking game. It's decentlooking. That doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the hell out of it, though.

http://www.gametrailers.com...

pause that at 0:59 seconds... this is months from release and already looks great

for anyone questioning the validity of the screens and wanting "actual footage"...did no one see the halo waypoint vidoc that these screens were taken off of?

I'm sure Halo 4 won't look bad or anything, but a few points:

Bungie released a lot of "in-game" shots early on as well....rendered at 1080p (and higher in some cases) with obscene amounts of AA.

Case in point:
http://www.bungie.net/image...

And 4:
http://s2.n4g.com/media/11/...
Above what its resolution will 99.999% likely be, no jaggies to be found. Not a single Halo game (sans Wars) has been full 720p or featured constant AA.

And "in-game" is the 'not quite false advertisement' term for "cutscene" or "pre-rendered", anyway.

Again, the Halo series doesn't look bad, but pictures like these are pretty much false advertisement.

EDIT: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Watch in HD. The jaggies are as clear as day in the gameplay parts.
These screenshots are pre-rendered, plain and simple.

Halo graphics never impress. There about as good as MW. Gears looks way better. I wait to see in game footage.

Lol @ people going so far out their way to nitpick the screenshots claiming that they are touched up, fake, or bullshots..Who cares?

Both the GDC gameplay 343i vid doc and the gametrailer interview vid ramped the excitement level for this title up a 1000 degrees...

Every nugget of footage and info in regards to the work this team has put in is beyond epic.

It cannot be understated at how immense this title will be this holiday when it ships..Cant wait for this years' E3 to see more peeks behind the curtain of this monster..

Master Chief FTW..

Evil

silent negotiator

the res has been confirmed at 1280x720

anyway, are you saying that a few jaggies in the gameplay mean that this doesnt have good graphics?

@tokugawa

I didn't say that Halo 4 wouldn't be 720p, but I DID say that none of the previous games were and my point was that there was no way that they jumped up to 1600x900.

And I CLEARLY said that Halo 4 wouldn't look bad, so don't twist what I said.
"I'm sure Halo 4 won't look bad or anything"
"Again, the Halo series doesn't look bad"

I couldn't have been more clear, but to others, I'm sure I "attacked" the almighty Halo by not being all smiles when a bunch of pre-rendered bullshots are released of it. There's even clear precedent to this being done, as I have shown in my other post.

Sigh, there are just so many things that the N4G community won't allow its fellow users to say, even if its glaringly true and discussed in tasteful context. And some say a certain "other" group "rules" n4g. Bullcrap.

I'm with Silent on this one. Early in development, we'd seen quite a few high rez scans of previous Halo games and the finished game didn't look anywhere near what had been presented early on. As long as they're clear on what the shots were and not trying to mislead, I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

Anyone remember back at E3, when Bungie admitted that Halo 2 footage shown "was a fanciful snapshot of a game that could never be recreated on Xbox hardware"? It always makes me shake my head when people bring up the Killzone 2 footage shown at E3 when the final product was vastly superior in every way (although there shouldn't have been a miscommunication in the first place as to what the trailer was)- and yet they forget when the Xbox's crown jewel pulled the same stunt and knew they could never back it up.

The point is, I'll believe it when the game is in my console.

The game itself is more important than the graphics. From what i can see, it is just another set of 'shots' that bungie used to pump out, massive resolution screens taken from a PC devkit and downscaled down to look super smooth and super anti aliasing. 343 are clearly up to the very same thing.

THIS:

http://i.picpar.com/54180e5...

Is clearly in game and not touched up. As you can see, it displays a whole bunch load of aliasing at the top of the doorway and several other edges.

Not to put a dampener on it, but be realistic. You are being suckered in yet again if you think it is going to look like the other pristine shots that have ALWAYS been pumped out for Halo games. These bullshots are ten a penny prior to Halo game releases. This is still an Xbox 360 game, not a next gen game. You know, this 7 year old machine around the time this game launches?

http://images.wikia.com/hal... This is an ODST bullshot. Do you remember ODST looking remotely as good as this in game? Me neither.

I am sure this will be a top top game. I can't wait for it. But cmon guys.....don't be fooled yet again! I'll see you on xbox live when the game launches.

I'd take you seriously if you actually played Halo. Judging from the two shots you gave, neither of them related to Halo 4's new engine., or were even correct for that matter.

That is NOT ODST, that is a 100% in-game shot of Halo: Reach. ODST could not support that many enemies on screen at once, and nevermind the fact that some of the grunts in that shot were not even in ODST.

Also, Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary did nothing more than run on the Reach engine, with a few enhanced shaders and various other small changes.

So I don't think the Halo franchise went from any form of aliasing from Halo: Reach, to a bugged mess like that. I'd say it looks more like this:

http://cdn4.digitaltrends.c...

or this:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U...

I do play Halo Arnon. The shot i linked to is most likely Reach i will admit although the source says ODST, because there are not a whole bunch of areas in ODST like that but i think that is not REALLY important which precise 360 halo game it is. Either ODST or Reach it matters not does it...

Since when did even Reach or ODST look that good? You said: "100% in-game shot of Halo: Reach" Clearly this is simply not true and exactly my point.

It is an 'in engine' shot, never a proper in game shot. For a start it is 1920 x 1080 in resolution when said games are sub HD, and is as smooth as any PC game i ever did see, fantastic edge AA and anisotropic filtering on the textures. This is despite the fact ODST has no AA and Reach doesn't either, apart from some near useless 'temporal' AA which wouldn't work on a still shot anyway.....

They are bullshots arnon. Be realistic here. Developers do it all the time, i mean it isn't only Halo games that have had lots and lots of bullshots before they come out. Don't think i am singling halo out- but the halo 360 games ALWAYS have had this treatment. Many many official early Halo 3 shots came from photo mode where they are rendered 8064x4480 and then downscaled. This is a well known fact. Even the smallest 720P shots are not direct captures from the sub HD framebuffer the game runs in. Its a bit of a disease from this generation.

Developers take the engine and then they run it at some crazy ass resolution on a PC kit, then downsample to get these super killa smooth shots and claim they are in game. Sure they are, on your 10 thousand dollar workstation or in a photo mode. The game isn't going to look like that on your 360 in gameplay....

Be realistic peeps.

@vulcanproject

I see you posting a lot of theory on what is actually occurring with promotional shots for Halo games. But when you attempt to show an example you totally blow it and don't even present a formidable argument. Until you demonstrate some actual knowledge on the subject then all your words are nothing but conjecture.

I totally blew it? Hardly legion, hardly....

What exactly have you brought to the table in your post? NOTHING. Your comment was useless. I have noticed your comments on N4G mostly consist of criticising others, rather than ever adding something new. You strike again- i don't appreciate useless criticism. You could produce evidence against my claims? You could form your own well worded and carefully judged intelligent argument? Of course not. Just empty criticism.

If you want further evidence of Halo's bullshotting history then it is readily available to anyone that knows anything about games, just google it.

Or better yet, read this: http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... especially the second page....all about Halo

This is not 'theory' it is stone cold fact as proven by this article but honestly- it is COMMON KNOWLEDGE to anyone who knows the slightest thing about promotion in this industry. Don't you know that legion? Well here is your lesson from me.

Virtually every very early shot from the halo games published by bungie before this was a bullshot, even the 720p catures as the article notes are not direct framebuffer rips and they weren't from ODST or Reach either because those games are still sub HD....Gameplay shots will come later.

The shot i linked to is still 1080p, and it is pretty much irrelevant which game it comes from. It is pedantic and missing the point to argue whether they are Reach or ODST, because the point is neither games look anything like that or run anything like the resolution and anti aliasing the shot illustrates....

Please legion, i have demonstrated knowledge. I have given links, and factual evidence. Why not try to do a little of that yourself, instead of waffling on about something you were previously in the dark about before i informed you?? You're welcome.

Vulcanproject knows what he is on about. You dont suddenly get native 1080p captures from games that run in less than 720p.

You dont suddenly get perfect anti aliasing from games that have as good as none.

Dream on kids. Developers and publishers love a bullshot, they love to punch out shots never from actual gameplay. Halo games more than most. It is obvious none of those are from proper gameplay.

" http://images.wikia.com/hal... This is an ODST bullshot. Do you remember ODST looking remotely as good as this in game? Me neither."

Simplest thing I can use is your own example against you. Speculation on Halo 4 and then you use a faulty assumption of an ad picture from ODST which wasn't even from ODST or even represented to be from in game.

I totally am aware of advertising methods and using the best iteration of the game to showcase the graphics these days. But your theories are still speculation until you can show different. And trying to pass bogus advertisements of ODST graphics as an example is a failure. And then posting a reply link to a site that also generalizes and does not identify Halo 4 in the manner that you did is ridiculous.

Lately I have been calling out pretentious posts that do nothing and are blatantly misleading. As was yours which had no actual proper references. But instead was a fabricated picture that you associated with a game that was not even the origin of the picture.

It's like talking about how cows look so funny and then link to a picture of a pig wearing a tutu.