This is how a remaster edition suppose to look. Most areas look remodeled with higher polygon counts, textures, and shaders. Throw in redone FMV cutscene along with all main Halo games and maps, damn my right trigger finger is itchy.
Hell yeah! I'm using Sony STR DN 1050 receiver with quad Polk Monitor 70s series, dual Polk monitor 40s, Polk Tsx 150 center channel, and BIC F12 475 watt sub to complete my 7.1 setup. I might add another sub but living in my expensive ass apartment I get neighbors complaining with just one.
1080P Vs 720P! There's a difference but its less noticeable depending on the size of your TV and the quality of its scaler. 900P VS 1080P! Very hard to spot the difference, even on computer monitors for foreground objects. Distance background objects is the only thing seem to suffer when comparing 900P vs 1080P, usually appearing slightly more jagged, or not as sharp. Frame rates is the most important to me, I like my games smooth.
Every generation a big jump except this one. Looks good but I'm not blown away like I was jumping from the PS2 to the PS3.
Some games are impressive like Infamous and Ryse, but beyond I'm somewhat disappointed. I think all manufactures went too conservative on their hardware, but I understand they wanted to minimize losses on hardware unlike last gen. Probably why last gen was such a big jump, we're buying $450-800 worth of hardware for $300-600 at launch. This generation we're buying $370-470 worth of hardware for $400-500. Well I'm sure the graphics will balance itself out, but I doubt this gen ...
I don't expect Avatar like graphics for another two generations. I think current system can render at about late 90's CGI in real time in a closed room. With that said I do think this generation is a bit of an let down in terms of graphics. The X360/PS3 graphics blew me away, the jump from N64/PS1 to XBOX/GC/PS2 blew me away, this generation while yes looks better, but not a big jump from last gen. I'm interested in seeing third generation software, by that time developers should ...
Yeah this guy info is wrong unless this video is old. Besides 24 FPS is too choppy. A lot of N64 games ran between 20-24 FPS, when I played Golden Eye about 4 years ago after about a decade, shocked I found this game impressive.
http://www.redgamingtech.co...
I think he's referring to her body. She's pretty flat front and back, plus she's short on top of that. Pretty and mature in the face but yeah her body looks like the girls I use to see in 6th grade.
http://media2.onsugar.com/f...
ht...
I wonder if WD Black Dual 1TB hybrid will work in my PS4. Otherwise I'm looking at Crucial M500 960GB SSD for around $400. I probably wouldn't go much faster than that or more expensive. PS4 Sata is only 2 or 3GBps so buying Samsung 830-850Pro is out of the question. I currently have Crucial M500 480GB connected to my XB1, will buy another SSD come July 21st (Samsung 850 Pro 512 GB), and upgrade my PS4 next month to Crucial M500 960GB. I guess the M550 1TB is not too much more.
Seem like the extra power is coming either in framerates at 1080P (Murder Souls, Tomb Raider DE) or resolution at 60 FPS (BF4, Their, AC4, and COD Ghost). Besides that there's not any particular feature one console can't do besides one running it faster.
So I wouldn't say its way more powerful. Way more powerful would be the Xbox compared to Sega Dreamcast, or Dreamcast compared to the 3DO, where one system is not even in the same ball park as the other. To my kn...
It's crazy to think 19 GBS is now a small game. What twelve years ago I was installing games from CDs! Now we have patches bigger than Xbox360 games.
Yeah I know that, but that was much later, I think after Halo 2 release.
I wouldn't say the rise of Graphical Downgrades. Sony has been passing off FMV as real time graphics since the PS1 days. MS is guilty as well with the first Fable, and Halo 2. Nintendo did it back during the N64 days. I can recall seeing rendering that would bring the PS3 to its knees Nintendo claimed the N64 would be capable of in real time.
Of course! Konami is not Ubisoft. With that said I'm interested in seeing Red Dead Redemption on Next Gen platforms if Metal Gear can look like this and run at 60 FPS.
Halo 4 is the best in the series, I never spent so much time playing a Halo game after I beat it. Halo 3-Reach left the series feeling stale/dated, Bungie became a one trick pony. So in short, Halo needed 343, and 343 needed Halo. I just played Destiny on the PS4 this weekend and I can see why MS was willing to let Bungie go.
Can hardly wait! I just hope its better than Uncharted 3 bromance back story. It took almost a year to beat the single player, I would play it for awhile, turn it off and not get back to it for months at time. Uncharted 2 I beat the same weekend I purchased it.
Not yet! When Ubisoft send out a patch to fix AMD graphics card issues I will start playing WD again. Until then I can't say for certain if this game is lives for to the hype.
Hell I'd take 900P! I like the battery life and comforts of my XB1 over my PS4 controller. Plus I just added an external SSD to my XB1 (Crucial M500 480GB). Now if the XB1 is 720P with laggy controls with stuttering framerates and tearing than I will get the PS4 version.
After buying the AMD poorly optimized mess that is Watch Dogs, I think I will buy GTA 5 on the XB1 unless the PS4 version is balls out superior.
I'm glad 343I took over the Halo franchise. Playing Halo 4 felt new unlike Reach and the God awful Halo 3. Looking back at it, the Halo franchise needed 343I. It took until 2012 before we actually got a HD Halo game. Comparing Halo 4 to Halo 3 and even Reach looks like their on two different platforms. Which kinda makes me question Bungie's talent, especially after playing Destiny on the PS4.