Forget the startlingly large screenshots, Bungie has confirmed ODST will run at the same below-HD 1152x640 resolution as Halo 3.
Speaking to 360 Gamer magazine, senior designer Lars Bakken confessed that ODST's engine is practically the same as Halo 3's and that graphical improvements are a result of talented artists, rather than improved tech.
"Everything that existed in Halo 3’s engine was there from the beginning. So the graphical differences that you’re seeing in ODST is really testament to the artists, because they were able to just take the tools that we had from the beginning, and just make awesome looking stuff."
When asked about the game's resolution, Bakken confirmed it would be:
"The same as Halo 3."
So, less than 1280x720?
"Yes, exactly."
Which is perhaps surprising news for anyone who can recall Halo 3's launch, and remembers the, erm, 'excitement' that followed when word spread that Microsoft's flagship 360 title wasn't using its flagship resolution. Or perhaps it's not really that important?
Regardless, we're sure it'll give the PS3 fanboys something to shout about. If only because they have little else right now.
USER COMMENTS
Posts: 1
Uhh what? It sounds like your the fanboy. It's always the immature Xbots that make comments like that. Being that I play games on multiple platforms I can say for a fact that there is a TON of stuff coming to PS3 this fall/winter. Uncharted 2, Ratchet & Clank, MAG, White Knight Chronicles, etc. Along with the price drop it'll be the best system this fall.
And as for all those games, they'll all do 720p. Where as OSDT is nothing more than a $60 expansion with only 3 new multiplayer maps and can't even render in HD. What a joke.
Posts: 1
My point is you say it has nothing, it's completely bs. You and the media have been brainwashed since 2007...its 2009 the world has changed, there are tons of top rated excluisves, great multiplats and tons of artistically great psn network games...and we just took Castle Crashers from xbox... The ps3 is on a role and only a fool would be blind to see that and have to make comments like its still 2007..
You wish it was still 2007 when people actually gave a crap about stupid halo lmnop.. Have fun with your expansion pak, have fun with your halo database, halo wars , halo reach, don't you think halo is reaching enough? Its milked to hell, its all you have and will be the first exclusive to get above a 9.0 rating in a year...yeah the last 360 game was Gears2 that got good marks (exclusives) So Have fun with the milo and halo with your avatars that can lick there shoes. I will be sticking with Superior games from a company that has 10x the amount of 1st party devs that give them time to make the games, not rushing them out the door. A company that lets me play online for free like it should be. Having zero advertisements on the gui, and pumping out content like mad every week. This ps3 has no games argument is getting old, and every ps3 owner will defend it to get the word spread that the 2007 crap is gone.
As for halo odst...who cares what res it is..as long as its fun. I should of been able to only post these last two lines but the xbot 360 fanboy comment from a article writter at the end made me do it.
Posts: 23
Posts: 1
I'm sorry but I don't see how you can claim that with a straight face. The PS3 costs £290 and the X360 costs £130, and yet multi-platform titles almost universally perform better on the X360. Just look at GTA4 - it ran slower on the PS3 and they had to lower the resolution to 640p. Both platforms have some strong exclusives but the X360 still has a lead there. The PS3 needs a price cut of at least £100, preferably £150 to really gain traction and that simply isn't going to happen this year. And if Microsoft pushes ahead for an early launch with their next console then Sony will really start to feel the pain, as they'll have the double whammy of dealing with a lower priced X360 and a much better performing machine in the upper price range; don't forget that the X360 launched at a price similar to what the PS3 costs at the moment.
As for Halo 3: ODST not supporting 720p I think that's just confirming that current consoles are already getting a bit long in the tooth. Console games already skimp on anti-aliasing, run at 30fps and now they're having to drop the resolution as well. Meanwhile, PC hardware is happily able to manage 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 with anti-aliasing, higher quality textures and at 60fps, while details can be dropped for those with lower budgets and still match or exceed that of consoles. And depending on how many games you buy it can actually work out much cheaper on PC simply because the price of games is so much lower - you don't have the console tax.
But do we really need people throwing around terms like "xbots"? That's incredibly inflammatory and only serves to derail discussions as each side takes pot shots at the other. Personally I prefer gaming on the PC but have had great fun with the PS3, the X360 and the Wii - all have their strengths and weaknesses.
Posts: 3
Here's what you need for a PS3 with wireless internet access and online gaming and Blu-Ray...
PS3 = 400$
includes:
*System
*One controller (wire to charge it)
*80gb hard drive
*Internal Router
*Internet Access
*Playstation Network (FREE)
*Blu-ray
ALL TOGETHER = $400 with one purchase
Here's what you need for a 360 with wireless internet access and online gaming (doesn't get Blu-Ray)...
360 = 200$
includes:
*System
*One controller (wire to charge it)
*60gb external hard drive
360 router = $100
*internet access
X-box Live = $50 for a YEAR!
All TOGETHER: $350 with 3 purchases (+$50 for each added on year of X-box Live)
To all other 360 fanboys: Even after all that Xbox 360 has NO blu-ray capabilities or web browser!!! PS3 capabilities > 360 capabilities. Not to mention PS3 has 4 processors while 360 has two.
Not to mention that the upcoming FF13 has to get downgraded graphics (compare 360 demo to PS3 screenshots) on 360 and is multi-disc (Lost Odyssey was multi-disk and no where near as big so confirmed). While on PS3 it has 1080p and one dual-layered disk, thus prooving PS3 superiority.
As for exclusives for PS3 refer to midnight31's comment. I can't think of half as many good 360 exclusives except Halo and Gears, but those are only 2 small series that are both first-person shooters and not that astounding.
P.S. I own all 3 systems so trust me...I know.
Posts: 31
I have a much better system: all video games consoles are shit. Especially the Dreamcast.
Posts: 3
Posts: 31
Posts: 3
Posts: 31
Posts: 23
Sure, Blu-ray playback is a nice addition, but when you're buying a machine for games, it's not a big deal. Definitely not reason to own the console when all the games you really want are coming out for the 360. And as for the PS3 web browser... it's awful. And if the 360 had web browsing, I doubt I'd use it at all.
Posts: 1
do they ride to work on sparkly unicorns too?
Posts: 1
You little 12 year olds trolling this thread can continue asking your parents to buy you M rated games while I pick up my own games and run them on max settings.
Seriously, consoles are a joke and Austin_4e is a joke. A PC is not a third gaming console if that is what you mean by "all 3 systems"
A PC isn't just for games. Not just web browsing, essays and excel. Pentiums.
Anyways, I'll leave you little 12 year old children to continue trolling about the console wars while I enjoy gaming on my hard earned $2000 desktop.
Posts: 23
C'mon Jake, don't limit your options. Don't think that because you've spent loads on a PC that you should sit back and miss out on all those MUCH BETTER games on consoles. Let consoles into your heart and you might turn into a much nicer person. Rather than the sort of elitest-yet-overwhelmed-by-insecurity serial-masturbator that spends his time being rude to people on message boards from behind the safety of anonymity.