Halo 3 is only running at 640p
by Dustin Burg 
{ Sep 28th 2007 at 11:30AM }
With digital cameras in hand, a 1:1 pixel setting on their HD TVs and numerous posted pictures and step calculation the Beyond3D members have concluded that Halo 3 is not natively being rendered in 720p. Instead, the game is being upscaled from a native resolution of 640p to 720p (or 1080p) by the Xbox 360. Gasp! We say again, gasp!
In all seriousness though, the difference between 640p and 720p isn't all that noticeable to the average gamer (unless you are one to take digital photos of the screen and count pixels), but it's still sad to see that our Halo 3 couldn't be developed to natively render 720p. It's kind of what the Xbox 360 is all about, HD graphics and all. But we'll let this slide because the game is so damned fun, though we'd still love to hear Bungie's response to this 640p resolution claim and tell us exactly why the back of the Halo 3 box states 1080p. The last time we checked, 640p and 1080p were quite different.
[Via gamerawr!]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
dunnypop @ Sep 28th 2007 11:36AM
does this explain why the splitscreen is really crappy?
Who Cares? @ Sep 28th 2007 11:47AM
I am not a fanboy, far from it, but honestly.... If it looks good (which Halo3 does) and it plays well (which it does) and its fun (which it is), What does it matter what resolution its running at. Unless you are sitting extremely close to your TV you cant notice things like this anyway.
Just play the damn game.
:( @ Sep 28th 2007 11:41AM
I'm running Halo 3 on a 1280x1024 display through VGA but it sure ain't outputting at 1280x1024 - I notice this aliasing too. Bungie claims here
http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topnews&link=h3avcal
that there should be a correctly-scaled high-definition picture for VGA. Except there isn't.
yuppy @ Sep 28th 2007 11:41AM
no wonder they lazily made the first few campaign lvls not very detailed and at times very dark.
Big Bird @ Sep 28th 2007 11:45AM
Just wanted to make sure you all were aware of this coming up next week on discovery channel.
http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/last-one-standing/halo-sweeps/halo-sweeps.html
not sure if we will see more or this is all the footage there is.
xenocidic @ Sep 28th 2007 11:46AM
Running on SDTV =) haven't been affected by either the Bioshock or this new H3 debacle.
BTex @ Sep 28th 2007 11:53AM
#1.you could be right
Ian Murray @ Sep 28th 2007 11:55AM
@ 6:
I understand where you're coming from, but plenty of people buy their high-priced systems BECAUSE they want the best. We all know what the Xbox 360 is capable of, because look at BioShock and Gears of War for quick examples. If your game isn't going to do what the box says, or what the consumers want, then don't say it will.
I'm not calling Bungie liars, but if this is true, they should at least make an official statement.
I agree that people should play the game and enjoy it for what it is, but when you pay good money for the resolution, you kind of expect it if the box says it.
Mauricio @ Sep 28th 2007 12:03PM
Im with Ian Murray. Im paying $60 for a "NEXT GEN GAME". Next Gen is HD - not SD upscaled.
Tony @ Sep 28th 2007 12:06PM
The Gamespot graphical comparison story reveals that the graphics for Halo haven't improved much at all. This 640 crap is just another lie from one of the beasts. I'm sick and tired of being jerked around.
MDJ2010 @ Sep 28th 2007 12:06PM
Asides from the fact that its a bit cheeky from Bungie it honestly makes soooo little difference, I cant emphasise enough that you really wouldnt notice if you werent told. Personally I am paying off bill after bill at the moment and dont have the cash to spend on a game - so no Halo 3 for me, so my suggestion is just to enjoy it, you luckly lucky millions of people!
:( @ Sep 28th 2007 12:49PM
I use a computer monitor, so sitting away 2 feet from the screen means I notice. I notice the ugly-ass aliasing and blurriness. And don't think it doesn't affect gameplay 'cos far-off enemies aren't as easy to see.
Tony @ Sep 28th 2007 12:15PM
What do you need graphical comparisons for if you can just pop in Halo 2 and Halo 3 on one system and compare them? If you can't tell the difference there, I really don't even know what could be said. Halo 3 is far from the most beautiful game ever, but it is definitely better than Halo 2 in significant ways.
As for this problem, I had heard about that from someone the other day (in addition to the VGA problem that was brought up by a commenter here) and I can see why people are annoyed about it. If nothing else, the numbers on the box are lies.
Personally, I am running in 1080i and I'd never even notice it. I could look at it now and still not be able to notice it. I have noticed no anti-aliasing issues, particularly compared to some other 360 games I own (such as Forza 2).
Hopefully we'll hear something about it soon, but it's definitely going to be something for people who hate Halo 3 to harp on for months on end.
Elliot J @ Sep 28th 2007 12:16PM
Meh, looks high def to me on my 55" SXRD through hdmi.
I wasn't expecting Halo 3 to be a graphical powerhouse like Gears of Bioshock. I was expecting solid visuals mixed with amazing gameplay, which is provides in droves. Besides, there's no way you can tell me that taking out a Scarab and watching that explosion looks like crap, 640p or not it looks fricking sweet.
Tony @ Sep 28th 2007 12:17PM
Also, 640p is still technically a "high definition" resolution. Anything higher than 480p is. It might not be what they're claiming it is, but that's another portion of the argument.
Elliot J @ Sep 28th 2007 12:18PM
Meh, looks high def to me on my 55" SXRD through hdmi.
I wasn't expecting Halo 3 to be a graphical powerhouse like Gears of Bioshock. I was expecting solid visuals mixed with amazing gameplay, which is provides in droves. Besides, there's no way you can tell me that taking out a Scarab and watching that explosion looks like crap, 640p or not it looks fricking sweet.
johnathon @ Sep 28th 2007 2:40PM
You guys will still play the game with nothing more than a yes maam, thank you maam.
quit yer bitchin.
brownc4 @ Sep 28th 2007 12:27PM
@9
SD is 480i
I do believe 640p is quite a bit higher than 480i.
brownc4 @ Sep 28th 2007 12:34PM
@10
Are you blind?
I am assuming you are referring to the this article:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6179901/index.html
In which the authors comment on how much a leap there is from Halo to Halo 2 and then to Halo 3
Bryant @ Sep 28th 2007 12:35PM
This is the kind of reporting that makes me love this site - almost too unbiased for a fanboy site. Good job X3F!
This whole resolution thing makes me pretty sad though, at least don't go parading the game's in HD if it really isn't.. :(
Still love the game and what really matters is it's fun! And you don't even notice the notice in resolution anyway.
@14 Although it's definitely not SD, it's not quite HD. "AlmostHD" maybe?
JagerQ @ Sep 28th 2007 12:36PM
Are these based on campaign images or multiplayer images?
Anonim @ Sep 28th 2007 12:40PM
Halo 3 works in 1138x640 no AA
Why?
Halo uses (probably) their method for HDR (price for gorgeous light effects)
Bungie method: (34Mb PDF)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=995b221d-6bbd-4731-ac82-d9524237d486&displaylang=en
Still I don't like it - no AA and slightly lower resolution = more jaggies than necessary.
On X360 scaled games
Two 640p Perfect Dark and Halo3 (1138x640) (no AA)
Three 600p PGR3, Call Of Duty 3 and Tomb Raider (1024x600) (all have 2xMSAA)
RR6 is ~ 1440x810
1080p VT3 and NBA street (1920x1080)
thats all - all other games use 1280x720 (Tony Hawk on X360 is 720p))
On PS3 scaled games
540p - The Darkness (960x540)
600p - Tony Hawk's Proving Ground, Call Of Duty 3
Ninja gaiden Sigma 1280x720 (not 1080p game - software 2x scaller to 1080 from 960x720 - 1080p is more blurred than 720p!)
GTHD use 1440x1080
Rub'a'dub use 1600x1080
Stardust HD use 1280x1080
and more - mostly software scaling to 1080i (R6:Vegas - bad and blurry)
( GRAW2 in multiplater 600p ? - unconfirmed)
more info
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=43330
Trogdor @ Sep 28th 2007 12:43PM
While I think the game looks and runs just fine, Bungie should clarify this. It makes them look bad if they talk about all the high resolutions like 720p and 1080p, but then stuff like this comes out. I just want to hear what Bungie has to say.
jabbertrack @ Sep 28th 2007 12:54PM
I guess if the game looked like shit I would give a damn but it looks pretty amazing so I don't give a rat's ass what resolution the engine is rendering stuff in.
Knight Marquise @ Sep 28th 2007 1:03PM
jabbertrack
You took the words right out of my mouth.
ez054098 @ Sep 28th 2007 1:06PM
There a lot of "jaggies" in Halo 3. My first impression of levels 1-3 were disappointing.
BTex @ Sep 28th 2007 1:11PM
Elliot J wrote "Besides, there's no way you can tell me that taking out a Scarab and watching that explosion looks like crap, 640p or not it looks fricking sweet."
Now imagine it in true HD or even 720P.
Much better.
HDDVD and Bluray look a lot better than upscaled dvd.
same thing
Josh @ Sep 28th 2007 1:15PM
*yawn*
looks good to me!
BTex @ Sep 28th 2007 1:13PM
#25
yeah the first few levels were shockingly ugly.
I got better tho
ez054098 @ Sep 28th 2007 3:33PM
#27
Glad to see I am not alone, but you are correct. The game ramps up nicely. Also, Halo 3 is so much fun. I am just sad I am almost finished.
Edge @ Sep 28th 2007 1:35PM
"But we'll let this slide because the game is so damned fun."
Bout damn time someone said this.
Jon @ Sep 28th 2007 1:56PM
I have a 24" monitor with a native 1900x1200 res. hooked up via HDMI with DVI adapter. I first noticed a problem while playing split screen, which would force the screen to a fullscreen image. However, if I change the resolution down a few steps it stretches back out.
While the graphics do look decent, I've noticed a lot of issues with jaggies and the inability to see enemies from a distance (resulting in many deaths from enemies I couldn't see in the first place).
Overall I am disappointed with this issue. The offset resolution is crap. This is the FLAGSHIP title for the Xbox 360, you would assume they'd put more effort into issues such as this. I just can't believe they'd release this title not in 720p or 1080p. Just baffles me.
Phew, that said, I still enjoy playing the game. Maybe thats why they didn't announce this. They didn't want people not buying the game - and they knew that if we played the game this problem wouldn't keep other gamers from buying it.
Agh.
inferno3387 @ Sep 28th 2007 2:22PM
If they would make us not push the STUPID d-pad to talk to people if there are more than 4 people on our team, I wouldn't care.
WHY DO WE HAVE TO PUSH THE D-PAD TO TALK IN HALO 3?!?!?
Mauricio @ Sep 28th 2007 2:40PM
yeah, sorry guys, 640p is not HD.
Edgar N, @ Sep 28th 2007 2:49PM
im gonna go ahead and blame this on disc space and not the 360 nor bungie.
gtpunch @ Sep 28th 2007 2:58PM
The GPU has only a finite amount of processing power. It uses this power to achieve the following:
- high detail models
- high resolution textures
- high frame rate
- high resolution
- high complexity of lighting
The problem is there just isn't enough horsepower on the PS3 or 360 to keep all of those factors high. Bungie decided to keep the frame rate and lighting complexity high, at the expense of some resolution.
The 360 is capable of 60fps 1080p graphics, but not with the complexity of models, texture detail and level of lighting effects that we would like to see. Like eveything in life, it's a compromise.
Game Artist @ Sep 29th 2007 11:36AM
disc space?!?!? It takes absolutely zero extra disc space to render at 720p. I can render *any* resolution and not affect space on disc.
JrezIN @ Sep 28th 2007 3:54PM
This is mostly disapointing... probably the reason of the split screen problem too.
violenceinhd @ Sep 28th 2007 3:56PM
Most levels look horribly (and NOTICEABLY) jaggy, the edges of your gun models look jaggy, and in turn degrades the overall picture quality. You could have the most complex lighting system, the highest res textures, and the highest polygon count that you wanted; it'd still look bad when it has NO anti-aliasing.
Nick @ Sep 28th 2007 5:44PM
IT IS A BIG DEAL ! 640p has only 79% of the pixel density of 720p. That is a lot of detail.
navstar @ Sep 28th 2007 5:54PM
640p? Bite that, HD fanboys. The Wii could play Halo 3!!
root @ Sep 28th 2007 6:34PM
halo 3 isn't a good game.
hyped to the death (x3f included!)
OTAM @ Sep 29th 2007 9:29AM
I'm with you xenocidic,SD all the way.
erivera3 @ Sep 28th 2007 8:50PM
I think Halo 3 is the most beautiful game I've ever played. By far the best water, amazing detail on textures, and the best HDR lighting I've ever seen. Add in the epic massive scaled battles and all the shit going on on the screen at once, how can you say this game is NOT the most beautiful game out there?
violenceinhd @ Sep 28th 2007 8:51PM
Wow. I payed $60 for HD content. I almost feel cheated... good thing the game itself is so damn good.
erivera3 @ Sep 28th 2007 8:58PM
Calling Halo 3 a bad game just makes you look ignorant. The multiplayer alone makes this game a 10 out of 10.
Azerael @ Sep 28th 2007 10:14PM
I noticed it was being upscaled while I was playing, you can tell by the bloom on lights flickering like crazy when you move around.
Doesn't bother me though, it's still a great game.
tubedogg @ Sep 28th 2007 10:46PM
For the record the back of EVERY 360 game box says 720p, 1080i, 1080p on it as far as I know. They are going off of the fact that the system can upscale & therefore output to 1080p, not the native resolution of the game. While this may be disingenuous on the part of Microsoft, it is not particular to Halo 3.
Neight @ Sep 29th 2007 6:07AM
From Frankie:
One item making the interwebs rounds this week was the scandalous revelation that Halo 3 runs at “640p” which isn’t even technically a resolution. However, the interweb detectives did notice that Halo 3’s vertical resolution, when captured from a frame buffer, is indeed 640 pixels. So what gives? Did we short change you 80 pixels?
Naturally it’s more complicated than that. In fact, you could argue we gave you 1280 pixels of vertical resolution, since Halo 3 uses not one, but two frame buffers – both of which render at 1152x640 pixels. The reason we chose this slightly unorthodox resolution and this very complex use of two buffers is simple enough to see – lighting. We wanted to preserve as much dynamic range as possible – so we use one for the high dynamic range and one for the low dynamic range values. Both are combined to create the finished on screen image.
This ability to display a full range of HDR, combined with our advanced lighting, material and postprocessing engine, gives our scenes, large and small, a compelling, convincing and ultimately “real” feeling, and at a steady and smooth frame rate, which in the end was far more important to us than the ability to display a few extra pixels. Making this decision simpler still is the fact that the 360 scales the
“almost-720p” image effortlessly all the way up to 1080p if you so desire.
In fact, if you do a comparison shot between the native 1152x640 image and the scaled 1280x720, it’s practically impossible to discern the difference. We would ignore it entirely were it not for the internet’s propensity for drama where none exists. In fact the reason we haven’t mentioned this before in weekly updates, is the simple fact that it would have distracted conversation away from more important aspects of the game, and given tinfoil hats some new gristle to chew on as they catalogued their toenail clippings.
Jon @ Sep 29th 2007 8:24AM
Hmm, word.