Upscaled games made 15 fucking years ago still look comparable to games made in the year of our lord 2020+2

fpbp

>dude its so optimized!
>the area the screenshot is from is barely 5 player widths wide
>still looks like ass

Also runs at 400+fps on modern PCs while looking about as good as other games that struggle to maintain 60.
The game is a dream to play in multiplayer on PC because it just runs good and looks good, you don't have to make it look like a shitty roblox map to maintain a competitive advantage.

original 2 had shit human faces too even for the time
CE's are the only ones that look and still look half decent

Developers that don't play their own fucking games.
Bungie played Halo 3 every single day during it's development and it shows.

>512 MB of GDDR3 RAM clocked at 700 MHz

Dude suck my dick halo3 is the best optimized game of all time and pound for pound the best looking when you compare it to its era.

Name a game you think looks good? There’s gonna be 4 or 5 titles that are better looking from the same era.

What looked better than halo 3, and ran at a fantastic frame rate on 360, in 2005

You can’t retard. Eat dick

Attached: Sir Fagalot.png (1918x936, 1.39M)

2 aged the worst out of the trilogy because it was simply trying to do too much with what the original Xbox had to give so a lot of it is just blurry mush.
They probably tried to do more but realized at the last second the Xbox couldn't do it so they just had to downsample everything and ship it like that because they ran out of time.

what was mario galaxy running on? because that game looks 500x better

I want to lick it

>hahah I was pretending to be retarded! XD

I accept your concession

>It takes a game that literally doesn't have to render anything but a flat colored sphere and the player character to look as good as Halo 3.
If anything your just proving his point.

also 512mb of gddr3 was a lot. a mid tier desktop gpu at the time was the GeForce 6600 GT. 128mb.
what? that doesn't at all address the fact that mario galaxy looks way better but also ran on far weaker hardware. with 60 fps performance.

Diminishing returns

Attached: 4f18bd6f14898d6460b502f3f918bb4c.jpg (549x274, 45.39K)

Attached: 1386123684429.png (1006x1007, 492.29K)

60,000 is clearly better than 6000 triangles though
That metaphor doesn't account for a moving camera that could come closer to his skin long enough to see veins, etc
In fact no one in their right mind would use the 6000 triangle one because dialogue would have the characters face in portrait view
All this image is is indiepixel faggot cope, lrn2threedee

>posts is 33 seconds apart
Damn you were waiting for someone to pull that image out you little faggot

It always happens in threads like this, pattern recognition and all that.

what game?

>dialogue would have the characters face in portrait view
Many games overpoly specifically the face to get around this.
The Halo Reach characters literally have more polygons in their faces than the rest of their body combined.

Spartans vs. Covenant: Third Impact

>343 343 343 343 343
Who is this entity and what does it have to do with halo 3? Why do halotards talk about this numerical being as if it were the devil? What the hell is an infinite halo?

Super Mario Bros 2.

you're misusing the term "upscaled". it means taking a low resolution image and increasing its resolution. what you're showing isn't scaled, it's a native image.

>XD It loooks better vro
Posts no screenshots to avoid getting BTFO*
Lol

It's upscaled because the original game ran at 720i.
Now fuck off with your "BUT ACKSHUALLY"

Halo 3 had some really nice environmental art but some absolutely trash facial animations. Johnson, Hood, Keyes all looked horrid.

no i'm just not some faggot that feels like he has to desperately defend his favourite corporation to the point where he seeks out and saves or makes screenshots of corporate products. kys consoomer. halo is soullless garbage.

hearing spics scream vetovetovetoveto made the teabags more satisfying

>fantastic framerate
The fucking thing ran at 540p with one of the shittiest FOVs ever shipped for an FPS game
It's a great game but you're retarded if you think it's the best optimized game of all time
Alien Isolation and NuDoom blow it out of the water
Also
>2005
What

Based.

>and ran at a fantastic frame rate on 360
It ran at 30 on a 360 and released in 2007. Also it had to run below 720p to achieve that.

Post Nintendo figure collection

>still no pictures to avoid getting laughed at*

Lmao

I don't unerstand why spics love halo reach so much, most of the players of that game e

>What

Zoomers forget when the 360 released XD

*Most halo reach players were fat mexicans with edgy gamertags.

Rockets on snowbound was unironically my favorite thing to do in Halo 3.

Did you think Halo 3 was a 360 launch title or something you clueless retard

I may be a nerd but you are retarded

It was worth it though because it means modern machines will crush it.
A toaster will easily hit triple digit fps in Halo 3.
Can't say the same for NuDoom or Alien.

halo 3 is not open world

Attached: 20201024103740_1.jpg (1920x1080, 680.19K)

By that logic Turok 2 was well optimized because modern toasters can crush it
>Can't say the same for NuDoom or Alien
youtube.com/watch?v=MHF_SH8BtGU

meet the spartans

Halo 4 is much more impressive. It looks like an Xbox One game. But they sacrificed a lot to get it. Halo 3 wasn't impressive just because of the graphics - I remember it got shit next to Gears of War - but because what it did and on what scale. It was huge with a lot of moving enemies and vehicles. All this in 4 player co-op. People always forget this. Every good looking game was mostly a single player corridor sim from that era.

Physics are the most impressive part.

tbf i can run Doom2016 on an Intel 620 at fluctuating 30-60 fps but not Eternal whatsoever

Looks about the same on a technical level but it's even worse for Alien because all it has to render is 2x4 rooms.

It hold up better now that you can see all that detail. On the 360 is was hidden by a sub HD resolution of 640p with no anti-aliasing and low levels of texture filtering

Attached: Untitled.jpg (3840x2160, 1.61M)

Halo 4 looks really bad when you upscale it because a lot of the tricks they used to get it working for the 360 shine through when you put more pixels on it.
Halo 3 aged better because it still looks good when upscaled, even if 4 looked better on the original hardware.

>Looks about the same on a technical level
So you're blind, got it

Attached: 2 whole yearspng.png (705x891, 296.89K)

next time you're in a video game restaurant ask for an upscaled steak and see if you'll be full after same amount of meat spread over the platter

its a picture i value a lot

Some games from that era actually end up looking worse at high resolutions when all those muddy textures were being hidden by low resolutions, aggressive lod's, DoF, and postprocessing.

Quote where I said it was

KZ2 comes to mind

It's because of that H3 still looks good at high resolutions

Play-doe lookin ass

t. 3dlet
Polys are cheap, they're not the reason modern games ruin like ass

Halo 3 doesn't exist in 2005 so mentioning that year makes no sense. You might as well claim Reach was looking great on the 360 in 2005 since it's looks better than Halo 3.

that pic has been ripped apart for years
it doesn't get much attention

I like how you clearly didn't read the second image, just responded to it as a kneejerk reaction because you're retarded.

>also 512mb of gddr3 was a lot.
no. those 512 MB were also the RAM for the console. the only other memory available were some 10 MB special super fast memory used for specific graphics tasks.

and meanwhile PCs already had 1 GB RAM and 256 MB VRAM. then in 2006 PC GPUs started to feature 512 MB VRAM and people started building with 2 GB RAM. by the time COD 4 and Crysis came out in 2007 the "new PC" standard was 4 GB. another year or two down the line GPUs started featuring 1 GB VRAM and more. so not only did PCs already have more memory when the consoles (PS3 was even worse) launched, in the following years both types of memory absolutely exploded on PC because it turned out memory was THE bottleneck to improving graphics. notice how modern games only render 2-4 times the pixels as a PS360 game, yet struggle if you have ONLY 16 times the memory. the equivalent of Halo 3 on the Xbox 360 would be running photo-fucking-realism on a Series X. also Halo 3 came out only 2 years after the console so our hypothetical photorealistic game would have to launch this year to rival Halo 3's optimization prowess.

>the mario galaxy shit
you're a goof.

retard

Far Cry PC (2003) looked better. Note that this isn't even the highest setting, without HDR and shitty low quality water without reflections.
Sadly I can't find a better screenshot right now.

Attached: external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg (1600x1000, 530.29K)

Friendly reminder for anons to ask Jesus to save you from hellfire if you believe the good news (pic)

Attached: My sheep hear my voice.jpg (1024x784, 379.91K)

I loved Far Cry, better than FEAR, HL2 and Doom 3 from fps titles released in same time.

Didn't count. Crytek used black magic

Yeah, I loved how big the maps were and how you could fuck with the enemies. But the maps were still small enough to be well designed and not cluttered with pointless filler.
This shot shits on other games of the era even more.

Attached: external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg (1600x900, 516.08K)