"Let's compare the BS "in-engine trailer" to the Beta footage." So if the In-engine trailer was BS, how would you explain Bungie's later demonstration of free-flying camera in that simulation rendered in real-time? Slight problem with the theory.
"other than a few lighting techniques, some shaders, smoothing of images, better texture and a higher polygon count, it looks just like Halo 2." You just named everything that would usually be upgraded in a sequel. That's like saying "Other than a few new controllers, a bigger hard drive, enhanced Xbox Live capability, faster processors, more RAM, better video hardware, and HD support, the Xbox 360 looks just like Xbox 1."
Keep in mind that it IS the Beta, now I know everybody's been throwing that argument around, but let me elaborate a little. Much of the under-the-hood mechanics are very well along and close to final, but secondary elements such as graphics or weapon balancing are still very much set to change. One good thing for you guys to notice is how uneven the graphics are in the beta. The Spartan models look amazing while some other textures are less than stellar. You can see examples of some things looking better than others all over the beta, this is because many of the graphical elements have not been finished, and have been replaced with placeholders. For example, take a look at the picture of the Ice Cave. Notice how detailed the shader effects are on it. That kind of quality is NOT everywhere in the beta, because that Ice Wall texture is one of the few graphical elements that are final or, at the least, farther ahead than other textures. Of course, in the final scheme of things, graphics are entirely secondary. It's the gameplay that really counts, and having played the game since Friday, I can easily say that Halo 3 certainly delivers in the gameplay department, to those who enjoy this type of game.
"i think vista doesnt make that big diffrence N00bl3t15 .." DirectX10 games like Crysis require Vista, because XP doesn't support DirectX 10. Gamespot put it perfectly, if you're a PC Gamer, Vista isn't an option, it's a necessity.
"Thats ridiculous that the DS and even the GBA are heaps faster, You pay an extra $150+ for the PSP over the Nintendo consoles and you get really good hardware but its slow to load up a game." It's because Nintendo uses Cartridges rather than UMDs. A UMD can hold more data, but the PSP needs to spin it up, which takes much more time, not to mention battery power. A Cartridge on the other hand is almost like an extension of the DS' hardware. It can be accessed as quickly and easily as any internal component of the DS.
QualityJeverage's comments