Originally posted by Edge
It will run at lower resolution and without AA (unless it supports HDTV, which I doubt), but the graphics themselves will probably be exactly the same. I don't think resolution should be factored into how "good" a game looks. Playing Quake 3 at 1600x1200 is a hell of a lot less impressive than Doom 3 at 640x480.
Anyway, it actually looks pretty good. It does have a bit of the "plastic doll" effect I've been seeing lately in games that use heavy bump-mapping, but it still seems to match up pretty well with upcoming PC shooters. Hopefully the indoor shadow system will match up to games like Splinter Cell and Doom 3. Amazing what you can pump out of 2.5 year old technology.
Now I just hope it will support more than 16 players online (16 players would probably be fine, but hey, the more the marrier).
I partially agree.. but you cannot deny that higher resolution makes a game look alot more detailed. It's just a simple matter of the the amount of pixels something is made up of. Of course on TV not much can be done(cept with HDTV, but i think they will be pushing it running H2 fine on xbox as is).
On a(my) monitor resolution matters alot.. i would rather play a game with 1280x960 with no aa than 800x600 with 4xAA, the jaggies aren't the only problem.. more resolution means more detail in any language. And personally(as i said on my monitor) i try to avoid anything below 1152x864.. maybe its just because it's my desktop resolution, but i really notice a scanline effect in any res below this.
Anyway.. a distant object is made up of say, 50pixels at a distance, at twice the res, it's made up of 100pixels, this is where higher res really starts meaning more than just reduced jaggies. It's all about detail.. i'm sure you know this.. but anyway.