Might i suggest getting the latest Catalyst drivers? They helped my frame rate significantly (Radeon 9500 pro)

This is Halo?...... this sucks. The graphics really arent that great anyway, and they are the only thing this game has going for it. Why does the dude you play as walk so slow? And why do they vehicles control like Hot Wheels? The sound sucks, theres no music etc... I could go on and on. I bet alot of people that bought an Xbox feel pretty stupid.

Anyway, back to Metroid Prime ( a game that is 1000x better than Halo)

your g/f want to come over and play with u! how many girls u know acutally like playing pc games with ther b/f's mine does!! and im not so nerd hahaha

its okay I guess. it aint gonna draw me away from Hidden and Dangerous 2 though.

I actually like this game, except for the english speaking aliens which makes the game looks a little childish...
BUT the controls are totally fucked up. the mouse sensitivity and acceleration in the menu is hilarious even tho I dont have mouse acceleration enabled at all. its really hard to get your mousepointer to one menu item. if turn the sensitivity in game to 1 it will work ok in the menus BUT in the game it will be totally slow, so you have to turn it to 7 or so to play in the game but it will be still very rubbish, just like a gamepad control. oh and at sensitivity 7 menu control is about as non-existent.
only that made me not get this game. very very sad...

btw: It ran very smoothly on my 2.6 P4 and Ti4600 at 1280x1024, except for some crowded situations where the FPS would drop to like 25 or 20.

This comment was edited on Oct 23, 04:06.

Tried it. Didn't like the single player so much, but I'm really liking the multi-player, esp. Capture The Flag. The vehicles are fun, the sniper rifle is easy to use, and there's been some semblance of teamwork. You don't even won't to know how old my machine is. I just turned everything down and it runs fine. All in all, it's fun, it's worth a try, but nothing new or particularly compelling. In summary, I wouldn't buy it for $50. I'll wait till this one hits the bargain bin.

-----------------------------------------------------
Cry 'havoc', and let slip the dogs o' war!

Precision and accuracy are two different things. You can be very precise (as in the frame rate is 34.56789 and measure that 100 times and get it the same), but not be accurate (as in the actual frame rate is 40).

Just like in archery. You can shoot an arrow into the same spot over and over (precision) but be way off the center of the target (accuracy)...

"And then I tried Multiplayer. "..

multiplayer on this demo is...well...I was utterly dismayed. However, after a couple of days, i found a good server...then, some vague pattern started to emerge, where a 10 player server would be fine until #9 or #10 joined, and then it would hit the skids. There are a few fine-speed CTF servers out there [accessible from the uk atleast], but a lot more wouldn't hurt. When the lag's not there, it plays great, and its alot of fun. Would be nice if there was some readily-visible ping-display too..but...i can't find it.

Anyway, all you big gfx boys, stop being so proud, drop the res and turn off spec, plays fine at 800x600, and put it down to the curious history this title has had, and the wonders of corporate pressure to release a game.

FuriousBroccoli who gives a shit about bumpmapping if it looks like shit? Every single bumpmap looked crap in halo, especialy the spaceship floors, looked like it was just slapped there for the brag rights instead of visual appeal.

High resolution textures? You better give me whatever you're smoking, have you played UT2K3? Now that's high res textures ya bum

The problem isn't a bad port. The problem is your moronic expectations. It is like you people are comparing it to half-life 2 and doom 3 VIDEOS. There is no other (popular) game that pushes the graphics envelope as far as halo pc does.

Wrong. When HL2 hits, you'll see.

---

This comment was edited on Aug 1, 2010, 01:54.

"However, you have to admit it's a pretty bad port. I remember when the game was supposed to come out for the PC and Mac, and they were demonstrating in-game footage. Now, this was back way before the 2GHz machines were out, and THE processor was a P3 or AMD Thunderbird with a Geforce2 or TNT. Yet, the game ran awesome in the video demos. Likewise, you'd assume they'd want to make sure that the game kicked ass on the current hardware, or then why make the game in the first place. "

I've been thinking the exact same thing. Although additions surely have been made to accomodate new chip capabilities, this game looks pretty similar to what was scheduled for PC release two years ago.

"I think the poor performance was bad porting on Gearbox's part. It might not have been their fault; the XBox code might have made it hard to make the performance. In either case, it is pretty sad."

I agree again. The original Max Payne and the sequel is tight. It can run on some pretty low end hardware and still look nice and smooth. The same goes for the upcoming COD.

The X-Box is a 700 Mhz machine.. that doesn't have to worry about device drivers, temporary internet files, viruses, or your bluesnews window running in the background while you bitch about halo. That's right: it's a DEDICATED GAMING MACHINE! Yes, there are many PC's these days that surpass the X-box spec-wise, and surely there are some that kick its ass performance-wise, but a gaming console devotes all of its muscle to running the game. What does this mean? I wish I had punchlines like maddox.

c0wz,
I agree and understand that the XBox is a dedicated gaming machine, and thus will outperform a Windows PC at higher specs. I've made the same argument in the past.

However, you have to admit it's a pretty bad port. I remember when the game was supposed to come out for the PC and Mac, and they were demonstrating in-game footage. Now, this was back way before the 2GHz machines were out, and THE processor was a P3 or AMD Thunderbird with a Geforce2 or TNT. Yet, the game ran awesome in the video demos. Likewise, you'd assume they'd want to make sure that the game kicked ass on the current hardware, or then why make the game in the first place.

I think the poor performance was bad porting on Gearbox's part. It might not have been their fault; the XBox code might have made it hard to make the performance. In either case, it is pretty sad.

Personally, I think it runs BEARABLE in multiplayer, since Im used to a little lag or chopppiness online anyway. But is saddens me that it runs like it does.

This comment was edited on Oct 21, 15:15.

I installed the demo the other night really late and spent about 5 min playing. My initial impressions were very good, seeing the game in higher resolutions and playing it on my PC was fun. I tried a quick capture the flag game and feeling much better about the game went off to bed.

After getting home from work I started this thing up again and decided to give it a thorough test... Wow, this thing runs like crap. I have a 3.06 P4 with a radeon 9800 pro AIW, 1 GIG of ram, 2 SATA drives w/Raid-0, and this game choked on FPS all the time. Seemed like everytime I pulled the trigger the frame rate dropped to 50% or so. Just got really jumpy. But overall I was still having a lot of fun. Then I reached the main structure and went inside. FPS was pathetic. Pulling the trigger caused framerates to hit rock bottom and game got extremely jumpy all the time. Basically I had to pick and choose my fights because I couldn't adjust my aiming if more than 2 or 3 enemies were on hte screen. After beating the single player missions I was very disaapoined with the gameplay. Completely unacceptable to have such lousy framerates.

And then I tried Multiplayer. LOL. And I realized that the FPS problems were the least of this games issues. If lag were a city, it's name would be Halo. I tried joining at least a dozen games with pings well under 100ms and I saw that little network plug at least 1 time every 10 sec. After the first 3 min I stopped being really pissed off and just started laughing. I'm imagining the playtesters sitting there ignoring this and pretending this game is awesome and kicks ass, all the while having a 5 sec pause every 10 sec. And to add insult to injury once I decided to quit and move on from this game, it locks you into watching a 30 sec little movie telling you to buy the full game. Any hesitance to remove this game from my system was gone after that bull.

Halo is a great game but it just runs like crap and by today's standards looks dated.

Sorry microsoft and gearbox, mabye you should put some thought into releasing halo 2 on pc much sooner?

Still laughing at the multiplayer, LOL, so bad.

The X-Box is a 700 Mhz machine.. that doesn't have to worry about device drivers, temporary internet files, viruses, or your bluesnews window running in the background while you bitch about halo. That's right: it's a DEDICATED GAMING MACHINE! Yes, there are many PC's these days that surpass the X-box spec-wise, and surely there are some that kick its ass performance-wise, but a gaming console devotes all of its muscle to running the game. What does this mean? I wish I had punchlines like maddox.

I believe that the real "Problem With Halo" is that there are way too many people content to bitch and moan. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Not that I agree with the trend of milking it (these days a god-damned map pack is now found on a shelf for $65 CDN)- they're only in it for money.

Does anyone remember how halo was originally headed for PC.. then rerouted (and thus delayed) to x-box.. and now it's delayed once again to come back to PC? I think many of you are giving off the impression to bungie that we're ALL morons, and that they can get away with this swindling!


"I'm having fun... some of you need to remember what it's all about... not light mapping and real time shadows, but playing"

thank you, m'friend.
This comment was edited on Oct 20, 21:49.

The human eye cant even see past 30fps LOL you Fking retards

Cheese, either your posts are trolls, or you are totally clueless.

First off, the often-appearing debate is whether the human eye can see past 60FPS, not 30. 30 is just what the tv-sets in the US are set to (I believe its 25 in Europe, but with higher res). At least get your numbers straight. The reason for movies (in theaters) for being passable at lower FPS is they use motion blurring, as in if you froze the projector at a frame of a guy doing kung-fu, you'd see a blur and possibly two sets of legs doing teh combat.

Second, I'm on the side that says those studdies are bs. I've actually participated in tests where I had to distinguish between varying degrees of framerates. I'll admit, I'm not as good as the pilots that can tell up to 200+, but I assure you there is a BIG difference (to my eyes at least) between 30, 60, and 100.

The test involved comparing different "feeds" and guessing the FPS of each (or whether there was a difference). These ranged from 27 to 115 (and they could have been any number in between).

I ranked rather well, and was able to distinguish the differences and was in the top 15% of candidates for estimating the FPS of the feeds. Granted, this was not a publishable project; merely a case study to prove the biology of our optics in one of my Physiology classes. But it proves a point none-the-less.

-EDIT-
Meant to say the top 15%, as in 85% scored lower than myself.


This comment was edited on Oct 20, 15:45.

In reply to: If your cheap ass would get off your butt and upgrade then you would not have to turn down anything, this is a port of a 2 year old game and its slowing your system down cause your too cheap to upgrade, I have no problems at all with halo maxed out even with a GF3 card LOL heres a few pesos brother go buy a new comp and mabey youll be able to play HL2 when it comes out

Some of us have more important priorities and responsibilities than to spend thousands on a cutting edge computer. Maybe you should spend some time away from your computer and tune up your social skills. We dont all live in the same world as you.

Cheese: "The human eye cant even see past 30fps LOL you Fking retards"

It's more complex than just the fps. See the site below below for more information.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

Oh, and this article too:

http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html

Seems airforce pilots manage to distinguish things at about 220 fps...

*edit* Just a bit more to brighten your day...

This comment was edited on Oct 20, 03:07.

---

This comment was edited on Aug 1, 2010, 01:54.

The human eye cant even see past 30fps LOL you Fking retards