halo needing a powerful PC

[RaolinDarksbane]

I bet some people are really disappointed that they waited two years for this piece of turd. Not only are the levels still repetitive, the performance is crap on a high end machine.

 

[zurich]

The shortcomings in Halo's singleplayer game were more than made up for with Co-op on the Xbox version. The PC version doesn't even have that. Ugh.

 

[mr]

The biggest letdown IMO is the absence of Single Player Coop.
This was very good on Xbox and I was really looking forward playing Coop with a few people online or in a LAN. :?

 

[cthellis42]

The biggest letdown IMO is the absence of Single Player Coop.

Isn't that a contradiction of terms?

 

[Fox5]

Meh, this game runs horrible on my comp.
I have a 1.7 Gig athlon with 1280 MB of ddr(probably the slowest variety) and a radeon 9700 pro, and on the timedemo(with pixel shader 2.0 on) I get an average of 20 fps whether I'm at 640x480 or 1280x960 with all effects maxed. Not sure what I'd get with all effects on low, but I do know that the framerate goes down when I select any other pixel shader configs(and for some reason, I think halo defaults to 1.4 for radeon 9700 pros) including fixed function, and that 1600x1200 on lowest effects is virtually unplayable.

 

[zurich]

Fox5,

Do you have the framerate locked in the video config?

 

[Fox5]

Umm....I don't think so. I tried disabling vsync in my drivers to see if that'd do anything, but nope. Besides, 20 fps is an awfully wierd number to be locked at, plus, it isn't always 20 fps, that is just the average I get in the timedemo, during actual play without any pixel shader effects in sight I can get a much better framerate.

 

[V3]

I just played Halo PC, yesterday on my friend PC, I think it is P3 733 + original Geforce 3, all detail set to max, 800x600, and I thought it was a bit better than the Xbox version, especially in frame rate department, obviously increase in resolution is a plus too.

I was suggesting co-op, but he said it was gone, is that true ?

I think most of the review said Halo runs very sluggish, because the game is just SLOW when you have a mouse and keyboard to use. So I suggest playing it with Xbox pad.

 

[Blade]

It's not the gameplay that sucks, Teasy. It's the repetitive and utterly unimaginative level and aesthetic design.

 

[cthellis42]

It's not the gameplay that sucks, Teasy. It's the repetitive and utterly unimaginative level and aesthetic design.

Jeez, it's like initial Halo reviews have been raised from the dead!

 

[LisaJoy]

It's not the gameplay that sucks, Teasy. It's the repetitive and utterly unimaginative level and aesthetic design.

yes, there are times you can tell they had to rush in finishing this one, like they just took some rooms and did a copy/paste job until they felt they had a full level.

 

[London Geezer]

wow.... never heard so many people complaining about this game, especially the gameplay....
personally i dont like it, but i thought it was just me...

**wonders why the game got 10/10 reviews from EVERYONE**

:? :?

 

[zsouthboy]

wow.... never heard so many people complaining about this game, especially the gameplay....
personally i dont like it, but i thought it was just me...

**wonders why the game got 10/10 reviews from EVERYONE**

:? :?

I wasn't "allowed" to say it sucked while it was just on the xbox, because everyone thought it was the gaming holy grail. Then it comes out on the PC, and oh, by the way, its the same game, but it actually has other FPSs to compete against.

 

[LisaJoy]

My Son insisted we get this game, so I folded, I always do..
we just have it in default settings, which looks great to me..
did our first timedemo

Date / Time: 10/5/2003 4:33:46 AM (75218ms)
2000MHz, 1024MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9800 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e48) Driver=6.14.10.6378 Shader=1.4
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -timedemo (Version=1.0.0.564)
Frames=4700
Total Time=97.15s
Average frame rate=48.38fps
Below 5fps= 11% (time) 0% (frames) (11.393s spent in 11 frames)
Below 10fps= 12% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 12% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 12% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 13% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 30fps= 13% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 40fps= 21% (time) 6% (frames)
Below 50fps= 43% (time) 26% (frames)
Below 60fps= 72% (time) 59% (frames)
Memory used Max=161MB, Min=131MB, Ave=150MB


certainly not bad

 

[zurich]

Doesn't the Halo benchmark use cutscenes? Cause that's pretty weak and meaningless if it does.

 

[London Geezer]

Doesn't the Halo benchmark use cutscenes? Cause that's pretty weak and meaningless if it does.

if it is so, then a cutscene that dips below 5fps 11% of the time, below 10fps 12% of the time and so on is pathetic.

unless i got this whole measurement thing completely wrong....

if i did, then sorry. but a game that cant even keep a decent framerate in cutscenes on a 2000MHz, 1024MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9800 PRO really is pathetic

 

[Fafalada]

Uhm... am I reading this right - 10% of the time under 5FPS?
Unless this is some disk loading delay at the start and benchmark isn't smart enough to ignore it, this sounds pretty awful to me. :?

 

[AlphaWolf]

(11.393s spent in 11 frames)

um... that's less than 1 frame per second at times. How would that be playable?

 

[cthellis42]

I don't quite know what the "time" measurement is looking at, but since everything "Below 30fps" on down has 0% on frames, I assume that means they were never touched.

Though MAN as that chart confusing to follow without the accompanying documentation. Nothing adds up!

 

[LisaJoy]

I don't quite know what the "time" measurement is looking at, but since everything "Below 30fps" on down has 0% on frames, I assume that means they were never touched.

you assume right.. too bad others don't get it