Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: WTF!?!?!? HALO CANT RUN SMOOTHLY!?!?!??!
  • Subject: WTF!?!?!? HALO CANT RUN SMOOTHLY!?!?!??!
Subject: WTF!?!?!? HALO CANT RUN SMOOTHLY!?!?!??!
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

computer specs:

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ @ 2.0ghz
512MB RAM (dont know which brand)
GeForce 5200FX AGP 8X 128MB
Flatscreen 17 inch LCD monitor with built-in speakers

  • 11.27.2004 3:36 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Your gfx card isn't powerful enough. Turn the graphics settings down.

[Edited on 11/27/2004 4:15:04 PM]

  • 11.27.2004 3:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

bring down the graphics settings. the 5200 can't handle graphics such as in halo so well
i know. i have it
EDIT: now that i see skippy's post, i feel the need to add -BLAM- U SKIPPY(jk)
but if you wanna play halo on high, do what im doing. upgrade your card. im getting the new 6600GT, on which a lot of game can be played on high without lag.

[Edited on 11/27/2004 4:00:20 PM]

  • 11.27.2004 3:58 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

why cant it handle halo, i've played games with better graphics than halo (Half life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry) and i play them on high and i get pretty smoot hperformance, and Half Life 2 has the BEST graphics engine yet, and i can run it on high, but not halo? P.S. I run in 800x600 in all games except games that are older than may 2003. there is something wrong with halo.........its graphics arent all that great. if u played Half Life 2, u'd go "HOLY -blam!-! THESE GRAPHICS PWNS!!!!" note: Even Unreal Tournament 2004 has better graphics than Halo and i can run that pretty smoothly, lags only when theres a big explosion that contais liots of smoke or dust

  • 11.28.2004 6:11 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

It's not actually possible to run Half-Life 2, Doom 3 or FarCry with the graphics settings on full with That card because it's not even DirectX 9 compatable. All those games detect your card limitations, and make it so you can't set the graphics any higher. Halo doesn't, it lets you set the graphics as high as you want even if your computer can't handle it.

This is what I run Half-Life 2 on:

Resolution: 1280x1024
Model detail: High
Texture detail: High
Water detail: Reflect all (highest)
Shadow detail: High
Antialiasing mode: 4X (runs smoothly at 8X, but pointless at 1280x1024)
Filtering mode: Anisotropic 2X (again, runs smoothly at 8X but makes no difference)
Shader detail: High
Hardware DirectX level: DirectX v9.0
Software DirectX level: DirectX v9.0

That, with the exception of AA and AF which make no difference at such high res, are the Maximum Settings. It would be physically impossible for your computer spec to run Half Life 2 with those graphics settings. The same is true of FarCry if you actually turn everything up. I don't have Doom 3 but I doubt it's any different.

If you run Halo with all the graphics settings on full, it looks amazing, so much better than the xbox version. By 'high' I mean:

Resolution: 1280x1024
Refresh rate: 60Hz
Frame rate: 30FPS
Specular: Yes
Shadows: Yes
Decals: Yes
Particles: High
Texture Quality: High

I'd also like to point out you have the same CPU as me. So it aint that. I used to be able to run Halo on those settings back when I had 512MB of ram, like you, so it aint that either. What's left to cause the slow-down? Graphics card.

[Edited on 11/28/2004 6:38:32 AM]

  • 11.28.2004 6:35 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

bring down the detail setting, I had a simialr problem with details set to high


they arent all that importaint but take alot of memory for you graphics card to sort out


For example, a cloud of dust isnt all that interesting, but the comp has to plot all those particals and the paths they take and that is hard

  • 11.28.2004 8:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: cartman555
why cant it handle halo, i've played games with better graphics than halo (Half life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry) and i play them on high and i get pretty smoot hperformance, and Half Life 2 has the BEST graphics engine yet, and i can run it on high, but not halo? P.S. I run in 800x600 in all games except games that are older than may 2003. there is something wrong with halo.........its graphics arent all that great. if u played Half Life 2, u'd go "HOLY -blam!-! THESE GRAPHICS PWNS!!!!" note: Even Unreal Tournament 2004 has better graphics than Halo and i can run that pretty smoothly, lags only when theres a big explosion that contais liots of smoke or dust

you are a rotten liar.
true to what skippy said, the geforce 5200 can't run doom 3 under any circumstances, but he is also a rotten liar. the 5200 DOES support dirextx 9.0, it just sucks, that all. i mean, i have this card, and i can't get the doom3 demo to run on medium settings. farcry demo...just sucked, and my computer just crashed, before i could downlpoad the half life 2 demo. but i had the UT2K4 demo. that worked fine. i didn't buy the full though, because gameplay sucked.

if you're wondering why im proving my point with demos, rember this: demos have lower requriements than the real game. game companies trick people into buying the full game, when it won't even run on their computer.

[Edited on 11/28/2004 8:56:01 AM]

  • 11.28.2004 8:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Sorry, I thought the 5200 was a DirectX 8.1 card, like the ATi 9200.
On the other hand, it's too weak to use directX 9 effects, so what's the point in having it other than a marketting ploy?

  • 11.28.2004 11:29 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

it's cheap, and it'll still run games on low settings. it's a budget card. that's why it's marketed

  • 11.28.2004 11:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

actually according to the packaging the MADE BY ATI version of the radeon 9200 is a dx9 card, but i somehow doubt it really is...

this sort of has to do with this subject, but not really,
does anyone know what nvidia card is about the same as an ati all-in-wonder 9600 xt? ive always been curious about that....

  • 12.01.2004 12:47 AM PDT