Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: Do you think that Bungie cares about it's PC Fanbase?
  • Subject: Do you think that Bungie cares about it's PC Fanbase?
Subject: Do you think that Bungie cares about it's PC Fanbase?
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Ima needs linkage righa here righta now causa meh wanta reada thisa!

  • 01.07.2008 2:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

WTF was that?
Ok dis regarding the one above me the last ten or so posts have been just warring about who is right, but no one thinks that games producers do things differently eh? I mean take EA and Westwood for example, yes i know Westwood has been liquidated, but still, before that happened, when Westwood was a branch of EA, anyone know Command and Conquer Tiberian sun? no? well let me enlighten you its the chronological sequel to the original Command and conquer, putting that aside, Tiberian sun was released in 200, but it was intended to be in development for alot longer than the one or two years it spent in the shop, more along the lines of 4 because the original came out in 1995, now that all Westwood's assets belong to EA they have control over the whole Command and conquer series, anyone played Zero hour? yeah they stopped patching that at 1.04, cheapos,

CnC 3 is probably going to stop its patches now that the expansion has been announced, dont tell me Crysis is taking all the work, because the CnC games aren't developed by someone else. Start up any CnC game and the only logoes that will show up are Westwood and EA, of course as aforementioned Westwood doesn't exist anymore, if you bothered reading the point is that Game companies do things differently, Blizzard isn't Blizzard anymore either its got Activision attached to it now, do you think how they do things is going to change? Of course it is, no different here you can't compare companies because ALL results vary, and if this still doesnt get the point through Bungie makes CONSOLE games, on a console made with computer components, but still a console, so they cant be that bothered to make Halo patches, and who handles LIVE patches? MICROSOFT

  • 01.07.2008 3:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: n357
I recall reading a post at the Gearbox forums that Microsoft either refused or never got back to them when they attempted to make another patch, and that they couldn't release one without Microsoft's consent. I couldn't find the post though, sorry.


Yeah.. I think the big thing is them forcing the 56k compatible netcode on us. We wouldn't NEED a god damn patch if M$ didn't have some stupid reason to get the AOL users to play with us (remember, these are the people who paid 30 bucks a month for dialup after broadband came out)

  • 01.07.2008 5:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: cHr0n0sPh3r3
I mean take EA and Westwood for example, yes i know Westwood has been liquidated, but still, before that happened, when Westwood was a branch of EA...

Blizzard isn't Blizzard anymore either its got Activision attached to it now...

Please, before you open your mouth again, know what you're talking about.

Westwood was an independent company carrying out contracts for different developers until its hostile takeover by EA in 1998 when the company was bought. After Renegade failed to produce a successful launch and successful sales, the company was liquidated, and anyone who actually remained behind was sent to EA HQ to fall into the masses.

Blizzard is owned by Vivendi Games, which is, in turn, owned by Disney. Vivendi recently bought Activision, and to clarify its new breakout to new company holders, Activision is being merged into Vivendi, and they're now renaming a new company Activision Blizzard. Blizzard, their games, their production, or their employees are in no way affected by this. All they did was borrow the name to confuse people into thinking Blizzard was involved with the new company, thus making any games they produce have this special Christmas morning effect on people so they can sell like crack.

  • 01.07.2008 9:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Maybe its not so much that bungie doesnt care but that microsoft doesnt care about the pc community thereby forcing bungie to not care. Think about it mircosoft is a greedy corporation that has a somewhat decent console. They want people to buy this console so they can make more money unlike pc games which they dont get anything for. So why would they want to support something people will only buy once, try it, and then stop playing because the game was made poorly.

Im going to look up that halo pc thread but in case i cant find the info im looking for can someone explain the 56k being forced onto people? I want to say it doesnt sound bad. At the worst 56k players can play with each other and the broadband players are playing a game that thinks your on 56k so wouldnt there be less lag? Of course im operating under the assumption the code is efficient.

  • 01.08.2008 11:02 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You mean this thread?

  • 01.08.2008 12:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Desert Fox RWTF
Posted by: Chris6691
That's not entirely true, either. Since there is no PC that can run Crysis Ultra high at 1280x1024. Heck, the 8800 GTX barely runs 15 FPS on Ultra High DX10 at 1024x768.
Ok, you're not correct, the 8800 GTX can get way more fps than that, I have 2 and get well over 75. So, unless you were making an extremely off hyperbole, you are wrong.


So, you've got 2 8800 GTX and can run Crysis on Ultra High DX10 at 75 FPS? Because i've looked at benchmarks at reliable sites and state completely different.

I've got a system with an 8800 GTX and i can't even run it at 20FPS at those settings.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=470&type=expert





  • 01.08.2008 12:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: HS113
Im going to look up that halo pc thread but in case i cant find the info im looking for can someone explain the 56k being forced onto people? I want to say it doesnt sound bad. At the worst 56k players can play with each other and the broadband players are playing a game that thinks your on 56k so wouldnt there be less lag? Of course im operating under the assumption the code is efficient.


In addition to the thread "aggy" threw up, there was another one on a Gearbox forum of interest. But I'd like to direct everyone that whines about GB to this particular part:

The beta code you think was great was actually Gearbox netcode. The fact that it was less laggy is revealing about Gearbox's holding out for a broadband standard. But, the specification was mandated for us. Halo PC is a work for hire and, as professionals, the Gearbox developers did what they were told. After all, it was not their property, it was Microsoft's / Bungie's.

It's really frustrating for us to get the finger pointed at us for decisions we are not responsible for. It's even more frustrating when we try to be diplomatic about it and then we get blamed even more. We don't want to point fingers at Microsoft because we understand their decisions. I'm not sure if I would've made the same decisions if I was in their position, but it's possible.


They could be lying but frankly, with the track record of the two companies I think I'll believe pretty much anyone over M$.
First of all, why would I want to play someone with a 56k connection? Are you serious? Maybe in UT or something, but with Halo and its physics I'll pass. The fact that when Halo PC came out dialup dependence was dying, AND wasn't viable for any sort of gaming infuriates me. For instance, in my clan of 300 people (and many leaving and joining through the years) there have been THREE Dialup gamers. And we all hated them, in case you're wondering. There's NO reason to have 56k support in a game made after 2001, maybe 2002. None.
And yet Microsoft sold perhaps three more copies of this port because some idiot that loves getting his game interrupted by a phone call had a thing for the Halo series.

And then, to top it off, these guys were scapegoated to hell and back. Veterans on this forum know whats up, but the new guys are all in here complaining about Gearbox and Hired Gun.
WAKE THE -blam!- UP! Since when has Microsoft made a positive decision for gamers? Whether it was GFW "initiatives" or mandating 56k netcode in a game like Halo, I'd like someone to name one good thing M$ has done for PC gamers recently.

  • 01.08.2008 2:43 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Careful Ryan, Wakeboy will be here in a second.

  • 01.08.2008 5:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I thought we were allowed to bash Microsoft now that Bungie isn't their trophy wife. Either that or I'll get boned for my -blam!- ing?

  • 01.08.2008 7:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

They put out an operating system that's compatible with most games, lol. J/k with ya Ryan.

  • 01.09.2008 3:31 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: JustBringIt69
They put out an operating system that's compatible with most games, lol. J/k with ya Ryan.


Given, that's a step forward over the mac camp ; )

  • 01.09.2008 1:26 PM PDT

Slaying noobs since 2007.

Posted by: Chris6691
Posted by: Desert Fox RWTF
Posted by: Chris6691
That's not entirely true, either. Since there is no PC that can run Crysis Ultra high at 1280x1024. Heck, the 8800 GTX barely runs 15 FPS on Ultra High DX10 at 1024x768.
Ok, you're not correct, the 8800 GTX can get way more fps than that, I have 2 and get well over 75. So, unless you were making an extremely off hyperbole, you are wrong.


So, you've got 2 8800 GTX and can run Crysis on Ultra High DX10 at 75 FPS? Because i've looked at benchmarks at reliable sites and state completely different.

I've got a system with an 8800 GTX and i can't even run it at 20FPS at those settings.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=470&type=expert

Well your system has to be bottle necking majorly then, because a 8800 Ultra can get Extremely good frame rates, and the 8800 GTX is only but so far behind.

  • 01.10.2008 5:37 PM PDT

Slaying noobs since 2007.

I hate this forum... Stupid double-post system.

[Edited on 01.10.2008 5:39 PM PST]

  • 01.10.2008 5:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I agree. Let's play some Team Fortress 2 instead. :)

  • 01.10.2008 6:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Yes that one thanks for the link.

edit- the whole gearbox/hired gun hubbub reminds me of the saying "dont shoot the messenger." I didnt really think about the fact that they were under orders to complete the port as directed by M$.

[Edited on 01.11.2008 11:45 AM PST]

  • 01.11.2008 11:41 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

lol oh and for the record, my friend has a small CAL team together for TF2 if anyone wants to stop arguing about H2V and play a good game ; )

  • 01.11.2008 2:07 PM PDT

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
Careful Ryan, Wakeboy will be here in a second.



Nah, Halo 1's netcode really did piss me off and Microsoft is always making the wrong move.

Somehow, I put up with it and find Halo 2 enjoyable :S

  • 01.11.2008 4:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Desert Fox RWTF
Posted by: Chris6691
Posted by: Desert Fox RWTF
Posted by: Chris6691
That's not entirely true, either. Since there is no PC that can run Crysis Ultra high at 1280x1024. Heck, the 8800 GTX barely runs 15 FPS on Ultra High DX10 at 1024x768.
Ok, you're not correct, the 8800 GTX can get way more fps than that, I have 2 and get well over 75. So, unless you were making an extremely off hyperbole, you are wrong.


So, you've got 2 8800 GTX and can run Crysis on Ultra High DX10 at 75 FPS? Because i've looked at benchmarks at reliable sites and state completely different.



I've got a system with an 8800 GTX and i can't even run it at 20FPS at those settings.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=470&type=expert

Well your system has to be bottle necking majorly then, because a 8800 Ultra can get Extremely good frame rates, and the 8800 GTX is only but so far behind.


Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5600+ (2 CPUs), ~2.8GHz
Memory: 2046MB RAM
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX

And here's another tech-site that prooves my point.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2222418,00.asp

Also, i'm beggining to wonder if you're referring to High setting(DX9), not Very High(DX10). Because i'm reffering to DX10. No PC can run Crysis the way it's meant to be played, with High Res, DX10 Very High setting, AA &AF, ext. Crysis is ahead of its time, mate.

Although i'm sure future drivers and patches from nVidia and Crytek will optimise this game a lot more than it currently is.




[Edited on 01.11.2008 4:42 PM PST]

  • 01.11.2008 4:31 PM PDT

Slaying noobs since 2007.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you. There are PCs capable of running Crysis extremely well, and yes when I say extremely well I do mean Very High.

  • 01.11.2008 6:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Desert Fox RWTF
Very High.
That's Obi Wan for you.

  • 01.12.2008 6:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Lol, I actually gave that up for a while. It sucks being stone sober...

I'm gettin a new PC soon, plus I need to start thinking about getting the bike plated this spring.

  • 01.12.2008 7:01 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Ryanman7
First of all, why would I want to play someone with a 56k connection? Are you serious? Maybe in UT or something, but with Halo and its physics I'll pass. The fact that when Halo PC came out dialup dependence was dying, AND wasn't viable for any sort of gaming infuriates me.
Screw you, for three years I was only able to play one decent online game with my 56k connection, and that game was Halo. It was damn fun, too.

  • 01.14.2008 3:54 AM PDT

Posted by: Reaver225
Posted by: Ryanman7
First of all, why would I want to play someone with a 56k connection? Are you serious? Maybe in UT or something, but with Halo and its physics I'll pass. The fact that when Halo PC came out dialup dependence was dying, AND wasn't viable for any sort of gaming infuriates me.
Screw you, for three years I was only able to play one decent online game with my 56k connection, and that game was Halo. It was damn fun, too.


There's one of the 3 players mention earlier.

  • 01.14.2008 11:36 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Reaver225
Posted by: Ryanman7
First of all, why would I want to play someone with a 56k connection? Are you serious? Maybe in UT or something, but with Halo and its physics I'll pass. The fact that when Halo PC came out dialup dependence was dying, AND wasn't viable for any sort of gaming infuriates me.
Screw you, for three years I was only able to play one decent online game with my 56k connection, and that game was Halo. It was damn fun, too.


Yeah I'm sure it was a blast for you. And for everyone else it was a nightmare.
Get over yourself man. It's not MY fault you can't drop twenty bucks a month for DSL. I don't care about your plight because, frankly, you ruined the game for hundreds of people over those three years thanks to either your cheap skating ways or your stupid parents. No sympathy homes - sorry.

  • 01.14.2008 3:42 PM PDT