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?

Slaying noobs since 2007.

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.

  • 01.04.2008 6:16 PM PDT

Long live the Last Refuge!


My computer model is Dimension DIME521

  • 01.05.2008 2:20 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

God dang it i cant find out what MB that is or the exact socket. What you can do is maybe download cpu-z and that will tell what socket it is and also what MB i hope. After you run it take a screenshot of both the cpu tab and mainboard tab and upload it to photobucket or where ever so we can see it. Thanks.

  • 01.05.2008 6:30 AM PDT

Long live the Last Refuge!

Ok

My package is Socket AM2 (940)

[Edited on 01.05.2008 9:23 AM PST]

  • 01.05.2008 9:11 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

OK then lol. This means you can probably upgrade anything in your system you want, DDR2 RAM runs at 40 bucks a gig or so, a new processor will fit in it (though I don't particularly suggest that because you don't know anything about computers to speak of) and you can stuff a PCIx16 card in there of your choice. You're ready to play games if you spend an hour or so learning how to install basic components.

  • 01.05.2008 9:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I would get a new mobo any ways, because dell uses crappy mobo's in everythign but XPS and Alienware.
If you go with AMD you can get a nice comp for a good price. I would recommend the AMD 64 X2 5000+ black edition. If you can overclock, other wise get a higher normal clocked processor.
I got 2GB of DDR2-800 ram for $80.
Not sure what that comp uses, but I would start from scratch with all, but the hard drive and optical drive.

Don't try to install any medium-to-high end GFX cards with the default Dell power supply. They are very bad, so you will likely need a better one first. Like the recommend PSU for a Geforce 7600 is at least 350 watts.

  • 01.05.2008 9:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

although I'd normally agree with you artillery, I don't think this guy has the savvy (or the funds) to pull that off. Putting a new PSU in a dell is a tricky deal, specially for a n00b. I always end up just recommending that these guys wait until their parents buy them a 800 dollar computer and THEN putting in a video card.

  • 01.05.2008 9:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

They care so much they havent responded to this thread. Releasing Halo 2 PC on Vista was stupid, I refuse to buy it and I never will. I still play Halo Pc (RPC~Arbitor). Have been since its release. They wont release for XP cause they will want to save face. I know it wasn't about the money cause they would have released it for XP and Vista if it was....ummmm....

  • 01.05.2008 11:35 PM PDT

Long live the Last Refuge!

Posted by: Ryanman7
although I'd normally agree with you artillery, I don't think this guy has the savvy (or the funds) to pull that off. Putting a new PSU in a dell is a tricky deal, specially for a n00b. I always end up just recommending that these guys wait until their parents buy them a 800 dollar computer and THEN putting in a video card.

Yeah I'll wait for my brithday on that which is in May

  • 01.06.2008 1:31 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I really don't understand the rationale behind all this venom being spewed at Bungie.

1. Their primary focus is on their console releases (a valid explanation for the links issue)
2. Halo 1 & 2 aren't new releases (Developers don't support games forever, it's a fact of life)
3. They weren't the main developer behind the ports, Gearbox [H1] and Hired Gun [H2] were (Blaming Bungie for a poor port is beyond unreasonable)

  • 01.06.2008 1:59 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Botolf
I really don't understand the rationale behind all this venom being spewed at Bungie.
Clearly, sir, you are not a PC gamer. :)
Posted by: Botolf
2. Halo 1 & 2 aren't new releases (Developers don't support games forever, it's a fact of life)
Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998.
Posted by: Botolf
3. They weren't the main developer behind the ports, Gearbox [H1] and Hired Gun [H2] were (Blaming Bungie for a poor port is beyond unreasonable)
Which, if you've been paying attention to what the likes of Agamemnon have said, Bungie and Microsoft are responsible because they are actually the ones telling the developers what to do. They mandated that Gearbox create Halo PC's horrid netcode that we could have done without.

  • 01.06.2008 7:32 AM PDT

Long live the Last Refuge!

it true Hired gun was a group of micsoft interns i think

  • 01.06.2008 7:37 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: halo3leader
it true Hired gun was a group of micsoft interns i think

I wouldn't doubt it.

  • 01.06.2008 10:01 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Clearly, sir, you are not a PC gamer. :)
Clearly, sir, you know nothing about me. I grew up on PC games, smartguy, I'm not some console-only fanatic.

Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998.
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?

Which, if you've been paying attention to what the likes of Agamemnon have said, Bungie and Microsoft are responsible because they are actually the ones telling the developers what to do. They mandated that Gearbox create Halo PC's horrid netcode that we could have done without.
I don't really possess the time and patience to read through the entirety of an 11 page thread, especially when much of the posts are rather old. Pointing out a specific post would be most helpful.

  • 01.06.2008 11:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Botolf
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?


Using EA Sports is not the best example of a company "pulling the plug" on a game. The reason they cancel online gameplay, is because a new Sports game comes out every year, and managing all of those different servers is costly, and causes more harm then good. They partially cancel service in old sports games because they release a new one every year, and they can't manage the servers, the other reason why they would cancel the servers is to encourage people to buy the latest Madden or Nascar game every year.

Bungie does not churn out new Halo games every year, and neither does Blizzard. It is expected that if you spend many years developing a game, that you update it and clean up the bugs, even after the major sales points in the game have passed. Valve is an excellent example of this, as they have been constantly updating Half-Life 2 ever since the game first came out.

  • 01.06.2008 12:22 PM PDT

Long live the Last Refuge!



Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?


So that means that not all games die you said devlopers don't support games forever. Will that makes the comment wrong you never said basically all games will become unsupported. Lets see starcraft as been out for 10 years and still supported, never winter nights is still supported, Halo PC, star wars empire at war, F.E.A.R, battlefield 1942 all still supported.

  • 01.06.2008 1:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Recoton007
Posted by: Botolf
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?


Using EA Sports is not the best example of a company "pulling the plug" on a game. The reason they cancel online gameplay, is because a new Sports game comes out every year, and managing all of those different servers is costly, and causes more harm then good. They partially cancel service in old sports games because they release a new one every year, and they can't manage the servers, the other reason why they would cancel the servers is to encourage people to buy the latest Madden or Nascar game every year.

Bungie does not churn out new Halo games every year, and neither does Blizzard. It is expected that if you spend many years developing a game, that you update it and clean up the bugs, even after the major sales points in the game have passed. Valve is an excellent example of this, as they have been constantly updating Half-Life 2 ever since the game first came out.

Best example, probably not, but the point I was making is that Bungie is hardly "pulling the plug", you can still play the games, in their entirety, services haven't been discontinued, aside from the obvious patching. The games aren't dead, the developers have just moved on.

To get patches now would be complicated. For Halo PC, Gearbox would probably be the party to do it, and they have their hands full with several ports and a new IP, if I recall correctly. They've no doubt moved on from Halo PC. For Halo 2 Vista, it's even less likely. Hired Gun was broken up into tiny chunks after release iirc, and was obviously handed too much to handle (IIRC, all they had for post-release support was no more than a dozen people, if that), their confirmation of ceased patching so early is no doubt a response.

I will agree with sentiment that Halo 2 Vista was seriously botched, though (Halo PC, not so much. Crappy netcode is an issue, but not a game-breaker often at all). I hope Microsoft handles the eventual porting of Halo 3 to PC (It's bound to, it's selling like the world's ending tomorrow) far better than the disaster that was Halo 2 Vista (More people working on it, non-gimped Guerilla, maybe some features like co-op, etc).

  • 01.06.2008 1:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: halo3leader


Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?


So that means that not all games die you said devlopers don't support games forever. Will that makes the comment wrong you never said basically all games will become unsupported. Lets see starcraft as been out for 10 years and still supported, never winter nights is still supported, Halo PC, star wars empire at war, F.E.A.R, battlefield 1942 all still supported.

If a developer ceases multiplayer support by shutting down servers, there goes the lion's share of the players, correct? Few to no sp/mp games can survive without their mp component.

Hope that clears up what I was saying.

  • 01.06.2008 1:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Botolf
Clearly, sir, you are not a PC gamer. :)
Clearly, sir, you know nothing about me. I grew up on PC games, smartguy, I'm not some console-only fanatic.
I know, I was just joking there; see the smiley face? :D
Posted by: Botolf
Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998.
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?
You're right, but what I said still applies. The creator have just moved on, which I suppose is what you meant but I didn't understand earlier.
Posted by: Botolf
Which, if you've been paying attention to what the likes of Agamemnon have said, Bungie and Microsoft are responsible because they are actually the ones telling the developers what to do. They mandated that Gearbox create Halo PC's horrid netcode that we could have done without.
I don't really possess the time and patience to read through the entirety of an 11 page thread, especially when much of the posts are rather old. Pointing out a specific post would be most helpful.
Yeah, I suppose I wouldn't either. I actually checked and I don't think he posted or at least elaborated on it in this thread, my bad. :/

  • 01.06.2008 5:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I know, I was just joking there; see the smiley face? :D
Ah, I took it as a veiled insult D:

You're right, but what I said still applies. The creator have just moved on, which I suppose is what you meant but I didn't understand earlier.
Yes, and I was also making the point that supporting games years and years later isn't the norm, and inversely, moving on isn't a reprehensible practice or anything :)

Yeah, I suppose I wouldn't either. I actually checked and I don't think he posted or at least elaborated on it in this thread, my bad. :/
Ok. If he returned and elaborated, that would also be helpful :p

  • 01.06.2008 6:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Botolf
Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998.
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?

No, but Bungie dropping support on Halo PC so soon is pretty ridiculous. I mean, seriously, the last patch we got was in 2006. Only 3 years after the PC release, and updates cease. That should show beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bungie doesn't care.

  • 01.06.2008 6:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Oni Ryu
Posted by: Botolf
Most developers don't pull the plug in such short times either, and Blizzard has been periodically releasing patches for StarCraft since 1998.
"Pulling the plug" would require more than ceasing to patch a game, I'd argue it would be more along the lines of shutting down all the multiplayer servers, like EA has done for some games in the past. That will most certainly kill a game, stopping post-release patches doesn't doom one. And your Blizzard example, would you expect that to be the norm in the industry? Really, would you?

No, but Bungie dropping support on Halo PC so soon is pretty ridiculous. I mean, seriously, the last patch we got was in 2006. Only 3 years after the PC release, and updates cease. That should show beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bungie doesn't care.

What? 3 years of post-release patching is more than decent, what were you expecting? 5 Years?

And it wouldn't have been Bungie dropping support, either, it would have been Gearbox.

  • 01.06.2008 9:31 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Legendary Member

Yes, I am a hypocrite, and I'm sorry. I really do mean well, but I'm not running on all cylinders.

Everytime someone buys a copy of Halo 2 Vista, a puppy dies.

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.

  • 01.06.2008 10:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

That'd be an interesting read, to say the least. Linkage for the me?

  • 01.06.2008 11:07 PM PDT