- last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT
Sorry to bust your idea about Halo 1 being too demanding for PC. Ask Darthbob. He has a Radeon 9200 with some other average specs, and he runs Halo better than XBox. A 9200 card is like 4 years old right now.
If you've played Halo PC on a MEDIOCRE PC at 640x480, it will run at about 50+ frames per second. That's much better than xbox, because xbox runs at about half that resolution with a cap of 30 frames per second. Sad how a low end Dell can beat the XBox, huh?
In addition, true some of the better computers could run it, but not at its best, thus, it wouldnt look as good as the xbox cause its not at its best.
Are you on crack? The best computers out there, like mine, run games like Half Life 2 and Doom 3, which are way more graphically intense than Halo 2, at 1200x1600 resolution with max graphics, and still get close to 80 frames per second. Note that the port for Doom 3 from PC to XBox involves making the graphics less intense and removing bump mapping many textures, as well as inferior shaders. what does that tell you? XBox is weaker than PC, so the games must get toned down.
All you are asking for is to be laughed at. You don't even have evidence to back up what you say. You said you know some stuff about computers. Great, so do I, and I just proved to you why many PC's are better than XBox. Even an average PC beats the XBox. You know nothing about the PC if you happen to believe otherwise....especially if you believe that a top-end PC, which is over 6 times faster than XBox, cannot handle Halo 2 in the same, and even better way. I mean, come on, the XBox is already 4 years old.
Well, actually, that whole paragraph was pointless. *sigh*, the XBox fanboys will never hear the 7ru7h.
[Edited on 2/5/2005 3:04:09 PM]