Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: So I lowered my resolution setting on Halo PC
  • Subject: So I lowered my resolution setting on Halo PC
Subject: So I lowered my resolution setting on Halo PC
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

So I lowered the resolution from 800x600 to 640x480 and everything became much much smoother, even though they're it was a bit uglier. Genrades to rockets to shooting and when they'res multiple guys fighting against each other like 10 guys at once with frags, rockets etc. its still smooth.

With this, I can aim better, shoot better, and I noticed the leading was a bit better, less to lead. Now killing pistol with the pistol is so much easier. My kills jumped up drasticly, just today on Blood Gulch in the Maw server, I got 31 kills and 13 deaths, using the pistol, much better than just around maybe 7 kills more than deaths. Just when I entered the game, our base was swarming with like 9 red guys, and after i got 9 kills and no deaths. :)

[Edited on 5/16/2006]

  • 05.16.2006 5:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

higher frames do help. if youve got speculars and shadows on also, id recommend turning them off. i get over 30 fps better in some cases just by sacrificing those little details that dont affect gameplay anyway.

  • 05.16.2006 5:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Lol I have a geforce 4 440 MX, I turned off everything but kept the textures on high.

[Edited on 5/16/2006]

  • 05.16.2006 5:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I find shadows helpful sometimes for judging a target's height off of the ground while he's in mid-air, so I leave those on.

Muzzle flash with particles on high also helps slightly to give away a person's position.

Specular is eye candy only, so I rarely turn that on.

  • 05.16.2006 5:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I run my game with max visuals and sound at 800 by 600 and can get up to over 70 fps. However, I set my fps to 30, since I don't like the inconsistency of 70 fps one second and then 47 fps the other.

  • 05.16.2006 5:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

well, as mr ma5b said, i always leave the shadows, and particles on, and still get a smooth framerate. i also found it useful to put in -use11 after the target link in your halo properties. (make sure theres a space before -use11)

for those people who also puts "-use11", can you tell me what it does again? i remmeber it has something to do with minimizing the ground of specula texture to minimize bad framerate, but im not sure. oh and is there a way to find out how many fps you are running at? im trying to find out, and once i do, im gona compare it with my friends, to see who gets the smoothest. xD

  • 05.16.2006 7:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i get a solid 60fps :)

  • 05.16.2006 7:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I believe it's ctrl + f12 for the framerate counter.

  • 05.16.2006 7:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Mr MA5B
I believe it's ctrl + f12 for the framerate counter.


oh ok, thnx, and um once i bring up the framerate counter, do i press ctrl + F12 again to make it go away?

  • 05.16.2006 7:22 PM PDT

Join the MAW Clan
X-fire username:Iggwilv
My Real Avatar

-use11 forces Halo to use the 1.1 version shader instead of the 2.0. If you have a low end card it can't support the shader 2.0 effects.

  • 05.16.2006 7:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Notic how halo doesnt mention the use of pixel shadders on the box.... but im telling you right now if you want halo to look its best you need to get a better card... i mean at least a ge force 5000 series, also if you have an intergrated GFX card your probably fooked. since alot of intel inetergrated gpu mobo dont have PCIe or AGP slots.. and halo doesnt really run very good on PCI cards. i ended up with 20 fps with my radeon 9250... which was a 256 bit pci card

now i get 120 frames no vsync, 85 fps vsynce with my new pc i built, and celerons are just fail P4 cores with no l2 cache so if your pc is using those componets.... you really really need a new pc. and dont buy stock computers as they usually turn out to be extremley cheaply made.

anywho back to the post... you can force certain fixed cards to use pixel shader but it usually doesnt end up with a very good outcome, usually end up with color coruption and artifacts

btw this is the 6th post i made with no reply.... we really need more players :(

oh and a 2.4 ghz AMD CPU runs more efficent than a Intel 3.2 CPU but costs half the price..
I hate intel...

  • 05.17.2006 6:06 AM PDT

you guys all have crappy computers. I can run just fine with all the settings maxed and on 1024x768 resolution.

If you don't believe me, try these stats:

Proccesser: AMD Athelon 1.2 ghz procceser overclocked to 1.5
Video card: ATI all-in-wonder radeon video card w/ 32 mb VRAM
Physical memory: over 700mb RAM
Hard drive: 28gb capacity with 2.5 gb free
A really decent sound card

And i'm gonna get:

Proccesser: intel Penitum 4 2.5 ghz
Video Card: BFG GeForce 7200 w/564mb VRAM And NVidea Pixel Shader 3.0
Physical memory: Over 1gb RAM
Hard drive: +80gb
A more decent sound card

[Edited on 5/17/2006]

  • 05.17.2006 7:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

thats it... my duel 7600's with SLI on a amd 64 bit cpu with ........ this is like the 3rd time i posted this... anywho my rez goes much higher than 1024 x 768

  • 05.17.2006 7:02 AM PDT

If it exeeds the recemended requrments i'm fine...

  • 05.17.2006 7:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

agreed... allthough halo lies about sys specs on the box

  • 05.17.2006 7:04 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

LOL dude of course a 2.4GHz amd is WAY BETTER than a 3.2Ghz intel.

Cheaper....... im not to sure about that

$120 for AMD 2.4. (754) <--
$300 for AMD 2.4. (939) <--
$550 for AMD 2.4. (X2)
$80 for INTEL 3.2. (Celeron) <--
$200 for Intel 3.2. (P4) <--
$240 for intel 3.2 (PD)
*<-- the ones in talking about other for reference*

BUT THE DIFFERNCE IN PRICE IS MORE THAN WORTH IT.


  • 05.18.2006 7:36 PM PDT