Xaximus on 25/7/2004 at 17:54
I'm playing Halo now on my 9500 Pro with very satisfactory frame rates (Athlon XP 2.0 GHz). It's my first time playing it, and man... I'm shocked at how repetative the level design is. It's just awful. I'm scratching my head trying to figure out why Xboxers loved it.
Yeah, I'm way off-topic, but the original question has been resolved. ;)
Skull Gun on 25/7/2004 at 18:19
Xaximus I felt the same way, it's like they've copy pasted most of the levels together, pretty dissappointing but then I played the muliplayer of Halo and it really is very good. I rate it up there with Unreal 2004 and Battlefield Vietnam.
Rolander on 26/7/2004 at 04:56
I played Halo at 800 x 600 with full eye candy and it only slowed down somewhat on the most graphic taxing situations.
I'm played it on a Celeron 1.7 with 512 mb and Radeon 9600XT. The clinch here is I'm STILL using Win98 so that was probably the reason that Halo ran fine (ie. more cpu power left unused by OS).
Because of this, I'm reluctant to switch to XP even though I already bought the software just in case (full price registered thingy, if you're wondering). Should have saved my money and bought a few other games instead; I forgot where I left the XP CD package.
I dunno about the rest of you, but Halo was fun for me on the whole. The most repetitive level I could think of was the Library. [SPOILER]It feels like wading through tons of decaying Flood tissue, yuck![/SPOILER]
The best parts IMO were the portions that stealth was viable aka Thief style. [SPOILER](Sneaking around and bashing Convenant heads in while their backs are turned or when they're sleeping)[/SPOILER] I also love the special game of:[SPOILER]"Pin the plasma grenade on the grunt/elite" It's so fun to watch them panic from impending doom ... especially the elites: "RARRGH .. Booom/Aieeee!"[/SPOILER] :ebil:
Halo Legendary was manical ... haven't even touched half of the levels on that ...
Moriturus on 26/7/2004 at 05:39
I played DX:IW first, and I thought it was pretty good, although of course not as good as the original. I attributed many of the shortcomings (such as short game, small levels, universal ammo, dumbed-down equipment screen, lack of detail in many levels) to the fact that it was designed for the X-Box. However, now that I'm several levels into TDS, my frustration with DX:IW grows, as I see how much more Ion Storm could have done with it. TDS is three PC disks to DX:IW's two. It's clear that Ion Storm could have made DX:IW much more than it is, and I'm disappointed.
Xaximus on 27/7/2004 at 19:28
As much as the Xbox limited Deus Ex: IW (tiny levels and lack of texture variety primarily), a lot of the design decisions were unneccesary (unified ammo, less detailed inventory/info system). Their choice to simplify to the extreme was deliberate, and I wish they hadn't done that.
I wonder if the tiny levels couldn't have been easily avoided as well, because I believe Morrowind used a continuously-loading system, unless you entered or exited a building. You could travel from one end of the world to the other without a loading screen though, I believe. (I've only played Morrowind PC, but I think they worked the same way).
Oh, and I completed Halo. But I was glad it was over... I still just can't get over how unbelievably repetative the level design is though. If you've played the first 10% of a level, you've seen what the other 90% looks like, more or less. Boring and uninspired. It was such a chore to complete it. [/whine]
