I'm having problems running Halo,it says my graphics card is not powerfull enough to run on minimal settings,
this is a xabre600 128mb card
my specs a 768mb ram
pentium 4 2.56mhtz


whats the point of releasing a such game if you need the latest £300 graphics card to run ??I hope half life 2 can at least run on minamal specs when that is released or looks like I'm gotta get meself a new card:(

The game runs pretty good with the settings maxed out on my system (Athlon 1.33GHz w/ 512 DDR memory) with a Geforce 3 Ti200. Although there are times during campaign mode when the game slows to a crawl for no apparent reason :confused: In fact, it runs even better when I play online.

This is all because of lazy programming - the fact there is already patch out is testament to that!

I've got a GF4-Ti 4200 AGP 8x alongside an AMD athlon 2200+ and via kt4 chipset & 512 meg PC2700. At first it refused to run because I had anti-aliasing turned ON in my display properties. Whats this all about? While my card isn't the newest, it's not all that old so why can't I have my games antialiased?

Then I set it up as 1024x768 @ 85Hz with everything maxed (I usually use this for everything) - and it was stuttering around like no-ones business. 800x600 works ok though although there are still places where it slows down.

Now, my roommate has an Intel Celeron 1.3 with a GF4 MX440 AGP 4x, Via 133 chipset and 256meg 133 SDRam yet there is no difference between the way HALO runs on my system or his.

Why is this? Surely my system should enable me to run games faster and visually better than his?

We have DX9 installed (I know both graphic cards are not full DX9 cards but that doesn't matter when just comparing the two.)

Now, far be it for me to start a conspiracy theory but... An INTEL celeron 1.3 + GF4 MX running the same as an AMD 2200+ (1.8GHz) and GF4 Ti?

Intel?

Amd?

Microsoft involved?

You work it out!

BTW, Chrome whoops Halo for graphics and looks stunning on my system - but you have to ramp down the effects for decent speed on my roommates system.

This is taken out straight from the readme:

F. 3D Card Issues

Halo only supports DirectX 9.0b-compliant video cards. It is good practice to always install the latest certified drivers for all of your hardware.

For assistance with top video issues, visit http://support.microsoft.com/?pr=gmsvideo.

ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128: You may experience inconsistent graphic performance with textures if you set the Mipmap Detail Level in the ATI Direct3D Control Panel to any setting except High Quality.

NVIDIA Video Cards and FSAA Modes: You may experience difficulties running Halo using NVIDIA video cards in any of the FSAA modes. If you are having a problem, you should disable the FSAA mode for the NVIDIA video card.

Via Motherboard Chipsets: If you have a Via brand motherboard, you may need to update to the latest “4-in-1” motherboard chipset drivers to avoid crashes.

I did read the read me!

Both computers are fully updated with both nvidia (45.23) and via drivers (4.29).

I mentioned the fact that both cards aren't fully DX9 compliant but this isn't an issue when comparing just the 2 systems I described.

But no matter what, the athlon with ti4 should be able to run Halo comfortably at 1024x768 but doesn't. It's funny how EVERY OTHER GAME runs at 1024x768 with everything maxed out without any problems. I stand by my accusation that there's some lazy coding in there somewhere.

Programmers of today just assume that everyone is running top end equipment and if they don't, people will just upgrade and like sheep, most people do. The program for tomorrows topend stuff using todays topend stuff when they should really be programming for yesterdays top end stuff.

There are no constraints for them - they program effects but very rarely optimize them because they aren't using real world equipment. They are using development systems with unlimited this, that and the other. The effect works, that's all that matters.

Anyways, is no one having the conspiracy theory I posted? :)

IAM HAVING PROBLES. I CANT SEE people type are cant type my self
are see when people die in right hand corner

My friend plays Halo ok without AA 1024x768 @ 75hrz but I think his Video card and my video card are both about done for when it comes to the newer games. (System 1)

His system 1
Althorn XP 2100+
Geforce 4 TI 4200 128
512 Megs 2100 DDR
VIA KT 333 Chipset.

His system 2
Pentium 4 1.8 GHz
Radeon 8500 64
512 Megs RDRAM
Intel 850 chipset

My system 1
Duron 600 MHz
Radeon 8500 128
512 Megs 2700 DDR
VIA KT 400 Chipset

My system 2
Pentium 4 2.4 GHz 533 bus
Geforce 2 64
512 Megs 2700 DDR
Intel 845P Chipset
We have swapped hardware in about every way possible here is what we think
1. our video cards are getting to weak for the newer games
2. the newer video card drivers are being more optimized for the new generation of cards alone with direct X
I would like to say though that as far as the chipset stability goes Intel more stable than VIA….. No that’s not true with there newer chips way in the past it was true but not any more they are about the same. I just think it’s the video cards and drivers.
I will test with the old original V drivers and direct X 8.1 slow motion = weak video card/drivers

i had halo working for a few minutes, then CRASH...

Some exception type error every time i get to a certain point on the pillar of autumn. My graphics card is new, a nvidia gforce fx5200 128mb, and athlon 1.47ghz. Havent really adjusted the settings much.

My xbox runs Halo with no problems, so i'll just stick to that! :)

Hmm...it was written for a custom nVIDIA GeForce 3-class chip, so you'd think it'd run well on GeForce 4/Radeon 9x00 or higher with a decent proc.

Originally posted by andyr
I did read the read me!

Both computers are fully updated with both nvidia (45.23) and via drivers (4.29).

I mentioned the fact that both cards aren't fully DX9 compliant but this isn't an issue when comparing just the 2 systems I described.

But no matter what, the athlon with ti4 should be able to run Halo comfortably at 1024x768 but doesn't. It's funny how EVERY OTHER GAME runs at 1024x768 with everything maxed out without any problems. I stand by my accusation that there's some lazy coding in there somewhere.

Programmers of today just assume that everyone is running top end equipment and if they don't, people will just upgrade and like sheep, most people do. The program for tomorrows topend stuff using todays topend stuff when they should really be programming for yesterdays top end stuff.

There are no constraints for them - they program effects but very rarely optimize them because they aren't using real world equipment. They are using development systems with unlimited this, that and the other. The effect works, that's all that matters.

Anyways, is no one having the conspiracy theory I posted? :)


You really don't get it do you? There have always been games that pushed the envelope and brought even the most powerful of machines to it's knees. Halo is hardly the first to do this. What are you going to say when Doom 3 comes out and realize again that your machine is obsolete?

If developers took your attitude then we'd still be playing games with Doom type graphics on 486 level machines (or worst). We'd never have 3D graphics, 5.1 surround sound, 32-bit color, or any of the other detail in games that we all now take for granted. People will sit there and complain about how all the new software needs newer and faster hardware yet at the same time these same people wouldn't really accept anything less.

If any developer did something as stupid as you suggested and programmed a game like Halo for yesterdays hardware people would just complain about how outdated and obsolete it was. It's a no win situation...

Err, I don't think you get it either. I think the point was that Halo appears to be poorly ported and thus requires better hardware then it really should.

Kinda like GTA3 v.s. Vice City.

I mean a game that does push the envelope is one thing, but I really don't think that covers halo. Like I said far more like GTA3, which required high hardware specs, not because the graphics or anything else pushed the envelope, but rather because it was a poor port of a PS2 game. Then take Vice City, they took the complaints about GTA3 in and released a game which ran much better, but not at the expense of graphics or anthing else.

You can't expect people to be happy about buying better hardware to cover up for someone's poor programing. On the other hand most (gamers anyway) wouldn't mind if they were actually getting something out of it, like better graphics than ever before, new effects or whatever.

Originally posted by Azn Spikes
This is taken out straight from the readme:

F. 3D Card Issues

Halo only supports DirectX 9.0b-compliant video cards. It is good practice to always install the latest certified drivers for all of your hardware.

For assistance with top video issues, visit http://support.microsoft.com/?pr=gmsvideo.

ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128: You may experience inconsistent graphic performance with textures if you set the Mipmap Detail Level in the ATI Direct3D Control Panel to any setting except High Quality.

NVIDIA Video Cards and FSAA Modes: You may experience difficulties running Halo using NVIDIA video cards in any of the FSAA modes. If you are having a problem, you should disable the FSAA mode for the NVIDIA video card.

Via Motherboard Chipsets: If you have a Via brand motherboard, you may need to update to the latest “4-in-1” motherboard chipset drivers to avoid crashes.

Intel/AMD
Something is wrong somewhere other than the processor you should be able to under clock that Athlon 2200+ by 1Ghz and out perform the Celeron 1.3Ghz conspiracy maybe Athlon 2500+ $89.00 Pentium 4 2.5Ghz $289.00 our price. Now Dell/Gateway price prolly $59.00. you may try and see how fast the games load and try to encode something or maybe it could be a very slow ram or chipset but still don’t make much sense though .

You really don't get it do you? There have always been games that pushed the envelope and brought even the most powerful of machines to it's knees. Halo is hardly the first to do this. What are you going to say when Doom 3 comes out and realize again that your machine is obsolete.


Hello...?

Halo does not push any envelope. It's an almost straight port of the 2 year old xbox version with a few tweaks for the PC and it's generally considered to be 'above average' by most people. Magazines have pointed out the very same problems I've highlighted and the fact the programming could be a bit tighter.

I also explained (did you actually read my posts?) that 'todays' games run absolutely fine and I only have any kind of problem with Halo.

If you want to subscribe to upgrade brigade then by all means go ahead BUT most people can't afford or don't want to upgrade their machines on the whim of a sloppy programmer.

@ Crosoft1

I encode video and stuff without any speed or reliability problems. It's not a chipset issue or ram - just bad programming.

I wonder why companies don't license Crow Team's Serious Sam's Engineand implement it in their games like Halo? It has fantastic graphics that won't take a big hit on your card plus it plays excellent online.