Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Games Entertainment

First Review of Halo 369

Posted by michael
from the high-altitude-low-opening dept.
The Halo Guy writes: "Voodoo Extreme has posted the first review of Halo, the new first person shooter from Bungie Software that's an Xbox launch title and will be ported to the Mac and PC later next year. Included are some very cool high resolution Xbox game captures too." I guess buying the bundle will be a little less painful if you get good games with the system.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Review of Halo

Comments Filter:
  • Slower PC's (Score:2, Interesting)

    by JohnHegarty (453016)
    "had the game chugging along nicely on a Pentium 2 powered 300Mhz PC equipped with a TNT2 graphics accelerator"

    How come games like this can not be designed to run on older pc's. As these graphics look like they would need at lease 600mhz running on a normal pc.
    • You're asking why newer games can't be designed to run on older PCs?

      Are you on crack? Do you know just how much new, graphics-laden games would royally suck if they were designed with, say, a Pentium 90 in mind?

      - A.P.
  • Promises (Score:3, Offtopic)

    by Violet Null (452694) on Friday November 09, 2001 @10:45AM (#2543030)
    And how many people remember Bungie promising over and over that Halo would not become a console game? Or, later, that it would be released for the XBox and (PC or Mac) simultaneously? Oh well. Here's to waiting for the port.
    • Re:Promises (Score:3, Informative)

      by Doktor Memory (237313)
      And how many people remember Bungie promising over and over that Halo would not become a console game?

      Zero. Because they never said that.

      Or, later, that it would be released for the XBox and (PC or Mac) simultaneously?

      Zero, because they never said that either. (They've consistantly promised that it would eventually ship for all platforms, but the word "simultaneously" was never, ever used.)

      And frankly, even if they had promised to deliver it directly to your doorstep in a shiny box with a nice pink ribbon on it... so what? For all of the amateur theatrics that have grown up around it, making games is a business. Building a game as large as Halo requires an investment of millions of dollars, not to mention uncountable man-hours. In the end, the decision about what to release, and when, gets made on the basis of what will maximize the return on that investment, and for no other reason. Ever. Some developer mentioned in an interview three years ago that they'd ship a BeOS version? Irrelevant. Show me the money.
    • Re:Promises (Score:2, Insightful)

      by StikyPad (445176)
      Not releasing a PC version of the game would defeat the purpose of the X-Box, which is not so much to capitalize on the console market, but to stimulate PC gaming development. To summarize an article in November's Wired magazine: While sales of new PCs have dwindled, sales of video cards have remained steady. Why? Gaming is currently the only real reason for upgrading a PC. However, IIRC, PC Games sales only make up 12% of the video game market. By creating a console which is essentially a PC and pricing it below cost, MS hopes to boost the creation of games which can easily be ported to a PC (running Windows of course). More high-end games for the PC means, hopefully, more purchases of new PCs which of course will come with Windows pre-installed.

      IMO, this seems like a stretch - what's the incentive for consumers to buy a new PC when their X-Box will run their games - but it does have some merit. PCs will be capable of running the games with more detail, smoothness, and content than their X-Box counterparts. Personally I hope their efforts are successful as I would love to see a larger variety of quality games for the PC.
    • Re:Promises (Score:3, Funny)

      by artemis67 (93453)
      And how many people remember Bungie promising over and over that Halo would not become a console game? Or, later, that it would be released for the XBox and (PC or Mac) simultaneously?

      That was before they were assimilated. Welcome to The Collective, resistance is futile.

      -----
  • Look at the headlights on that dune buggy. Nice(if it is an actual sreenshot). These shots remind me of the Final Fantasy movie.
  • I'm not buying either a cube or box until I see a good comparison of Metroid vs. Halo.

    Then I'll make a decision...
  • Good to see (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jued0001 (95852)
    Finally some competition worth looking into in the console market. It's seems the Console Wars are back on and much better than ever. Time to see if Nintendo's rehashed ideas and Sony's "old" PS2 can compete with the X-Box.
  • Porting? (Score:2, Informative)

    by dezwart (113598)
    The game was originally designed to run on a Mac.
  • bad eyes (Score:2, Funny)

    by friscolr (124774)
    Players assume the role of the Master Chief

    does anyone else keep reading this as "Master Chef" ? Maybe it's just the influence of certain Steven Segal movies or South Park, or the lack of caffeine in my breakfast.

    • does anyone else keep reading this as "Master Chef" ?

      Well, if you're to be the Master Chef, I want to be the Swedish Chef.

      "Svensk&#228 grusk&#228 wit d&#252 .50BMG un d&#252 fraggie fraggie un d&#252 b&#248rk, b&#248rk, b&#248rk!"
  • by Uttles (324447) <uttles@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Friday November 09, 2001 @10:55AM (#2543074) Homepage Journal
    I used to have a Macintosh, so when everyone was talking about Duke Nukem and Quake and all that I was left out in the cold, but then Marathon came along. I used to go to my friend's house and play his shoot 'em up games on his PC, so I knew the type, but Marathon just blew them all away. I even snuck a copy to our high school computer lab and setup some network games for us "geeks" while the rest of the class was still working on their assignments. It was the coolest game as far as fluidity of game play and ease of use. If Halo follows in that tradition then it must be pretty good. It's unfortunate though that it's only released on the XBox as of yet, I mean it's a shame that the first release is going to be tainted by the "blue screen of death."

    On a side note, Bungie has a cool product page [bungie.com] with a little more info.
    • Marathon predates Quake by a few years.

      I was playing the beta of Marathon in 94 at the latest.

      Marathon was a killer app that drove sales of the first generation of PPC macintoshes. No shit.

      Pathways to Darkness, also by Bungie, was around circa Wolfenstein.
  • by dave-fu (86011) on Friday November 09, 2001 @10:57AM (#2543089) Homepage Journal
    ...I dunno. I thought the controls for the game were pretty painful, but then again I have yet to play a console-based FPS whose controls I find as intuitive as keyboard+mouse.
    Granted, I didn't get to take the XBox home and hook it up to my Wega, but graphics didn't even come close to blowing me away.
    MS is supposed to be spending half a billion promoting the XBox, right? Ads and demo machines are pretty sparsely dropped, so I guess we know where that money earmarked for advertising found its way to, hmm? Not saying that there's payola going on here, but "better single-player than Half-Life" has more than a tinge of that bought-and-paid-for hyperbole.
    • I actually got to play the full game (not the demo) for about 30 minutes at a local software store. I issue this as a disclaimer, I have not had the opportunity to complete the game so this is going on less of an exposure than the mentioned reviewer. However, I think that I have played enough to make some pretty solid judgments. Although the graphics were good I was not as impressed with them as I would have hoped. There was little visual flair for the majority of the beginning levels both in the level architecture and the texturing. Much like UT, everything had an unusual sheen to it that I found to be unrealistic. In my opinion, look at what is coming out of the Half-Life, UT, and Q3 mod communities for the best, most innovative, and unique level design. Then to get into the story which is pretty much told thought the mentioned in-game cut scenes. Frankly I would have been much more impressed with pre-rendered sequences a la Final Fantasy or Red Alert. As good as the game engine might be, its hard to beat prerendered graphics and Halo doesn't change this. The controls are also not a highpoint in the game. I am very used to playing FPS games on my PC so the transition would obviously have a few challenges. Yet even after some time playing I was not able to get into sync with the gameplay due to the button mapping. Beyond this, Halo stuck me as little more than your standard first person shooter, perhaps on par with Unreal Tournament or Quake 3 but definitely not surpassing them and absolutely not enough reason for me to buy and X-Box.
  • lifespan? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 09, 2001 @10:58AM (#2543097)
    I noticed the author said he played through it a few times. If he means fully then this must be some short game. Also console games don't have the same life span as PC games since at the moment, no mods/maps/etc. (although getting closer to this).

    So your life span is cut short, and as for the graphics, well, with Unreal 2 and Doom right around the corner, I doubt this will hold the crown for too long in first person shooters.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to see a kick ass fps on a console's launch and I've noticed Halo since its birth, but for some reason I doubt people will play Halo as long as they did (and still do) Half Life, Quake and Unreal.
  • According to GameStar magazine [gamestar.de], Europeans will have to pay much more than US citizens for the xbox and individual game titles (European prices: 479 Euros for the box and about 69 per game, according to this news [gamestar.de] the exact numbers), not to mention the extra 50 bucks for the DVD support. :(

    Regards,
    Marc

  • Those screenshots are supposedly from the XBox version, then how are they so big? I didn't catch the actual resolution of them, but they filled up my 1600 x 1200 monitor quite nicely. I know the XBox can't push resolutions like that (it would be pointless because TVs don't go that high) so where dod the really grap those screen shots?
    • Actually the Xbox supports HDTV out of box. There is also an adapter you can use to hook it up to your monitor.
      • Actually the Xbox supports HDTV out of box.

        No, you have to buy the High Definition AV Pack [xbox.com]. Heck, you have to buy the Advanced AV Pack [xbox.com] just to get s-video.

        There is also an adapter you can use to hook it up to your monitor.

        There is? Where did you see that? I hope you're not talking about some sort of awful scan convertor solution.

      • Everything I have read said that Halo supports only 480p. I think only a couple of games so far are supporting 1080i. I haven't really followed this too much though so I might be wrong.

        They probably got the screenshots from the "PC version" (developer box version). I think there was some trick about pulling the upsampled images from the backbuffer when the box is running it through 4x AA (which I think most/all Xbox games will be running with).

        As far as I know there is no official monitor adapter available (please correct me if I am wrong) other than getting a componant to HD15 adapter like this [copperbox.com]which cost a lot of money ($180).
  • Better Review (Score:2, Informative)

    by Red Avenger (197064)
    I think there is a better review over at TeamXbox check out their review [teamxbox.com].
    • Re:Better Review (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Rogerborg (306625) on Friday November 09, 2001 @11:50AM (#2543385) Homepage

      Cheers, nice review. But...

      • "Finally, we have a combat title that actually gives us a taste of what the real thing might be like"

      The reviewer needs to go and play Hidden and Dangerous. You crawl on your belly for 20 minutes, then get shot once by a sniper that you can't even see, and just curl up and die. Or, better yet, read "Dulce Et Decorum Est" [utexas.edu]

      Also, both reviews seem to imply that you'll simply zip straight through the single player version, but the multiplayer has enough variety to keep you playing. Hmmm, seeing as how your only option (at launch) is a LAN party, you'd better hope all your friends buy Xboxen as well.

      I'll definitely be waiting until after Christmas to decide on an Xbox purchase, and I strongly suggest that everyone else considers making the decision to do likewise rather than playing the "how much is the hype affecting me today" game. ;-)

  • I guess I've never liked first person shooters on consoles. My brother had doom for Play Station and I didn't really like the control. Maybe the new controlers will work better. I still think it will work better with mouse/keyboard.

    I just don't know. Halo was big news a couple years ago (they did a demo at mac-world..). Then bungie got bought by MS the game was delayed and now seems to be Xbox only. Like the mac world needed one less game developer developing for them....
  • And so it begins (Score:2, Interesting)

    by alexjohns (53323)
    I guess buying the bundle will be a little less painful if you get good games with the system.
    And so it begins. The path to the dark side is so seductive, so easy to take. One wonders how many steps Michael has taken. Or, is it a slippery slope and he's just accelerating his slide?

    Wake up, people. M$ is making money off this. Don't be tempted. Stay strong. Buy a Gamecube 3 days later. The less money they have, the sooner there will be parity in the marketplace. The same goes for keyboards and mice, too. Sure, their mice are nice but Logitech and others make good ones, too. Don't be sucked in! Stay strong.

    (I can't tell if this is begging, sarcasm, funny, or insightful. Probably just flogging the old dead horse. Either way, I'm not buying one.)

    • "Buy a Gamecube 3 days later. The less money they have, the sooner there will be parity in the marketplace. The same goes for keyboards and mice, too."

      Yeah, not to mention the US Gamecube can be modded with just a switch to allow it to play both US and Japanese GC titles, easiest mod ever, woot!
    • Re:And so it begins (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Reality Master 101 (179095) <RealityMaster101&gmail,com> on Friday November 09, 2001 @11:44AM (#2543329) Homepage Journal

      Actually, if you want to hurt Microsoft, buy the box, but don't buy any games. They are selling the box below cost, but hoping to make it up on games. :)

    • Wake up, people. M$ is making money off this. Don't be tempted. Stay strong. Buy a Gamecube 3 days later. The less money they have, the sooner there will be parity in the marketplace.

      Actually, Microsoft loses money on every XBox console that anyone buys. The exact figure is unknown, but it's estimated at $200 per unit.

      More than one wag has suggested that MS-haters might want to buy lots of XBoxes this christmas, just to put a big ol' dent in Bill's bottom line.

      Of course, what they do make money on is the software, which is why they're trying to force those awful multi-game bundle deals on everybody. But if you can find an unbundled xbox and a single copy of Halo, you can have a pile of gaming goodness and still pick Bill's pocket while you're at it.
      • Yeah, but they still lose more money on an unsold XBox than one that they sold.

        If those things are sitting on the shelves gathering dust, MS will drop the price to $200, and that will put them further in the hole than any concerted effort to put them out of business by spending $300.

        (Anyone know what the revenue per game is like? I figure $10, which means that MS will need to sell every XBox owner 20 games to break even! Not that they really need to break even. The people I know with N64 and PS units certainly don't have 20 or more games. I know about the razors and blades bit with the console market but this seems a little crazy.)
  • the death of Halo (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Friday November 09, 2001 @11:22AM (#2543230) Homepage Journal
    about a year ago, when first previews with more than just some marketing hype came around, Halo was the next step in FPS gaming.

    let's see - it had a persistent, massive-multiplayer online world, a solid storyline driving an amazing outdoor graphics engine. and there were rumours that it was going to be released for windos, Mac and Linux - simultaneously.

    then, bungie got bought.

    when Halo finally comes to the PC in summer 2002, it will be yet another FPS, as all the really innovative concepts have been removed. the graphics will also be much less amazing given the amount of time that has passed.

    all that wouldn't be catastrophic, if it weren't for the fact that 90% of those who were starving for Halo earlier this year have been alienated.
    first the Mac and Linux users by bungie being acquired by none else then microsoft. the bungie forums were aflame in Mac users who felt somewhere between sold and raped.
    then, all those looking for the "next generation" game were pissed of by waiting about a year longer than was originally said, during which time Halo's graphics and physics engines have dwindled from "revolutionary" to "quite nice".
    and finally, everyone looking for the next step in FPS gaming, in the sense of more depth in gameplay than just kill-em-all, will have to look for some other place. sorry, Halo is just another shooter, try again next year.

    frankly, selling the game as part of a bundle is, IMHO, the only chance it has to break even. some idiot has systematically destroyed its fanbase, and because of the early marketing offense, almost everyone who'd pay money for Halo *was* a part of the fanbase.

    let's hope someone takes that which has been taken out of the game, i.e. all the *really* great parts, such as the persistent world, and makes a game around those.
    • As a longtime mac user, I was (and still am to a lesser degree) a huge fan of Bungie. Starting with the original Marathon, they've always put a lot of love and technical detail into their games, and their storylines were some of the most complex and intriguing in the industry. Even now, the Marathon story is still a matter of discussion. Hopefully, all that and more carried over into Halo (which is a spin-off of the Marathon story). But considering what we've lost already - the game was originally to be played from a third-person perspective to enhance the storytelling - I'm a little doubtful it will live up to our original impression. Well, here's hoping the mac version will run on my new powerbook.
    • No... Halo was never going to be massively multiplayer. The cool multiplayer aspect to the game was that they were going to have mission based cooperative play. One player would be the driver, one would be the gunner, and one would ride shotgun. That was the cool idea. No one ever said a thing about massively multiplayer. It still has a fantastic outdoor graphics engine, and we don't know if it still has deformable terrain and a persistent world. I'm not sure what's making you say that Halo is now just another FPS. That's not what the reviewer said at all...
    • by Ryandav (5475)
      okay Mr. Cranky Troll, you win, I'm posting.

      Just because you feel like mister poopy pants about a game on a system that _hasn't_ actually been released officially yet because it wasn't released by the company you like or on _your_ system of choice first, doesn't mean it sucks or it died.

      By all online accounts, and my own play testing experience, you're wrong. The game is incredible.

      frankly, all the bitching about microsoft buying bungie so they could use the game as a launch title is silly. if you want the game, buy their console. I'm planning on it, and the first title in it will be Halo.

      PS. The prequel book they just released about the Halo world is _good_. Think Enders Game meets Dark Angel.
    • a persistent, massive-multiplayer online world
      We were NEVER promised this. It was a collective dream by the community based on screenshots.
      a solid storyline driving an amazing outdoor graphics engine
      If you had actually read the review, you would see that those are still in the game.
  • has played their Dreamcast online with "Alien Front Online", "Outtrigger", "NFL2k1", etc...will notice that when using one of these "New Fangled" machines it will be like taking a big step in the reverse direction. Is it not sad that when the bar gets set to a certain level -- todays competition does not match up to yesterdays inovation. Just wait until all these people buy Halo and are able to "own" the AI of the machine -- and are left with nowhere else to turn for competition.

  • by briggsb (217215)
    Here are some other xbox bundles [bbspot.com] that Slashdotters may want to take a look at.
  • Remember, Bungie was jumping into the Linux games market, with titles like Myth 2 (way cool game!).

    Now we'll never see a port of this for Linux.

    Although, I just bought a slew of Loki games, and I'm still playing Terminus.
    • Remember, Bungie was jumping into the Linux games market, with titles like Myth 2

      Bungie was hardly "jumping into" the Linux market. They licensed Myth II to Loki well over a year after the PC and Mac versions shipped.

      Even before the MS buyout, Bungie never said a word about a Linux port of Halo, probably because Loki never sold more than a handful of even their most popular titles.
  • Stop (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rogerborg (306625) on Friday November 09, 2001 @11:35AM (#2543285) Homepage

    Stop. Wait. Pause for breath.

    Don't speculate that this is faked up, or a bought review, or that it rocks, or sucks, or is the best thing since sliced Tomato Demon.

    Just wait. Wait until you've played it in a store, or your excited friend plays it, or a plethora of reviews from many independent sources are available.

    Anything other reaction is just buying the hype, either Microsoft's bought hype or that of the anti-Microsoft crusaders.

    Make the decision now to wait until after this Christmas to buy an Xbox. It'll still be there, and it's still be as good or as bad as it is on the day it ships.

  • by Xibby (232218)
    How do you get hi res screen shots from a game designed to run on a device that uses a TV for output? Smells fishy, but that could just be my lunch.
  • Keep in mind that Gamespot is a bit stingier about their scores than Voodoo Extreme, but here's what the other big launch has to offer:

    Tony Hawk 3 is also out for GameCube launch, but there's no review of that version of it up yet.
  • I won't bother. (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by Linux_ho (205887)
    I've been boycotting Microsoft products for years. I don't see any reason to stop now. It amazes me to see the M$-bashing Slashdot crowd suddenly cooing all over the newest Microsoft baby.

    I don't think Microsoft is inherently evil. Windows XP would be their first decent "for-home-machines" OS if it wasn't for all the crappy business practices such as tying it to Passport. Their business practices have been so damaging to the technology industry that I refuse to buy their products.

    You all should think about that before you run out to buy their new toy. There are other toys on the market.
    • Yeah! Boycott corporations with evil business practices like Microsoft! Instead, I'm gonna get my next console from Nintendo!

      Cough.

      Uh... or Sony.

      Shit.

  • Granted the XBOX has a powerfull graphics chip, but isn't the biggest trick in the bag -- that the resolution of the TV is *soooo* much lower then the pc its trivial to render for compared to the (standard) 1024x768?
  • Disappointment (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Bugmaster (227959)
    The review (both of them, actually) seems to imply that Halo is an incredibly beautiful and advanced first-person shooter for the Xbox console. There are a couple of facts contained in that statement that disappoint me:
    • It's a first-person-shooter
    • It's for the console
    First-person shooters, in general, are IMHO the lowest class of games. Regardless of smart enemy AI, semi-deformable terrain, etc., the gameplay is almost always the same: "aim for the face". That's it. Just run around, look at the nice backgrounds, and shoot demons in the head. It gets boring after about 5 minutes. The notable exceptions for this rule are HalfLife and Deus Ex, both of which introduced story elements and puzzles into the braindead shooter genre. The ultimate continuation of this trend is System Shock 2, which has actually caused my college grades to drop a couple of points, and gave me nightmares for years to come. Unfortunately, it looks like Halo is sticking with the stale old formula: shoot monsters in the face, and that's it.

    As if this wasn't bad enough, Halo is a shooter game for the console. There are 2 reasons why FPS games for consoles rarely work. First of all, consoles have no mouse. It's hard to aim without the mouse. When the sole purpose of the game is to aim for the face, the lack of a good aiming mechanism becomes troublesome. Second of all, consoles rarely have good Internet access support. This means that multiplayer games (i.e., deathmatch) are hard to pull off. Actually, the Xbox may be able to overcome this limitation - we'll have to see.

    In general though, I wouldn't buy Halo even if it was released for the PC. Not because of some kind of a religious anti-Microsoft passion, but simply because I expect the game to be boring. In case anyone remembers, Max Payne was also hyped as the best forst-person shooter game ever - and it turned out to be a glorified rail game with a cool graphics effect that you get to watch over, and over, and over, and over again.

    Unfortunately, modern games seem to be focusing more and more on graphics, and less and less on actual gameplay (works of art such as Ico are rare exceptions). I, for one, will note use my hard-earned cash as a vote to continue this sad trend.

    • I agree with many of your points, but FPS games can be *great* on consoles. Just check out Goldeneye. Check out Medal of Honour. Yes, coming from PC FPS games they feel a bit weird at first, but let me assure you that doesn't mean that you can't get hours of fun out of them. They're different. Not necesarily worse.
  • Every game seems to use this effect now, and they all put it in their screen shots. But why do they use it so much? Does anybody feel that this enhances gameplay or even the graphics in any way whatsoever?

    Lens flare is not experienced with your eyes in real life. It's an effect of a camera lense. So in a game where the creator wants to make it look at real as possible, and make it appear as you're in the action, why would they use an effect that makes it feel like you're behind a camera?

    The only purpose I could see using for is maybe in a sports sim that allows replay, or possibly in some cinematic sequences where you'd be looking at a TV within the game.
  • Although Microsoft now owns the whole of Bungie, as part of the deal, Take 2 Interactive (who used to own 19.9% of Bungie) have acquired all the rights to Oni and Myth, as well as the rights to build two titles based on the Halo engine.
    Bungie have also been quoted as saying that they will remain autonomous within MS, and may continue to develop titles for non-MS platform (e.g. Mac), although it remains to see how long that lasts. I suspect that Mac titles may be allowed to continue for a little while, but PlayStation 2 titles will be knocked right on the head in favour of X-Box.
  • FWIW, I've played all of the major shooters from Wolfenstein through today's HLCS/UT/Q3/Wolf2. I'm not a PC-only type, either, I have also spent hundreds of hours in front of consoles.

    I spent an hour at e3 playing Halo. Not looking, playing. First off, it is truly beautiful. Nothing I've seen compares with the look of the game. Driving around in a car adds something I've wanted to do (and failed with mods) for a long time.

    Know anyone who plays Counterstrike with a Sidewinder? There is a reason people use mice and keyboards for FPS games-- it evolved over years of trial, research, and all sorts of goofy 'solutions' from joysticks to headbands.

    Halo is simply unplayable on the Xbox. Anyone who has tried Doom or Quake or UT on any console will attest to this. Yes, you can spend 20 hours learning how to cope with the lack of a mouse, and you can get close to the speed required to play a FPS. But not close enough.
    I'll wait for the PC version on this one, and it looks to kick ass. As an added bonus, I can't wait to pound fool Xbox users who join PC multiplayer games. You'll be able to spot them easily, they'll be the ones with no points.

    That Microsoft is making Halo their launch title really shows Microsoft's lack of knowledge about consoles and gaming. FPS games on consoles are about the worst-selling type of console game-- they aren't even a category. Treating a console like a PC does not make it one.

    When I look a historic come from nowhere successful launches, say, PlayStation, I see awesome console games and strong differentiation from competition at launch. PlayStation had kick-ass console games at launch - Toshinden, Ridge Racer, Tekken. Saturn was a very weak contender. The only thing I see that *might* be worth a look is Oddworld, but that isn't worth buying a console. I'll just wait for the PC version, or the Gamecube version.

    I just don't see strong differentiation for Xbox. I don't see powerful, must-have titles that are exclusive on the Xbox.

    OTOH, Gamecube has some awesome games that I won't be able to get anywhere but Gamecube. Rogue Squadron, Luigi's Mansion, etc. Those games are sweet.

    -B
  • How long do ya'll think it'll take till someone
    writes an emulation app for xbox games?

    In comparison to writing an N64 or PlayStation emu (which have both been done), emulating the very PC-like xbox on an PC should be a piece of cake.

    Are there any such projects in the works yet?

    C-X C-S
  • Does Halo take place on a Ringworld? Looks that way in the screenshots, but they got the perspective all wrong. By the time the curvature of ringworld brings the arc into view over the horizon, it should appear MUCH more narrow and farther away than it does in those screenshots.

    This ringworld looks to be maybe a couple hundred miles in diameter and perhaps 50 miles in width, Niven's Ringworld was 180 million miles in diameter, and 1 million miles wide. The walls at the edge were 1000 miles high.

    This [ve3d.com] screenshot also seem to show that the sun is offset from the center of the ring. I am having a hard time accounting for the shadow on the visible part of the ring, given the position of the sun.

This screen intentionally left blank.

Working...