Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
First Person Shooters (Games) PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

Halo PC Updates Delayed, Much Desired 53

Posted by simoniker from the make-it-go-faster dept.
Thanks to VE3D for its article reprinting comments by Gearbox Software's Randy Pitchford regarding future Halo PC patches. Pitchford, seemingly irked at Bungie/Microsoft testing and approval delays, notes the enhancements Gearbox "...has generated between launch day and now is amazing in quality and volume. Thus far, just a fraction of that work has made it into the official updates." These prospective updates, mentioned last month, include the HEK (Halo Editing Kit), the lack of which is preventing substantial modding from taking place, and a waiting-in-the-wings "massive [graphical] performance boost... we call it 'fast shaders' - we're seeing a 30% to 50% [framerate] increase."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Halo PC Updates Delayed, Much Desired More

Halo PC Updates Delayed, Much Desired

Comments Filter:

  • does anybody care? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Hes Nikke ( 237581 )
    does anybody still care about halo? it shipped as a has-been product for a premium. if halo for the PC was released 2 years ago (as was the plan before bungie was assimilated) then i'm sure people might care. maybe

    • Yes (Score:4, Insightful)

      by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Saturday February 07, 2004 @05:33PM (#8214412) Journal
      It's still a fun game. Bungie puts out good software.

      Heck, most Game Boy Advance software could be considered to be roughly ten or more year old computer software, but it's still entertaining.

      That being said, I can see Microsoft not having a lot of interest in improving PC Halo. They made a promise to do a release, but have little interest in really polishing it. And, frankly, PC Halo is in many ways (frame rate, lack of sitting next to your best friend and playing in cooperative mode in front of the TV, driving the vehicles with a mouse) not as nice as the X-Box release.

      • Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cbirdsong64 ( 410584 )
        One - The vehicles control wonderfully with a mouse.

        Two - Where's my co-op patch?

        • Re:Yes (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Goldberg's Pants ( 139800 )
          Co-op would be good, as would bots for multiplayer. The single player in Halo is a bit dull. The multiplayer would be good, except for having to play with the great unwashed. Besides, bot teammates don't tend to get pissed when you shoot them:)

          Halo is too little, too late really. If it had come out when it was supposed too, it would have been great, but then MS bought Bungie and it all went to hell. Still, at least Bungie are more than capable of making a good game. (Made my favourite of all time: Myth 2).
        • One - The vehicles control wonderfully with a mouse.

          But not wonderfully compared to the Xbox controller, which does the vehicle thing a lot better.

      • Re:Yes (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Heck, most Game Boy Advance software could be considered to be roughly ten or more year old computer software, but it's still entertaining.

        It has the slight advantage that there isn't anything much better available when you're on the move. The market for retro games on the PC is much smaller, since there are actually more modern titles available to play.

    • Re:does anybody care? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Of course people still care about Halo. People still care about CounterStrike and Quake, too. Both of which have been out for years.

      Halo has pretty decent graphics (though shittily rendered map textures). It has great gameplay, the best vehical play I've ever seen in an FPS and is generally a very fun game. There is nothign else out there right now that is entertaining gamers since there has been a serious glut in major releases in the last few years.

      The last game I looked forward to seeing come out was..
      • The last game I looked forward to seeing come out was... um... Wow - I can't even think of the last time I looked forward to a game coming out. And I'm not looking forward to anthing until Unreal 2004/DoomIII/Half-Life-II. Halo is a good filler game in the meantime.

        point 1 - i personally was looking forward to the release of Halo, until Bungie was assimilated.

        point 2 - you forgot about Duke Nukem Forever :P
    • Im just glad I didnt pay for it. Horrible excuse for a PC FPS.

      Sure, the single player was spiffy, but the lack of any distinguishing multiplayer features pretty much clinched the deletion tab for me.
      • Bear in mind that some of us don't play multiplayer - if the single-player experience is great, then that's all that's important for us.

        • Re:does anybody care? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by prockcore ( 543967 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:23AM (#8216566)
          Bear in mind that some of us don't play multiplayer - if the single-player experience is great, then that's all that's important for us.

          Yeah, but the single player experience in Halo is miserable. Hey look, this looks just like that corridor I was just in. Hey look, the bad guys are in the same exact spots they were in the last identical room.

          The Library will probably go down in history as the single most worst gaming level ever.
          • It does pick up after that. I played it through a week or so ago, and it was a perfectly enjoyable experience - in fact, the most fun shooter I played in a long while. Great story, for a shooter at least. Marathon I and II (two of Bungie's earlier FPS) were way better though - I think of all FPS I played so far, Marathon 2 and System Shock 2 had the best/most engaging story lines.
            • You realise that it "picks up" after the Library because levels 6-10 are just levels 1-5 in reverse, right? :)

              And yes, Marathon 2, System Shock 2 and Deus Ex are the Holy Trinity of first person shooters. :)
          • See that button labeled 'Preview' ? you should check it out sometime...The Library was a kick ass level...you are out of your mind for declaring that...We used to boot up Halo and load just that level on COOP 'cause it was that fun...
    • Sure. Just like people still care about Tribes and its sequels. Most people wouldn't know about other games, however, because they don't show up on their Counterstrike server list.

  • lag (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 07, 2004 @05:31PM (#8214405)
    As someone who only jumped on the Halo bandwagon a week or so ago (I refuse to own a console and didn't care much for the idea of Halo, but nothing else has come out that is very exciting gamewise in AGES so I gave it a shot) -- the ONLY thing I really want to see right now is a fix for all the lag. If Microsoft/Bungie are holding this up, I am seriously pissed.

    Quake3, CounterStrike and all MMORPGs that I have recently played work FINE on my network. Zero problems. Smooth as can be except for a moment or two of lag every 30 or 60 minutes. Totally okay.

    Halo, on the other hand, is a total bitch lagwise. There are only two maps it is even tolerable on and most (like Prison) are impossible to play because the framerate drops to about 4 frames per second - if that. This really isn't acceptable on a fat pipe with souped-up hardware in 2004 running a video game that was made in 2001(?).
    • Halo, on the other hand, is a total bitch lagwise. There are only two maps it is even tolerable on and most (like Prison) are impossible to play because the framerate drops to about 4 frames per second - if that.

      Why would lag affect framerate?
      • just a guess here (I really don't know) but wouldn't all the rubberbanding eat up a lot of the processor? Although, I don't know -- maybe it wouldn't. But either way if you lagging or you have low fps a slideshow is still a slideshow...

        • Re:lag (Score:3, Informative)

          by DeadScreenSky ( 666442 )
          Rubberbanding really shouldn't use up any significant additional CPU power on a game like Halo. The players are usually moving anyway, so the only difference is a quick calculation to say "Oops, he is really here, not there." (And that should only be on the server end, really - the player's PC should just be given new coordinates for the other player, which would happen regardless of movement.) But we are talking about Gearbox, so who knows. I am surprised they can't at least simulate predicted movement bet
    • Quake3, CounterStrike and all MMORPGs that I have recently played work FINE on my network.

      Presuming your network is a LAN setup, the problem with the lag stems from the way the multiplayer netcode is built. I don't have a link to any exact article stating this but, supposedly all the data in a multiplayer game is transferred to the server so it can be double-checked to make client-side cheating programs ineffective. With this said, I'm guessing you play Halo PC on a non-dedicated server. Try playing the g

    • you should have tried Uru Online.
    • I refuse to own a console and didn't care much for the idea of Halo, but nothing else has come out that is very exciting gamewise in AGES

      Actually, much exciting gamewise has come out. It's just come out for consoles rather than the pc since those are machines designed for, you know, playing games. If you "refuse" to buy a machine to play games, you shouldn't also get to complain about the fact that you have no good games to play.

  • M$ does not know how to market anything (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mrshowtime ( 562809 ) on Saturday February 07, 2004 @06:01PM (#8214611)
    I bought HALO last month for the PC, even though I have owned it for the past two years on my XBox. Why did I buy it? Well, I was dying to play the rediculously large multiplayer maps with more than FOUR people and to be finally able to use my mouse and keyboard. Now, after playing it for a month, I am bored, and apparently so are a lot of other players given the immense amount of T'kers lurking online with Halo. Biggest question: Where are all the f'ing maps? You mean to tell me that after two years, M$ could not come up with any new multiplayer maps for HALO? Now the Halo Editor is coming out in June?!!! By then we will hopefully have moved onto Unreal 2004, HL2, and DOOM3; with Halo becoming a game that could have been much more.

    • Re:M$ does not know how to market anything (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      They don't know how to market? You bought the same game twice. What is your threshold? Would they be good marketers if they convinced you to buy it 8 more times?

  • Something smells fishy.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Undefined Parameter ( 726857 ) <fuel4freedomNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Saturday February 07, 2004 @06:10PM (#8214666)
    Consider that Microsoft has allowed at least one patch through that introduced major bugs into the game. Also consider that, by Pitchford's words, we are now informed that Gearbox is only supplying the fixes, and that Microsoft is the one which is testing the patches and rolling them into an update.

    And it's taking so long as to make Pitchford publicly angry.

    I can see three possibilities: either the Microsoft lead for the Halo PC patches is incompetent, not enough money and/or men have been allocated to that particular project by Microsoft, or Microsoft is playing dirty with both Gearbox and the paying public. Note that the first and second explanations could also be the last, though that may not necessarily be the case.

    I'm no fan of Microsoft or how it usually plays with plebs and politicians, but I have to give them the benefit of the doubt. It could simply be that the Microsoft lead doesn't know what he or she is doing in getting these patches out, that Pitchford can't get Microsoft to put a new lead in, and public pressure by fans hasn't had an effect. It could be that Microsoft simply didn't anticipate the number and complexity of the patches Gearbox has been issuing, and is now reluctant to make changes to the personnell and/or funding levels.

    Hell, it could even be Gearbox trying to shift some blame in order to get out from underneath the heat that a portion of the Halo PC fanbase has been giving them.

    Or (and most of you have probably been salivating in anticipation of this one) it could be that Microsoft has an ulterior motive and is malevolently, quietly, and intentionally sabotaging Halo PC and Mac updates. Reasons for this could be to boost xbox and Halo xbox sales due to a difference in the ammount of profit gained, internal politics against Bungie for making sure that an outside company did the port (or making sure the port was made at all), or any other of a number of reasons.

    I'm not trying to excuse Microsoft or Gearbox here, or lay any blame at either company's feet; but if patches are being delayed intentionally, as Pitchford (and some critics) has suggested, then there is reason for anger and outcry.

    What kind of outcry is left to the individual Halo PC fan / Microsoft basher.

    ~UP

    • you forgot one (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bluGill ( 862 )

      Your forgot one: the patches are so buggy that not even Microsoft would release them. (okay, Microsoft has gotten a lot better in the last 10 years, so this can just mean bugs that most users would consider minor)

    • I know what Randy is talking about. My company fought tooth and nail to get MS to release any patches. There's nothing fishy here... it's just MS corporate policy not to release patches until *they* are good and ready. It's not just games, it's with all Microsoft products. Sheesh, if you want further proof, just look at Office or Windows. Try to get a timely patch for their flagship products let alone a game.

  • Great (Score:3, Funny)

    by Iammadmak ( 460794 ) on Saturday February 07, 2004 @06:10PM (#8214668) Homepage
    "massive [graphical] performance boost... we call it 'fast shaders' - we're seeing a 30% to 50% [framerate] increase."

    Finally, now my framerate can be 8 frames per second instead of 5 frames per second.
    • --Blast it man, you stole my post. :)

      --Seriously though - with a 900MHz AMD Duron with 512MB RAM, and a Geforce 4 MX440 (64MB) AGP graphics card, my framerate varies from about 8-15 FPS, on average. Truly pathetic, even with all the suggested speedup mods from the support boards. I also have the latest Nvidia patch (altho I'm still running Win98SE, so that's from a few months ago.)

      --So yes: even though these patches are horribly delayed, it still might make some people (like me) dig out the game again,

  • I just want it to RUN (Score:3, Informative)

    by Dixie_Flatline ( 5077 ) <vincent.jan.goh@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Saturday February 07, 2004 @07:49PM (#8215252) Homepage
    Will they have patches so that it actually freaking RUNS without crashing all over the place? I couldn't even make it off the ship at the beginning without the game crashing. It would crash in an auto-saved transition, too, so if I ran the game again, it would crash instantaneously if I tried to play from where I left off.

    I went looking for fixes, and people were having the same problem, and proposed registry hacks to fix things. I sold the game. I shouldn't have to do THAT much to get it running, and if it doesn't run, they should patch it as quickly as possible.

    It was easily the worst port I ever played, so I sold it. I tried the Mac version, and I managed to make it off the ship before I ran into the same problems with the game crashing. I gave up. I'm glad I got the game in trades. I would have been really mad if I had paid money for it.

  • The possible reasons (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Saturday February 07, 2004 @08:34PM (#8215527)
    1.the stuff Gearbox has been sending for QA is too buggy to release (and after learning from the flak MS got from the last buggy patches for the game, they are listening).

    2.The people running halo QA at MS are incompetent

    3.Not enough money or personell allocated to halo QA.

    or (the conspiricy theory) 4.Microsoft doesnt want the editor and the "patches that make the game better" to appear since that will make Halo PC better than Halo XBOX and lead to more sales of Halo PC and less sales of Halo XBOX (and therefore potentially less XBOXes).
    I suspect that Microsoft is waiting for the (XBL enabled) Halo 2 to appear so that people wanting a good halo online experience are forced to get Halo 2 (plus an XBOX and an XBL subscription) and then, once its been out for a while, then release the patches.

    Ultimatly, the only reason MS wanted Halo was because they wanted "a game that would sell XBOXes". Thats why they screwed gamers with the PC/MAC ports and thats why they continue to screw gamers with the patches and the editor.

    BTW, I was able to play completly through the PC version of the game (forget which difficulty level though) with (as far as I can remember), no major crashes or lockups (this is on windows XP).
  • Tell someone who gives a shit, if you ship a product while still in beta phase and then cry about delays in shiping the fix patch maybe you shouldn't have shipped a half finished product in the first place.

    If anybody wants to argue the beta phase point, a 50% speed increase sais it all.
  • I was one of the many holdouts waiting for the PC version. When I finally had it in my grubby hands I was sorely dissappointed. From shoddy framerates, bad mulitplayer experience, to frequent firstplayer crashes. The last straw was when I came to a point early in the game where I *could not* for the life of me proceed in the level without the game crashing at the same moment every time. This even happened when I tried to play the game on my laptop which has a entirely different CPU and GPU as my desktop

  • I totally feel for Gearbox. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Dolemite_the_Wiz ( 618862 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @07:04PM (#8221465) Journal
    This is the second time that the Big Publishers have limited Gearbox in what they wanted to do versus what they could do.

    Gearbox, for those of you who don't remember, developed 007: Nightfire for the PC. This game was Published by EA and it's console version, which is different than the PC version, was published at the same time by a different company.

    As RTM neared, EA forced Gearbox to publish the game as/is which was anything but complete. The PC version of this game featured a GREAT multiplayer and had a GREAT grassroots interest for Modding. However, the much promised Editor and improvements didn't come until many, many months after the patch was ready and promised. By this time any/all interest in Modding or extending the life of this game all but disappeared, thanks to EA.

    It's too bad that Gearbox doesn't have the $$ to publish these games themselves without the Big game distributors messing up serious modding potential.

    Perhaps they should stick to working with companies like Valve who have a great track record for understanding and nurturing the potential in a modding community.

    Dolemite
    _____________________
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

"If you are afraid of loneliness, don't marry." -- Chekhov

Close