halo 1 pc

I've played it on Xbox and PC, and it works really well on PC, although it is a lot easier becuase of mouse control. But regardless of that, it's a great game, and I'd whole heartedly recommend getting it.

Bought it last summer and am still thoroughly enjoying the mulitplayer. Plenty of people online.

However, the campaign is terrible, the multi is really the only reason to get it.

and is really poorly optimised for the PC - severe lack ensures. biggest_loser

Not really, I thought Gearbox did a pretty good job at the port, you're pretty much fine as long as you've got at least a Geforce 3.

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]and is really poorly optimised for the PC - severe lack ensures. G013M

Not really, I thought Gearbox did a pretty good job at the port, you're pretty much fine as long as you've got at least a Geforce 3.

The online multiplayer is poorly optimised. There is lag no matter what kind of computer you have.

Otherwise, Halo for the Xbox is my favorite game. I suggest you try it.

The online multiplayer is poorly optimised. There is lag no matter what kind of computer you have.

Otherwise, Halo for the Xbox is my favorite game. I suggest you try it.

Ninja_Dog

Oh, yes, I remember that now :P.

is this game any good. ive heard good reviews of it nad ive always wanted a halo gaem. +, i cant get an xboxpuckmagnet35

It's fun. I enjoyed it, and although it is not one of the best fps, it's good for several hours of entertainment. I would recommend getting it (although I would not recommend getting Halo 2).

It's a mediocre FPS but it worths trying.thusaha

Don't say that. It's a fun game with tons of production value. The combat was smooth, straight forward, and action-packed. All of which establish it as a competent shooter. Sure, the Library has to be one of the stupidest levels ever made, but even in that level there were a set piece or two to make it not completely worthless. In fact, many of the levels in that game were quite excellent. A mediocre shooter is something like Blacksite: Area 51, Lost Planet, or Infernal.

The first Halo isn't the second coming of Half-Life by any stretch of the imagination, but it's in no way mediocre.

If your looking for the single player campaign...Halo:Combat Evolved is great ! I preferred it on the Xbox, but either Xbox or on the PC, you will really enjoy this game....it's a true gem !

*+

[QUOTE="thusaha"]It's a mediocre FPS but it worths trying.Noldorin2646

Don't say that. It's a fun game with tons of production value. The combat was smooth, straight forward, and action-packed. All of which establish it as a competent shooter. Sure, the Library has to be one of the stupidest levels ever made, but even in that level there were a set piece or two to make it not completely worthless. In fact, many of the levels in that game were quite excellent. A mediocre shooter is something like Blacksite: Area 51, Lost Planet, or Infernal.

The first Halo isn't the second coming of Half-Life by any stretch of the imagination, but it's in no way mediocre.

If you get it then you will get it for the singleplayer. The mutiplayer is CRAP (It's great on 360, but PC has some networking issues). Even on LAN games there's significant lag. You have to aim about 4-5 feet in front of a target to hit them, it's ridiculous (the demo will show you that).

The singleplayer is good for about the first half. Then you meet a annoying new enemy. You will tear your eyeballs out at the repitive gray-block mazes 'flooded' with these annoying enemies. The first half is pretty good though, but it seriously degrades after that.

I really enjoyed it on the PC. I had played it on the Xbox and, of course, found the mouse and keyboard to be much more satisfying.

The claims of design repetitiveness are just but the A.I. makes up for it.

On the contrary to what these uhh "gentlemen" say ahem, lol, the game has very repetitive level design - copy and paste jobs- and is really poorly optimised for the PC - severe lack ensures. biggest_loser

This guy is actually right on both points.

However, it is an alltogether decent game, and if you don't mind suffering through the poor level design and shoddy port, you should be allright. The gameplay can be fun and the music score is excellent. Since most every PC Gamer likely has at least a GeForce 6000 series video card and 500 Mb of RAM the game should run decent now.

Personally I always thought Nintendo's Metroid Prime was a MUCH better game than Halo, but of course thats not on the PC.

only good thing in halo is music, the rest is ...

On the contrary to what these uhh "gentlemen" say ahem, lol, the game has very repetitive level design - copy and paste jobsbiggest_loser

Isn't it funny how the Library has influenced everybody's opinion about Halo's level design?

The Library is a mindless killing spree area. Like in the early '90s. It's you, your guns, a corridor and a billion aliens. It's a Marathon reference.

The rest of the levels aren't obvious copypasta. The only other area that was truly repetitive was the beach area... but there are lots of ways to navigate that area.

Let me quote a great guy from System Wars:

A thing about Bungie's level design. It's not your typical method of design, and in fact unless you're good at it you'll probably suck. That's because Bungie's level design philosophy is environment/architecture first, and "gameability" second. If you've noticed, all of Halo's levels are not gameplay-friendly in the way Half Life or Portal is. It's as if they've created a render of what something would really be like, and dropped the players in. In fact, I Googled it just now, and you can hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

Seeing as you're a fan of Valve and their games, you can see the stark difference between the two. Both Half-Life games feel like a game world through and through. That's because Valve does gameplay first, and environment second. Does it make it more playable? Arguably so, but the levels make the whole thing seem like an extreme version of an elaborate theme park ride. The bridge overhead is made for Combine to rappel down, as well as exploding barrels to come tumbling towards you; the slicer-on-rails means that you'll need to time yourself as zombies come out of nowhere to harass you. That doesn't happen in Halo. Strip down all the pretty textures and art direction in Half-Life, and you may just end up getting a game that looks like the bulk of Portal's levels. Portal had the benefit of context, where "Aperture" consciously designed environments that progressively got harder in order to test you and their new toy.

Looking at MINERVA: Metastatis (that fantastic mod for Half Life), it's even more clear because it's almost as if someone from Bungie made a HL2 mod. Though Adam Foster isn't a Bungie employee, he's a Bungie fan. Their influence on him created some of the most technically ingenius and engaging maps I've ever seen for a mod (well, the Elder Scrolls games had some great artists too). Since the game is somewhat linked to the Half Life universe, I'll repeat again the differences are painfully obvious.

The best adventure games have puzzles that are logical in context, and progress game and story. The worst ones have random puzzles that, while they may be easier to have design-wise, just seem bizarre in he overall scheme of things. Being primarily an adventure gamer, I've probably translated that expectation from adventure games to pretty much everything else. Halo has those logical puzzles; Half-Life sacrifices that for the sake of being a video game.

It looks as though things may be changing around for the future of Half-Life, however. Adam Foster has been hired by Valve to work in Episode 3 and future Valve projects. What does that mean, exactly?

Half-Life's levels may not feel as artificial anymore.

FrozenLiquid

Bottom line is: Halo is the closest thing to Far Cry and Crysis. Gigantic open levels, tons of vehicles, fun to use guns, very intelligent enemies, a suit that offers a lot of gameplay opportunities (you jump very high, move very fast you have super-strength and you even have a cloak similar to the Predator cloack... sometimes).

Open your mind and don't let the PC purists propaganda influence you. Also, Halo is dirt-cheap now. It's a legendary game, you HAVE to own it :)

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]On the contrary to what these uhh "gentlemen" say ahem, lol, the game has very repetitive level design - copy and paste jobsBaranga

Isn't it funny how the Library has influenced everybody's opinion about Halo's level design?

The Library is a mindless killing spree area. Like in the early '90s. It's you, your guns, a corridor and a billion aliens. It's a Marathon reference.

The rest of the levels aren't obvious copypasta. The only other area that was truly repetitive was the beach area... but there are lots of ways to navigate that area.

Let me quote a great guy from System Wars:

A thing about Bungie's level design. It's not your typical method of design, and in fact unless you're good at it you'll probably suck. That's because Bungie's level design philosophy is environment/architecture first, and "gameability" second. If you've noticed, all of Halo's levels are not gameplay-friendly in the way Half Life or Portal is. It's as if they've created a render of what something would really be like, and dropped the players in. In fact, I Googled it just now, and you can hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

Seeing as you're a fan of Valve and their games, you can see the stark difference between the two. Both Half-Life games feel like a game world through and through. That's because Valve does gameplay first, and environment second. Does it make it more playable? Arguably so, but the levels make the whole thing seem like an extreme version of an elaborate theme park ride. The bridge overhead is made for Combine to rappel down, as well as exploding barrels to come tumbling towards you; the slicer-on-rails means that you'll need to time yourself as zombies come out of nowhere to harass you. That doesn't happen in Halo. Strip down all the pretty textures and art direction in Half-Life, and you may just end up getting a game that looks like the bulk of Portal's levels. Portal had the benefit of context, where "Aperture" consciously designed environments that progressively got harder in order to test you and their new toy.

Looking at MINERVA: Metastatis (that fantastic mod for Half Life), it's even more clear because it's almost as if someone from Bungie made a HL2 mod. Though Adam Foster isn't a Bungie employee, he's a Bungie fan. Their influence on him created some of the most technically ingenius and engaging maps I've ever seen for a mod (well, the Elder Scrolls games had some great artists too). Since the game is somewhat linked to the Half Life universe, I'll repeat again the differences are painfully obvious.

The best adventure games have puzzles that are logical in context, and progress game and story. The worst ones have random puzzles that, while they may be easier to have design-wise, just seem bizarre in he overall scheme of things. Being primarily an adventure gamer, I've probably translated that expectation from adventure games to pretty much everything else. Halo has those logical puzzles; Half-Life sacrifices that for the sake of being a video game.

It looks as though things may be changing around for the future of Half-Life, however. Adam Foster has been hired by Valve to work in Episode 3 and future Valve projects. What does that mean, exactly?

Half-Life's levels may not feel as artificial anymore.

FrozenLiquid

Bottom line is: Halo is the closest thing to Far Cry and Crysis. Gigantic open levels, tons of vehicles, fun to use guns, very intelligent enemies, a suit that offers a lot of gameplay opportunities (you jump very high, move very fast you have super-strength and you even have a cloak similar to the Predator cloack... sometimes).

Open your mind and don't let the PC purists propaganda influence you. Also, Halo is dirt-cheap now. It's a legendary game, you HAVE to own it :)

Very well said ! .............8)

*+