PDA

View Full Version : Halo Universal Binary confirmed!


LimeiBook86
May 26, 2006, 05:48 PM
I was reading the list of the Universal Binary games list on macguides.com and I decided to send a quick e-mail to MacSoft to see if they were actually working on a universal binary version as rumored. Here's the e-mail reply I got back.

Hi Steven,

We're working on a UB for Halo right now. I don't have an estimated release date yet.

Thanks,

Greg Grimes
MacSoft Technical Support

This is good news for me, when I got Halo all I had was my PowerBook and it ran kind of bad so, now with my new Intel Mac I can use my game once again! Yay! :D

Haoshiro
May 26, 2006, 05:54 PM
I was reading the list of the Universal Binary games list on macguides.com and I decided to send a quick e-mail to MacSoft to see if they were actually working on a universal binary version as rumored. Here's the e-mail reply I got back.

This is good news for me, when I got Halo all I had was my PowerBook and it ran kind of bad so, now with my new Intel Mac I can use my game once again! Yay! :D

Yowza!! Now that is good news! I like the sound of that... for sure. :) Thanks.

crazzyeddie
May 26, 2006, 06:18 PM
Awesome! I can't wait.

greatdevourer
May 27, 2006, 08:09 AM
FSAA 24x anyone? :D

keithbennis
Jul 8, 2006, 02:30 PM
Good news

AvSRoCkCO1067
Jul 8, 2006, 03:44 PM
Good news

??? This thread hasn't been posted on in over a month...:D

Unless...did you hear something new about Halo UB?

BlizzardBomb
Jul 8, 2006, 04:27 PM
??? This thread hasn't been posted on in over a month...:D

Unless...did you hear something new about Halo UB?

The UB was destroyed when Halo exploded. :)

JDOG_
Jul 8, 2006, 07:09 PM
I'm still amazed you're all getting excited about a UB of a 3 year old port of a 5 year old game :rolleyes:

People have even gotten tired of Halo 2...


/troll

eXan
Jul 8, 2006, 08:39 PM
Halo sucks. I hate it and yes, I completed it without cheats.

FSAA 24x anyone? :D

I thought 6x was max :confused:

JDOG_
Jul 8, 2006, 10:23 PM
Halo sucks. I hate it and yes, I completed it without cheats.

Hah, well you're entitled to your opinion, and it's not some great feat to beat the game without cheats...that is unless you're playing on legendary.

dmw007
Jul 8, 2006, 11:09 PM
Hah, well you're entitled to your opinion, and it's not some great feat to beat the game without cheats...that is unless you're playing on legendary.


JDOG_, you are right- completing Halo on legenday without cheats is a feat. :)

eXan
Jul 9, 2006, 01:37 AM
I didnt try to sound like a hero.

I just know some people say the game sucks but they never touched it.

No, I never completed Halo on Legendary. Why would a person want to run through the game on highest difficulty if he doesnt like this game?

JDOG_
Jul 9, 2006, 02:00 AM
I didnt try to sound like a hero.

I just know some people say the game sucks but they never touched it.

No, I never completed Halo on Legendary. Why would a person want to run through the game on highest difficulty if he doesnt like this game?

I'm not flaming you I was just pointing it out. If you think it sucks for a constructive reason than go for it, but I doubt you're gonna get much sympathy in a thread of people who are excited for the UB.

And to answer your question there is no reason to do it if you don't like the game. Also, many people who love the game throw their controller in rage while trying to beat on in legendary. Getting stuck by a grunt from a quarter mile away will do that to a man...

I still stand by my original statement though. Halo 1 is so old these days, it's hard for me to believe people still play it! When I was in college we used XBOX Connect to tunnel games from our laptops to our consoles (in the pre-Live days)...and that seemed like ages ago.

There's pretty much no hope of Halo 2 coming to the Mac though. They're pushing DirectX 10 so hard to move Vista units that Halo 3 will have been out for ages before we see a mac port (if we do...)

mishi
Jul 10, 2006, 01:30 AM
this will be sweet when i get my MBP :D

LimeiBook86
Jul 10, 2006, 03:20 AM
Wow...so many replies! Where were you people two months ago when I first started this thread? haha :p

Everyone has their reasons, for me it's simply that I'll be able to play the game again. When the game came out I got it as a gift, I tried it out on my 12" PowerBook G4 (867mhz) but, it was barley playable, I remember playing online with a few friends but, that was a rare event. Now that I have a faster Intel Mac I'll be happy to dust off the Halo CD case and give it whirl. :) So in my eyes, I'm finally getting a good use out of it! :p

eXan
Jul 10, 2006, 03:31 AM
When the game came out I got it as a gift, I tried it out on my 12" PowerBook G4 (867mhz) but, it was barley playable, I remember playing online with a few friends but, that was a rare event. Now that I have a faster Intel Mac I'll be happy to dust off the Halo CD case and give it whirl. :) So in my eyes, I'm finally getting a good use out of it! :p

This makes you think how badly the game was optimized to run on the hardware that was available when the game was released. :mad:

However I managed to complete it on a 700 MHz eMac :D

LimeiBook86
Jul 10, 2006, 04:11 AM
This makes you think how badly the game was optimized to run on the hardware that was available when the game was released. :mad:

However I managed to complete it on a 700 MHz eMac :D
Yeah, even on my brother's iMac G5 you can feel an overall sluggishness to the game. Oh well...here's hoping that the Universal Binary release runs far better than the PowerPC version! :rolleyes:

dmw007
Jul 10, 2006, 07:15 AM
Wow...so many replies! Where were you people two months ago when I first started this thread? haha :p

Everyone has their reasons, for me it's simply that I'll be able to play the game again. When the game came out I got it as a gift, I tried it out on my 12" PowerBook G4 (867mhz) but, it was barley playable, I remember playing online with a few friends but, that was a rare event. Now that I have a faster Intel Mac I'll be happy to dust off the Halo CD case and give it whirl. :) So in my eyes, I'm finally getting a good use out of it! :p


Glad to hear that you are finally able to fully enjoy playing Halo on your new Intel based Mac LimeiBook86! :)

fblack
Jul 10, 2006, 09:57 AM
Wow...so many replies! Where were you people two months ago when I first started this thread? haha :p

Everyone has their reasons, for me it's simply that I'll be able to play the game again. When the game came out I got it as a gift, I tried it out on my 12" PowerBook G4 (867mhz) but, it was barley playable, I remember playing online with a few friends but, that was a rare event. Now that I have a faster Intel Mac I'll be happy to dust off the Halo CD case and give it whirl. :) So in my eyes, I'm finally getting a good use out of it! :p

Odd...it runs well on my QS 933mhz. Pretty smooth actually.:) I still play with my friends on MP, but mostly modded as standard games have gotten boring. We just started playing the New Mombassa Classic map that some nice person ported over from the PC Halo CE--so there's still some life left in this now old game.:p

I'm planning on picking up an intel mac in the next month or two, so its all good news to me.:)

LimeiBook86
Jul 10, 2006, 10:25 AM
Odd...it runs well on my QS 933mhz.

Well the G4 933 QuickSilver machine had a 64mb AGP nVidia GeForce4 MX video card and my PowerBook has some pathedic 32mb nVidia Go MX. You'd be surprised how much a of a difference 66mhz makes ;) and I'm sure you had more than 640mb of RAM in your G4 haha :D

supremedesigner
Jul 10, 2006, 11:18 AM
Well the G4 933 QuickSilver machine had a 64mb AGP nVidia GeForce4 MX video card and my PowerBook has some pathedic 32mb nVidia Go MX. You'd be surprised how much a of a difference 66mhz makes ;) and I'm sure you had more than 640mb of RAM in your G4 haha :D

I still play Halo Demo online and it's still fun, never old! Actually, I have GeForce Ti and 2GB of ram and it ran smoothly until 16 peeps with like 6 TANKS, 2 SHEES, and 6 WH! (with mod) That's insane!! BUT FUN!!!

EDIT: I have PowerMac G4 with Dual Processor, 1.42 GHz and it ran just fine on Demo :)

KingYaba
Jul 12, 2006, 11:23 AM
Funny how we all reply about 2 months later :D

Yeah I have played Halo on my poor eMac and im glad there will be a UB released :) But now I feel good about getting a MacBook Pro, apart from the portable recording center i will use it for.

applekid
Jul 13, 2006, 09:52 PM
Man, that UB is taking freaking forever!! :eek:

I bought a used copy of Halo from a friend prior to the Intel Mac releases. I installed it on my iMac Core Duo as soon as it arrived, and its just too damn choppy. But, I must say it's amazing how good the graphics are with the X1600. It looks almost like Halo 2 (and better than Halo 2 in some places!).

Definitely got some nice eye candy though compared to my previous iMac G4 with its weak specs :)

Really, it's disappointing the rate at which UB's are coming out for older games. I think UT2K4 is like the only major modern game that's older than 6 months that got a UB update.

Soulstorm
Jul 14, 2006, 02:13 AM
Man, that UB is taking freaking forever!! :eek:

I bought a used copy of Halo from a friend prior to the Intel Mac releases. I installed it on my iMac Core Duo as soon as it arrived, and its just too damn choppy. But, I must say it's amazing how good the graphics are with the X1600. It looks almost like Halo 2 (and better than Halo 2 in some places!).

Definitely got some nice eye candy though compared to my previous iMac G4 with its weak specs :)

Really, it's disappointing the rate at which UB's are coming out for older games. I think UT2K4 is like the only major modern game that's older than 6 months that got a UB update.
Ryan Gordon rocks :)

Eric5h5
Jul 14, 2006, 03:39 AM
Yeah, even on my brother's iMac G5 you can feel an overall sluggishness to the game. Oh well...here's hoping that the Universal Binary release runs far better than the PowerPC version! :rolleyes:

The PPC version runs fine. It was optimized quite well. Halo on the Mac needs a decent graphics card, same as the PC version. Sadly, the majority of PPC Macs didn't have decent graphics cards, mostly just the Power Macs (if you specifically bought one, otherwise the default card wasn't the best either). That's really the only factor that accounts for sluggishness (and no, the 5200 in a G5 iMac is certainly not a decent graphics card).

So, a UB of Halo will run well on Intel Macs that have decent graphics cards (Macbook Pro, iMac), and not so well on those with integrated graphics (Macbook, Mini).

--Eric

ccfman2004
Aug 13, 2006, 12:58 AM
I got an email about a month ago from MacSoft that said a UB Halo is currently in QA for Final testing. But no release date :(

p0intblank
Aug 13, 2006, 01:16 AM
Does anyone have any working links to the Halo demo download? I've tried several sites and all links are forbidden. :(

seenew
Aug 13, 2006, 01:44 AM
I spent forever and a day downloading the Halo demo from Apple.com. I don't think it was UB, because it was slow as molasses. I mean, I've topped out my iMac, 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 256MB VRAM... and it was going at like 15fps. :(

I hope it wasn't UB, if so, dang.

LimeiBook86
Aug 13, 2006, 02:41 AM
Halo is not yet a Universal Binary application, MacSoft is currently working on a Universal Binary version but, it has not yet been released. The current version of Halo was created for PowerPC Macintosh systems so in order for it to run on your Intel Mac it is emulated which is resulting in the poor performance.

robegian
Aug 14, 2006, 08:05 AM
Halo is one of those few games having something special which makes them memorable. I still love it, and I'll be happy when the UB version is out :-)

harveypooka
Aug 14, 2006, 10:20 AM
I didnt try to sound like a hero.

I just know some people say the game sucks but they never touched it.

No, I never completed Halo on Legendary. Why would a person want to run through the game on highest difficulty if he doesnt like this game?

Roooorrrrrwwwww!

fblack
Aug 14, 2006, 03:41 PM
Well the G4 933 QuickSilver machine had a 64mb AGP nVidia GeForce4 MX video card and my PowerBook has some pathedic 32mb nVidia Go MX. You'd be surprised how much a of a difference 66mhz makes ;) and I'm sure you had more than 640mb of RAM in your G4 haha :D


This thread is still going on?:D

Your right, 32mb is bare minimum but with your nvdia you probably didn't have much go in it.:)

I also ran halo off my work inspiron w/512mb ram shared memory and it did pretty good...except everyone was the same drab color (no red vs blue intel chip did not support) which made team games hard...LOL.

Still cant wait for UB,I'm just drooling at those new mac pros (slurpp).

KingYaba
Aug 14, 2006, 05:08 PM
Can't wait to see Halo. Can't wait to get a new freakin' computer. Good things comes to those who wait.

eXan
Aug 15, 2006, 10:07 PM
Roooorrrrrwwwww!

?

dukebound85
Aug 15, 2006, 10:21 PM
jw how well does halo run on os x on a stock macbook?

xPismo
Aug 15, 2006, 10:44 PM
Awesome, the most ported game continues to be ported. Lets see now:

Halo: Mac -> xbox -> PC -> MacPPC -> MacUB.

Weeeheee!

BTW, why would they port it? Isnt Halo:CE already better & now available via bootcamp? I'm happy and all... but I be more interested in the applesauce conversion of the Halo:CE code to run in OSX.

Bungie, how we miss you so.

LimeiBook86
Aug 15, 2006, 10:47 PM
jw how well does halo run on os x on a stock macbook?
I would imagine pretty bad until the Universal Binary update comes out since it's being emulated and using integrated graphics. :rolleyes:

exabytes18
Aug 16, 2006, 01:05 AM
I wish there were a UB of America's Army.

Soulstorm
Aug 16, 2006, 01:24 AM
I wish there were a UB of America's Army.
There won't be any. The american Army stopped paying for the OS X version long ago. In fact, Ryan Gordon was making the releases of AA last year for free, only for his love of the game.

exabytes18
Aug 16, 2006, 01:25 AM
There won't be any. The american Army stopped paying for the OS X version long ago. In fact, Ryan Gordon was making the releases of AA last year for free, only for his love of the game.

I know. It was wishful thinking.

KingYaba
Aug 16, 2006, 05:34 AM
Yeah Halo runs beautifully under PPC machines. Optimized I believe? Least M$ had the funds to do something like that. Instead of a poor porting job.

Mord
Aug 16, 2006, 06:24 AM
I didnt try to sound like a hero.

I just know some people say the game sucks but they never touched it.

No, I never completed Halo on Legendary. Why would a person want to run through the game on highest difficulty if he doesnt like this game?


because it's a completely different game on legendary, it's not worth doing it on any other difficulty, seriously.

oh and co-op is 20 times better than single player.

Haoshiro
Aug 16, 2006, 02:35 PM
Well it's done, you can now get Halo UB!

But... if you bought it before January you'll have to pay for it...
http://www.destineerstudios.com/support/halo.html

LimeiBook86
Aug 16, 2006, 02:40 PM
Well it's done, you can now get Halo UB!

But... if you bought it before January you'll have to pay for it...
http://www.destineerstudios.com/support/halo.html

Awesome news! Although I'm not too thrilled about paying $5-$10...I think I'll do it. Now I just have to find the original box and manual (or whatever the CD key was on) :p...It must be around here somewhere. *rummages*

BlizzardBomb
Aug 16, 2006, 02:49 PM
Wahey! Let's see some benchmarks guys!

harveypooka
Aug 16, 2006, 03:26 PM
Well it's done, you can now get Halo UB!

But... if you bought it before January you'll have to pay for it...
http://www.destineerstudios.com/support/halo.html

What?! Pay for it! Sack that! My Halo playing days were numbered anyway, now they're gone!

LimeiBook86
Aug 16, 2006, 04:17 PM
Well I just bought the download, it says about 25 minutes left. Although their method of downloading the files is quite odd. But, the CD image has your CD Key keyed into your CD image so, this will help prevent piracy. :)

Digital Download Product Information:

Thank you for purchasing Halo Universal Binary! Please use the link below to download it!

Your valid CD KEY is keyed into your downloaded update image! Please do not give this download link to anyone as it would be considered pirating.

As soon as it's done I'll all let you know how it runs! :D

harveypooka
Aug 16, 2006, 04:19 PM
Well I just bought the download, it says about 25 minutes left. Although their method of downloading the files is quite odd. But, the CD image has your CD Key keyed into your CD image so, this will help prevent piracy. :)



As soon as it's done I'll all let you know how it runs! :D

Sweet, thanks for that. If I get 350fps I *might* consider buying it...how much is it? $5 or $10?

LimeiBook86
Aug 16, 2006, 04:19 PM
Sweet, thanks for that. If I get 350fps I *might* consider buying it...how much is it? $5 or $10?
Only $5 for the digital download, not really too bad at all :)

harveypooka
Aug 16, 2006, 04:21 PM
Only $5 for the digital download, not really too bad at all :)

I don't suppose it's that bad at all. That's about £2.50. I never really got into the Multiplayer that much though. HL2 Deathmatch took care of that. Maybe if Bungie added a grav gun and the ability to slam a toliet into someone's face, it'd be better?

LimeiBook86
Aug 16, 2006, 04:43 PM
It's so beautiful! :D Now burning and then installing! :) Also there are some interesting notes on the version history in the "Read Me" PDF. Also note you can not install the game from the disk image, when I tried it shows no available volumes to install on to but, when I burned the image on to the CD it installed fine. :)

Haoshiro
Aug 16, 2006, 05:42 PM
Nice, be sure to post frame rates and your specs! I'm interested in knowing if it's worth my money. :)

Thanks!

KingYaba
Aug 16, 2006, 06:00 PM
Seems rather anoying to pay another 5 bucks. But I'll end up doing it anyway once I get my MBP. Plz post benchmarks

LimeiBook86
Aug 16, 2006, 06:00 PM
Nice, be sure to post frame rates and your specs! I'm interested in knowing if it's worth my money. :)

Thanks!
I would if I knew how! I put the model detail on High and ran the game at the 2nd highest resolution, for some reason it wouldn't let me put it on the highest. Also I didn't see any Widescreen display support so being on a 20" iMac and playing this game you see the side bars. I'll double-check the Video settings and post a screenshot of that. The game runs smooth, doesn't run choppy, It runs better than my brother's 2.0ghz iMac G5 and I'm overall happy with it.

Definitely worth $5 considering none of my Macs could play my $49 Halo game before this update :p

Benchmarks?: Like I said before if you want me to post benchmarks please let me know how.

Nermal
Aug 16, 2006, 07:35 PM
MacSoft will send out a new Halo disc to owners of the original version of Halo. To receive a new disc, you can send MacSoft a photocopy of your Halo registration code number, along with your return address and $9.95(US) for shipping and handling. A new disc will be mailed to you.

So the charge is just for delivery? Are we therefore allowed to share the patch with others?

Haoshiro
Aug 16, 2006, 07:44 PM
Although their method of downloading the files is quite odd. But, the CD image has your CD Key keyed into your CD image so, this will help prevent piracy. :)

That would seem like a "no" to distributing it to your friends, I guess.

iPoster
Aug 16, 2006, 07:51 PM
A UB of the most boring and over-rated game in FPS history?
(Yes I've tried it and Halo 2 on my brother's Xbox as well as the Mac version)
Yawn... :rolleyes:

maximile
Aug 16, 2006, 08:14 PM
I want a UB of the version they demoed at 1999 MacWorld. Doesn't matter if it's not finished. ;) That was running smoothly on a 333MHz G3.

Actually, what I'd really like is the source to it.

fblack
Aug 16, 2006, 08:40 PM
I would if I knew how! I put the model detail on High and ran the game at the 2nd highest resolution, for some reason it wouldn't let me put it on the highest. Also I didn't see any Widescreen display support so being on a 20" iMac and playing this game you see the side bars. I'll double-check the Video settings and post a screenshot of that. The game runs smooth, doesn't run choppy, It runs better than my brother's 2.0ghz iMac G5 and I'm overall happy with it.

Definitely worth $5 considering none of my Macs could play my $49 Halo game before this update :p

Benchmarks?: Like I said before if you want me to post benchmarks please let me know how.

when you open the app you should get a screen that says Halo graphics settings. Under game options check "run time demo" try it a couple of times with different resolutions 640x480, 800x600, etc and with different settings to get gen idea. You should get a timedemo.txt file in your halo folder click to open to find results.

To give you an idea on my QS at 800x600 w/no hardware accel, normal sound settings, med texture, decals on, but no specular or shadows my avg. frame rate (while running safari and iphoto in the back) was 30.86fps. Let us know.:D

LimeiBook86
Aug 16, 2006, 08:52 PM
Well here is what I got when I ran the Demo. It was run on 800x600 and the other specs are below. I can't figure out how to change the screen-res before I run the Demo, because it was set higher than 800x600 last time I ran the game yet, the test ran at 800x600... :confused:

Date / Time: 8/17/06 9:45:38 (0ms)
2000MHz, 2048MB
C:\Applications\Halo.app psn_0_5636097 -console Frames=4700
Total Time=78.47s
Average frame rate=59.89fps
Below 5fps= 14% (time) 0% (frames) (11.071s spent in 11 frames)
Below 10fps= 14% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 14% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 18% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 25fps= 22% (time) 2% (frames)
Below 30fps= 24% (time) 4% (frames)
Below 40fps= 30% (time) 6% (frames)
Below 50fps= 36% (time) 11% (frames)
Below 60fps= 54% (time) 28% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Low
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= Medium
###Video Options###
Resolution= 800 x 600
Refresh rate= 0 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= Yes
Shadows= Yes
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= High

For further information, please visit the timedemo FAQ at: http://halo.bungie.net/site/halo/features/hpcperformancefaq.html

jeffy.dee-lux
Aug 16, 2006, 09:20 PM
nice! that sounds awesome! I'll admit to having played through the game on my intel imac without having bought it, but i think i'll go out and get my hands on a legit copy now that it should run smoothly on my computer. It was a sweet game despite the choppiness, i can't wait to try it at 60fps!

fblack
Aug 16, 2006, 11:12 PM
Well here is what I got when I ran the Demo. It was run on 800x600 and the other specs are below. I can't figure out how to change the screen-res before I run the Demo, because it was set higher than 800x600 last time I ran the game yet, the test ran at 800x600... :confused:

Still not bad at all (I want my intel mac soon--must...wait tho argghh!).

Hmmm...if I remember right pass thru initial screen go directly into game. Then go to ingame video settings change resolution to like 1024x768. Then quit game, reopen app go run time demo gain, then reopen .txt file should have your first run at 800x600 at top scroll down to find your 1024x768 run.

Hmmm...test might have defaulted to run at 800x600 if your vid card did not support resolution you tried. If you have more than 1 profile make sure you select the one with altered settings and quit, dont go back and select a different profile. for me at 1024x768 same settings except texture on high I get 26fps. You should be able to do it too. Let us know, how it goes.

Nermal
Aug 17, 2006, 12:52 AM
Grr...

When you're paying for a download, you'd think they could manage to get some bandwidth! This thing's crawling along at 82 KB/s :(

BlizzardBomb
Aug 17, 2006, 01:28 AM
I want a UB of the version they demoed at 1999 MacWorld. Doesn't matter if it's not finished. ;) That was running smoothly on a 333MHz G3.

Actually, what I'd really like is the source to it.

The Master Chief didn't look like the Master Chief we know today :p

While the average is through the roof for 800x600, this is a bit worrying...


Below 5fps= 14% (time) 0% (frames) (11.071s spent in 11 frames)

To compare, this is what my iMac does in 1024x640.

Total Time=185.41s
Average frame rate=25.35fps
Below 5fps= 2% (time) 0% (frames) (4.754s spent in 9 frames)

tominated
Aug 17, 2006, 02:45 AM
WOOO HOOO!:D :D :D :D :D

LimeiBook86
Aug 17, 2006, 02:55 AM
While the average is through the roof for 800x600, this is a bit worrying...

To compare, this is what my iMac does in 1024x640.

Total Time=185.41s
Average frame rate=25.35fps
Below 5fps= 2% (time) 0% (frames) (4.754s spent in 9 frames)
Hmmm... I don't know why, BTW how did you change the screen resolution for the demo? Maybe later I'll re-run the demo and see how it goes. :)

merc669
Aug 17, 2006, 05:52 AM
Having problems with mine. I installed the download in my Apps/Halo Folder. I have the CD in the drive. But when I try and launch Halo (New) it says it cannot find the CD. I can launch the older version no prob. I read the README which tends to be a bit confusing. Do you have to reinstall the Game. I also tried just installing the download in just the Apps Directory vice /Apps/HALO/ with No Joy. Anybody else having this problem or have any suggestions? Thanks!!

Bill......:(

LimeiBook86
Aug 17, 2006, 10:48 AM
Having problems with mine. I installed the download in my Apps/Halo Folder. I have the CD in the drive. But when I try and launch Halo (New) it says it cannot find the CD. I can launch the older version no prob. I read the README which tends to be a bit confusing. Do you have to reinstall the Game. I also tried just installing the download in just the Apps Directory vice /Apps/HALO/ with No Joy. Anybody else having this problem or have any suggestions? Thanks!!

Bill......:(
You have to burn the Halo UB.dmg image to a CD-R using Disk Utility. Then when the CD is done burning, double-click on the installer to install Halo. Then you should be able to play the game. I don't know what you mean by "installing the download" but, maybe my instructions will help. :)

shadowmoses
Aug 17, 2006, 11:31 AM
I don't understand this $5 digital download business....If I never owned Halo for Mac in the first place what should I do in order to get the UB version??

ShadOW

harveypooka
Aug 17, 2006, 11:35 AM
You have to burn the Halo UB.dmg image to a CD-R using Disk Utility. Then when the CD is done burning, double-click on the installer to install Halo. Then you should be able to play the game. I don't know what you mean by "installing the download" but, maybe my instructions will help. :)

What is your machine spec, graphics and memory? What sort of FPS are you getting and what sort of settings have you set?

BlizzardBomb
Aug 17, 2006, 12:35 PM
Hmmm... I don't know why, BTW how did you change the screen resolution for the demo? Maybe later I'll re-run the demo and see how it goes. :)

Simply change it in the settings and click OK. Your screen should flash then it should change to your chosen resolution. Make sure you click OK for the next menu to set the resolution permanently. Then quit and go back and check the Time Demo box. Hope that helps.

EDIT: And for the record, widescreen resolutions are 800x500, 1024x640, 1152x720, 1440x900 and 1680x1050 (the 20" native resolution). Also you could try it out with 4x FSAA. Makes the game look a lot better.

Nermal
Aug 17, 2006, 02:41 PM
I don't understand this $5 digital download business....If I never owned Halo for Mac in the first place what should I do in order to get the UB version??

It appears that you need to buy a boxed version. By the way, "digital download"? As opposed to an analogue download? :p

tominated
Aug 18, 2006, 02:45 AM
do you have to uninstall it first or not?:confused:

downloading it now. can't wait

It runs tons better now!

harveypooka
Aug 18, 2006, 06:27 PM
It runs tons better now!

Great, what FPS are you getting? What settings are you using etc? Also, can you give us actual FPS and not just TimeDemo ones?

PureMac
Aug 19, 2006, 12:47 PM
Great, what FPS are you getting? What settings are you using etc? Also, can you give us actual FPS and not just TimeDemo ones?

Maybe a stupid question: but how can I calculate the FPS of Halo on my iMac Core Duo?

Has anyone tried with max settings a multiplayer CTF match?

BlizzardBomb
Aug 19, 2006, 12:58 PM
Maybe a stupid question: but how can I calculate the FPS of Halo on my iMac Core Duo?

Has anyone tried with max settings a multiplayer CTF match?

Just do a timedemo. If you average above 30fps and rarely go below 10fps you're fine.

PureMac
Aug 19, 2006, 01:01 PM
Just do a timedemo. If you average above 30fps and rarely go below 10fps you're fine.

Thanks

Have you already tried to play a multiplayer match with max settings?

harveypooka
Aug 19, 2006, 01:06 PM
Maybe a stupid question: but how can I calculate the FPS of Halo on my iMac Core Duo?

Has anyone tried with max settings a multiplayer CTF match?

CTRL+F12 on the PC...let me take a peek for Mac shortcut...

BlizzardBomb
Aug 19, 2006, 01:08 PM
Thanks

Have you already tried to play a multiplayer match with max settings?

I don't have an iMac Core Duo :o But as I said already, if timedemo.txt says you are doing an average of above 30fps and rarely going below 10fps, you should enjoy comfortable multiplayer matches. I think 1440x900 resolution might be a bit hard to get reasonable results but other than that you should be able to max everything out.

PureMac
Aug 19, 2006, 01:10 PM
CTRL+F12 on the PC...let me take a peek for Mac shortcut...

Yeah, a shortcut, this is what I was looking for. ;)

KingYaba
Aug 19, 2006, 06:37 PM
You can't enter a command ? Like stat fps (as it was for Unreal tournament) or /cg_draw fps somethign like that?

Conner36
Aug 19, 2006, 09:45 PM
Can someone post an old version compared to new version benchmark?

xPismo
Aug 19, 2006, 09:52 PM
yep, I can't wait to see the benchmarks.... dang it... now I have to find my copy of Halo. Or buy another copy - when I get an intel mac that is. :D

LimeiBook86
Aug 19, 2006, 10:11 PM
Can someone post an old version compared to new version benchmark?
Well the major difference in the new version is that it's been re-coded as a Universal Binary so now it runs native on the new Intel Macs. Comparing it with the older version (while running on an Intel Mac) would be silly because the older version would be emulated via Rosetta. :rolleyes:

tominated
Aug 20, 2006, 03:07 AM
the problem with doing a timedemo is it spills the story of the game

BlizzardBomb
Aug 20, 2006, 03:53 AM
the problem with doing a timedemo is it spills the story of the game

Hardly. You can always turn the volume off can't you?

tominated
Aug 20, 2006, 04:50 AM
yeah, but looking at it spills it even more

harveypooka
Aug 20, 2006, 06:14 AM
the problem with doing a timedemo is it spills the story of the game

I just prefer in game FPS, high and low etc. Bugger it, I'm going to buy the Universal and try and get an FPS count.

EDIT: Damn! "The full download is 650 MB. This download is only for the North American English version of Halo". Guess I'll have to wait until (if) they expand this to the UK/EU.

Conner36
Aug 20, 2006, 08:14 AM
Well the major difference in the new version is that it's been re-coded as a Universal Binary so now it runs native on the new Intel Macs. Comparing it with the older version (while running on an Intel Mac) would be silly because the older version would be emulated via Rosetta. :rolleyes:
Another major difference is that it was mostly rewritten and they implemented new technologies and fixed bugs, so Halo v2.0 is better than v1.52 but HOW much better in reality? Looks better runs faster... Whats the difference (a comparison with benchmarks would be nice).

greatdevourer
Aug 20, 2006, 08:58 AM
I just prefer in game FPS, high and low etc. Bugger it, I'm going to buy the Universal and try and get an FPS count.

EDIT: Damn! "The full download is 650 MB. This download is only for the North American English version of Halo". Guess I'll have to wait until (if) they expand this to the UK/EU. There's an actual difference? :confused:

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 09:05 AM
EDIT: Damn! "The full download is 650 MB. This download is only for the North American English version of Halo". Guess I'll have to wait until (if) they expand this to the UK/EU.

You mean, that those who live in Europe can't download it?!? I live in Italy and have purchased my Halo copy at the online Apple Store... :confused:

I'm at the seaside right now and cannnot download it -- or, at least, try to do it -- until next week.

harveypooka
Aug 20, 2006, 09:05 AM
There's an actual difference? :confused:

Yes. I want to know what it's like in heavy enemy count situations, averages etc - not just a visual.

"Unfortunately, testing that way doesn't always paint an accurate picture of what happens when you really play a game. When playing back a standard timedemo-style recorded benchmark, many of the game's systems either don't operate or function in a controlled, pre-determined fashion. AI, physics, and much of the core game logic can entirely "turn off" when back recorded benchmark demos are playing. These are CPU-intensive tasks, and removing them from the picture can be useful in graphics benchmarking, but what if you want to see which CPUs perform best in real-world gaming scenarios?"
From http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1997005,00.asp

So yeah, real word is good! The article goes on to say you can use FRAPS, but I've never used it myself.

harveypooka
Aug 20, 2006, 09:06 AM
You mean, that those who live in Europe can't download it?!? I live in Italy and have purchased my Halo copy at the online Apple Store... :confused:

Most of you will have your copy of Halo already, which is made for PPC. This is essentially a patch for the Intel machines - a Universal binary.

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 09:09 AM
Guess I'll have to wait until (if) they expand this to the UK/EU.

Then, wait for what? Can't you download it?

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 09:11 AM
This is essentially a patch for the Intel machines - a Universal binary.

Not a patch. They say the game has been rewritten and it is 650 MB!!:eek: It's not a patch as it was for Unreal Tournement 2004, Doom 3 or other PPC games.

harveypooka
Aug 20, 2006, 09:15 AM
Not a patch. They say the game has been rewritten and it is 650 MB!!:eek: It's not a patch as it was for Unreal Tournement 2004, Doom 3 or other PPC games.

Oh ok, it's not a patch - excellent! I don't want to download it in case it dosen't work, a waste of money and bandwidth. I'll email them asking if it'll work with a UK copy, but since they state 'North American', I doubt it will. :(

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 09:24 AM
Oh ok, it's not a patch - excellent! I don't want to download it in case it dosen't work, a waste of money and bandwidth. I'll email them asking if it'll work with a UK copy, but since they state 'North American', I doubt it will. :(

Ok, I got it. :)

Thanks for your explanation: so, you prefer to get a full copy already burnt on a CD instead of using Disk Utility. I think you're right. It's a good strategy. I'll ask one as well, and I hope they can mail it to Italy.

;)

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 09:37 AM
yep, I can't wait to see the benchmarks.... dang it... now I have to find my copy of Halo. Or buy another copy - when I get an intel mac that is. :D

Come on guys--those who can, post some benchmarks!

;)

MacRumorUser
Aug 20, 2006, 11:19 AM
And 800x600 is fairly poo these days. Please bench at no less than 1024x768 and above if you can. :)

LimeiBook86
Aug 20, 2006, 11:21 AM
And 800x600 is fairly poo these days. Please bench at no less than 1024x768 and above if you can. :)
Alright maybe I can try this again later today. Although the "Time Demo" has a habit of reverting itself to 800x600 and sometimes it doesn't even make a timedemo.txt file...:rolleyes: But, I'll try anyway.

MacRumorUser
Aug 20, 2006, 11:23 AM
Alright maybe I can try this again later today. Although the "Time Demo" has a habit of reverting itself to 800x600 and sometimes it doesn't even make a timedemo.txt file...:rolleyes: But, I'll try anyway.

Many thanks LimeiBook :)

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 12:32 PM
Alright maybe I can try this again later today.

A question: right click on bloodgulch.map, click Get Info, what's the size of it in bytes, just for curiosity about the new UB version? (not MB, just bytes.)
:confused:

PureMac
Aug 20, 2006, 01:09 PM
A question: right click on bloodgulch.map, click Get Info, what's the size of it in bytes, just for curiosity about the new UB version? (not MB, just bytes.)
:confused:

Ok, I know: bloodgulch is 14,366,196 bytes

LimeiBook86
Aug 20, 2006, 01:52 PM
I run those benchmarks in a bit, I'm just battling off The Flood at the moment, *mumbles something about a robot tricking him* *cocks shotgun* I'll be back :D...hehehe

PureMac
Aug 21, 2006, 12:09 PM
I run those benchmarks in a bit, I'm just battling off The Flood at the moment, *mumbles something about a robot tricking him* *cocks shotgun* I'll be back :D...hehehe

Hey Lime, did you notice any speed/graphics improvement running Halo on your Intel Mac if compared to the PPC version?

Any lags in multiplayer matches?

LimeiBook86
Aug 21, 2006, 12:13 PM
Hey Lime, did you notice any speed/graphics improvement running Halo on your Intel Mac if compared to the PPC version?

Any lags in multiplayer matches?
The only PPC machine I ever played Halo on in multiplayer mode was my PowerBook G4 with a 867mhz G4 CPU and a 32mb nVidia Go card in it, so of course the Intel iMac runs lik 1000x better. It's hard to compare since the iMac just blows it away but, of course the PowerBook barley met the requirements to run the game in the first place. :p

PureMac
Aug 21, 2006, 12:45 PM
The only PPC machine I ever played Halo on in multiplayer mode was my PowerBook G4 with a 867mhz G4 CPU and a 32mb nVidia Go card in it, so of course the Intel iMac runs lik 1000x better. It's hard to compare since the iMac just blows it away but, of course the PowerBook barley met the requirements to run the game in the first place. :p

Thanks! ;)

LimeiBook86
Aug 21, 2006, 01:32 PM
Ok I just did two more benchmarked time demos, one at 1024x768 and another at 1280x800 (widescreen). I'm running the game on my 2.0ghz 20" Core Duo iMac with 2GB of RAM and the 256mb ATI graphics upgrade.

The text files with the benchmarks are attached to this post. :)

BlizzardBomb
Aug 21, 2006, 01:51 PM
Ok I just did two more benchmarked time demos, one at 1024x768 and another at 1280x800 (widescreen). I'm running the game on my 2.0ghz 20" Core Duo iMac with 2GB of RAM and the 256mb ATI graphics upgrade.

The text files with the benchmarks are attached to this post. :)

Thanks for the benchmarks! :) Looks like it would run fine on max settings at 1280x800.

LimeiBook86
Aug 21, 2006, 01:53 PM
Thanks for the benchmarks! :) Looks like it would run fine on max settings at 1280x800.
Yup, it runs great. Now I just have to complete the game in campaign mode. Damn flood...:p

MacRumorUser
Aug 21, 2006, 01:57 PM
Thanks Limeibook, your efforts are appreciated. Now if only there was a way of trashing that awful 'library' level. :D

fblack
Aug 21, 2006, 05:20 PM
Ok I just did two more benchmarked time demos, one at 1024x768 and another at 1280x800 (widescreen). I'm running the game on my 2.0ghz 20" Core Duo iMac with 2GB of RAM and the 256mb ATI graphics upgrade.

The text files with the benchmarks are attached to this post. :)


Pretty cool. Thanx. Now I just gotta get me an intel mac in another month or so <sigh>.

LimeiBook86
Aug 21, 2006, 05:22 PM
Thanks Limeibook, your efforts are appreciated. Now if only there was a way of trashing that awful 'library' level. :D
I swear I almost had a nightmare about that one level...that damn robot's hum will be enclosed in my mind for all eternity...:rolleyes: :p *goes insane*

yippy
Aug 21, 2006, 05:41 PM
Oh don't tell me that, I am playing for the first time and am currently trying to excape after just having found the flood. I don't care about spoilers but I don't do so well with the nightmares.

Good to hear it flies on intel though, now I just need to get a new machine:D

Knack
Aug 22, 2006, 04:48 PM
Small warning for everyone: this game runs MUCH better on Windows if you have a Windows partition on your computer. I did a timedemo in Windows and recieved 58 (or so) fps on 1024x768, but done on the OS X partition, I only get about 36. It shocked and annoyed me pretty bad, and there are also many effects in the Windows version (glow from Covenant weapons, glow from the wings on the banshee, ect.) that are not present in the OS X version. I don't know if this was shotty code work or if Open GL just doesn't meet the standards these days, either way it runs much better on Windows.

LimeiBook86
Aug 22, 2006, 09:03 PM
Well I've had no problems yet. The only thing I've noticed is during the last two levels there was a little slow down here or there but, then again I was playing in windowed mode with a few other programs running.

It's still a good upgrade for only $5 if you want to download the disk image. The only reason I bought it is because I never got to play it since my PowerBook didn't run it well so, I thought for an extra $5 it's worth it. I could install the Windows version which my brother has but, even if I do lose 20FPS or so, it's easier to play it in Mac OS X. Especially when I can pause it and check my Mail or use iChat for a bit. :)

redsteven
Aug 22, 2006, 11:52 PM
DAMMIT. I just typed up a huge post on the problems I'm having with the Universal Binary version and how performance totally sucks for me and I see no improvement at all on my iMac.....

then i hit "submit reply" and it tells me i'm not logged in... and hitting the back button cleared the text and so did logging in.... very frustrating.

i don't have time to retype all of it, so i'll give an abbreviated version.

I bought the universal version today and performance sucks unless I turn the resolution all the way down (840x524 max)

I have almost everything else turned on (except antialiasing)

turns out that the only differences i had in options between the universal version and ppc version was that I had the "specular" and "shadows" options disabled in the PPC version.

BTW, it DID run fairly well in the PPC version, but I still wanted to maximize performance

And I know somebody else mentioned somthing about time demo's not giving accurate statistics... and they're one thousand percent correct.

Ran fine in the time demo with resolution turned up, but as soon as you play the game and add in a few NPCs, I go to about 2 frames per second.

System Stats: 2GHz intel core duo iMac with 256 megs of VRAM and 1 gig of RAM.

BlizzardBomb
Aug 23, 2006, 01:00 AM
Small warning for everyone: this game runs MUCH better on Windows if you have a Windows partition on your computer. I did a timedemo in Windows and recieved 58 (or so) fps on 1024x768, but done on the OS X partition, I only get about 36. It shocked and annoyed me pretty bad, and there are also many effects in the Windows version (glow from Covenant weapons, glow from the wings on the banshee, ect.) that are not present in the OS X version. I don't know if this was shotty code work or if Open GL just doesn't meet the standards these days, either way it runs much better on Windows.

Glow from the Covenant's weapons and from the wings of banshees can be seen if you turn "Lens Flare" up to high.

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 01:57 AM
I bought the universal version today and performance sucks unless I turn the resolution all the way down...
Hmm I have a similar spec machine, I don't know why it's running so bad. Do you have enough free hard drive space? Did you try turning some of the effects off? I don't think I turned all of mine on but...I'll double-check.

I haven't had any major problems playing, I'll look at my video settings and post them. Maybe even the benchmarks will tell you them but, I was playing at 1280x800 I believe.

PureMac
Aug 23, 2006, 09:58 AM
Ok, game settings can be set up for best iMac performance. But, has any of you already tried one of those multiplayer matches with heavy weapons and banshees. Does it lag even al low resolution 840x524?

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 10:00 AM
Ok, game settings can be set up for best iMac performance. But, has any of you already tried one of those multiplayer matches with heavy weapons and banshees. Does it lag?
I was just playing a multiplayer game running at 1028x800 and it wasn't bad at all. I mean there was a little lag here or there but, nothing really noticable at all. The map was Death Island so there were tons of vehicles and players and it ran fine for me. :D

PureMac
Aug 23, 2006, 11:13 AM
I was just playing a multiplayer game running at 1028x800 and it wasn't bad at all. I mean there was a little lag here or there but, nothing really noticable at all. The map was Death Island so there were tons of vehicles and players and it ran fine for me. :D


Thx a lot! :)

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 12:28 PM
Just for kicks I tried Halo on my brother's MacBook (2.0ghz 1GB RAM). I was able to play some multiplayer maps at 800x600 but, I didn't get a chance to try any other servers with big maps. I tried the TimeDemo and it ran horribly, slower than my old PowerBook, it was so slow that I just canceled it. But, it seemed to run pretty well in multiplayer. If I get a chance I'll test it some more, I still wouldn't recommend Halo on a MacBook but, I'm just curious to see how it'll run. :)

PureMac
Aug 23, 2006, 12:33 PM
Just for kicks I tried Halo on my brother's MacBook (2.0ghz 1GB RAM). I was able to play some multiplayer maps at 800x600 but, I didn't get a chance to try any other servers with big maps. I tried the TimeDemo and it ran horribly, slower than my old PowerBook, it was so slow that I just canceled it. But, it seemed to run pretty well in multiplayer. If I get a chance I'll test it some more, I still wouldn't recommend Halo on a MacBook but, I'm just curious to see how it'll run. :)

Thanks for all your tests Lime :)

It's strange that MacSoft has not a "Halo UB system requirements page"... well, at least not yet!
:(

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 01:10 PM
Thanks for all your tests Lime :)

It's strange that MacSoft has not a "Halo UB system requirements page"... well, at least not yet!
:(

Actually in the Halo "Read Me" on the UB disc it has a list :) I also saw a MacSoft web page with it, I think it was the Press Release page but, it mistakenly says "800mb or faster" instead of "800mhz or faster". :p

System Requirements:

Halo requires a PowerPC or Intel based Macintosh with the following minimum specifications:

800 MHz or faster PowerPC G4, G5, or Intel processor. 1GHz or faster recommended.

Mac OS X 10.3.9 or later. mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" recommended.

256 Megabytes (MB) of RAM. 512 MB recommended.

32 MB 3D hardware-transform-and-lihting-capable AGP graphics card. Hardware vertex shader-capable graphics card (ATI Radeon 8500/9000, GeForce 3Ti/4Ti) or higher recommended.

1.5 GB of available hard disk space. 2 GB recommended.

8x CD-ROM drive

56 Kbps modem or LAN for online network play. Broadband recommended.

PureMac
Aug 23, 2006, 01:15 PM
System Requirements:

Halo requires a PowerPC or Intel based Macintosh with the following minimum specifications:

800 MHz or faster PowerPC G4, G5, or Intel processor. 1GHz or faster recommended.

Mac OS X 10.3.9 or later. mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" recommended.

256 Megabytes (MB) of RAM. 512 MB recommended.

32 MB 3D hardware-transform-and-lihting-capable AGP graphics card. Hardware vertex shader-capable graphics card (ATI Radeon 8500/9000, GeForce 3Ti/4Ti) or higher recommended.

1.5 GB of available hard disk space. 2 GB recommended.

8x CD-ROM drive

56 Kbps modem or LAN for online network play. Broadband recommended.


Same lies as usual... if a MacBook 2 GHZ 1 GB RAM can't run it.. :mad:

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 01:33 PM
Same lies as usual... if a MacBook 2 GHZ 1 GB RAM can't run it.. :mad:
No they're not lying, the MacBook only has intel integrated graphics. That's the only reason why the game runs badly on the system. The iMac/MacBook Pro is basically the same system but with dedicated ATI graphics instead of integrated Intel graphics (which share RAM for VRAM) - if the MacBook had a decent dedicated graphics card it would run fine.

displaced
Aug 23, 2006, 01:43 PM
I was just playing a multiplayer game running at 1028x800 and it wasn't bad at all. I mean there was a little lag here or there but, nothing really noticable at all. The map was Death Island so there were tons of vehicles and players and it ran fine for me. :D

Just out of interest, does Mac Halo multiplayer work with other players running the Windows version?

I've got Halo installed in my Bootcamp partition, but I wouldn't mind one less reason to reboot :D

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 01:48 PM
Just out of interest, does Mac Halo multiplayer work with other players running the Windows version?

I've got Halo installed in my Bootcamp partition, but I wouldn't mind one less reason to reboot :D
Yes, Halo will let you play multiplayer games with a Windows or Mac copy of the game no matter which platform your on. Just make sure your copy of Halo has all the available updates installed and it should work fine. ;)

displaced
Aug 23, 2006, 02:13 PM
Yes, Halo will let you play multiplayer games with a Windows or Mac copy of the game no matter which platform your on. Just make sure your copy of Halo has all the available updates installed and it should work fine. ;)

Splendid :)

I wonder if I can get a crossgrade from PC to Mac? I'd imagine not, since the two games technically have different publishers. I think I'll just pick it up used from Amazon.

BlizzardBomb
Aug 23, 2006, 02:32 PM
Same lies as usual... if a MacBook 2 GHZ 1 GB RAM can't run it.. :mad:

Actually the MacBook's graphics card does not have hardware transform and lighting. It fails to reach the requirements.

redsteven
Aug 23, 2006, 04:40 PM
i'm gonna test a few more things on the iMac... but one thing I noticed was that Lime mentioned he tested in time demo and multiplayer.

My time demo was ok, but I tested in single player, not multiplayer. The major difference there being that in single player the processor has a lot more to deal with when it's handling the AI's for the 2 marines next to you and the 6 covenant you're shooting at.... however, that SHOULDN'T even be worth mentioning since the iMac is more than capable of handling the AI...

And of the course, the most ironic thing is that this game runs great on the X-Box, a system released about 5 years ago (i think)...

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 04:43 PM
And of the course, the most ironic thing is that this game runs great on the X-Box, a system released about 5 years ago (i think)...
Well the game was originally designed and released for the XBox, it was ported to the PC and Mac. Porting can sometimes have negative effects on games I suppose but, it's better than nothing! :D

Try out some multiplayer and let us know how it works out.

redsteven
Aug 23, 2006, 05:02 PM
this is amazing.... it turns out... that everything you said was true... for me also...

it does run fine, and rather nicely at that.... as long as i'm in multiplayer

I just played a 16 person game in Blood Gulch, with all vehicles. I then got in a banshee and played for a while, so I had a birds-eye view of the field and could see every single vehicle. Played fine.

But when I started a single player game and saw 2 grunts.... I dropped to about 1 fps.
Amazing.

Note that the single player tests were all done on the first level, so it is possible (though very unlikely) that on a different lvl performance would be better. I can't figure out how to transfer my profiles from the PPC version to the UB version... I tried dragging and dropping stuff from the application support folders, but it didn't work. I guess i'll start a game on "easy" mode and get to lvl 2 and see what happens. (but i'll have to play that first lvl at the lowest resolution lol)

robegian
Aug 23, 2006, 06:17 PM
I've played Halo UB (Campaign - still have to try Multiplayer) on my MacBook 2.0GHz 2GB RAM, and it's barely playable... but playable nevertheless.

These are the results of the Timedemo:

2000MHz, 2048MB
C:\Applications\Giochi\Halo.app psn_0_13238273 Frames=4700
Total Time=142.47s
Average frame rate=32.99fps
Below 5fps= 2% (time) 0% (frames) (4.121s spent in 4 frames)
Below 10fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 4% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 18% (time) 8% (frames)
Below 25fps= 36% (time) 20% (frames)
Below 30fps= 53% (time) 34% (frames)
Below 40fps= 77% (time) 58% (frames)
Below 50fps= 85% (time) 69% (frames)
Below 60fps= 91% (time) 79% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Normal
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= Medium
###Video Options###
Resolution= 800 x 500
Refresh rate= 0 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= No
Shadows= No
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= Medium


By the way, disabling Hardware Shaders seemed to help considerably, while keeping 2x FSAA didn't show a great hit on performance. Choosing "Low" texture quality bettered the average frame rate by less than 2 fps, while choosing "Low" sound quality didn't seem to have any considerable impact on performance.

What I wouldn't have expected is that the game actually runs better in a window than in full screen mode: 36.23fps in a window, vs. 32.99fps in full screen, same settings (the ones specified in this post).

Disappointingly, the MB's fan became very noisy during the game - and this after applying the firmware upgrade.

redsteven
Aug 23, 2006, 06:48 PM
yeah try multiplayer. because the poor performance could just be caused by the macbook's poor graphics card :(

rwk001
Aug 23, 2006, 06:53 PM
Actually, it's the only game I still play. Every now and again, when I'm feeling bored, I power it up and play through it again. Legendary without cheats, of course. Without the shotgun on the library level either (pistol, machine gun, an an occasional rocket launcher for fun). Just biding my time until Halo 2 comes out, or else I upgrade to an intel MacPro and use Bootcamp to finally play some of these other games I've heard about. :rolleyes:

PM Dual G5 2.0, 3.5MB, ATI 9600XT

redsteven
Aug 23, 2006, 08:32 PM
ok i just noticed ANOTHER problem.

When turning on FSAA (even only at 2x), whenever a grenade explodes near me, there's about 1 full second of lag, where the game "freezes".

i've only checked this in multiplayer since i'm having so much trouble getting single player to work well.

man, i'm so pissed at MacSoft. In early May i emailed them about whether or not then would make a universal binary version of Halo. They said yes, and gave me a "very rough estimate" of six weeks. About 2 months after that I emailed them again, asking if they had any update on the situation. I didn't receive any response... at all.... then 1 or 2 weeks after that i emailed them AGAIN, and I STILL didn't get a response.

Now they finally come out with the UB version, I pay $5.00 for it, and it's chock full'o bugs

eXan
Aug 23, 2006, 08:34 PM
System Requirements:

Halo requires a PowerPC or Intel based Macintosh with the following minimum specifications:

800 MHz or faster PowerPC G4, G5, or Intel processor. 1GHz or faster recommended.

Mac OS X 10.3.9 or later. mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" recommended.

256 Megabytes (MB) of RAM. 512 MB recommended.

32 MB 3D hardware-transform-and-lihting-capable AGP graphics card. Hardware vertex shader-capable graphics card (ATI Radeon 8500/9000, GeForce 3Ti/4Ti) or higher recommended.

1.5 GB of available hard disk space. 2 GB recommended.

8x CD-ROM drive

56 Kbps modem or LAN for online network play. Broadband recommended.


OMG how can they sleep at night? This game runs like cr@p on my iMac G5 at highest settings and 1024x640!

The only way to achieve an "ok" performance is to turn "Lens Flare" to low-medium.

Urgh, UT2004 is a much newer game and it runs beautifully compared to Halo on my machine :eek:

redsteven
Aug 23, 2006, 09:16 PM
OMG how can they sleep at night? This game runs like cr@p on my iMac G5 at highest settings and 1024x640!

The only way to achieve an "ok" performance is to turn "Lens Flare" to low-medium.

Urgh, UT2004 is a much newer game and it runs beautifully compared to Halo on my machine :eek:

lol, tell me about it.

I got Quake 4 and the graphics ROCK. Unfortunately, the multiplayer isn't what I hoped it was... mainly because it's too fast... like, ridiculously fast (although I know some people like that).

The main reason I'm not playing Quake though is because the dummies over THERE (at Aspyr) still haven't released the mac version of the 1.3 patch (the one that came out on July 21st)... so since I can only play against 1.2 users (i.e. mac users), there's only like 12 people online... total, across all the available servers...

I've always been a mac gamer, but when Halo 2 comes out, I'll get it for PC and run it in boot camp. That way I won't have to wait months for patches to get up to date and for the software to even be released. The only company that reaches my expectations on mac support is Blizzard entertainment... much easier for them to do so since they're not porting the games... they're the actual creators.... and they rock.... but after 20 months of World of Warcraft I'm taking a small break.

But back to the main topic, I think I'm gonna have to make a bug report to Macsoft -_-

LimeiBook86
Aug 23, 2006, 09:19 PM
I've always been a mac gamer, but when Halo 2 comes out, I'll get it for PC and run it in boot camp. That way I won't have to wait months for patches to get up to date and for the software to even be released.
I believe Halo 2 was only going to be released to work with Windows Vista only. So here's hoping Boot Camp will officially work with Windows Vista when/if it comes out (hehe :D), I know some people got the beta to work on it. But, it'll be a while before it comes out so I'm sure we'll have an update by then. :)

redsteven
Aug 23, 2006, 11:24 PM
I believe Halo 2 was only going to be released to work with Windows Vista only. So here's hoping Boot Camp will officially work with Windows Vista when/if it comes out (hehe :D), I know some people got the beta to work on it. But, it'll be a while before it comes out so I'm sure we'll have an update by then. :)

Based on this article (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/02/10/halo2/index.php), I think what they meant is that the only version of WINDOWS it will run on is Vista... and that's been verified. But the status of the mac version is still up in the air.

And making Vista a requirement for Halo 2 is a great way for Microsoft to get people to shell out the money for Vista.
I still think it's a sleazy move though (although you can argue that plenty of developers have done similar things). I mean, am I REALLY expected to believe that a game developed for a console that came out nearly 5 years ago requires new technologies available ONLY in Windows Vista? I mean, come ON.
And here's an interesting fact I found (according to wikipedia) - The original Xbox came with a 733 MHz Intel Mobile Celeron and ONLY 64 megs of SHARED memory

Spaceman Spiff
Aug 24, 2006, 12:02 AM
And here's an interesting fact I found (according to wikipedia) - The original Xbox came with a 733 MHz Intel Mobile Celeron and ONLY 64 megs of SHARED memory

Well, it's sharing that memory with a lot less than a Macbook would. 64 cookies for 128 people does a lot more than 64 cookies for 512 people.

LimeiBook86
Aug 24, 2006, 12:06 AM
Well, it's sharing that memory with a lot less than a Macbook would. 64 cookies for 128 people does a lot more than 64 cookies for 512 people.
Well also another thing to think about is that the XBox didn't have to run an OS or anything else in the background, just the game. So that made things easier on the CPU and RAM :)

Spaceman Spiff
Aug 24, 2006, 12:20 AM
Well also another thing to think about is that the XBox didn't have to run an OS or anything else in the background, just the game. So that made things easier on the CPU and RAM :)

Basically what I meant, I just said it in cookie-form. Though in retrospect, I suppose it wasn't very comprehensive. Cookies = ram and people = OS, other programs, etc.

redsteven
Aug 24, 2006, 01:11 AM
that's 100% true... but we also have to take into account the fact that with Safari, iCal, Activity Monitor, and the Finder open, my CPU's %idle fluctuates between 96-100%.... and I've got a lot more than 64 megs of memory free... plus the 256 on my video card : \

is that enough whining for now?

but on the bright side.... i like cookies.... i wonder if RAM really DOES taste like cookies....

robegian
Aug 24, 2006, 01:45 AM
When turning on FSAA (even only at 2x), whenever a grenade explodes near me, there's about 1 full second of lag, where the game "freezes".

It's a known bug, fixed in a previous version of Halo... and unexpectingly reintroduced with this version (!). It's likely they'll fix it again, hopefully.

Haoshiro
Aug 24, 2006, 08:37 AM
but on the bright side.... i like cookies.... i wonder if RAM really DOES taste like cookies....

I can tell you first hand that no, it does not!

PureMac
Aug 24, 2006, 12:22 PM
It's a known bug, fixed in a previous version of Halo... and unexpectingly reintroduced with this version (!). It's likely they'll fix it again, hopefully.

So, this looks like being the same old story... the very same games run much better on Windows with much less hardware.

No way: Macs and computer games are still on two different planets. I don't want to install WinXP on my Mac to play games decently.

:(

redsteven
Aug 24, 2006, 09:08 PM
So, this looks like being the same old story... the very same games run much better on Windows with much less hardware.

No way: Macs and computer games are still on two different planets. I don't want to install WinXP on my Mac to play games decently.

:(

Yup. And I don't even know if I'd bother buying the UB version of Halo if they would've released the 1.3 patch for Quake 4 sooner (35 days and counting).

I don't want to run games in Windows either, but I feel like it's the only way to avoid all this hassle : \

NickElls
Aug 24, 2006, 10:12 PM
I wish they would make a UB for the demo version, there's actually a somewhat large community there too. (but it's probably nothing compared to full, I wouldn't know)

harveypooka
Aug 25, 2006, 10:21 AM
I don't want to install WinXP on my Mac to play games decently.

:(

Why not?

7on
Aug 25, 2006, 10:30 AM
I bought the UB 2 days ago and it runs pretty good. A lot better than my old powerbook. Now I just need to wait for my mouse (gave my sister my BT mouse, now waiting for the Mighty Mouse BT).

harveypooka
Aug 25, 2006, 10:31 AM
I bought the UB 2 days ago and it runs pretty good. A lot better than my old powerbook. Now I just need to wait for my mouse (gave my sister my BT mouse, now waiting for the Mighty Mouse BT).

Has anyone posted any benchmarks yet?

PureMac
Aug 25, 2006, 12:38 PM
Why not?
Because I already have the most advanced OS and spent 50 euros to buy Halo. I don't want to spend a single cent for the worst OS on earth and some more euros to buy the Windows version of the game.

:D

PureMac
Aug 25, 2006, 12:41 PM
Has anyone posted any benchmarks yet?

Is there a particular app to record videogames benchmarks? :confused:

I use XBench (http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/16231) to test my Mac performances, but there's no way to set it up to test an app.

:(

LimeiBook86
Aug 25, 2006, 01:23 PM
Has anyone posted any benchmarks yet?
Well I posted some 'TimeDemo' results in the thread a few pages back. :)

redsteven
Aug 25, 2006, 02:41 PM
Lime, test Halo in single player for me please.

Turn pretty much everything on high (but leave FSAA off), and just mess with the resolution and see what happens.... especially when there are NPCs on screen.

LimeiBook86
Aug 25, 2006, 02:44 PM
Lime, test Halo in single player for me please.

Turn pretty much everything on high (but leave FSAA off), and just mess with the resolution and see what happens.... especially when there are NPCs on screen.
I'm not sure how to test things in single player except for the TimeDemo test :( I guess I could take a video of me playing but, I don't know how much that would help...:confused:

redsteven
Aug 25, 2006, 07:05 PM
I'm not sure how to test things in single player except for the TimeDemo test :( I guess I could take a video of me playing but, I don't know how much that would help...:confused:

all you need to do is open up Halo, click on the "campaign" button, select "new game", pick any difficulty lvl, play with the same settings u used in multiplayer, and tell me if the performance is crap. I don't know how to display framerate or anything accurate like that either, but you'll know whether it's 2 fps (unplayable), jerky but playable, or runs great.

then try changing ur resolution and see what effects that has.

Also... i don't really want to go out of my way and take the time to look through this whole thread and put together a collection of all the problems, write it up nice, mail it to macsoft, and hope they answer (cause they DIDN'T answer the last 2 emails i sent their support).
So I think I'll link them to this thread (starting with whatever page has good info) and let them look through it. It's THEIR mistakes we're talking about (and paid for), so they can take the effort to look through 3 pages of a thread.

EDIT: i thought about it, and.... if they never even responded to the last 2 emails i sent them (b4 UB was released), there's almost no chance of them actually taking the time to read a thread. So i guess i'll just have to mail them something saying that their UB SUCKS and summarize what i can : \

PureMac
Aug 26, 2006, 10:52 AM
their UB SUCKS

Well, well... you're wrong. If you only says it sucks, MacSoft may think it's a compliment :D

The sad truth has just been posted by BareFeasts (http://www.barefeats.com/quad10.html): they ran Halo 2.0 UB benchmarks with a Mac Pro and a Quad G5. At max settings the MacPro 3 Ghz reached 21 fps and the Quad G5 60! The different graphics card is not that relevant to justify such a diffence.

How sad.... :( To be fair I'm more angry than sad! :mad:

yippy
Aug 26, 2006, 10:56 AM
If you read the article, that frame rate difference has almost everything to do with the fact that the Mac Pro had a much inferior graphics card.
Anything with a 7300 will get clobbered by a computer with a 7800. When when the X1900 starts shipping those benchmark scores will be very different.

PureMac
Aug 26, 2006, 11:04 AM
If you read the article, that frame rate difference has almost everything to do with the fact that the Mac Pro had a much inferior graphics card.
Anything with a 7300 will get clobbered by a computer with a 7800. When when the X1900 starts shipping those benchmark scores will be very different.

I don't think that the graphics card only can explain a 20 to 60 fps difference.

Doom3 and UT2004 benchmarks on the iMac Core Duo were much more impressive (http://www.barefeats.com/imcd.html), that I can't imagine to get only an average of 40 fps--and even less--with the Halo Demo.

Anyway, we'll wait for the benchmarks with the ATI X1900. ;)

Mr. Mister
Aug 26, 2006, 11:22 AM
Windows XP is a ton better for games than Mac OS X, like it or not. So buy a copy of Windows XP, and the cheaper cost, wider selection, and better performance of Windows games pays for the cost of XP and the minor hassle of rebooting.

Mord
Aug 26, 2006, 11:48 AM
I don't think that the graphics card only can explain a 20 to 60 fps difference.

Doom3 and UT2004 benchmarks on the iMac Core Duo were much more impressive (http://www.barefeats.com/imcd.html), that I can't imagine to get only an average of 40 fps--and even less--with the Halo Demo.

Anyway, we'll wait for the benchmarks with the ATI X1900. ;)

the gpu is the bottleneck in all examples, the 7300 is an 8 pipe card and the x1600 is a 12 pipe card, the 7800GT is a 24 pipe card and an x1900XT is a 48 pipe card, pipelines are the most important things in a gpu, the more the merrier.

a mac pro with the same gpu as a powermac would destroy it in any universal game.

redsteven
Aug 26, 2006, 12:54 PM
Well, well... you're wrong. If you only says it sucks, MacSoft may think it's a compliment :D

The sad truth has just been posted by BareFeasts (http://www.barefeats.com/quad10.html): they ran Halo 2.0 UB benchmarks with a Mac Pro and a Quad G5. At max settings the MacPro 3 Ghz reached 21 fps and the Quad G5 60! The different graphics card is not that relevant to justify such a diffence.

How sad.... :( To be fair I'm more angry than sad! :mad:

Ok, I ran the ULTIMATE test today. It's harder to get more accurate than this.

I have both a MacBook Pro (15 inch) and an intel iMac. They both have 1 gig of ram and the 256 meg graphics card. The only difference is that the macbook pro has a 2.16 GHz core duo with a 15 inch screen and the iMac has a 2.0 GHz core duo with a 20 inch screen.

So today I ran the UB version on my iMac and the PPC version (in rosetta) on the macbook pro... and the macbook pro kicked ass.

Everything was set on highest on both computers, except I left FSAA turned off. Framerate was set on 30 FPS.
The only difference between the two computer's was the resolution. The highest res. on the macbook pro was 1440x900. The closest to that on the iMac was 1344x840, one level below the iMac's maximum of 1680x1050. So I ran the iMac at 1344x840.

There were a few hiccups in the cinematics on the macbook pro, but the overall framerate was smoother than on the iMac

Then came the single player campaign. WOW, playing on the iMac felt like playing on my old iBook G4. Though I obviously had to use the lowest settings when I used to play on the iBook G4, the iMac played just as poorly, if not worse. The framerate on the iMac was maybe half that of the macbook pro, and that's being generous.

I have to run out now, but when I get back, I will finally write that email to MacSoft, telling them that this is probably THE most disappointing purchase I've ever made. And it's a good thing it didn't cost me more than $5.00.

And it's obviously MacSoft's fault if the UB runs worse than the PPC version. It has nothing to do with the mac's "inferior gaming capability" (though it may BE inferior). As i mentioned earlier in the thread, I bought Quake 4 (the mac version... it's a universal binary app AND supports dual processors) and the graphics are better than the cinematics in Halo. Of course it's much newer, but it just proves that our macs can STILL kick ass at gaming when you use decent programming. And Quake 4 was STILL a port.

--------------------------------

Oh yeah, and to the person who claimed that the graphics card caused the difference in framerates between the G5 and the Mac Pro... that would be an acceptable argument for a new game. But Halo doesn't require a top of the line graphics card. It runs great on a 5 year old Xbox that doesn't even have any dedicated VRAM... it has 64 megs of shared RAM, and I'm sure the graphics card sucks by todays standards.

Edit: This is ****ing ridiculous. I want to email macsoft and I can't even find the address for their technical support. I know it USED to be listed on their site as support@macsoftgames.com, but that's the address that I sent my last two emails to that didn't receive a response. There is no address listed in the Halo readme, and their new website doesn't have an address either. Any suggestions before I just send the email to their parent company (Destineer Studios)?

PureMac
Aug 26, 2006, 01:50 PM
Edit: This is ****ing ridiculous. I want to email macsoft and I can't even find the address for their technical support. I know it USED to be listed on their site as support@macsoftgames.com, but that's the address that I sent my last two emails to that didn't receive a response. There is no address listed in the Halo readme, and their new website doesn't have an address either. Any suggestions before I just send the email to their parent company (Destineer Studios)?

Call them 763-231-8050 and have fun... :D

Mord
Aug 26, 2006, 01:51 PM
Ok, I ran the ULTIMATE test today. It's harder to get more accurate than this.

I have both a MacBook Pro (15 inch) and an intel iMac. They both have 1 gig of ram and the 256 meg graphics card. The only difference is that the macbook pro has a 2.16 GHz core duo with a 15 inch screen and the iMac has a 2.0 GHz core duo with a 20 inch screen.

So today I ran the UB version on my iMac and the PPC version (in rosetta) on the macbook pro... and the macbook pro kicked ass.

Everything was set on highest on both computers, except I left FSAA turned off. Framerate was set on 30 FPS.
The only difference between the two computer's was the resolution. The highest res. on the macbook pro was 1440x900. The closest to that on the iMac was 1344x840, one level below the iMac's maximum of 1680x1050. So I ran the iMac at 1344x840.

There were a few hiccups in the cinematics on the macbook pro, but the overall framerate was smoother than on the iMac

Then came the single player campaign. WOW, playing on the iMac felt like playing on my old iBook G4. Though I obviously had to use the lowest settings when I used to play on the iBook G4, the iMac played just as poorly, if not worse. The framerate on the iMac was maybe half that of the macbook pro, and that's being generous.

I have to run out now, but when I get back, I will finally write that email to MacSoft, telling them that this is probably THE most disappointing purchase I've ever made. And it's a good thing it didn't cost me more than $5.00.

And it's obviously MacSoft's fault if the UB runs worse than the PPC version. It has nothing to do with the mac's "inferior gaming capability" (though it may BE inferior). As i mentioned earlier in the thread, I bought Quake 4 (the mac version... it's a universal binary app AND supports dual processors) and the graphics are better than the cinematics in Halo. Of course it's much newer, but it just proves that our macs can STILL kick ass at gaming when you use decent programming. And Quake 4 was STILL a port.

--------------------------------

Oh yeah, and to the person who claimed that the graphics card caused the difference in framerates between the G5 and the Mac Pro... that would be an acceptable argument for a new game. But Halo doesn't require a top of the line graphics card. It runs great on a 5 year old Xbox that doesn't even have any dedicated VRAM... it has 64 megs of shared RAM, and I'm sure the graphics card sucks by todays standards.

Edit: This is ****ing ridiculous. I want to email macsoft and I can't even find the address for their technical support. I know it USED to be listed on their site as support@macsoftgames.com, but that's the address that I sent my last two emails to that didn't receive a response. There is no address listed in the Halo readme, and their new website doesn't have an address either. Any suggestions before I just send the email to their parent company (Destineer Studios)?

the thing is at that res it's all gpu bound, you can isolate the cpu by running at 640x480, but at higher res's especially with pixel shaders the gpu is what is being taxed, i'd bet my macbook a mac pro with an equal card to a quad g5 would beat it.

redsteven
Aug 26, 2006, 01:57 PM
the thing is at that res it's all gpu bound, you can isolate the cpu by running at 640x480, but at higher res's especially with pixel shaders the gpu is what is being taxed, i'd bet my macbook a mac pro with an equal card to a quad g5 would beat it.

but with my "test" the PPC version ran MUCH better at very similar resolutions.

Once again, I just find it hard to believe that such an advanced graphics card is necessary for such an old game.

And I sent the email to their parent company (destineer studios). I'll see what happens.

Mord
Aug 26, 2006, 02:03 PM
pixel shaders kill, halo was a very very taxing game when it came out and not even the highest end pc's could run it at max settings, gpu's need as many pixel pipelines as possible to run halo at 1920x1200 and the 7300 comes up short.

redsteven
Aug 26, 2006, 11:03 PM
well i've got some... rather interesting news. I was messing around with the settings in Halo UB still trying to figure out the problem and I made it to the second lvl... turns out that the performance was.... much, much better. Even with everything on, it still ran smoothly unless there was a lot of traffic on the screen... even though i still think that it should run flawlessly at this point regardless of what's on screen.

So in the second level, whether I was outdoors or in that cave place, the framerate was much better than ANY part of lvl 1. I don't know what to say.

LimeiBook86
Aug 27, 2006, 05:06 AM
redsteven, I'm a bit confused but, before you said you were running the PPC version of Halo on an intel iMac under Rosetta? Or am I mistaken?

Halo on the Xbox lagged, it wasn't perfect by any means. It ran ok but, there were more than a few times that things didn't run smoothly. The last level was horrendous actually, although that's mostly because it was rushed. Even though the Xbox had much lower-grade hardware than the computers we have today all the Xbox had to do was run the game with no OS in the background or anything else which simplified things a lot. I'm sure the developers of Halo for the Xbox squeezed every ounce of power out of that system to make the game run the best it could.

I played Halo on my 20" iMac running in 1280x800 with the following settings: Shadows on, Decals on, Texture Quality High, Vsync Off. It ran fine, no problems at all. I believe Vsync is a big No-No, especially if you have a good graphics card. There were slow downs once and a while in the beginning of the very 1st level but, these only lasted for a second if that and then they were gone. Nothing lagged except Multiplayer mode and that was only due to a poor connection with the server, all the other times it played fine.

I played through the whole game without any problems. I had no problems with cut scenes or loading anything. Hector is 100% correct, even when Halo came out some of the fastest PCs had problems playing it, I know my old Pentium 4 machine chugged along, even with everything on medium. Also I agree that in a case between a Mac Pro with the same graphics card as the PowerMac G5, the Mac Pro would win - hands down.

I think no matter what computer your trying to play Halo on, or any other game for that matter, you should have a decent, modern, graphics card and a good CPU to back it up. The better the GPU and CPU in the computer, the better the game will run and perform. :)

redsteven
Aug 27, 2006, 01:31 PM
redsteven, I'm a bit confused but, before you said you were running the PPC version of Halo on an intel iMac under Rosetta? Or am I mistaken?

well before the UB was released I was running it in Rosetta on the iMac.

But for the test I did I ran the UB version in the iMac and the PPC version on the MBP.

What I was saying about that was that my MBP ran better in single player than the iMac... it was at least twice as fast.

The problem was that macsoft gave no instructions on how to use your saved games from the PPC version in the UB version, so for my test I had to start on level one. Turns out that when I finally tested it on level 2.... it ran MUCH, much better.

But I'm still not satisfied. I know that my iMac isn't THE top of the line computer, but it's pretty good. And I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself, but Quake 4's graphics kick Halo's ass, and Quake 4 (which is a UB) kicks UB Halo's ass in framerate, also.

And even on lvl 2, where the framerate was much better, there were still slow downs, and there should be very, VERY few slowdowns with this machine. I just don't see a noticeable improvement with the UB... except for the fact that the game happens to start up quicker.

DrStrangelove
Dec 10, 2006, 11:25 PM
Bringing this thread back from the dead. I've been bored lately and decided to go out and get a game (not a big gamer-- but I do enjoy it from time to time). So I go to the apple store and see HALO (I've obviously heard of the game) and then see the UB descriptor on it and think, "Great I'll give this a try."

So... it's now sitting unopened still in the bag on my other desk. I come onto Macrumors to do a search on HALO looking for REVIEWS OF THE OVERALL GAME basically and I stumble onto this thread talking about how crappy the UB version is.

I'm on a 20" iMac 2.0GHz (1st gen Core Duo) with 1.5MB of RAM. I've got the X1600 video card (128 MB VRAM).

I'm seriously thinking about not opening this game and returning it. Is it still running as poorly as all of what I've read above or have patches come out since August making this now a better port. Please let me know.

I've asked this in another thread but since I've got your attention, I also play (and enjoy WoW). I'll take any game recs you may have-- with the caveat that it should run well on my machine. Much thanks!

tominated
Dec 10, 2006, 11:28 PM
Bringing this thread back from the dead. I've been bored lately and decided to go out and get a game (not a big gamer-- but I do enjoy it from time to time). So I go to the apple store and see HALO (I've obviously heard of the game) and then see the UB descriptor on it and think, "Great I'll give this a try."

So... it's now sitting unopened still in the bag on my other desk. I come onto Macrumors to do a search on HALO looking for REVIEWS OF THE OVERALL GAME basically and I stumble onto this thread talking about how crappy the UB version is.

I'm on a 20" iMac 2.0GHz (1st gen Core Duo) with 1.5MB of RAM. I've got the X1600 video card (128 MB VRAM).

I'm seriously thinking about not opening this game and returning it. Is it still running as poorly as all of what I've read above or have patches come out since August making this now a better port. Please let me know.

I've asked this in another thread but since I've got your attention, I also play (and enjoy WoW). I'll take any game recs you may have-- with the caveat that it should run well on my machine. Much thanks!

if you have broadband, keep it for online play. i love going online and sniping some modders ass.

eXan
Dec 10, 2006, 11:31 PM
Bringing this thread back from the dead. I've been bored lately and decided to go out and get a game (not a big gamer-- but I do enjoy it from time to time). So I go to the apple store and see HALO (I've obviously heard of the game) and then see the UB descriptor on it and think, "Great I'll give this a try."

So... it's now sitting unopened still in the bag on my other desk. I come onto Macrumors to do a search on HALO looking for REVIEWS OF THE OVERALL GAME basically and I stumble onto this thread talking about how crappy the UB version is.

I'm on a 20" iMac 2.0GHz (1st gen Core Duo) with 1.5MB of RAM. I've got the X1600 video card (128 MB VRAM).

I'm seriously thinking about not opening this game and returning it. Is it still running as poorly as all of what I've read above or have patches come out since August making this now a better port. Please let me know.

I've asked this in another thread but since I've got your attention, I also play (and enjoy WoW). I'll take any game recs you may have-- with the caveat that it should run well on my machine. Much thanks!

You were right not to open Halo. This game s@cks IMO, the gameplay is boring, the enemy models and textures are cartoony and lame. The graphics is awful, but it still manages to run horrible even on today's computers (the game is over 5 years old).

I suggest that you get Unreal Tournament 2004 instead. Its loads of fun, has great gameplay, awesome multiplayer, smart bots, beautiful graphics, runы exceptionally well and has TONS of great content: both preinstalled and custom. I Love this Game! :)

DrStrangelove
Dec 10, 2006, 11:52 PM
if you have broadband, keep it for online play. i love going online and sniping some modders ass.

Well, online play is DEFINITELY something I enjoy, but I'd like to be able to play in "solo" (?) mode if possible as well.

What other games do you recommend that run well on intel Macs?

DrStrangelove
Dec 10, 2006, 11:53 PM
You were right not to open Halo. This game s@cks IMO, the gameplay is boring, the enemy models and textures are cartoony and lame. The graphics is awful, but it still manages to run horrible even on today's computers (the game is over 5 years old).

I suggest that you get Unreal Tournament 2004 instead. Its loads of fun, has great gameplay, awesome multiplayer, smart bots, beautiful graphics, run? exceptionally well and has TONS of great content: both preinstalled and custom. I Love this Game! :)

Thanks-- I'm going to check out their website and see what it's about. I'm glad that I didn't open it either. And I never mind a reason to have to go BACK to the Apple store so long as more purchases are involved. ;)

LimeiBook86
Dec 11, 2006, 12:22 AM
Thanks-- I'm going to check out their website and see what it's about. I'm glad that I didn't open it either. And I never mind a reason to have to go BACK to the Apple store so long as more purchases are involved. ;)

Halo is fun - it runs well on my Intel iMac but, Unreal Tournament 2004 is a better buy in my opinion. UT2004 has a lot of cool mods, extras, and add-ons out there, plus it's a whole lot of fun to play online. Halo is nice but, the only reason I paid to upgrade my version of Halo to a Universal Binary was so I can actually play it since I've owned it for the Mac for a while without having a fast enough machine for it.

Unreal Tournament 2004 is a lot of fun, I think you'll enjoy it. Also it runs great on my Intel iMac, it should run great on yours too. Happy fraging :) :D

I just wish the game were as cheap as it is for the PC, I saw it in the EB games the other day for $9.99 new - the Editors DVD version no less. :rolleyes: If Mac games were less expensive I know a few people who'd buy some new games, but that's a whole other story :p

Mackilroy
Dec 11, 2006, 08:06 AM
Funnily enough *I* have no issues running Halo… and please don't just take his word for it – it's a fun game. I've played countless hours of both Halo and Halo 2 simply because they're fun – not for ub3rl33t grfx, or anything else like that.

UT2004 is still a very cool game, but please do give Halo a chance as well. :)

Haoshiro
Dec 11, 2006, 09:05 AM
Bringing this thread back from the dead. I've been bored lately and decided to go out and get a game (not a big gamer-- but I do enjoy it from time to time). So I go to the apple store and see HALO (I've obviously heard of the game) and then see the UB descriptor on it and think, "Great I'll give this a try."

So... it's now sitting unopened still in the bag on my other desk. I come onto Macrumors to do a search on HALO looking for REVIEWS OF THE OVERALL GAME basically and I stumble onto this thread talking about how crappy the UB version is.

I'm on a 20" iMac 2.0GHz (1st gen Core Duo) with 1.5MB of RAM. I've got the X1600 video card (128 MB VRAM).

I'm seriously thinking about not opening this game and returning it. Is it still running as poorly as all of what I've read above or have patches come out since August making this now a better port. Please let me know.

I've asked this in another thread but since I've got your attention, I also play (and enjoy WoW). I'll take any game recs you may have-- with the caveat that it should run well on my machine. Much thanks!

I have a similar iMac (though some better specs) and I thought even the PPC version of the game was playable. I don't yet have the UB version, but if it's even a small amount better then the PPC version it should be just fine.

Remember, Halo has always ran at 30fps, even the original Xbox version. Getting framerates like that aren't bad, they're perfect. Sure I might like playing at 45-60fps, but 30fps is still playing the game as the developers intended.

harveypooka
Dec 11, 2006, 10:17 AM
Bringing this thread back from the dead. I've been bored lately and decided to go out and get a game (not a big gamer-- but I do enjoy it from time to time). So I go to the apple store and see HALO (I've obviously heard of the game) and then see the UB descriptor on it and think, "Great I'll give this a try."

So... it's now sitting unopened still in the bag on my other desk. I come onto Macrumors to do a search on HALO looking for REVIEWS OF THE OVERALL GAME basically and I stumble onto this thread talking about how crappy the UB version is.

I'm on a 20" iMac 2.0GHz (1st gen Core Duo) with 1.5MB of RAM. I've got the X1600 video card (128 MB VRAM).

I'm seriously thinking about not opening this game and returning it. Is it still running as poorly as all of what I've read above or have patches come out since August making this now a better port. Please let me know.

I've asked this in another thread but since I've got your attention, I also play (and enjoy WoW). I'll take any game recs you may have-- with the caveat that it should run well on my machine. Much thanks!

Play it for yourself and see. Graphics are ok mate, not bad. It isn't any Marathon unfortunately.

DrStrangelove
Dec 11, 2006, 11:48 AM
Question: when you play HALO on the Mac and you want to play "online" (I guess) are you stuck playing other people with Macs or can you also play against/with people on xbox 360?

applekid
Dec 11, 2006, 12:33 PM
Question: when you play HALO on the Mac and you want to play "online" (I guess) are you stuck playing other people with Macs or can you also play against/with people on xbox 360?

You're playing PCs and Macs.

DrStrangelove
Dec 11, 2006, 08:17 PM
Well... I returned Halo and picked up Unreal Tournament 04. I'll post how I like it later. Hope to have it loaded and playing tomorrow.

eXan
Dec 11, 2006, 08:24 PM
Well... I returned Halo and picked up Unreal Tournament 04. I'll post how I like it later. Hope to have it loaded and playing tomorrow.

Just be sure to download the latest patch (Mega Pack), if the game didnt come with it out of the box :)

How much did you play for it?

DrStrangelove
Dec 11, 2006, 10:06 PM
Just be sure to download the latest patch (Mega Pack), if the game didnt come with it out of the box :)

How much did you play for it?

$39.95 in the Apple store. Also, it's marked "Universal."

eXan
Dec 11, 2006, 10:15 PM
$39.95 in the Apple store. Also, it's marked "Universal."

So, you already have the latest and greatest 3369 patch + ECE bonus pack + Mega Pack's new maps :)

I was thinking about ordering a legal copy of UT for myself, but that wont happen untill summer 2007. I want to play online! :(

DrStrangelove
Dec 11, 2006, 10:49 PM
So, you already have the latest and greatest 3369 patch + ECE bonus pack + Mega Pack's new maps :)

I was thinking about ordering a legal copy of UT for myself, but that wont happen untill summer 2007. I want to play online! :(

Oh, cool for me then. I'm half-tempted to load it tonight but I know that'll result in my staying up till 4AM.

Does this game go out and retrieve patches on its own like WoW or do you have to visit a site and download them as they're available?

LimeiBook86
Dec 11, 2006, 10:51 PM
Does this game go out and retrieve patches on its own like WoW or do you have to visit a site and download them as they're available?

You have to download the patches manually but, usually they're pretty painless to install :)

eXan
Dec 11, 2006, 10:56 PM
You have to download the patches manually but, usually they're pretty painless to install :)

Yes, but now they weight 200 MB :eek:

LimeiBook86
Dec 11, 2006, 10:59 PM
Yes, but now they weight 200 MB :eek:

Those are the extras, they aren't needed although they include extras that new servers would probably have. The patches are much smaller and let you play online with everyone else although you may still have to download additional maps and such, so it's best to download the big update and get it over with. :)

ericsthename
Dec 12, 2006, 12:01 AM
and check out the little guide to making it (UT2004) look better I wrote in the forums a couple days ago...

I'd post a link if I knew how, haha

I'll try to find out

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=259560

PS I love that facing worlds level in CTF, it was sweet even in UT the original

eXan
Dec 12, 2006, 03:57 AM
Those are the extras, they aren't needed although they include extras that new servers would probably have. The patches are much smaller and let you play online with everyone else although you may still have to download additional maps and such, so it's best to download the big update and get it over with. :)

Unfortunately, Mac patches and add-ons are distributed as single files. So Each patch since ECE was released was about 86 MB, and now with Mega Pack included - 200 MB.

The Windows version's patches are either standalone (about 12MBs) or the above mentioned Mega Pack (200 MB)

I'd also like not to download the entire Mega Pack with each update, but now with my unlimited DSL it has become a little bit easier (speed is limited to 64k though :()