PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: datamage on September 13, 2001, 04:08:16 PM
-
the single-player game runs at or close to 30 frames per second.
@ or close to.. Meaning it still chokes from time to time. So much for the promised 60fps. Yup, I\'m sure in the 2 mere months (really less) they have left they\'re gonna double the framerate. Unstable framerates here we come.
Source. (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/previews/0,10869,2812299,00.html)
/ dm /
I\'m still getting the box, just not @ launch.
-
Originally posted by datamage
I\'m still getting the box, just not @ launch.
I hear ya! I\'m gonna get the Xbox a year after it\'s released.... I got a bad feeling about it......
And I think I\'m going to buy a $200 GameCube instead! But then again....... I got a bad feeling about that system also.... None are looking all too great.
As for this news..... Kinda sux.... and kinda is good news..... Since I\'m starting to dislike the Xbox games again..... I\'m slowly realizing that graphics isn\'t everything.
-
FPS are not meant to be played on consoles anyway. I never was too excited about it.
-
Originally posted by Watchdog
FPS are not meant to be played on consoles anyway. I never was too excited about it.
The control setup for HALO is still pretty spiffy, and it feels great. Read the impressions from those who\'ve played HALO at E3... And the impressions from the guy who wrote this article! He was pretty positive about it. :)
And as for the framerates, they still do point out that there are some optimizations left to the game engine. Bungie has promised that it\'ll be locked at 60fps, and I believe \'em.
-
Bungie has promised that it\'ll be locked at 60fps, and I believe \'em.
I would like to believe. But what can I say? I\'m a skeptic, and a realist. I doubt the framerate will just double in the short-time they have to finish the game. The X-box launch is less than 2 months away.
/ dm /
-
I gotta agree with datamage, if the frame rate is like that in the single player mode, ugh I don\'t even wanna think of the multiplayer..
-
I\'d be happy with this actually:
"One of the most impressive scenes of this first level (and there are many) is where you enter the ship\'s mess hall and you encounter about twelve to fifteen marines fighting off an equal number of Covenant Drones and Elite in an epic firefight. Throughout all of this the framerate is rock solid at 30fps without any drop even with thirty characters on the screen in a crowded room such as a mess hall."
"Running at the same super smooth frame rate with no detail loss as the single player mode, playing co-op in the same mission is fantastic. You really get a sense of team tactics when playing together that follows into the multiplayer four-player mode. "
"Just take a minute to appreciate this. Halo is game loaded with critters, graphics and intricate gameplay elements, yet there is no significant load time to suffer through, ever. I can definitely appreciate this leap in game development. "
Source: IGN
For the first time I\'m excited about playing and potentially owning a xbox.
-
HALO = The definition of spiffiness. :D
Just another FPS my ass! :p
-
What are you going on about, halo developers just said in there up dates on teamxbox a few weeks ago, that the game is locked on a 60 fps!!!:D
You dont know what version they showed these guys, this one could have been a version before it was locked on at 60fps,and if this game doesnt run at 60fps the i will be disappointed, but why would the developer say it was at 60fps ,if it wasn\'t. I mean it\'s not as if it is going to fool you,in to think it is 60fps,it is going to be easy to see that it isnt.
-
Well,
The sad thing is most people won\'t care whether it\'ll be 30 or 60. I don\'t care because I\'m not getting Halo regardless. I just hope it\'s 60 so Bungie stays true to their word. I guess we\'ll find out soon enough.
/ dm /
-
It\'s funny that some ppl are focusing on Halo\'s framerate, when some of the reviews about the game are actually praising it and saying that this game is actually going to deliver as being one of the tops in it\'s genre. Some going so far as to say the gameplay is great and the graphics are superb, which sounds refreshing b/c nowadays those two qualities don\'t seem to go hand in hand very often. It has even been touted as actually raising the bar for next-gen console FPS.
I guess after all, it ain\'t about the gameplay or even the graphics, but it\'s all about the framerate......sheesh.
-
I guess after all, it ain\'t about the gameplay or even the graphics, but it\'s all about the framerate......sheesh.
*sarcasm detector explodes*
-
Originally posted by kimathi
It\'s funny that some ppl are focusing on Halo\'s framerate, when some of the reviews about the game are actually praising it and saying that this game is actually going to deliver as being one of the tops in it\'s genre. Some going so far as to say the gameplay is great and the graphics are superb, which sounds refreshing b/c nowadays those two qualities don\'t seem to go hand in hand very often. It has even been touted as actually raising the bar for next-gen console FPS.
I guess after all, it ain\'t about the gameplay or even the graphics, but it\'s all about the framerate......sheesh.
Thank you for bringing that up. IGN posted some really positive things about HALO\'s gameplay and graphics... And all people can talk about is the framerate. Its annoying. The IGN folks are going crazy over this.
Oh well, screw \'em and there framerate debates... I\'m more excited about HALO now than I ever was. :)
-
I agree. I played UT (the best FPS ever IMO) at a constant 35-40. When I upgraded and got 75fps, I really couldn\'t tell the difference most of the time because of the pace and action associated with these types of games.
Framerate only becomes a problem if it dips well below 30. It doesn\'t seem like this game will even dip below 30 in 4-PSS. I\'m basing this on the fact that there are 30 characters fighting in an ornate room, with 2-way split screen.
But really, as has been said, 30, 60--who cares. The game sounds awesome, and that is the important thing.
-
I don\'t care what Halo\'s framerate turns out to be, because I play enough FPS on my PC. This was just to point out that;
- The \'not running on final hardware\' statements didn\'t mean sh!t.
- Bungie lied with their promised 60fps.
- The X-Box isn\'t the all-mighty graphics processing beast that it\'s supposed to be.
- Games\' framerates don\'t double from the beginning of development to the end.
So yes, from the supposed mighty xbox, I expect nothing less than a constant 60fps. Sue me, flame me, do what you wish. I more than welcome it. :)
/ dm /
-
just remember that its the consoles first launch titles...remember how horrible the ps2 lauch titles were?
remember how jaggy ridge racer was?
ofcourse, it shouldnt have to be this way, but its a trend for launch titles to be less than expected...
which is why im getting an xbox sometime NEXT year, when the software is better...same as i did with the DC, and the PS2.
-
I think you are being too sensational. Really, you seem to be going out of your way to stir up sh!t. I\'m not a very big xbox backer so I\'m probably not the best person to defend it, but I\'ll give it a try.
"The \'not running on final hardware\' statements didn\'t mean sh!t."
Why can\'t it mean what is says. It\'s not running on final hardware. The early demos dipped below 10fps. Final hardware it\'s up to 30--that seems significant to me and worthwhile for a developer to point out in their own defence.
"Bungie lied with their promised 60fps."
In a matter of speaking I guess they lied. You\'ve never set expectations high only to come up short? They didn\'t fulfil their goals. Unforseen complications, shortened development cycle etc could account for this also. To say they lied implies that the team PURPOSELY mislead the public, and I don\'t believe this is necessarily the case. It might be, but this accusation seems unfair.
"The X-Box isn\'t the all-mighty graphics processing beast that it\'s supposed to be."
It\'s more powerful than anything on the market. It\'s the first generation. There are no bottle necks with the system that anyone can see. It IS the all-mighty graphics processing beast. Anyone who has played near final software have been blown away. I can\'t remember anyone being blown away by ps2\'s launch titles (unfortunately).
"Games\' framerates don\'t double from the beginning of development to the end."
I don\'t know the answer to this. I\'ve never developed a game. I have no idea how this optimization works or how long it takes or what\'s involved. Do you? I doubt it, but perhaps you do. Either way, if history is any indication, near final betas don\'t double framerate so it would be foolish to expect Halo to.
I really don\'t care beyond the hope that xbox succeeds only enough so that Sony pulls its socks up for the next round. But this kind of stuff is inflamatory, and I can\'t resist responding to it.
I guess this post bothered me because the review was so overwhelmingly positive that for you to jump on the one thing that was slightly negative paints you as a bit biased. This is not to say that you can\'t express dissappointment or negative reviews, but to focus so keenly (and unfairly) on one small aspect seems to me that you are reaching a bit too far and a bit too much.
-
Over at the TeamXbox forums they think it is impressive to have 30 fps. But Waverace has 30 fps and the rate sucks. :rolleyes:
http://forums.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24909
-
Uh - oh fanboy alert
anyway, stop moaning about framerates, Red faction runs at 30fps and no one minds. Halo has a 30fps rate when there are about 20 - 40 marines and aliens battleing at the same time together with 2 planes flying around! Impressive If you ask me
-
Originally posted by Metal_Gear_Ray
anyway, stop moaning about framerates, Red faction runs at 30fps and no one minds. Halo has a 30fps rate when there are about 20 - 40 marines and aliens battleing at the same time together with 2 planes flying around! Impressive If you ask me
Thank you.
It may not be 60fps like we all wanted/expected, but 30fps is still quite a feat if you think about all the things that\'re going on in HALO.
Anyways, it could be possible for them to get the game up to a steady 60fps before launch. If not, I\'ll know why.
-
Watchdog,
Don\'t have time to reply to each quote as I have to head off to work. Just the mere reason that people are satisfied with games running @ 30fps is the reason why some developers don\'t strive to get to 60. I\'m not going to get into a framerate war, but if you can notice the difference between 30 and 60, especially when the camera pans around, you\'d understand why 60 should be the norm. It\'s much more fluid and lifelike.
The X-box has no bottlenecks? If that were true, they wouldn\'t have a problem tossing aroung the polygons in Halo and keeping the framerate @ 60.
I agree that the X-box looks to be the most capable in the graphics area, but to me framerate is just as important. Yes, I\'m a framerate whore. After playing all of SEGA\'s beautiful AM2/3 games in the arcade, plus some of Namco\'s, I was spoiled and always wanted the consoles @ home to run @ that magical
60fps.
Uh - oh fanboy alert
anyway, stop moaning about framerates, Red faction runs at 30fps and no one minds. Halo has a 30fps rate when there are about 20 - 40 marines and aliens battleing at the same time together with 2 planes flying around! Impressive If you ask me
Fanboy of which system hmm? I\'m a happy owner of the DC/PS2, and will be getting the GC @ launch and the X-box in Feb. So which console exactly was I advocating? I do mind that Red Faction was @ 30fps, and I\'m sure others here do. It\'s a shame not many people see the difference in framerates anyway.
/ dm /
-
Originally posted by datamage
It\'s a shame not many people see the difference in framerates anyway.
/ dm /
thats the problem...lots of people dont know the difference between 30 and 60 frames...and theyll make dumb comments like "the human eye cannot see past 30 frames"...its so ignorant..
when a game runs at 60 frames, moving around on a 3d world is sooo much smoother and real...specially when you pan around the screen...notice when you watch a movie on your vcr or dvd and the camera pans around, notice how the screen gets blurry and it jitters really fast...that doesnt happen with 60 frames...
has anyone seen the cartoon \'rolie polie and olie\' ?
that toon is running at 60 frames which is why it looks totally different than every other cartoon they play on tv...
i also think that if people wouldnt be satisfied with 30 frames, developers would work harder to get 60 fps...
-
Well so much for 60fps. Why does xbox have such a hard time getting constant framerate!?!?!?:laughing: :laughing:
-
Originally posted by raslant
Well so much for 60fps. Why does xbox have such a hard time getting constant framerate!?!?!?:laughing: :laughing:
I dunno..
Im no techie.. But to me it seems like a bandwidth problem.
-
Yes you can tell the difference, but I think there are other things that contribute to that. If it goes from 60-45-30-64-35 then you can definately tell and it definately hurts teh experience even thought the FR never dipped below 30.
If a game is locked and steady at 30 with no dips or spikes, it is very difficult to distinguish. Sure if you look for it you can tell, but then I think you are being too stingy.
IF there is no slowdown, no dips in the FR, if it is truly LOCKED at 30, then there is no reason to complain as far as I\'m concerned. Afterall, I can\'t name a game that can handle that amount of detail and remain constant even the vaunted Q3 can\'t do it on my PC (geforce2, 398 ram & 1.4 amd processor).
It\'s not a bandwidth problem. It doesn\'t have a hard time getting a constant FR. It\'s constantly 30. The Halo team is having a difficult time (persumably) reaching 60FPS. There isn\'t a FPS on any console that gets 60, and you need a beast of a machine to get 60 on a PC. 60 is an artificial number, that doesn\'t really mean that much. There are dozens of things to love about this game, picking on the one small weakpoint is ridiculous. Someone please show me a perfect game.
One last thing; is anyone else dissappointed with the ps2 version of Halflife? Marginally better graphics, 10 multi-player maps, only 2 player head to head. 50-60 FPS (source ign). This is a four year old game, certainly they could have added 4 player split screen, more multi maps and graphics that are up to today\'s standards. I wish sierra would stop milking a tired game and focus on something new.
-
Originally posted by Metal_Gear_Ray
Uh - oh fanboy alert
anyway, stop moaning about framerates, Red faction runs at 30fps and no one minds. Halo has a 30fps rate when there are about 20 - 40 marines and aliens battleing at the same time together with 2 planes flying around! Impressive If you ask me
red faction does not run at just 30 fps, the developers made some huge advancement after the demo, i own the game, and it is very very smooth. i think they must hav jumped it to 30fps when everything\'s happening, but at a contant 60 during normal gameplay.
its not at 30 fps.
-
I am happy that it is locked at 30 fps, because it would have been terrible if it went from 30-60fps all the time, does anyone remember playing sega rally, **** that framrate got on my nerves.
But people do have to remember just how much is going on in the game at one time, also the graphics are ment to be lovely, so i carnt wait to play this game.
-
Originally posted by Watchdog
If a game is locked and steady at 30 with no dips or spikes, it is very difficult to distinguish. Sure if you look for it you can tell, but then I think you are being too stingy.
by that statement alone, you obviously cannot distinguish the difference between 30 and 60 fps which is why you would be content with 30 fps.
-
No you are so superior to any normal person, only you have this ability. Give me a break.
I run many games on my PC at 60. Up until last year I was running those same games at 25-35. I know the difference. It\'s not as distinct as you are making it out to be. Sure it\'s nice, but it is not as critical as you are making it out to be.
You obviously have a bias against xbox else you wouldn\'t be so ridiculously against halo and 30fps.
Again, how do you even play a console FPS--there isn\'t one that I know of that even runs at a steady 30 (I\'ve never played one that has no slowdown or stuttering). I say get off your pulpit and and give this famboyism a rest.
I\'ve never understood this thing about console loyalty. I\'m a fan of good games, and by all accounts Halo is a great game. That is enough for me.
-
IF there is no slowdown, no dips in the FR, if it is truly LOCKED at 30, then there is no reason to complain as far as I\'m concerned. Afterall, I can\'t name a game that can handle that amount of detail and remain constant even the vaunted Q3 can\'t do it on my PC (geforce2, 398 ram & 1.4 amd processor).
Instead of a game being locked @ 30 as you\'d like it to be, why not locked @ 60? This is my problem with today. If we supposedly have these powerful consoles, they should be able to handle the polygons thrown around @ a contant and locked in 60fps. It\'s not my beef with the X-box, it\'s my beef with any developer/game. I just chose the X-box because people were sure Halo would run @ 60fps when it reached the end of development. While it can still happen, I am doubtful.
It\'s a matter of opinion of course, but to me as I stated before, framerate is important, and with today\'s technology I expected every single game to be running @ 60fps. Yes, it does matter to me, whether it be a FPS or a silly puzzle game, I just like the fluidness the higher framerate provides.
Now if the framerate is going to be 60 and it dips frequently, of course I\'d prefer a steady 30, but I would always want a steady 60fps instead. 30fps didn\'t stop me from enjoying JetGrind, Shenmue, Ecco, etc.. but IMO, the experience would have been better with the higher framerate. Anyhow, I don\'t see why the PC setup you have would have a problem running Q3A @ a steady 60fps+ .. I have a 1.0ghz Tbird, w/a GeForce 2 (GTS) and 256mb of ram, and Q3A runs over 60fps 99% of the time. (in 1024x762x32) What kind of settings are you using? Drivers/etc.
On another note, I am disappointed with HL being released on the PS2 3 years later, but I suppose there are many people out there that never got to enjoy the excellence of HL.
/ dm /
-
Originally posted by Watchdog
I say get off your pulpit and and give this famboyism a rest.
I\'ve never understood this thing about console loyalty. I\'m a fan of good games, and by all accounts Halo is a great game. That is enough for me.
dude, get off your \'fanboyism\' crap...i nor datamage is a fanboy of any freaking console...i own a dreamcast, ps2 and will get an xbox this february when jet set radio comes out...and i might also get a game cube now that RE is coming out for it and looking so awesome....
no where on my statement do i defend any other console nor do i bash the xbox so shaddap!
if you know the difference between 30 and 60, then why are you so content with 30 when nowadays, with all these powerful systems, all games should be running at 60?
now honestly, i do not want to play FPS on a console...thats why i have a PC where i can use my mouse and keyboard and run it at a HIGHER resolution....but if FPS will be out on consoles, then they should atleast be at 60 so that they could atleast give the PC\'s a good challenge.
-
My only point is that 60 fps is not going to make or break a game.
I\'m not criticizing an entire game because of framerate. I\'m not defending the xbox or any other console for that matter, I\'m speaking out against the number of people who bash a game or console because of a minor framerate issue. Yes it is minor if in fact it is at a steady 30. If it spikes and plunges then that is a major issue and is intolerable and I\'ll be the first to voice dissatisfaction.
Yes locked in at 60 is ideal, and possibly, in the future, we\'ll get games like that, but it\'s never been a possibility before and it doesn\'t seem to be now. Whether this is a hardware or human problem is difficult to know, but during the lifespan of the xbox we\'ll probably find out.
My point is that from the description of the game, it far out-performs any game I\'ve ever played on a console and possibly PC. That includes any game I\'ve either purchased or rented for the ps2. There is something to be said for that. There are many (positive) things to be said about this game (by all accounts) that picking on it for this is unfair.
Under usual circumstances, Q3 runs at 60 or better on my machine. But put 30 characters on screen at a time in an intense firefight and then check you framerate. It dips noticeably. Let\'s not forget this is an ID engine too. Let\'s not forget this is a $2000 machine.
-
yeah well i saw halo die in my mind when it was announced that it wouldnt be online. all hopes for the game died really quickly. cuz that wouldve been the best part of it.
-
Originally posted by Falcon4
yeah well i saw halo die in my mind when it was announced that it wouldnt be online. all hopes for the game died really quickly. cuz that wouldve been the best part of it.
The game could still be shipped \'net ready. Because the information has already been sent out... They could be low key about it.
If they dont ship it \'net ready... They could do like Itagaki\'s doing with DOA3. Give gamers a patch(Yes, I know what was said before about patches and mods on the Xbox months ago when nobody believed in it, but c\'mon... If it means getting HALO online, I\'m all for it. :D) when the Xbox is ready for internet gaming, and you\'ll have the best version of HALO everz. :)
-
they made an official statement abou ti tnot being able to be online because microsoft didnt have the information ready for internet access when they made the game. they said it would be able to be playable via LAN, but other than that, no internet.
-
Xbox Online Network UP AND RUNNING! (http://194.47.16.181/forums/showthread.php?threadid=13665) :)
Like I said before, the information has been sent to developers, now its up to them to put it in. This information was sent out a couple of weeks ago, and Bungie has yet to comment... Its really up in the air, but the game could ship \'net ready.
And they could use a patch like Itagaki San\'s doing with DOA3... Bungie can do it. If they choose not to, they\'ll be pissing off a lot of HALO fans who wanted the online experience(That includes myself). -_-;
-
Whie online is cool, the fact is the majority of players don\'t go online. So it won\'t be a priority for them I don\'t think. It\'s too bad really. They could re-release it with online fuctionality, Sega did that with some of their software.
IMO, the online issue is a huge dissappointment (I had forgotten about that detail).
-
Originally posted by Nu Gundam
Xbox Online Network UP AND RUNNING! (http://194.47.16.181/forums/showthread.php?threadid=13665) :)
Like I said before, the information has been sent to developers, now its up to them to put it in. This information was sent out a couple of weeks ago, and Bungie has yet to comment... Its really up in the air, but the game could ship \'net ready.
And they could use a patch like Itagaki San\'s doing with DOA3... Bungie can do it. If they choose not to, they\'ll be pissing off a lot of HALO fans who wanted the online experience(That includes myself). -_-;
there was somthing on ign that said that bungie didnt have the information it needed when they could have put it into the game. i dont think that they will put a patch on the game, as there arent really that many people with broadband as they expected earlier.
i dont know, its pretty much up to the developers, as you said, but i dont think that bungie will do it, but we will see.
-
yeah, but Sega did that with an add-on, this puppy is built in, and the network is up, they would be fools not to do it.
Eric Jacob
-
Hmm....this whole "Should a next-gen console run games at 30 fps or 60 fps" imo points to a larger problem that\'s going on with gamers and the relationship with this latest generation of games and consoles and why there has been so much disappointment in both.
If the launch of the DC can be considered the 1st in the begining of the newest gen and the PS1 and N64 the last gen, let\'s look at what manufactures have said or more importantly what they haven\'t said. I personaly can recall no press conference, no press scripts and no claims by any one that all next-gen games are guaranteed to run at a constant 60 fps, b/c that\'s an impossible promise to make. Sure most games could probably run at 60 if the devs were and are willing to sacrifice some of their personal vision that they have for their game but most aren\'t willing to make that sacrifice. On the contrary most have said that even with this latest hardware, they are still limited as what they would like to acheive.
So where did this idea that this latest gen of games should all run at 60 fps come from in the 1st place? This idea came from the fans themselves. Their own imaginations have made them believe that all next gen games should reach the "holy grail" of 60 fps and now some are disappointed b/c reality is never as good as what we believe it should be. It would be different if MS, Sony, Nintendo and all devs said "We catagoricaly and unequivocably guarantee that NO game will run below 60 fps, but to my knowledge this hasn\'t been the case. Because we WANT these things to be, we feel they SHOULD be but that is not the reality at this point. No, the reality is some games will run at 60 fps and some games won\'t. If it were left up to my imagination, we\'d all be playing realistic holograms like they did in the 1st Star Wars movie but we probably won\'t see that for a loong time yet.
That\'s just my two cents worth, but what do I know, I\'m just a casual gamer that takes everything about this generation with a grain of salt.
-
Originally posted by datamage
@ or close to.. Meaning it still chokes from time to time. So much for the promised 60fps. Yup, I\'m sure in the 2 mere months (really less) they have left they\'re gonna double the framerate. Unstable framerates here we come.
Source. (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/previews/0,10869,2812299,00.html)
/ dm /
I\'m still getting the box, just not @ launch.
Who cares about frames per second as long as there isnt any slowdown like a lot of first gen PS2 games and the graphics are awesome with great playablity.
I never critized PS2 games because they were at 30, only when they had slowdown and crappy graphics.
Looks like awesome fun and awesome graphics and I can\'t wait to purchase it. :)
-
"One last thing; is anyone else dissappointed with the ps2 version of Halflife? Marginally better graphics, 10 multi-player maps, only 2 player head to head. 50-60 FPS (source ign). This is a four year old game, certainly they could have added 4 player split screen, more multi maps and graphics that are up to today\'s standards. I wish sierra would stop milking a tired game and focus on something new." - Watchdog
Sierra didn\'t make Half-Life, that\'s Valve\'s doing. They are, however, responsible for strongarming Valve into making noumerous add ons and versions, usually with increasingly lacking funds and timeframes which negetively effects quality in the name of decreasing the bottom line, because they know that will sell regardless anyhow. And hey, after making a bonehead move like laying off some of the best talent you\'ve ever had with one unthinking stroke of a pen.. many of whom are founders of the company, thus alienenating all prior fans... I guess you gotta milk a winner for everything it\'s got cause you never know when, if ever, the next hit will arrive.
IMO, Sierra themselves hasn\'t made a decent game since 1999. Anything good and original to have come out of there was made either by contracted companies or subsidiarys like Dynamix (Tribes) and Valve (Half-Life). Sierra themselves, grow more known for cheap "Civilization" rip-offs and and Bass Fishing/Bull riding games every day.
Remember also, that Sierra really isn\'t in contol of their own products anymore either. They are owned and operated by Credant.. who in turn are owned and operated by Havas.
(Why, oh god, WHY couldn\'t Sega have bought Sierra/Credant instead of Havas????)
-
SonyFan,
Gearbox is the one handling the HL port to the PS2. Valve is busy working on some extra stuff for HL, and of course the highly anticipated Team Fortress 2.
Docwiz - I\'m glad you managed to reply without any kind of flaming. I appreciate your opinion, but I will still be disappointed. Let me reiterate that I\'m disappointed in any game for any system that runs @ 30fps. Not just Halo. The framerate won\'t stop me from purchasing a game that I want, but I would always want 60fps.
/ dm /
-
well i dont know, i just downloaded that really long movie of halo, and man, it is smooth. smoother than a baby\'s bottom.
i think that it wont look bad at all.