Jump to content


Halo Universal Binary Available


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
46 replies to this topic

#21 XxtraLarGe

XxtraLarGe

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2324 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 16 August 2006 - 01:58 PM

Let me be the first to say I'd gladly pay $5 for a Universal patch for Deus Ex!

#22 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:09 PM

View PostXxtraLarGe, on August 17th 2006, 05:58 AM, said:

Let me be the first to say I'd gladly pay $5 for a Universal patch for Deus Ex!
Right on. Also UT '99. And NOLF 2. And Giants.

View Postthe Battle Cat, on August 17th 2006, 05:39 AM, said:

Is version 2.0 network compatible with 1.5.2?
From the announcement:

Quote

Halo owners who have not upgraded to an Intel-based Mac do not need to upgrade their version of Halo. They will still be able to play network games against owners of the Universal version.


#23 gbafan

gbafan

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 395 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:11 PM

Not sure I like this idea of charging for patches and/or UB updates.  This is the first time that I can recall that a patch has been charged for for any PC/Mac game.  Is this is the new standard?  Will older, modern game titles now follow suit?  

Why isn't Macsoft actually working on developing new games or expansion packs for revenue? AoE 3 is the first game they've announced in quite a while.  Yet games like Zoo Tycoon 2 could use an expansion pack or two.  Railroad Tycoon 3 could use a patch, perhaps I'll have to pay for that as well.

I can understand where Tamte is coming from in a business perspective yet I think it's bad for the consumer as we now have a precedent set for charging for patches.
Advocate for consumer friendly DRM.

#24 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:18 PM

View PostTuncer (IMG), on August 16th 2006, 11:41 AM, said:

Burn the Halo UB image and keep it in your drive to run the game.

You've got to be kidding me. How do they think that copy protection is supposed to work?

Hopefully it's at least Halo CE. I know people who'd pay $5 for that, but they don't have Intel Macs yet.

#25 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:21 PM

I don't think the $5 thing will be a trend: the days of porting games from PPC to UB are a relatively brief window.


View Postthe Battle Cat, on August 16th 2006, 03:39 PM, said:

the bug where the Grunts are so cute you hate to smash their brains out while they are sleeping.

Run A-way!

Actually, I'm not a violent person, but I find the grunts so cute that I WANT to smash their brains out. They have always seemed irritatingly out of place in a serious game, to me. And I tolerated the Ewoks!

#26 gbafan

gbafan

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 395 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:28 PM

View Postnagromme, on August 16th 2006, 01:21 PM, said:

I don't think the $5 thing will be a trend: the days of porting games from PPC to UB are a relatively brief window.
Ah, but remember Classic to Mac OS X?  Lots of games didn't even make the transation which took a very long time, yet I never once had to pay for a Classic -> Mac OS X patch.
Advocate for consumer friendly DRM.

#27 Endymion

Endymion

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1693 posts
  • Steam Name:Aleksael
  • Steam ID:Aleksael
  • Location:Miami, FL
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:58 PM

View Postgbafan, on August 16th 2006, 04:11 PM, said:

I can understand where Tamte is coming from in a business perspective yet I think it's bad for the consumer as we now have a precedent set for charging for patches.

Perhaps you are right and we should set precedent for discontinuing support for PowerPC instead.

#28 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 16 August 2006 - 02:58 PM

It is not a "patch".

It is a full fledged Point Release Upgrade. Every company charges for a large point release upgrade. Apple charged for a sub-point upgrade (10.3 to 10.4 anyone?!). Adobe charges for ANY upgrade... even when they fixed bugs! (those bastards hahah).

Like Nagro said, the UB transition window is a small one.

Macsoft could have easily said "naw... screw it" and not made a UB for Halo. Just be glad they did, and are not selling the whole game as a full purchase boxed version.

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#29 gbafan

gbafan

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 395 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 03:06 PM

View PostFrigidman, on August 16th 2006, 01:58 PM, said:

It is not a "patch".

It is a full fledged Point Release Upgrade. Every company charges for a large point release upgrade. Apple charged for a sub-point upgrade (10.3 to 10.4 anyone?!). Adobe charges for ANY upgrade... even when they fixed bugs! (those bastards hahah).

Like Nagro said, the UB transition window is a small one.

Macsoft could have easily said "naw... screw it" and not made a UB for Halo. Just be glad they did, and are not selling the whole game as a full purchase boxed version.
For all intents and purposes, it is a patch.  It makes the same game that is currently playable natively on PPC now natively capable of playing on Intel.  According to Macsoft, the only change is that Halo is now native Intel and PPC consumers do not need to upgrade.  However, according to patch notes this isn't the case.  This is probably why the game was "re-released" as a CD download.

Macsoft could have easily said screw it.  Many companies have.  Others haven't.  And some, in cases like the Classic to OS X transation, decided to port their game to OS X in their own free time without charge.  Thank you Ryan Gordon, as one example.

If charging for "point release upgrades", which is hardly the case here and you know it, is the direction that Macsoft is going to take in the future then perhaps I won't buy anymore of their titles.
Advocate for consumer friendly DRM.

#30 a2daj

a2daj

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3400 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 16 August 2006 - 03:13 PM

For those who care, Halo's all in a nice bundled app.  Now to find out where the benchmark results go.  Stupid day job...
Dual 2.5 GHz G5-RADEON X800 -4 GB RAM-Revo 7.1
MBP 2.0GHz -Mobility RADEON X1600-2 GB RAM

#31 Batcat

Batcat

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2907 posts
  • Location:In Flux

Posted 16 August 2006 - 03:47 PM

View Postthe Battle Cat, on August 16th 2006, 02:39 PM, said:

Too bad they can't fix the bug where the MCs feet are always knee deep in Mississippi mud
You'll have to wait for Halo 2.

Quote

...and the bug where he can survive reentry from orbit without a landing craft but a 25ft fall off a ledge kills him
He departs the Pillar of Autumn in an escape pod, not by jumping, and in The Fall of Reach you'd like made into a movie, Spartans do indeed have terminal velocity limits, as in the diving Pelican early on. Falling damage is eliminated in H2 to a point, but the 'death by falling too far' limit is still there, perhaps to limit stunting and exploration. Take it up with Jason, maybe he'll fix it for 3. :)

Quote

and the bug where the Grunts are so cute you hate to smash their brains out while they are sleeping.
What- take away my Grunties' cuteness, humor and pathos? ARE YOU NUTS? :blink:

Anyway, you know you love 'em.

...or am I cramping your comedic style? :)


View Posta2daj, on August 16th 2006, 04:13 PM, said:

For those who care, Halo's all in a nice bundled app.  Now to find out where the benchmark results go.  Stupid day job...
Get Barefeats on this, stat!

#32 Amon CMB

Amon CMB

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:05 PM

Is there any reason for PPC owners to get this?

#33 Batcat

Batcat

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2907 posts
  • Location:In Flux

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:10 PM

View PostAmon CMB, on August 16th 2006, 05:05 PM, said:

Is there any reason for PPC owners to get this?
The graphics improvements and all the other fixes in post 16. The former alone are worth more than the asking price.

#34 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:17 PM

View PostBatcat, on August 16th 2006, 03:10 PM, said:

The graphics improvements and all the other fixes in post 16. The former alone are worth more than the asking price.

The patch notes don't say much about improvements, and I really doubt they're anywhere near worthwhile. I know I wouldn't spend $5 for a patch that adds features that were in the PC version the whole time. Even if it genuinely adds something, I'd bet the fans would have done that better and cheaper if the port had been more deserving.

#35 Maestro

Maestro

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Steam Name:kgmoome
  • Location:Boston

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:24 PM

View Postgbafan, on August 16th 2006, 04:06 PM, said:

For all intents and purposes, it is a patch.

You must not know what it takes to program a game.

Do you honestly think MacSoft is gouging us?

Quote

it makes the same game that is currently playable natively on PPC now natively capable of playing on Intel.

If that's your qulifacation of a "patch" then the PPC version of halo is a "patch" since it was "natively" playable on the XBox.

You know what?! All Aspyr does is sell PATCHES?!?!!!! Their ripping us off!

Quote

If charging for "point release upgrades", which is hardly the case here and you know it, is the direction that Macsoft is going to take in the future then perhaps I won't buy anymore of their titles.

Perhaps, you should never post stupid stuff again.
Tortillas are sleeping bags for ground beef.

#36 tthiel

tthiel

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:40 PM

I will gladly pay the measly $5 for the Ub version of Halo.  Now if Aspyr would just do the same for COD and UO.  They are still more fun to play online than COD 2

#37 calroth

calroth

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 123 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Australia

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:53 PM

Saw the news, five minutes later, had dug the serial key up and was downloading.

Five bucks is a small amount to pay for this. MacSoft has, in my opinion, gone way beyond what they could have done for us (i.e. nothing). I just hope they fixed the Mac bug where you can't see chat during the Postgame Carnage Report ;)

(For those who oppose the price on anything other than ideological grounds: put it this way, you just shelled out big money for a new Intel Mac gaming rig. What's five dollars more? Repeat: does not apply to ideologues.)

#38 Bachus

Bachus

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 05:12 PM

When did MacSoft change their name to "Adobe"?

Charging for a patch is unacceptable.

#39 NeoWolf

NeoWolf

    Heroic

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 05:20 PM

View PostThain Esh Kelch, on August 16th 2006, 12:40 PM, said:

If im not mistaken, thats quite a big change, right? How is that gonna affect performance (in theory)?

In theory that should improve things on dual processor/core systems. Probably why they took the time to do it considering almost every Intel Mac system is dual core and really shines when apps take advantage of that. Honestly while I'm irked that they're charging for what is at it's heart an update. Considering the work they've put into it both by luxury (that) and necesity (switching to XCode and GCC), I can really understand it. Switching development environments is no faint task, especially when you're talking about a massive project like this.

#40 tthiel

tthiel

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az

Posted 16 August 2006 - 05:30 PM

Why is it "unacceptable"?  This is an old game, it takes a fair amount of work to do this, and I seriously doubt MacSoft is doing much more than covering their costs.  How anyone considers this a "patch" is beyond me.
Plus its only $5.  Big deal.  No one is forcing me to do it and PPC Halo runs fine on my iMac so I don't need to upgrade unless I want to.   If $5 matters that much to you than you should probably be using one of these
www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/basdt_b110?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19

View PostBachus, on August 16th 2006, 04:12 PM, said:

When did MacSoft change their name to "Adobe"?

Charging for a patch is unacceptable.