[Jupeman]

I just hooked up my 30" ACD with X800 XT yesterday. I only played briefly but I set Halo up for full screen resolution and it plays pretty nicely! I'll report back when I've had more time to evaluate!

Needless to say it looks freaking awesome.

[Turias]

Really? I tried Halo out on my 2x2.5 G5 with an Nvidia 6800 and all of the effects turned up and I was quite disappointed. It ran very poorly and everything looked unimpressive.

Now World of Warcraft, on the other hand. That game looks very nice.

[Jupeman]

I hope to play some more later today and will report back from a more full experience.

Unfortunately I do not have WoW, but I hope to play some other games to test at large resolution, too...

[ajprice]

Can you make screenshots? Would be good to see these games running at the 30" resolution

[Jupeman]

I'm not sure how to take screen shots at full res.

Halo big: Fwiw, once engaged in heavy battles (5+ opponents) the game slowed down a bit. I switched to 1900xYYYY (whatever that resolution is) and the game was fine, even in heavy combat...

[Mafia]

do u have a digital camera i wouldn't mind just seeing a picture of the game playing on the monitor.

[Jupeman]

Here's Halo @ 2560x1600 on my 30" ACD.

[Vash]

To take a real screeny, just do Command + Shift + 3. Halo is one of the few games that still works with that.

[Jupeman]

Originally posted by Vash:
To take a real screeny, just do Command + Shift + 3. Halo is one of the few games that still works with that.

Ah yes, of course if I do that it won't look at all special since to reasonably post I would just shrink the image, anyway.

[Mafia]

wow that is a sweet display. overkill at all?

[macaddict0001]

Post the full res image please.

[Jupeman]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
Post the full res image please.

Ok, you asked for it! This is a command+shift+3 of the Halo screen. I've brightened it up a bit as the native capture was kind of dark (darker than it appears when you play the game).

[Jupeman]

Originally posted by Mafia:
wow that is a sweet display. overkill at all?

I do not find it overkill at all. It is sensational for working with pictures and video. One also grows into the space very quickly. There is no going back. 30" is now the minimum!

[RonnieoftheRose]

The XBox versions looks better than that at TV resolution.

[macaddict0001]

I would recommend linking that image because this thread isn't an image orgy.
oh and if you think that the xbox version looks better than that, you obviously haven't looked at the picture hard enough.

[mdc]

all i have to say is that is a *huge* monitor, and that i am jealous.

[Luca Rescigno]

How did the image get to be 3555x2222 pixels? You must have changed the size as well.

[Vash]

Yea, that image looks like complete ****. Halo has horrible graphics anyway, idk why you all think its amazing looking. Its absolutely crap compared to Doom 3 or UT2k4

[Forte]

Its absolutely crap compared to Doom 3 or UT2k4

What do you expect from a game that is several years older than either of those, pray tell?

[OwlBoy]

Too bad the HUD ain't vecorized.

-Owl

[nforcer]

Originally posted by Vash:
Yea, that image looks like complete ****. Halo has horrible graphics anyway, idk why you all think its amazing looking. Its absolutely crap compared to Doom 3 or UT2k4

It looks pretty good for a game released at the end of 2001. The only bad parts are the ammo graphics, which unfortunately are the first thing many see with the large image posted.

As for Doom 3, many objects on the screen look decent from a distance. But up close there are a lot of terrible low-resolution textures, even when all of the settings are turned up (check out some of the soda machines). And nevermind the fact that it uses the same clich� environments that ID has been building game after game upon for the last 10 years (Hell, Space Station).

I have not had much experience with UT2k4. From what I have seen it looks good and has a lot more graphical variety than Doom 3, and possibly Halo.

Of course the real measure of a game is the gameplay. IMO, Halo has a lot of great design things that Doom 3 and UT lack.

[Stradlater]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
The XBox versions looks better than that at TV resolution.

Well they should, shouldn't they? TV resolution is MUCH smaller, HD-enabled or otherwise.

[Luca Rescigno]

Just imagine that same thing, except instead of being compressed onto your crappy little 17" or 20" or 23" monitor, you're seeing it on a freakin' 30" cinema display at full resolution. I don't think you'd be complaining.

[Cadaver]

Originally posted by Vash:
Yea, that image looks like complete ****. Halo has horrible graphics anyway, idk why you all think its amazing looking. Its absolutely crap compared to Doom 3 or UT2k4

I just installed an X800 XT into my DP2.5GHz...
At 1600x1200, everything set to highest, 4x FSAA and 16x AF, UT2004 and 2003 look freaking amazing. Smooth as silk no matter what's happening on-screen.

The only thing stopping the G5 from being a killer game machine is the relative paucity of games itself, not the hardware. Looking forward to the next release of cool games.

[Jupeman]

Sorry the image is not quite the right size, that's what it was captured at by control-shift-3.

I played Halo 2 on the XBox the other day and the graphics in it SUCK compared to Halo on my Mac. Perhaps the picture posted does not do it justice. I'm not trying to argue that Halo is better than the newer games, but I do think it looks pretty good on the big screen and it blows the TV-Halo away in graphic detail. Honestly, Halo 2 was so crappy looking I couldn't bear to play.