StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Why doesn't Half life run in 1280 * 1024, but in 640*480 - 800*600 - 1024*768?

It has 1280*960, but Ivan's monitor doesn't do that resolution.

So why?

1280x960 is a nonstandard ratio, so its no wonder your monitor can't do it. Half-Life, being 5 years old, probably can't handle the extra res and get up to 1280x1024.

bacuase it's a 6-year-old game? In CS 1.6 (which should come with a new Half-Life update, i think) you can get 1280x1024 (I think) my monitor can't do that high, so I've never really paid attention to that

1280x960 is a standard resolution. It's 4:3, unlike 1280x1024, which allows for two-page layouts but distorts geomety.

I run games at 1024*768 because my monitor supports it at 100Hz.

I could if I wanted go to 1600*1200, bit that would cut me to a lesser refresh, and more headaches.

And when I get a bigger, badder graphics card, 1024*768 will give me huge AA and Aniso capabilities.

My R8500LE can hit 1024x768 with ansio and maybe some minor AA. On the desktop I run at 1600x1200x32.

Well I can, in half life, technically apply 4xAA with little to no performance hit.

My creaky old GeForce 2 can only do 2X aniso, however a shiny new FX5900 should be winging it's way to my home soon.


I run a 1024x768 desktop, because anything greater fucks with my eyes on my 17" monitor. I like my eyes.

My eyes are already fucked up, though on 17" monitors I prefer 1152x864.

Vendetta wrote:Well I can, in half life, technically apply 4xAA with little to no performance hit.

My creaky old GeForce 2 can only do 2X aniso, however a shiny new FX5900 should be winging it's way to my home soon.


I run a 1024x768 desktop, because anything greater fucks with my eyes on my 17" monitor. I like my eyes.

Gah. Too large. I like 1280x1024x16. Probably because I used to run 1024x768x16 on a 15 incher, which has had the side affect of making me wear glasses. I don't bother running it at 24 or 32 bpp because I can't tell the difference until I meet the occasional rare app.