Jump to content

Half Life 2 release.. good game so far.


dragknee66

Recommended Posts

I woke up a bit early to catch the steam release. So far Im only a mear 15mins into the game and must say... its been worth the wait for the release of this game.

 

I cant wait to get home and geek out the rest of my day :D I even took off Thurs and Fri to play lol graemlins/burnout02.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Originally posted by gergwheel:

are the graphics as intense in HL2 as they are in doom3? i have a geforce fx 5700 ultra and in doom 3 they werent really smooth flowing graphics, a little jumpy. any word on a counter strike for the new half life engine?

I'm not a gamer but this is just what the gamers at work are saying. Half Life 2 is a totally new engine. It is the engine that will be used for the next 5-7 years on all (most all) games. IIRC, whatever engine is used now by all most all games is 5 years + old. Knowing this little information, I would expect your video card to have a very hard time running HL2.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with Neo... You could probably run 800x600 at low to medium res maybe.

 

The GF FX cards were nice at first, but got put down and shut out quite fast...

 

Im going to take some screen shots tonight and will post them.. some of the guys here at work want to see as well.

 

Here is Doom3 at high quality.. 1024x768.. card bench... http://www.jlipp.com/temp/bench.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive never done the time demo.. but personally I pull 60+ frames most of the time on Doom3.. I get slow downs because of my shit ram amount at the moment.. Doom 3 runs my system up to 604megs used, with a mear 161 running before I play the game. Thats with no processes other than my system stuff, and ATI software, and logitech MX1000 mouse soft too.

 

These new games are MACHINE INTENSIVE!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow that graph is crazy, that is one HUGE jump from radeon 9800 to x800, but it is good to see nvidia on the top again. my system itself should be fine, i got 1 gb mem, 2.4 ghz proc, and the 5700 ultra, i was just hoping for good graphics quality, looks like it will be a year or so down the road for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6fps isnt much from ATI to GF

 

Different benches show the X800 on top, other ones show the GF on top... X800 pulls a little ahead on quality with AF and AA. I'll still be getting the GF6800GT myself in a bit. I only got the 9800xt because I paid $150 bucks for it with an ICEQ fan setup :D:D

 

Greg you should pull decent frames with an 800x600 res at medium qualities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doom3 is tailored for the nvidia rendering pipeline. John Carmack has said so publicly. Its not surprising to see the nvidia card edging out the ATI on that game.

 

That being said, the rumor grist mill is saying the HL2 engine is partial to the ATI cards.

 

Its an either/or thing. IMO because of the better form factor (one card slot not two), the better heat management, and the realistic power requirements (300watts vs 480watts and much less picky on power supply brands), pus monthly driver updates like clockwork, the ATI card is the way to go.

 

That plus Doom 3 disappointed me, and my money is on HL2 tending to spawn more games that'll use its engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Mowgli:

That plus Doom 3 disappointed me, and my money is on HL2 tending to spawn more games that'll use its engine.

I COULDNT agree more. HL2 engine is by far more exciting. Doom3 was popular at the time, HL2 will be the new hotness now, and more so in the future. I think it was a good thing HL2 was released after Doom. After people see HL2, I dont think Doom will sell nearly as much to new players.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, there is no qestion that HL2 engine will be better than doom 3. not to mention that the HL2 engine will probably be used for 7 years, just like the first one. i was just trying to see how well my card would perform compared to someone htat has played HL2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus both of those charts are with AntiAliasing off. One has Anistropic filtering off too.

 

When you turn ON anti-aliasing, the ATI card just starts pulling away from the nVidia one more and more.

 

I forgot to ask - how's the game so far? HL1 was the only game ever where my wife sat with me while I played - so I'm hoping the sequel is just as engrossing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Ricochet:

I have an nvidia GeForce4 MX 420... how does that stack up?

The GeForce4 MX cards were essentially relabeled GeForce2 cards.

 

On that second chart it would be near the bottom of the chart.

 

EDIT: Did some research - when this card came out in spring 2002 it was considered the slowest of the GeForce4 line of cards. It was on par with the vid cards from a year previous, 2001. But it had a very low pricepoint in its favor. But even when it came out it was not a good card. The review of the next gen card that came out, the FX series - more than quandrupled the performance over that card and they're down on that list in the 2-18 range. The GeForce3 card tripled its performance and its not even ON that chart.

 

I'd place the MX on THAT chart around a 0.5-1.

 

[ 16. November 2004, 03:20 PM: Message edited by: Mowgli ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...