Half-Life 2 Visuals Dissappointing *Updated with pics*

[ronnn]

I have been enjoying hl2. Looks pretty good and is fun to play. Though the problem solving (looking for a vavle) gets old. Doom 3 didn't look good (bunch of dreary dark tunnels and labs) and gameplay was quite boring. Far Cry looks great and was fun to play, mind you the last couple of levels were a bit boring. So in my mind the big winner is Far Cry and the big loser is Doom 3. Will avoid any game using that engine, at least until they develop hardware that can run it, without over half the screen being black.

 

[kuangs168]

should I buy HL2 then after all these complains?

 

[BenSkywalker]

It isn't a bad game, but it is far removed from what they hype has made it out to be. I would reccomend FarCry first if you don't already have it(it's cheaper now).

 

[VIAN]

Yes, I agree with Ben again.

 

[Zenbeatnik]

I just bought FarCry, HL2, and Doom 3. What order would you play these three and why? I've played Doom and Half Life years ago so I have some experience with those two games.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: kuangs168
should I buy HL2 then after all these complains?

Yes, it's good but not marquee great. There are only about 1 or 2 a year like that and FarCry was this years, HL had it's run already years ago.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Zenbeatnik
I just bought FarCry, HL2, and Doom 3. What order would you play these three and why? I've played Doom and Half Life years ago so I have some experience with those two games.

Play doom iii FIRST!

It is SUCH a POS you won't finish it if you play a really good game (like HL2) first.

Your choice on HL2 and FC.

 

[LocutusX]

I could probably count the number of AT'ers who think of HL2 the same way as Ben/VIAN on one hand.

But if I was to tally the number of AT'ers who had a blast in HL2 - more so than D3/FC - I'd need a small town. And I'm sure the staff of AnandTech and most other major hardware sites would be part of this population. That's the impression I get, from most of the articles I read.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: LocutusX
I could probably count the number of AT'ers who think of HL2 the same way as Ben/VIAN on one hand.

But if I was to tally the number of AT'ers who had a blast in HL2 - more so than D3/FC - I'd need a small town. And I'm sure the staff of AnandTech and most other major hardware sites would be part of this population. That's the impression I get, from most of the articles I read.

agreed

BTW, does FC have a properly working "save anytime" feature (yet)?

 

[LocutusX]

Dunno, I last played FC at 1.0 / 1.1. More than half a year ago.

Can't be bothered to re-install it to try the new patch (1.3).

 

[OCNewbie]

I'm not even remotely disappointed with the HL2 visuals. It's the best looking game I've ever played by far. I haven't played FarCry or Doom3 yet though. Perhaps the graphics aren't as good compared to the tech-demos, but saying that I was disappointed in the final product would be about as far from the truth as you can get for me anyway. Phenomenal game all around.

 

[NYHoustonman]

Originally posted by: LocutusX
I could probably count the number of AT'ers who think of HL2 the same way as Ben/VIAN on one hand.

But if I was to tally the number of AT'ers who had a blast in HL2 - more so than D3/FC - I'd need a small town. And I'm sure the staff of AnandTech and most other major hardware sites would be part of this population. That's the impression I get, from most of the articles I read.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...3&threadid=1461277

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: LocutusX
I could probably count the number of AT'ers who think of HL2 the same way as Ben/VIAN on one hand.

But if I was to tally the number of AT'ers who had a blast in HL2 - more so than D3/FC - I'd need a small town. And I'm sure the staff of AnandTech and most other major hardware sites would be part of this population. That's the impression I get, from most of the articles I read.

agreed

BTW, does FC have a properly working "save anytime" feature (yet)?

Hi Mark,

Yeah, I was using a quick-saving mod. I think I got it HERE, but the link doesn't seem to work now. If you need it you can prolly find it on that board.

Fern

 

[Robor]

Man, all the hating on D3, FC, and HL2. I own all 3 and while none of them are perfect they're all great games in their own right. I just don't understand what everyone expects from a video game...

 

[Regs]

The only thing I really dislike about HL2 is some surfaces textures go blurry from a marginal distance without AF enabled. Maybe Im the only one noticing this but there is almost a horizon line where textures go from completely crisp and clear to a complete blur on the screen. Maybe just a driver problem.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Robor
Man, all the hating on D3, FC, and HL2. I own all 3 and while none of them are perfect they're all great games in their own right. I just don't understand what everyone expects from a video game...

What's anything "great" about Doom iii?
:roll:

other then the gfx it is a POS game . . . . it does not remotely belong in the same company as HL2 or FC.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

HL1 better story? I think you need to go back and play HL1 again.

Done. Now while the story doesn't hold a candle to something like KoTOR or Mafia, it is easily better then what they have in HL2.

Jiffy-

Sure we're still a ways off from total interactivity, but the ability to throw around barrels, wrenches, boxes, planks of wood, and countless metal objects (ok there's probably about 10 different ones, not countless) was a blast, and far more interactive than any game I've played in the past.

It was a FarCry wannabe, only without the level of physics interaction that FC has.

I disagree. I don't even understand how you can say Far Cry had more physics interaction.

If nothing else HL2 was a giant step in the right direction - longer game, more interactive, more realistic settings. I found the vehicle parts (particularly the hoverboat or whatever it was called) to be a thrill too.

Longer game? Longer then what, MaxPayne? I mentioned Pokemon earlier- playing through LeafGreen right now and I have a bit over 92 hours into it- HL2 was miniscule in length in comparison. Even by shooter standards, it took me quite a bit longer to get through D3 and FarCry then it did HL2.

I wouldn't want a 92 hour shooter. I like my FPSes to be 8-12 hours in length.

I found the vehicle parts (particularly the hoverboat or whatever it was called) to be a thrill too.

While the hooverboard wasn't that bad...[/quote]

It sounds like you're just looking for reasons to downplay the game.

Maybe you genuinely didn't like the game, but I think HL2 is a much better game than you give it credit for, and I don't attribute it all to the hype.

 

[imported_thomash]

One of the Best game's i've ever played.

Play this on an Asus X800XT, P43.2, 1024mb Ram

And this game is stunning when all those settings are at full.....

 

[BenSkywalker]

I disagree. I don't even understand how you can say Far Cry had more physics interaction.

By playing both.

I wouldn't want a 92 hour shooter. I like my FPSes to be 8-12 hours in length.

So you want super short games- all the power to you. Most people don't want them that short.

It sounds like you're just looking for reasons to downplay the game.

Hooverboard, Hovvercraft(I tend to differntiate betwee those based on if it has a bag filled with air on the underside, though that could just be me), Windbuggy- which term would you prefer?

It sounds like you're just looking for reasons to downplay the game.

Instead of trying very hard to ignore the plethora of flaws in the game?

Maybe you genuinely didn't like the game,

Where did I say that?

but I think HL2 is a much better game than you give it credit for

There is nothing great about the game on an analytical level. The AI is sub par for years old games, the level design is mediocre at best, the story can only be desrcibed as poor- what element of the game is so great? You tell me. I heard this same type of talk when I blasted Black&White when it came out, after the hype died down I didn't hear people backing the title anymore. Explain to me why the game is so great and worthy of praise.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

I disagree. I don't even understand how you can say Far Cry had more physics interaction.

By playing both.

I wouldn't want a 92 hour shooter. I like my FPSes to be 8-12 hours in length.

So you want super short games- all the power to you. Most people don't want them that short.

It sounds like you're just looking for reasons to downplay the game.

Hooverboard, Hovvercraft(I tend to differntiate betwee those based on if it has a bag filled with air on the underside, though that could just be me), Windbuggy- which term would you prefer?

It sounds like you're just looking for reasons to downplay the game.

Instead of trying very hard to ignore the plethora of flaws in the game?

Maybe you genuinely didn't like the game,

Where did I say that?

but I think HL2 is a much better game than you give it credit for

There is nothing great about the game on an analytical level. The AI is sub par for years old games, the level design is mediocre at best, the story can only be desrcibed as poor- what element of the game is so great? You tell me. I heard this same type of talk when I blasted Black&White when it came out, after the hype died down I didn't hear people backing the title anymore. Explain to me why the game is so great and worthy of praise.

Curious . . . how do you compare HL2 to Doom iii? Where do you personally rate both (give it a X.x/10, please).

 

[iskim86]

well Half Life 1's graphics weren't that great when it first came out either, so I'm not complaining. maybe Valve just wanted to focus on the game and thought too good of a graphics engine may distract the players from the game or something.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Curious . . . how do you compare HL2 to Doom iii? Where do you personally rate both (give it a X.x/10, please).

HL2 probably about a 7.8, DooM3 a 5- and the only reason I would rate D3 that high was the Hell levels I enjoyed(along with the first twenty minutes or so of the game- rest was repetitive). I thought the D3 engine lived up to the hype, the gameplay was quite poor(which I don't think HL2 is poor, just nothing like the revolutionary title they make it out to be).

 

[jim1976]

Well let's see:

Story:
-----
DIII : What story again?
FC : Mediocre
HL2 : Mediocre

Gameplay/Interactivity
------------------
DIII : What gameplay again? The exact same gameplay as Doom and DoomII isn't exactly gameplay in my book
FC: Pretty good in terms of gameplay and interactivity
HL2 : Should I even bother to compare it with the other two? The only title that deserves to stand right next to HL2
is HALO

AI
---
DIII : Pretty weak.Enemies appearing out of nowhere isn't exactly the smartest idea and even in the hardest level I
found them pretty easy to beat
FC: Very good. Almost as good as Halo's
HL2: Pretty weak. That was my biggest dissapointment in the game. I expected it more challenging in AI.Also the
team that followed Freeman was more like a problem than help most of the times

GFX
---
DIII : The best lighting/shadow FX I've ever seen in a game. Amazing job. But that was in the cost of textures
which look really bad and low detailed so that even a high end system can handle the complex calculations.
FC : The best looking game in my book. Pretty high polygon characters,very good textures,HDR patch, amazing
water,great shadows.Overall the best FPS graphically speaking
HL2 : While not so close when compared to FC, someone should consider of how good the source engine really is.
I mean I have played the 3 games in an MX440 and only HL2 looked comparable to my high end card. Both FC and
DIII sucked graphically compared to my card.

Physics
------
DIII : Nothing wortmentiong.Sufficient
FC : Very good
HL2 : Excellent. Almost everything reacted as it should. Brilliant job, loved the gravity gun

Sound
-----
DIII : 10/10
FC: 9/10
HL2 : 9/10

Overall I would say that these 3 games had their pros and cons but each one was special in its terms.
I completely agree with Robor when he wonders what more does someone expect from a FPS game?
If HL2 was released when it was supposed it would lead the race IMO, but coming after the arrival of FC it was something expected and didn't manage to create the shocking impression in GFX terms. If an HDR patch is relead in the future then that would be great and make it more impressive.
But overall it's still the KING of FPS IMO as HL was when it came out.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

I disagree. I don't even understand how you can say Far Cry had more physics interaction.

By playing both.

Where exactly do you see this great physics in Far Cry? What can you do with physics in Far Cry aside from sliding/dead monsters?

I wouldn't want a 92 hour shooter. I like my FPSes to be 8-12 hours in length.

So you want super short games- all the power to you. Most people don't want them that short.

No, I want short FPS games (8-12 hours). Other genres I like long .

It sounds like you're just looking for reasons to downplay the game.

but I think HL2 is a much better game than you give it credit for

There is nothing great about the game on an analytical level. The AI is sub par for years old games, the level design is mediocre at best, the story can only be desrcibed as poor- what element of the game is so great? You tell me. I heard this same type of talk when I blasted Black&White when it came out, after the hype died down I didn't hear people backing the title anymore. Explain to me why the game is so great and worthy of praise.

'On an analytical level' many people found the game great, you just don't agree with them. I personally found the graphics to be great, the physics to be better than any other game (for what you could play with, which was many objects in the game; think about wooden planks in water, etc), the storyline was thin but at least it set the mood. I found it to be fun and not requiring too much thought in the actual gameplay; again that's what I want out of an FPS (although I could have gone for MUCH more depth on the storyline).

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Robor
Man, all the hating on D3, FC, and HL2. I own all 3 and while none of them are perfect they're all great games in their own right. I just don't understand what everyone expects from a video game...

What's anything "great" about Doom iii?
:roll:

other then the gfx it is a POS game . . . . it does not remotely belong in the same company as HL2 or FC.

They're totally different games. Yes it was dark, yes it was linear, yes it used sliding walls and spawnpoints too much. But the fact is id said they were making D3 to be scary and at times it was. The visuals and sounds combined to make some really creepy parts of the game. In my opinion the most amazing thing about D3 is the environment and how well it ran with those amazing graphics.