Half-life 2 runs already on Xbox

tommycat said:
Resolution of a television: 800x600
Resolution of a computer monitor: depends on the monitor.
Max settings on X Box won't be the same as max on PC.
the X800 only gets as low as 60 fps when running AA/AF, trilinear filtering and a host of bells and whistles not even available on the X Box at 1024x768(If I remember correctly)
If you can't see the difference, you need thicker glasses.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that the resolution of a TV is 640x480. Atleast that's what it was when I've captured a VHS tape to digital format.
 
NTSC: about 525 lines at 60hz
PAL (Wide parts of Europe): about 625 lines at 50hz

VHS ist using half the lines.
 
Who gives a shit about console games? It's a waste of time and money.
 
I wouldn't trust the info, this is coming from the same guys that said Half-Life 2 has fully destructable terrain in their preview. Kinda strange how they are the only source of the info.
 
only reason i would understand someone buyin the crappy version of hl2 (xbox version) is if they have a very very bad pc and dont have enough cash for a new one and HAS to get xbox version. kinda ruining it for themselves but hey what else do you want them to do.
 
If the XBOX version is exactly like the PC version except a slight difference in graphics, you have to wonder how much the game was dumbed down to cater to XBOX users. Was the XBOX version being developed by Valve simultaneously with the PC version? Will Half-Life2 have universal ammo and when did Warren Spector start working for Valve? :p
 
Considering that the actual controls of HL are pretty simple (move, aim, shoot, use), they probably wouldn't need to dumb things down as much as with a game like DX.
 
Ghost Freeman said:
...How does this bring us any closer to HL2?
Click to expand...

Theoreticly every second that passes is closer to HL2, so there!
 
Lobster said:
Theoreticly every second that passes is closer to HL2, so there!
Click to expand...

Getting so close, but yet its still so far away
 
Oh god....

Future HL2 pc only buyers: Dont worry, xbox versions suck and will never and i mean never top the PC version (apart from games Microsoft buys then delays for years then ****s up the port.... halo grrrr)

Future HL2 Xbox only owners: retards! buy a pc.

Future HL2 Xbox and PX owners: are you stoned?
 
Gorgon said:
I am buying the pc version. thats it...............in your face Bill
Click to expand...

Have you forgotton that microsoft also has WINDOWS!? Your still buying it to play on "BILL's" system called WINDOWS!....just thought I'd let you know. :thumbs:
 
The X-Box can easily run HL2 with great graphics, as long as the programmers and artists are good enough. It isn't going to be exactly the same, but it will look great when compared to the pc versions high end systems.

Nearly everything you see running on HL2 for the pc can have a mirror image on the x-box. It might not be the exact same thing, but it can be replicated to the point where the average gamer won't notice or care.

Picture 1

Picture 2

Picture 3

Picture 4

Picture 5

Just showing you some of the systems best visuals...in order.

Riddick, visually, is the best looking console game I have seen. Ninja Gaiden is close, especially because it runs at a non stop 60 FPS.

My point is that the X-Box will be able to run HL2 without a problem, as long as the programmers are great. Too many people seem to think that the systems clock frequency is what makes the system. It isn't. That is not how console systems work. As I have debated time and time again on this forum, and proved people wrong who thought otherwise. It takes an entire console systems pipeline to bring great games out.

IE you would never have Ninja Gaiden, Halo 2, or especially riddick running on a console system at 60/30 FPS almost all the time--without a top high end machine. Riddick uses a full blown dynamic lighting system, which the developers should get some serious credit for pulling off. Not to mention the normal mapping and bump mapping tech used. Yes, the X-Box can do this stuff.

DooM 3 is an exception, because honestly...the design team isn't that great. Jedi Academy was decent port wise, and that game had SERIOUS frame rate issues on the x-box. It was just an advanced quake 3 engine...and obviously games like Riddick and gaiden look and run 4X better. If DooM 3 X-Box was in the hands of the team that did Riddick--I will bet you they would have it running at 30 FPS nonstop, AND have the visuals 1.5-2X better then they are now. Just the way it is...

Later...
 
Polykarbon said:
The X-Box can easily run HL2 with great graphics, as long as the programmers and artists are good enough. It isn't going to be exactly the same, but it will look great when compared to the pc versions high end systems.

Nearly everything you see running on HL2 for the pc can have a mirror image on the x-box. It might not be the exact same thing, but it can be replicated to the point where the average gamer won't notice or care.

Picture 1

Picture 2

Picture 3

Picture 4

Picture 5

Just showing you some of the systems best visuals...in order.

Riddick, visually, is the best looking console game I have seen. Ninja Gaiden is close, especially because it runs at a non stop 60 FPS.

My point is that the X-Box will be able to run HL2 without a problem, as long as the programmers are great. Too many people seem to think that the systems clock frequency is what makes the system. It isn't. That is not how console systems work. As I have debated time and time again on this forum, and proved people wrong who thought otherwise. It takes an entire console systems pipeline to bring great games out.

IE you would never have Ninja Gaiden or Halo 2 running on a console system at 60/30 FPS almost all the time--without a top high end machine.

DooM 3 is an exception, because honestly...the design team isn't that great. Jedi Academy was decent port wise, and that game had SERIOUS frame rate issues on the x-box. It was just an advanced quake 3 engine...and obviously games like Riddick and gaiden look and run 4X better. If DooM 3 X-Box was in the hands of the team that did Riddick--I will bet you they would have it running at 30 FPS nonstop, AND have the visuals 1.5-2X better then they are now. Just the way it is...

Later...
Click to expand...

Those Are Just Like Screenshots Of GT3 For PS2 They Make It Look WAY better then it really is
 
Polykarbon said:
The X-Box can easily run HL2 with great graphics, as long as the programmers and artists are good enough. It isn't going to be exactly the same, but it will look great when compared to the pc versions high end systems.

Nearly everything you see running on HL2 for the pc can have a mirror image on the x-box. It might not be the exact same thing, but it can be replicated to the point where the average gamer won't notice or care.

Picture 1

Picture 2

Picture 3

Picture 4

Picture 5

Just showing you some of the systems best visuals...in order.

Riddick, visually, is the best looking console game I have seen. Ninja Gaiden is close, especially because it runs at a non stop 60 FPS.

My point is that the X-Box will be able to run HL2 without a problem, as long as the programmers are great. Too many people seem to think that the systems clock frequency is what makes the system. It isn't. That is not how console systems work. As I have debated time and time again on this forum, and proved people wrong who thought otherwise. It takes an entire console systems pipeline to bring great games out.

IE you would never have Ninja Gaiden or Halo 2 running on a console system at 60/30 FPS almost all the time--without a top high end machine.
Click to expand...

Sure, it could probably run with nearly the same detail settings as the PC version, but the resolution, Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic Filtering cutbacks are what's going to hit it hard. I want to play this game at a damn high resolution with a mouse and keyboard, and by heck I will.
 
dream431ca said:
Have you forgotton that microsoft also has WINDOWS!? Your still buying it to play on "BILL's" system called WINDOWS!....just thought I'd let you know. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

still i bet about 5% of use are using a legit ver... and running a bootleg program allwas supports the desiger
 
Whezzy I assure you, you are wrong.

Go play Ninja Gaiden and especially Riddick and try to say that statement again.

Of course the resolution is going to take a hit...that is only logical with a console game. Anti-Aliasing and Anisotopic Filtering arn't really a problem anymore with the better tools Microsoft is providing. The routines code used for the new development tools are pretty amazing. It isn't going to be AS GREAT as the pc version, but it will be damn close.

Anyway though--I am agreeing with the last statement. I too would rather play it with higher resolution and a mouse and keyboard. That isn't what I am talking about though.

I am simply saying that the X-Box can easily handle HL2, given the right development team. Tired of people saying it can't.

GT3 doesn't even look that great. Not when compared to the A+ titles of the X-Box. Ninja Gaiden is insane development wise. It uses every trick in the book, has crisp textures and high polygon counts...and runs at 60 FPS nonstop.
 
Polykarbon said:
It might not be the exact same thing, but it can be replicated to the point where the average gamer won't notice or care.
Click to expand...

I'm not the average gamer. ;) Go PC version! :O
 
Most console gamers are. I don't really care what you guys want to play it on. It's obvious almost everyone here would rather play the pc version.

I am just stating that it is indeed possible. Just backing the black and green monster up a bit.
 
I love Xbox.. But there's no way I'm getting it on anything but my trusty ol' comp.
 
Polykarbon said:
DooM 3 is an exception, because honestly...the design team isn't that great.
Click to expand...

You're..... you're joking right? ID pioneered FPS games and have since developed some of the best 3d engines in existance. You obviously know jack about ID, they trump Valve in every way possible.
 
ID isn't developing the X-Box version, Vicarious Visions is...

ID AT THIS point is known for technology demos. Believe it or hate it, that is what they have become to many fans. Raven Software is their "trump"--because that company loves their engines. DooM 3 will be the test if ID is a game developer or not.

Also, a lot of people seem to think for some reason, that ID developed RTCW. They didn't. Gray Matter Studios and Nerve Software did. Just to clear that up, incase anyone thought otherwise.
 
iD software created the FPS form, then Valve came along and showed what could be done with it to make amazing games. Pretty much every modern FPS owes something to Doom/Quake/Half-Life.

iD may do fantastic technology, but Valve make better games.
 
The Xbox won't get HL2 first. Someone at Valve said this.

Basically, the game as a whole needs to be debugged (it is finished) and once that is done it will be released on PC. Whilst it's released on PC, the game will be ported into a format suitable for Xbox. It should thus be released on Xbox AFTER the PC version. It is here that MS have their say with quality control (if they have such a thing!) and Valve will need to dumb it down even more!
 
lol

Your game represents our console too much! TONE IT DOWN!

You make Bungie Cryz ;-(
 
Esquire said:
Hmm, i thought the resolution for the X-Box was 800x600. But the image for ninjagaiden was 1024x576, Riddick was 640x480, and the image for Halo2 was 1600x1200!!

Did some quick research: Maximum resolution for X-Box is 1920 x 1080 pixels.
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view.php/1250
Click to expand...
exactly. but even an HDTV doesnt support that res... only works with a 'montor'. using VGA box or something.
 
Most developers for consoles take screenshots at resolutions almost no one will play at. It's not a big deal.

But anyone who thinks that the Xbox HL2 will be in any way comparable to a high end PC in graphical wow is fooling themselves. I mean, look at how crappy Doom3 looks on Xbox compared to the PC version. And Xbox is easily the most powerful console out right now. The game should play pretty much the same, be lots of fun, but it wont even begin to look as good.
 
DooM 3 looks crappy because the developers suck...this is obvious by their development on Jedi Academy.

With the right development team DooM 3 could have looked VERY similar to the high end pc version. I say could have because the games graphics are already pretty much set. At E3 the game got choppy whenever action loaded up on the screen...which is sad considering it looks crappy.

Those screenshots don't even really show how great Riddick or Gaiden look. They look and play much better then the shots.
 
I'm going to be buying it on both systems :) can't wait to play HL2 on link up with my a few mates, will be great :)
 
With the right development team DooM 3 could have looked VERY similar to the high end pc version.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The textures are muddy due to the limited space available, and the engine just can't handle the lighting system AND do everything else as well like the PC version can.
 
Your wrong. The pipeline is very capable of doing so.

Riddick runs at a nonstop 30 FPS, and is on par with DooM 3 PC like graphics.
There is a heavy reason why nearly all reviewers at the moment are praising riddick as being the best looking console game ever made.
It uses a dynamic lighting system[yes, it indeed does] and houses advanced normal mapping technology. Lots of characters on screen...explosions...ragdolls...perfect 30 FPS.
Both main two things that many thought X-Box couldn't do without chugging down.

The D3 X-Box engine is quite capable of doing so much more, if only the programmers weren't...well...sloppy. Their previous games prove this.
Wierd how DooM 3 doesn't look nearly as good as Riddick, yet it seems to chug with little action on the screen; AND small/low poly environments/creatures. [Which still look good because of mapping technology]
I guess this is the consoles limitation right? :thumbs:

Yea...whatever :rolling:

With the right programmers and artists, ports and especially full blown games[shame on the D3 X-box developers] can be powerful, fast, and great looking.

Want an example? Quake 2. John Carmack himself laughed at this even being ported over to the Playstation. It indeed was, and ran perfectly. A little too perfectly. It even blazed away in multiplayer modes. HammerHead Ltd. did the job, and Carmack was amazed.[He shouldn't of been]

Want another? Halo. It was terribly ported to the PC, and you need a pretty high end system to run it decently. Dare I question how porting Halo 2 would run...considering everything on the scale of graphic ability has been nearly doubled. Poor programming development--thats what. I suppose it is just the fact that the X-Box is inferior ^_~.

Console systems have a software/hardware pipeline. Programmers and artists have to use tricky alg. property formulas and routine code to create what they want to fun fast AND look good. This is of course logical for the pc, but it is especially important for console systems. This is the great development property of console systems.

Better programmers and artists--and of course higher budgets can change everything. This is why games start out looking like Splinter Cell 1...and end up looking like Splinter Cell 2. The programmers go back and change the core engine, to run faster and look better. Look back at Splinter Cell 1...it still looks great. Now look at the Splinter Cell 3 videos. Active ragdoll and physics. Bump mapping and normal mapping on everything. One of the best lighting systems in the business. High polygon environments with effects applied to them. That is just how it goes...

I really could go on and on with this subject...

Excuse errors in my writing please. I wrote this as of 1:46 AM.
 
My only problem with some people is that they doubt the power of console systems, mainly because they don't see enough showcasing high end games.

You see games like DooM 3 and HL2, which honestly justify the power of PC arch. Yet, you don't see the true power of a console system until nearly the end of it's life. This is because programmers have to keep up with the coding techniques on each individual console. Learn the tricks', figure out what you can and can't do on it. This takes years, and often it isn't until the last stage of the consoles life that you see the true power. By this point there is a new "WOW" pc game/engine...like Unreal 3.0, and the pc techies go--"oh see...can the X-Box do that??!?!"

Oh course it can't. Consoles are static...unless the company updates it. They usually don't unless they build around it.[Nintendo 64]
 
xbox maximum resolutoin for might be 1920x1080

BUT ITS GAMES RUN AT 640x400 and/or 800x600!

do not be fooled.

and riddick looks NOTHING LIKE THOSE SCREENS when its actually running on xbox. when runnin on xbox and tv it looks extremely worse.
 
I guess all of the reviewers are lying =p.

I suppose my eyes also lie to me.

/stabs eyes out.

Look--All I am saying is that the X-Box COULD do it. The actual probable chance of the perfect team coming along to do it is so very slim though.
 
I have seen riddick with my own eyes playing on TV>

looks nothing i mean NOTHING close to what pc currently has or will have.

but its alright for consoles. Residen EVil 4 , doom3(xbox) and halo2(SP) all look better imho.
 
"It's also guaranteed to run more smoothly than a Porsche on rails, no matter how many aliens cram onto your TV. How? By fractionally reducing the detail level of each creature, so the mayhem continues uninterrupted. Sweet. As yet there's no release date, with the PC version shipping first. But one thing's for sure - Xbox ain't that far behind."

You guys should have taken some time to read the article in the link, that's one of the things it said so quit worrying about HL2 coming out on Xbox first rather than PC (which didn't make any sense anyways). Let's calm down people.
 
ya...I suppose that is what it comes down to. Opinions.

I just base everything on technology...but ya I do agree...artistic control can make games look way better then technology alone.

I am just stating what I have seen from a developer perspective. I don't really care when it comes down to it =p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Half-Life's lost feature, Timeline
Replies
0
Views
6K
Barnz
B
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
The leaked maps of the Half-Life 2 episodes - Part 2
Replies
0
Views
9K
Barnz
B
B
The leaked maps of the Half-Life 2 episodes - Part 1
Replies
0
Views
48K
Barnz
B
Back
Top