Half-life 2 runs already on Xbox

[shapeshifter]

CVG.com interviewed Gabe Newell.
The game will be identical to the PC version, but graphics will be slightly inferior.

Try VERY inferior.

The game will be running at 640x480 if it does come out (and thats IF it supports Progresive, (480P) but becuase of how demanding it is, it may just be 480i.

Not only will the res make it look like crap, the texture resoultions are seriously reduced for games on consoles for the simple fact the tv can not display them (so its looking crudier already) then top on the fact its running a geforce 3.5 basically... well you get the idea.

Take a computer (pentium III about 1ghz, mabye 256mb of ram TOPS) pop a geforce 3 Ti500 in (overclock it as much as you can) then stick everything to max settings, put the res at 640x480, (which will even then still look better then a console version :angel: ) then using fraps, keep droping IQ settings down and down and DOWN untill you get a rock soild 30 fps (can't dip under it)

There's your xbox hl2


PS. not to mention becuase of the xbox lack of ram, levels will be very very small (they will take the average level size on pc, then turn it into swiss cheese)

the only thing the xbox version will have going for it are:

A) Sound, if you have good speakers it will sound great, xbox for the most part has better sound then most pc users (unless you have soundstorm or a audigy 2 zs with some kick arse speakers)
B) The fact you are 100% sure its not going to be on 7+ cds its a dvd

 

[JimmehH]

Games tend to look better on consoles and TVs. The extra brightness and the soft antialiasing effect you get from the TV helps a lot along with all the optimisations you can squeeze in on a console. MGS2:Substance barely runs on my computer (1.4GHz Athlon XP, 768MB RAM, GF4MX440) but it plays really smoothly on a PS2. In fact, PS1 games on an emulator don't even run that well, but that's a slightly dodgy area really.

I know I should tune the computer and get a better graphics card and processor, but isn't my computer processor a lot faster than the PS2's and doesn't it have a lot more RAM? So why the shoddy performance?

 

[shapeshifter]

Games tend to look better on consoles and TVs. The extra brightness and the soft antialiasing effect you get from the TV helps a lot along with all the optimisations you can squeeze in on a console. MGS2:Substance barely runs on my computer (1.4GHz Athlon XP, 768MB RAM, GF4MX440) but it plays really smoothly on a PS2. In fact, PS1 games on an emulator don't even run that well, but that's a slightly dodgy area really.

I know I should tune the computer and get a better graphics card and processor, but isn't my computer processor a lot faster than the PS2's and doesn't it have a lot more RAM? So why the shoddy performance?

I don't know what world your coming from, but the fact you have a crappy computer doesn't mean everyone does. Hell and games do NOT look better on TV sheesh. all you have to do is use a computer that has Tv out and then watch what games look like compared to the monitor, Huge decrease in image quality.

Ps1 games on an emualtor on my computer run faster then the ps1, I have to slow them down. In fact with the emulator your getting into a case where those games DO look better on the tv for the simple fact the monitor shows you just how UGULY those games really are.

 

[JimmehH]

It doesn't matter that my computer is crappy. It should still be more powerful than a PS2 right?
My point is that games can be optimised to run at least as well on consoles as they do on more powerful PCs because a PC's configuration is unknown to the developer.

They have to make sure it runs well on a wide variety of systems which bogs down the game with features and optimisations that aren't suitable for your particular computer. A console is the same the whole world over (more or less) so they can keep the code efficient for that console and not stick in a load of irrelevant functions like they have to do with a PC version.

 

[shapeshifter]

It doesn't matter that my computer is crappy. It should still be more powerful than a PS2 right? .

To a point somewhat yes.

a ps2 is a closed system, they don't have to worry about all the overhead and specs that can be on the millions of variations of computers, so a developer for ps2 will use EVERYTHING the system can throw. while for computer they have to scale, thus they don't (and can't) use everything the systems do, becuase of the simple fact it varys SO MUCH. Now a developer for some reason decided to use your system as a platform and make a game that only runs on your system and they spent years at it, it could look amazing. but its not going to run on anything else becuase they made it JUST for yours.

The fact is for specs in these systems there is more going on, Your computer IS more powerfull then a ps2 in the fact it can DO more. But in terms of games No, your using a geforce2 mx (which is basically a pile of crap) and has been a running joke ever since Nvidia decided to make them. there is much more then just comparing spec per spec. (but it does come down to this in the end, not by mhz and ram, but by how much information it can push, how much overhead it can take, how fast it can excute those comands what features it can do etc)

So in terms of hl2 and looking at the xbox. It simple can not meet up to match or even compare to a well made computer these days in any way. Its outdated and no ammouant of optimzations or platform specifc code will change that. Its going to look like a game running on years old computer hardware running at 640x480 and no magic bill gates fairy can change that.

 

[JimmehH]

It was a rhetorical question. Did you even read the rest of my post?
I said exactly what you just said...

 

[wonkers]

Halo was a disgrace and a slap in the face to all PC users. I can't fully emote everything I think about the halo fiasco.

#1 It was orignally stated to be a super online multiplayer FPS. The ring world was to be sectioned off in zones and you would be flown in by air or drive to the fight in the hog. It started as a Covenant Vs. Marine super show down. The whole War was to take place in certain areas one day then the next in another. A total fight for halo.

#2 Dun dun DUUHHHN! Microsoft baught the thing out. Halo gets completly redone,... PC users scratch their heads saying what the hell. BAM, it comes out on xbox and it's the best made FPS for a consol since golden eye and perfect dark.

#3 Microsoft PUMPS halo hype through the roof to cover the obvious flaws like repetitive levels and crappy multiplayer.

#4 It takes an eternity to come to the PC, it's original home. They boast that it has great multi player and all this other crap like "improved" graphics. Then the real [fun] begins

#5 It is a PEICE OF SHITE on the PC. It bogs down the bleeding edge hardware for no reason. It doesn't even come with a plastic case!!! It's in a buget-ware cardboard folder. The menu had uber high mouse sensitvity and the game has UBER slow sensitivity. Indoor enviroments BOG the hell out of most computers. The multiplayer is MEAGER. The game isn't even that great and to this day it still runs slow because it was ported to horribly to the PC. I want to beat the hell out of who did it. Why can an 800 Mhz Xbox run it fine and a 1800 Mhz computer bog down. Microsoft & Gearbox RUINED it. I paid $80 Canadian to get a game that ran like shit, played like shit, and didn't even come with a proper CASE! It's been "patched" multiple times and still sucks.

I know I ranted a lot but it's all true. We fear Microsoft touching anything that they didn't create themselves for this very reason. They will Kill it deader than dirt.

I Wish to WARN all WHO buy PORTED GAMES. DO NOT BUY IT RIGHT AWAY. Test it on your computer. Test It on your Xbox. If you have a computer & an Xbox buy the computer version, F**K the people who just want profit. Reward the people who make games.

 

[wonkers]

On a side note.

Good luck to HL2. I hope it's great.

 

[shapeshifter]

I Wish to WARN all WHO buy PORTED GAMES. DO NOT BUY IT RIGHT AWAY. Test it on your computer. Test It on your Xbox. If you have a computer & an Xbox buy the computer version, F**K the people who just want profit. Reward the people who make games.

except remeber, any game that is released on pc and xbox at the same time (and not pc first then xbox months down the road) will suck.

See dues ex II (was made for the xbox as seen by how crappy it is)

See thief III (although some people like it becuase its "fun" that doesn't excuse the crap port, becuase thats what it is again like dues ex II)

 

[Tadashi]

Don't compare an emulated console game with the PC running it.
It's like a guy speaking native english and has to translate spanish from a dictionary.
An emulator simulates a whole system, what costs lots of resources.

 

[Subz]

this topic is rediculous. Xbox sucks.

 

[joule]

...Xbox sucks.

I beg to ****in differ.

 

[iamaelephant]

This thread is boring as hell. Some people like X Box, some people dont. Yeah, we get it. Close this f*cking thread.

 

[lans]

this topic is rediculous. Xbox sucks.

You are ridiculous, as you have no idea what you are talking about.

P.S: Learn how to spell before bitching at something.

 

[Warbie]

Take a computer (pentium III about 1ghz, mabye 256mb of ram TOPS) pop a geforce 3 Ti500 in (overclock it as much as you can) then stick everything to max settings, put the res at 640x480, (which will even then still look better then a console version :angel: ) then using fraps, keep droping IQ settings down and down and DOWN untill you get a rock soild 30 fps (can't dip under it)

There's your xbox hl2

What a complete load of rubbish. Comparing an Xbox and pc by specs is silly.

 

[Frank]

This is stupid

*thread closed*

 

[shapeshifter]

What a complete load of rubbish. Comparing an Xbox and pc by specs is silly.

hardly, the xbox itself is basically using off the shelf parts A pentium III 700mhz (or is it 750?) but it has less chace then a usual, so its almost like a celeron. A geforce 3.5 (better then a geforce 3 ti500 but only by a small bit, its like a geforce 3 with some geforce 4 features) 64mb of ram a 8gb hd (and oh btw, you can format and USE on your computer if you so choose to do and mod) and the motherboard it uses is based on the Nforce 1 with alterations.

So yea it is a computer. just a closed system that can not be upgraded (unless you mod it, people can upgrade the ram, cpu and hd then)

 

[Frank]

But you can't compare the specs...they're not identical in any way...as far as I know!

 

[Warbie]

I don't know what world your coming from, but the fact you have a crappy computer doesn't mean everyone does. Hell and games do NOT look better on TV sheesh. all you have to do is use a computer that has Tv out and then watch what games look like compared to the monitor, Huge decrease in image quality.

It depends on the game.

(I know I sound like a broken record) GTA, PoP, Halo all look better on a tv (GTA on a pc looks like a tiny model, PoP feels small and far less grand, Halo too angular - the outside areas less organic. The Aliens small and unimpressive. Halo needs a big tv and analgoue control.

Blurring can addly greatly to a titles visuals, and can make the game world feel far more solid. It's the reason why Mario 64 'feels' more 3d than any pc game i've played. All of these games are better with a joypad)

Some games are just better on a tv - and some of the best games ever made are on consoles Of course, the same can be said about pcs.

It's horses for courses

I hope HL2 is good on the XBox. Some of my mates don't have pcs and I want them to experience the game. (imagine co-op )

 

[nvrmor]

Ah, but the thing about XNA, is at the moment, it's pretty nebulous. It's nothing but a press release and some videos.

There's nothing concrete for developers to use. And if there is something concrete, Microsoft aren't showing it to the general public, and quite frankly, Microsoft show pretty much everything to the general public - you can already get at the Longhorn SDK, for example.

For example, this "framework" they're describing, making renderers and physics engines swappable plugins, these kind of things need technical specifications, interfaces to program against, and they simply don't exist.

Ah, I'll be less skeptical if Microsoft comes up with some goods. But at the moment, talking about something using XNA is meaningless, it doesn't exist yet.

i would have to disagree. the xna sdk is comming out this month. it has been in the works for over 2 years now. did you know far cry is one of the first games to use xna features? have you seen the list of partners m$ has lined up for xna? impressive to say the least.

 

[riTuaL]

I don't think VALVe would screw over the PC people like us, they know we're the driving force behind their community.

 

[Scapegoat]

PC will always be superior. What help make Half-Life so grand? Multiplayer, maps, and mods.

Think of the hundreds of countless serious and fun usermade maps and mods that could be made for Half-Life 2 (buggy racing, physics, etc).

None of that on Xbox.

 

[tokin]

I dont even know why someone had to make a thread about this to start false crap up, of course valve will release HL2 to PC before Xbox, thats a no brainer.

 

[iamaelephant]

I agree with Warbie 100%. Sure he just listed a bunch of things that consoles have over PC, and the same can be said for PC features. Horses for Courses is dead right, and calling console players "dumb" or saying consoles suck is just plain ignorant.

 

[Subz]

i dont see ANYTHING console has over pc other than collecting dust.

 

[Sai]

i dont see ANYTHING console has over pc other than collecting dust.

what about no installation, no real game crashes, and much more affordability

 

[Scapegoat]

No troubles about hardware compatiability, no upgrading your machine for 5 years (average lifespan of each generation of consoles).

 

[Crusader]

I would have put no upgrading your machine for 5 years in the negatives pile, but I see what you're saying


Tbh it's an argument not worth having really...I can't look anyone in the eyes who tries to tell me consoles look or play better than pc games.

 

[Axyon]

This is stupid

*thread closed*

What have I said about doing that? You're not a bloody moderator, so you don't have the right to go round saying things like that, okay?

 

[Warbie]

I would have put no upgrading your machine for 5 years in the negatives pile, but I see what you're saying


Tbh it's an argument not worth having really...I can't look anyone in the eyes who tries to tell me consoles look or play better than pc games.

Why not?

PC games are great - but only a few genres are catered for. They're also a far more solitary experience. Even if you play with your mates on comms, it's not the same as being in the same room.

(and Halo does look, and play, better on the Xbox )

 

[poseyjmac]

Why not?

They're also a far more solitary experience. QUOTE]

bzzt!

you can play xbox in solitary, or play with people in same room.

you can play PC in solitary, or play with people on the internet OR

at a LAN PARTY with people in the same room. which i might add are very popular, www.lanparty.com for some bigger ones. and that is why you are wrong :monkee:

 

[Crusader]

Pong looks and plays better than Halo on the PC. What especially makes me laugh, is how system intensive it is for a game that looks so bad :/

I think it says it all that since I got a PC, I've stopped buying consoles entirely, or even feel the slightest bit inclined to buy one. I played some game on the XBOX last time I went on holiday, and I was just like "wow, I used to do this for fun, now it's like having a tooth pulled out." As I struggled against those umm.. what are they called again... the big plastic thing with buttons on that are really imprecise and unweildy...hmm I forgot.

Oh, and split screen multiplayer at 500 * something resolution. Man, I felt like I was in ye old fashionedde tymes again.

 

[iamaelephant]

Thats very nice Crusader but thats only your opinion. Even though I only own a PC and no consoles (in fact the only consoles I have ever owned are Sega Master System and N64) I believe that consoles do have their place in the market. Consoles are cheaper, more reliable, simpler and smaller. On top of that, consoles are far superior for sports and fighting games due to the design of the controllers aswell as the simple, enjoyable multiplayer setup. There are also a vast number of different ancilliaries to plug into them, like portable memory cards, different designs of controllers, including steering wheels, joysticks, mouses (mice?) and more.

When it comes to gaming neither system is "better" or "worse", they are just different. I wouldnt dream of buying a fighting game for my PC, just like I would be rather reluctant to play an FPS on a console (although I really enjoyed Duke 64).

 

[Warbie]

bzzt!

you can play xbox in solitary, or play with people in same room.

you can play PC in solitary, or play with people on the internet OR

at a LAN PARTY with people in the same room. which i might add are very popular, www.lanparty.com for some bigger ones. and that is why you are wrong :monkee:

I know this - having been to various LAN parties. But they don't happen that often, and can be alot of hastle to set up (which is fine - but not something you wanna do every day)

When my friends come around, and we want to play some Winning Eleven, we can - with no hastle. It's the convinience that makes console gaming great. (not to mention the massive variety of games. Samba De Amigo anyone? )

I also enjoy playing games online with my clan mates - but it's a different experience to console gaming in your living room (less social)

I'm not trying to argue which type of gaming is better, just that both have their pros and cons and that neither is 'the best'

 

[Crusader]

Simpler and smaller, but requiring lots of ancillaries? Can't you buy control pads for the PC? Where did I say the word better in my post?

I guess the main advantage is that the user doesn't need any more technical knowledge than knowing where the 'on' button is, and they are always good for a laugh, throwing the controller between mates as you get drunk, but for competing against the PC as a serious gaming machine? I think not.

 

[Warbie]

Simpler is good. Ancillaries are great (lightguns, maracas, dance mats and even fishing rods - I love all this crap)

What pc games do you really need a pad for? Can't think of many 4 player pc titles off hand (it's not the platform for this immediate and disposable type of gaming). Nor would it be convinient, or comfy, to crowd around my desk and play on a 19" monitor. (sure you can use tv-out, but from a experience this isn't usually worth the effort)

Sitting on a sofa with your mates, a few beers, and a massive tv is where this type of gaming excels. It can't be done on a pc.

 

[iamaelephant]

Simpler and smaller, but requiring lots of ancillaries?

They dont require lots of different controllers but they are available if you, for example, enjoy playing driving sims alot, you would benefit from buying a steering wheel.

I know all of this is available on the PC, but all I'm saying is that you are not strictly confined the the controllers you get with the console.

What the hell is wrong with you anyway? Why is it so hard for people to admit that consoles are genuine gaming machines? They offer people the opportunity to plug in a game and play it with no experience, no technical know-how and no problems. Consoles are a great thing, so are PCs.

 

[Crusader]

Hmm Ok....

 

[GordonfreeMAN]

[[[What the hell is wrong with you anyway? Why is it so hard for people to admit that consoles are genuine gaming machines? They offer people the opportunity to plug in a game and play it with no experience, no technical know-how and no problems. Consoles are a great thing, so are PCs.]]]

damn right....

 

[Crusader]

I'd also like to know what the hell is wrong with you...