HL2 lost its magic?

nah, i think the delay made the game better, and now they're perfecting it
 
Maybe in the graphics department, but none of those games seem to offer the sort of things one can expect to do playing Half-Life 2.
 
No. If game has nice graphics that dont mean there is good and playable game. HL2 has good game with interesting strory and nice graphics.

Sry about messing things, I am just wake up:D
 
Well graphics are all the first thing we know about a game, as far as the physics are concerned, no games coming out with these engines will be lacking in the physics department. I think this years e3 just showed us that the playing field is alot more even then any of us knew.
 
Unreal 3 is coming out 2006 + factor in the delays it'll probably be 2007.

LIVE IN THE NOW!!!!
 
amneziac85 said:
With games like F.E.A.R. and the Unreal 3 engine...did HL2 and Doom 3 make a mistake by taking this long to drop? So far, graphically the Unreal 3 engine is on a completely higher level then HL2 and Doom 3.

http://www.unrealtechnology.com/flash/technology/ue30.shtml

What do you guys think? Has the game been hurt by this long development time?
Click to expand...
--------------------------------------------------------------
HL2 lost its magic?
Click to expand...
I'm saying this and only this: NO
 
amneziac85 said:
Well graphics are all the first thing we know about a game, as far as the physics are concerned, no games coming out with these engines will be lacking in the physics department. I think this years e3 just showed us that the playing field is alot more even then any of us knew.
Click to expand...
/Start rant

Half-Life 2 has indepth story, free and complex gameplay-firefights, problemsolving, drivable vehicles and offers something that pretty much all games on the market today lacks, soul!

Furthermore, the competition is nowhere near. No other FPS-adventure game is nearly as good as Half-Life 2, and doesn't even match Half-Life the first today! As someone else said on these forums some days ago "There hasn't been a game as good as Half-Life the first since, well, Half-Life the first".

If you're looking for F/TPS-roleplay-Mayhem, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is the best game coming out next. Go shoot some civilians and do some mafia work. What you have to remember is that Half-Life 2 and GTA: SA are two completely different games in two completely different categories.

/End rant

In other words, keep your mouth shut and be happy :rolleyes:

Regards
Dead-Inside
 
they're all nice games... depends on what genre of fps you like to play... hl2 is right up my street
 
ummm...why's everyone getting so ranty?

I think hl2 looks superb and Unreal 3 engine is a long way away but if Carmack and Valve intend to sell their engines to other people they may have been caught napping slightly. At the moment though, nothing can touch hl2 as a game or the source engine but i'm sure it would have been more beneficial to have released the game a year ago.
 
if Carmack and Valve intend to sell their engines to other people they may have been caught napping slightly.
Click to expand...

You're comparing the current technology of HL2 and Doom 3 to Unreal tech that won't be out for another year or two. Valve and id aren't going to sit back and not update their engines in that time.
 
Yeah, Unreal III looks freaking fantastic, I had a friend come over today and I showed him some videos and he couldnt believe how good gaming was going to get, he bought a new computer. HL2 will be good for its time, remember those Unreal III graphics wont be here for a while like already mentioned.
 
if Carmack and Valve intend to sell their engines to other people they may have been caught napping slightly.
Click to expand...

My point exactly, were they caught sleeping? Spending so much time on gameplay and working on the actual game, engine wise, competition is catching up. So in 2 years when their trying to sell their engines, I think they'll have good competition and not the land slide killer "every game for the next 5 years should be made in Source" engine we have all been thinking.
 
The thing that made HL1 the best FPS/Game ever wasnt the graphics but the Story and the gameplay. HL2 has mostly the same 'Storywriter and Leveldesigner etc. + very nice graphics..
 
amneziac85 said:
My point exactly, were they caught sleeping? Spending so much time on gameplay and working on the actual game
Click to expand...

This is asinine in the extreme. Valve have been working on a GAME. Of course they're going to have been concentrating on gameplay. Would you prefer them to have just concentrated on engine features?

engine wise, competition is catching up.
Click to expand...

Obviously. There comes a point where you have to lock your features and just finish the actual game.

So in 2 years when their trying to sell their engines, I think they'll have good competition
Click to expand...

They've got competition now. No engine is all things to all people.

not the land slide killer "every game for the next 5 years should be made in Source" engine we have all been thinking.
Click to expand...

If that's what you think, then more fool you. I've certainly not been labouring under that misapprehension.

You're completely neglecting the fact that engine technology is not stagnant. You don't do the engine for your game, then stop. Valve themselves have said that they'll continually update the engine, just like Epic do with Unreal Tech. The Unreal 3.0 technology is just an evolution of current efforts - there's nothing revolutionary in it, nothing that id and Valve can't do.
Epic themselves have said that the Unreal 3.0 tech won't be usable until 2005/2006. Do you have any idea what Source will look like by then? Or what Carmack's next effort will be like? As hardware capabilities increase, so does the quality of rendering. By the time game start coming out with Epic's latest technology, everyone else will be using the same features.

And I thought you said you worked for Activision - this is really basic stuff. Frankly, I'm surprised.
 
amneziac85 said:
With games like F.E.A.R. and the Unreal 3 engine...did HL2 and Doom 3 make a mistake by taking this long to drop? So far, graphically the Unreal 3 engine is on a completely higher level then HL2 and Doom 3.

http://www.unrealtechnology.com/flash/technology/ue30.shtml

What do you guys think? Has the game been hurt by this long development time?
Click to expand...
F.E.A.R doesnt have graphics on par with Doom 3 or HL2, more on par with Far Cry. Unreal 3 of course kick everythings ass. But this is a ridiculous arguement anyway because the UE3 technology is 2 - 4 years away from being in any game.
 
Half-life 2, magic, loose?

Nay! Never! No!

You are forgeting that a good game and good graphics are not co-dependant. One of the best scenes in HL2 E3 2004 vid was the "Welcome to City 17: Its safer here". Plot, atmosphere and dialogue are 9/10 of a game IMHO.

Not that HL2 isn't visually stunning anyway. Your god! Have you even seen the source video!
 
PiMuRho said:
This is asinine in the extreme. Valve have been working on a GAME. Of course they're going to have been concentrating on gameplay. Would you prefer them to have just concentrated on engine features?



Obviously. There comes a point where you have to lock your features and just finish the actual game.



They've got competition now. No engine is all things to all people.



If that's what you think, then more fool you. I've certainly not been labouring under that misapprehension.

You're completely neglecting the fact that engine technology is not stagnant. You don't do the engine for your game, then stop. Valve themselves have said that they'll continually update the engine, just like Epic do with Unreal Tech. The Unreal 3.0 technology is just an evolution of current efforts - there's nothing revolutionary in it, nothing that id and Valve can't do.
Epic themselves have said that the Unreal 3.0 tech won't be usable until 2005/2006. Do you have any idea what Source will look like by then? Or what Carmack's next effort will be like? As hardware capabilities increase, so does the quality of rendering. By the time game start coming out with Epic's latest technology, everyone else will be using the same features.

And I thought you said you worked for Activision - this is really basic stuff. Frankly, I'm surprised.
Click to expand...

i would not go so far as to say that his comment was vacuous in any way. I think that there is a valid point for arguing that valve would have stood to make more money from their source if it'd been released a year earlier. Obviously i agree with you as well: Of course Carmack and VALVe are gonna follow the competition and perhaps that extra year has given them time to make Source even more update friendly. Given the valve track record though wouldn't you expect them to take more than a couple of years to give us the next great installment or do you think they'll keep adding to it gradually?
 
Yeah, and if Doom 3 was released 4 years ago.. :rolleyes:

All engines, once you have the license for them, you are entitled to updates of them, as soon as they are made.
 
Perhaps the graphics might not be as white-hot as some other upcoming games (to be honest I find the HL2 graphics look very different from one video/set of screenshots to another, so its hard to make a judgement or comparision. Other engines might look better in certain ways, but I think the way Valve have implemented Source in HL2 is just more satisfying somehow - the little details are very pleasing) but what we should remember is that there were games that came out before Half-Life (1) which had technically better graphics (ie Quake 2, Unreal) - but nobody really gives a rats ass about these games now.
Sure it would be nice if HL2 is right at the top of the graphics hill when the game comes out, but it is such a slippery slope (mixing my metaphors?) and there are so many different factors important to the "virtual experience" ie the immersion level, not to mention the overall entertainment value, that its not worth getting worked up about.
 
Unless you have in your possesion right now a X800 your computer wont run any Unreal 3 engine game.

*as stated by U3 devs*

so considering Geforce 2's can play half life2 i dont see Valve loosing out.

especialy since the U3 games aint coming till 2006 at the earliest.
 
i would not go so far as to say that his comment was vacuous in any way. I think that there is a valid point for arguing that valve would have stood to make more money from their source if it'd been released a year earlier. Obviously i agree with you as well: Of course Carmack and VALVe are gonna follow the competition and perhaps that extra year has given them time to make Source even more update friendly. Given the valve track record though wouldn't you expect them to take more than a couple of years to give us the next great installment or do you think they'll keep adding to it gradually?
Click to expand...

Dont worry, he flames after every post I make, im flattered by it now...

Point being that the more time they spend on tweaking gameplay settings and details in the actual HL2 game, the less time Source gets. Imagine if the game actually had come out in September...most of this time could have been spent making Source better. So the longer HL2 is pushed back, the less spectacular the engine looks. Period.

As far as...
The Unreal 3.0 technology is just an evolution of current efforts - there's nothing revolutionary in it
Click to expand...
I didnt know you were on the Unreal 3 design team? Neat.
 
Besides, graphics don't make a game

Look at Far Cry or Unreal 2 for example, they have great graphics (U2 did for its time)














Thats all they have
 
i would not go so far as to say that his comment was vacuous in any way.
Click to expand...

I do. If Valve had been working purely on an engine, then they would have features like Unreal 3.0.

Valve wrote Source around a game. Unreal 3.0 is purely an engine.
 
Dont worry, he flames after every post I make, im flattered by it now...
Click to expand...

Don't flatter yourself. I could quite easily show that I don't even respond to the majority of your posts, but you already knew that...

I didnt know you were on the Unreal 3 design team? Neat.
Click to expand...

Nothing in that tech demo is revolutionary. It's just an evolution of current technology, and it'll all be mainstream by the time any games using the engine will be out.
 
I gotta agree with PiMuRho here. Nothing there is revolutionary, although it is still goddamn impressive. And it knocks my socks off everytime i watch the video of it
 
When did graphics become the standard for what is or isnt a great game? Look at all the mods STILL being played on the orginal HL engine and look at all the mods for the unreal II game... still looking.... hmmm, oh yeah it was a beautiful game that ended at the 9 hour mark with zero involvement on my part. Couldnt wait to resell that coaster.

HL set the standard for gameplay not by graphics but by storytelling, getting the player involved in the events unfolding. I cant imagine the next-gen HL will be anything less.

Comparing a game today to a game 2-4 years in the future is apples and oranges. Of course devs teams will continue to push the boundaries of realism in a game but without getting a player involved in the game what is the point. I continue to play HL even now because no game has surpassed the "game play". And as stated my moderators here, the game engine itself will be continuously tweaked for better graphics and improvements. What other company out there is supporting mod teams 5 YEARS AFTER their game has been released. Still looking? None. Its not just the game but the committment to the game community as a whole that will make or break a game.

people can continue to flame Valve for whatever perceived wrong-doings with the release of HL2 but the fact of the matter is that no other company has stood behind its product like they have.
 
Unreal is supposed to be released on 2006..it's a year two thousand and four and we're speculating will the games look/feel/taste better two years from now? I think you should seriously think more what you post.
 
Anyways, Unreal gameplays always sucks, it's basically doom with better GFX,
The story is what it's all about...
 
Why are people so damn concerned about the graphics? (Yes ive made complaints about them but i never said they were bad) The graphics are amazking, what the hell do you guys want? Real life graphics? Oh, and for those who think a game will be amazing because you saw how good the graphics are, I have two words for you - Far Cry.
 
Graphics?!? LOL I STILL play XCOM:UFO Defense. It came out in 1993 and I originally played it on a 386. To this day I haven't found a game I like more. Fully deformable terrain with strategy and action all mixed into one. Great game even though I have to run a program that slows my cpu down 90% to enjoy it.

I still consider the original HL to be the best FPS ever. Obviously that has nothing to do with graphics either. FarCry has nice graphics, but couldn't imagine playing it 11 years from now.

Graphics <> Good Game
Graphics != Good Game
Graphics don't equal Good Game
 
Enemy Unknown? Hmmm hadn't heard of that one before. I have UFO defense, Terror from the Deep and Apocolypse. Is it true there is an xcom game I don't have?

*runs for google*
 
Nevermind I think enemy unknown is the UK title. I think it is the equivalent of UFO Defense. Set me straight if I'm wrong. Agreed best strategy game ever!
 
Yeah, it's the UK and Australian name for it.

Only three XCOM games?

Don't you have XCOM: Interceptor?
 
I can't believe people are making threads like this..

halflife 2 has EVERYTHING we want in a good game..and now someone DARES to make a thread like this...omfg

A game has MUCH more then graphics you know...now try to remember this so you don't forget it again. Thanks.
 
I haven't seen Interceptor. I'll have to look for it. To be honest I pretty much only play UFO Defense/Enemy Unknown. I played the other two breifly, but they never hit me like the first one.

I tried that recent UFO Aftermath or whatever it was and I hated it. Didn't capture anything from the originals. It's amazing with all of this new technology and the growth of the game industry in general that they can't make a new ufo game even remotely close to as good as the original, let alone better. And deformable terrain? Fahgedaboudit.
 
Well, UFO:Aftermath wasn't an offical sequel.

Interceptor kind of breaks the mould: It's an XCOM space sim game. Not bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Half-Life's lost feature, Timeline
Replies
0
Views
6K
Barnz
B
B
Gabe Newell's AMA summary (January 17, 2017)
Replies
1
Views
24K
Gerzowktz
Gerzowktz
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
USB λ
Two Is A Coincidence, Three Is A Pattern
Replies
3
Views
2K
Sidedraft
Sidedraft
Back
Top