HL2 xbox

Smack500

Smack500

Newbie
Joined
Sep 12, 2004
Messages
256
Reaction score
0
Is there going to be any diffrences from the xbox version to the pc version? I dont see how a xbox can handle the graphics as a top pc can. Also I herd with the small amounts of ram on the machine they will most likely have to make the maps smaller.

xbox
733mhz
64mb ram
geforce 3

Top pc
3800mhz
4000mb ram
ati x800 or nividia 6800 ultra
 
You won't be able to tell the difference.
 
Ownzed said:
There won't be that much of a difference.
Click to expand...


yes there will.

xbox can no way get the same visual effects that a pc will be able to.

you play your xbox 6' away from the tv for a reason. most tv's have only a resolution of 800x600 anyway.
 
SixThree said:
You won't be able to tell the difference.
Click to expand...

Since xbox uses a DX8 graphical rendering engine you should see a few slight differences. Get a geforce 4 ti and set your monitor resolution to 640x480 without FSAA or AF and thats pretty much what the Xbox version will look like.
 
Well if Doom 3 can run on an x-box, HL2 should be just fine.
 
Hazar Dakiri said:
yes there will.

xbox can no way get the same visual effects that a pc will be able to.

you play your xbox 6' away from the tv for a reason. most tv's have only a resolution of 800x600 anyway.
Click to expand...



you mean interlaced 640x480, right?

The game will will look as good as 640x480 w/o aa/af can. :)
 
It uses a dx8 card, with low resolutions. The only way to run these games would be on verry low settings there would have to be a noticeable diffrence.

None of the new generation games have come out to consoles yet, so no one has seen how it will be. Doom III is suppose to come out near december, and far cry instincts got pushed back until feb. 2005.
 
SidewinderX said:
you mean interlaced 640x480, right?

The game will will look as good as 640x480 w/o aa/af can. :)
Click to expand...

yup... Most TV screens come with inbuilt FSAA and AF anyhow. (crap screen resolution that blurs textures and edges) :E
 
Hazar Dakiri said:
yes there will.

xbox can no way get the same visual effects that a pc will be able to.

you play your xbox 6' away from the tv for a reason. most tv's have only a resolution of 800x600 anyway.
Click to expand...
To be exact, all NTSC (US, Canada, and Japan) TV's has 525 lines and PAL(basically everywhere else) has 625 lines. Analog TV's work different from PC monitors and the quality can appear better on a TV due the way it blurs images. However, a monitor for say a PC game will expose the imperfection of an image. So the Xbox won't need to work nearly as hard to attain the same apparent image as the PC version.
 
Monitors vs. TVs
Your computer probably has a "VGA monitor" that looks a lot like a TV but is smaller, has a lot more pixels and has a much crisper display. The CRT and electronics in a monitor are much more precise than is required in a TV; a computer monitor needs higher resolutions. In addition, the plug on a VGA monitor is not accepting a composite signal -- a VGA plug separates out all of the signals so they can be interpreted by the monitor more precisely.
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/tv16.htm
 
Smack500 said:
Monitors vs. TVs
Your computer probably has a "VGA monitor" that looks a lot like a TV but is smaller, has a lot more pixels and has a much crisper display. The CRT and electronics in a monitor are much more precise than is required in a TV; a computer monitor needs higher resolutions. In addition, the plug on a VGA monitor is not accepting a composite signal -- a VGA plug separates out all of the signals so they can be interpreted by the monitor more precisely.
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/tv16.htm
Click to expand...

Sweet. I learned something today. :D
 
Smack500 said:
Is there going to be any diffrences from the xbox version to the pc version? I dont see how a xbox can handle the graphics as a top pc can. Also I herd with the small amounts of ram on the machine they will most likely have to make the maps smaller.

xbox
733mhz
64mb ram
geforce 3

Top pc
3800mhz
4000mb ram
ati x800 or nividia 6800 ultra
Click to expand...
1. PC games(including HL2) are made to run on much slower PCs.

2. Take a PC with the same specs as the XBox and which one is more powerfull? Byfar the xbox, because the games are optimized for only one configuration of hardware. PC games cannot be as much optimized because they are designed for virtually any hardware(as long as its fast enough).

This said, of course the PC version will be prettier. I'd worry about how they ajust the controls and AI for xbox. Anyone played HL1 on PS2 ? how was it?

coZ said:
xbox suports hdtv...
Click to expand...
still, I doubt HL2 on xbox will support higher resolutions than 480p (about 640*480)
 
fudnick said:
To be exact, all NTSC (US, Canada, and Japan) TV's has 525 lines and PAL(basically everywhere else) has 625 lines. Analog TV's work different from PC monitors and the quality can appear better on a TV due the way it blurs images. However, a monitor for say a PC game will expose the imperfection of an image. So the Xbox won't need to work nearly as hard to attain the same apparent image as the PC version.
Click to expand...

you also forgot to mention that most current tv's are interlaced, so you actually end up with an image closer to 320x240. most TV's less than 27 inch can display no mroe than that. an HDTV, and the xbox hdtv output, are progressive scan meaning that they actually show each line of resolution. and even tho those of you will swear taht your vidcard puts out a higher res image than that...so what. your card DOES put out a higher resolution, but your tv converts that image to one it can display.


the only difference is that the xbox version won't have any shaders
 
cadaveca said:
you also forgot to mention that most current tv's are interlaced, so you actually end up with an image closer to 320x240.
Click to expand...
Even if it is interlaced, you still have about 480 different lines being displayed. When interlaced, the lines are just not as sharp as they could be, but the result is much closer to 640*480 than 640*320.

Doesn't directX 8 (like the xbox) support shaders? I might be mistaking, but aren't bump mapping and specular highlights shaders?
 
People who flame the XBOX obviously never owned an XBOX. The XBOX is a very good system..especially to run HL2. You all better be thankful that HL2 is not coming out on PS2 because that would suck so much. The PS2 version would be so choppy and the loading times would be horrid..but enough on the PS2. Some people don't have $2000 to spend on a new computer so they buy a XBOX. I'm glad that more people will beable to enjoy half-life 2 because of the XBOX. Half-life 2 gets more players that way and also gets Valve more money. So I say I'm all for the XBOX version (even though I will get Half-life 2 on PC).
 
nicrd said:
Even if it is interlaced, you still have about 480 different lines being displayed. When interlaced, the lines are just not as sharp as they could be, but the result is much closer to 640*480 than 640*320.

Doesn't directX 8 (like the xbox) support shaders? I might be mistaking, but aren't bump mapping and specular highlights shaders?
Click to expand...


i was refering to dx9 shaders...they are the pretty ones :p

in regards to the interlaced bit..your wrong.

http://www.aluminumstudios.com/digitalvideo/advanced/interlaced/interlaced.html

is a simple explanation....but it boils down to this:
yes, it's like 640x480 but only every second line is drawn.
Period. that makes for 320x240. Try playing Doom3 on your tv at that resolution, and you'll find that it is better looking, because every actual frame gets drawn in it's entirety, rather than every second line of pixels getting dropped.
 
The point is it seems there will be a noticable graphical diffrence compared to a good pc. But if all you have is the xbox and your not a pc gamer shouldnt be a big deal.
 
dream431ca said:
People who flame the XBOX obviously never owned an XBOX. The XBOX is a very good system..especially to run HL2. You all better be thankful that HL2 is not coming out on PS2 because that would suck so much. The PS2 version would be so choppy and the loading times would be horrid..but enough on the PS2. Some people don't have $2000 to spend on a new computer so they buy a XBOX. I'm glad that more people will beable to enjoy half-life 2 because of the XBOX. Half-life 2 gets more players that way and also gets Valve more money. So I say I'm all for the XBOX version (even though I will get Half-life 2 on PC).
Click to expand...

it's good for what it does, yes, but someone earlier posted the most important part...you can totally optimize better for xbox than you can for a standard pc. plain and simple like...nvidia's driver actually reverses the code from the way ATI deals with it, at the gpu, and this was one of the largest reasons why ATI pwns Nvidia in HL2...it was even said that simple driver revisions could bring nvidia closer in performance. it's a big thing when the gpu has to deal with the code backwards! This is part of the reason actually rendering differs between the two major card types. You also have to take into consideration that it is a Nvidia gpu powering the xbox. Maybe when xbox2 comes out with the sti r520, HL2 will look sweet....with better graphics that ATI's current consumer offerings(x800xt ain't no thing to the r520)
 
Smack500 said:
The point is it seems there will be a noticable graphical diffrence compared to good a pc. But if all you have is the xbox and your not a pc gamer shouldnt be a big deal.
Click to expand...

I am still a PC gamer and it's not a big deal to me. I fully support HL2 on XBOX. The graphics should not be too much different. and if they are different..oh well. It's not like many people are buying HL2 for the graphics anyway.
 
yes if you compare a xbox to a pc at that time the xbox was a bit better. But the pc has been upgraded so much since that time, it is better even with more things to load, and less standardization. The same thing happens over and over. When the xbox2 comes out it will probally be a bit better then the 6800/x800 or whatever is top when it comes out. But in 6 months time a new pc card will be released and it will be back on top. Just the facts.
 
I read some where, I think it was EGM, that HL2 would be held back for the Xbox 2 rather than the Xbox. Whether or not this is true, it would be a better move to HL2 on the Xbox 2 because of the hardware included as apposed to that in the original Xbox. In case you don't know the specifics of the Xbox 2 (which technically no one knows for sure because the only evidence is from a "leaked" diagram), it is supposed to have three 3.6 Ghz Power PC (64 bit IBM processors that power Apple G5) 256 mb of Ram, and a suped-up ATI graphics card based on whatever PC card is out at the time.
 
dream431ca said:
People who flame the XBOX obviously never owned an XBOX. The XBOX is a very good system..especially to run HL2. You all better be thankful that HL2 is not coming out on PS2 because that would suck so much. The PS2 version would be so choppy and the loading times would be horrid..but enough on the PS2. Some people don't have $2000 to spend on a new computer so they buy a XBOX. I'm glad that more people will beable to enjoy half-life 2 because of the XBOX. Half-life 2 gets more players that way and also gets Valve more money. So I say I'm all for the XBOX version (even though I will get Half-life 2 on PC).
Click to expand...

hell yeah what he said
 
As much of a PC fanboy I am, I don't condemn Valve for releasing an XBOX version. The fact is that a Gaming PC is becoming more and more difficult to maintain, purchase, and run when compared to an XBOX. Of course it won't look as good, but it will bring the game to a lot more people, and Valve will make a lot of many.

And if Valve makes money, they will develop even better games for the PC.
 
It will also be supporting Microsofts new XNA program which, correct me if I'm mistaken, should replace Direct X as a cross platform graphic module.
 
I have a hard time beleiving those specs for the xbox 2. Its not that there not possible but the price would be outrageous. 3 top of the line cpus, would cost around $1500 (and thats the cheapest price I could find) not including anything else.
 
cadaveca said:
i was refering to dx9 shaders...they are the pretty ones :p

in regards to the interlaced bit..your wrong.

http://www.aluminumstudios.com/digitalvideo/advanced/interlaced/interlaced.html

is a simple explanation....but it boils down to this:
yes, it's like 640x480 but only every second line is drawn.
Period. that makes for 320x240. Try playing Doom3 on your tv at that resolution, and you'll find that it is better looking, because every actual frame gets drawn in it's entirety, rather than every second line of pixels getting dropped.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but i'm not wrong. Althought the TV draws about 240 lines 60 times per second, its the equivalent of 480 lines 30 times per second. Look at the gif animations on your link, even thought the interlaced one is kind of blury, it has as much details as the progressive one.

I'm an electronic technician (IT) and I've completly analyzed the NTSC electrical signal. I've even programmed a chip to generate the signal (I've made an NTSC arkanoïd game as my final school project). Just to test the definition of the a TV, I made all the odd lines white and all the even lines black. The result was about 480 interlaced lines (it was clearly visible that the white lines were seperated by black lines), but the image was heavily flickering.
When using a composite video signal (RCA cable with the NTSC signal), the XBOX renders more than 480 lines (the signal has 525 lines, but 18 are scan lines with no image and a few are drawn of the screen) at a frame rate of 30 images per second.
Smack500 said:
I have a hard time beleiving those specs for the xbox 2. Its not that there not possible but the price would be outrageous. 3 top of the line cpus, would cost around $1500 (and thats the cheapest price I could find) not including anything else.
Click to expand...
The hardware in a console is almost always worth more than the console, so Microsoft does not profit from selling the xbox. It profits from the games(thats why console games cost more than pc games). The same is true for the playstation or gamecube. Btw, those specs are only rumors and the cpu part is probably bogus. just ask yourself why would you have 3 cpus and only 256 Mb? However, there is a big chance it will be a Power PC cpu and an ATi graphic card.
 
Some of the games for the xbox can run in the higher HDTV ranges.
1080i
780p
I have a converter that will let the xbox run at HDTV res on my monitor.
When I play the games in HDTV they look great!!!!!!!!!(for an xbox) ;)

BUT you really cant say that it looks as good as a game runnning at 1280x1024 in 32bpp. on the pc.
And I play my games on a 17" LCD 16ms
 
xbox sux. end of story...ooooo halo was sooo good (lmao)
 
the XBox version will look noticeably bad when compared to the PC version because

1. Low quality textures, much less specularity, and the texture res will probly be brought down to 512x512.

2. It can't hand as many polies as a higher end PC, so models will look noticeably crappier, with a few shortcuts in some areas.

3. their is a chances some maps have been made smaller.

4. No DX 9.0 effects will ever be seen.

5. The water will look crappy.

Anyone who said it wont look crappier, is stupid, doesn't know what they are talking about, and are XBox fanboys who need to die :).
 
Apparently, Half-Life 2 is planned to be an XBox 2 launch title, which makes sense given XBox 2 will be out by the end of next year and that it will actually be able to handle the game, without making its graphics look crap. They're in the preliminary stages at the moment with that with nothing at all even confirmed regarding its status, but it can be said the chances you'll see HL2 on the current XBox are slim to none.
 
nicrd said:
This said, of course the PC version will be prettier. I'd worry about how they ajust the controls and AI for xbox. Anyone played HL1 on PS2 ? how was it?
Click to expand...

was the same as PC, the graphics where in maximus quality and the controls were so easy adapted that for my is so easy as play in a keyboard,and the AI where the same,I remenber I always hate trow a grenade to a soldier and hes kick it back to me :angry:
the point is that was the same

I think HL2 for xbox will look good cuz HL2 dont require so much

also are a game for xbox that has a engine very similiar to the doom3 engine and xbox run it fine,maybe whiout the better fps ever but run very fine, IMO it has better graphics that doom3

the game is Cronicles of Riddick: Escape of butcher Bay
here is a link to screenshots
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/chroniclesofriddick/screenindex.html

and if Xbox can run that game and doom3 will be able to run HL2
(also cronicles of riddick;escape of butcher bay will be on PC for the interesed)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
The leaked maps of the Half-Life 2 episodes - Part 2
Replies
0
Views
9K
Barnz
B
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Omnomnick
Examining The Files Of "SteamVR Performance Test" & "Aperture Robot Repair"
Replies
27
Views
91K
MFL
MFL
Omnomnick
Steam Machine Prototype Revealed + Details
Replies
19
Views
15K
salmonfish123
S
Anthraxxx
BF3 System Specs
Replies
22
Views
1K
unozero
unozero
Back
Top