OT: Think HL2 graphics are good?

Unreal 3 is not the same generation of engine as HL2. There is no basis for comparison.

As for the graphic, I think they're very good though not the best.
 
U3 r0x0rZ your world riGht n0w..
But in 2006.. it's standard.
 
To answer the original question, yes. I think the HL2 graphics are good.

Have a nice day.
 
It's not like we don't know about the next generation engine. Even if the game would look good, it doesn't have to be a good game (A la Doom 3. It'll be forgotten when HL2 is released, slowly, painfully forgotten, trust me).
 
Neutrino said:
Unreal 3 is not the same generation of engine as HL2. There is no basis for comparison.
Click to expand...

This was not meant as "flamebait" as another poster put it. I agree that you can't really compare HL2 with Unreal Engine 3, since they are not of the same generation.

I was just blown away by the detail.

As for the graphic, I think they're very good though not the best.
Click to expand...

Can you give me some examples of ingame graphics that are better?

Just curious
 
If my games can run at that quality with the same specs i run half life 2 at highest, then i'll be happy. I dont want to upgrade for an engine.
 
yeah lets compare a present day graphics engine to another graphics engine not due for another 4 years. /slap
 
As others mentioned, these are shots from a next-generation engine and cannot be compared with HL2, because today's middle-of-the-road hardware can run HL2 at a decent framerate, whereas the U3 engine would choke.

As far as an actual opinion about HL2's graphics, I would say they're slightly better than Doom 3's, for a number of reasons. I prefer the far more realistic look of the textures (shiny textures only applied where they should be), open environments, and rolling, organic terrain.

In fairness, I was really excited about D3 and bought it the first hour it was on sale, played though it several times and did have a lot of fun with it. I just think they went overboard with lighting and shiny textures. It's one thing to show off your graphic engine, but they should have shown more restraint and used it here and there rather than on nearly every texture in the game.

Yes, HL2 will stand head and shoulders over D3 for many, many reasons, and we have only days until we discover why.

-UnmarkedOne
 
dunawayc said:
Can you give me some examples of ingame graphics that are better?

Just curious
Click to expand...

I think D3 looks better graphically than anything I've seen so far for HL2. Not by much, but still better.

Also STALKER: Shadow of Chernobyl.
 
This is old news, been posted before. We don't need another thread on it.
 
Unreal 3 Engine does indeed have the best looking graphics of any engine currently on display, however U3 will not run on any of today's current hardware at acceptable speeds.

Also, you have to consider that part of what's making that so damned good is that Epic's artists are some of the best there are. There is nothing in the U3 engine aside from Soft shadows that the Doom 3 engine is incapable of handling.

Source, while still a potent platform, lacks several features that both U3E and D3E implement. Source will stay relevant or not depending upon the ease with which development can be made with its tools and that seems to be what Valve was shooting for all along.
 
Well Unreal 3 is at least two years away so enthusiasts will have time to catch up.
 
ummm one year... and devs have already started with it.

the mod team i am on might evan get it, if we win the msu we get a free liense to the unreal engine, that includes UE3. and we would get to use it now...

EDIT: yes that is real time. there is a movie out of it.
 
U3 blows half life out of the water visually no doubt about it. And also imo even D3 looks a fair bit more impressive. At the end of the day its all about the gameplay though, which is why HL2 stands such a good chance as a game, because valve know what they are doing gameplay-wise.

It really is silly though to have people say that HL2 look's as impressive as other recent/upcoming engines. Source really is quite ordinary looking now thanks to the year+ delay etc.. its just a fact. You can talk about art direction etc.. but that simply isnt an argument, we are talking about the capabilities of the engines. Its also important to remember that most of the next gen engines are not a long way off at all. The U3 engine and the engine that Bethesda are using for TES4 (sorry i forget the name of it) are going to be used extensively on the Xbox2/PC/PS3 and they are well into developement. The r500 chip that ATI are working on is scheduled for release Q1 2005, this is the chip that will be used in the Xbox2. I think we will see some of these games next year.

Anyway it doesnt matter, HL2 will hopefully be a very cool game indeed, the graphics will not be revolutionary, but such is life... Its just something that has to be accepted.

edit: btw has everyone seen the magazine scans from TES4? that looks easily as good as, if not better than anything ive seen from U3 so far. It really does look crazy.
 
yea it looks good, only a few years to wait for it :)
 
NB. said:
U3 blows half life out of the water visually no doubt about it. And also imo even D3 looks a fair bit more impressive. At the end of the day its all about the gameplay though, which is why HL2 stands such a good chance as a game, because valve know what they are doing gameplay-wise.

It really is silly though to have people say that HL2 look's as impressive as other recent/upcoming engines. Source really is quite ordinary looking now thanks to the year+ delay etc.. its just a fact. You can talk about art direction etc.. but that simply isnt an argument, we are talking about the capabilities of the engines. Its also important to remember that most of the next gen engines are not a long way off at all. The U3 engine and the engine that Bethesda are using for TES4 (sorry i forget the name of it) are going to be used extensively on the Xbox2/PC/PS3 and they are well into developement. The r500 chip that ATI are working on is scheduled for release Q1 2005, this is the chip that will be used in the Xbox2. I think we will see some of these games next year.

Anyway it doesnt matter, HL2 will hopefully be a very cool game indeed, the graphics will not be revolutionary, but such is life... Its just something that has to be accepted.

edit: btw has everyone seen the magazine scans from TES4? that looks easily as good as, if not better than anything ive seen from U3 so far. It really does look crazy.
Click to expand...

also i think hl2 looks better than doom3, and because i think that it must be a fact :p

there is way to many rubber faces in doom 3 for me
 
Hehe, i agree Doom3 has a weird shiny effect on everything, but still i think its more technically impressive than enything ive seen from HL2, I'll hold judgment until ive played the full game though but from what ive seen so far thats the case.

And U3/TES4 etc.. are not 'a few years' away, i'll bet there will be games available before you imagine.
 
The U3 engine... Don't get me started. No need to get into that kind of comparison since the answer is obvious.

Doom 3 is visually more impressive than HL2, if you ask me. It's certainly got a more powerful engine.

But I generally like the look of HL2 more than Doom 3. More variety. Less plastic-looking. Great animation. Great use of physics. And Valve has the sense to show some restraint when it comes to these things, rather than throwing eye-candy at you every frame.
 
TES4 looks to be a huge disappointment, as in the article they said they were spending more time on the graphics and less on the story/plot/gameplay aspects of the game than they previously had.

The Elder Scrolls 4: The Sellout Eddition.
 
I like HL2's graphics more than I did D3. but from a technical standpoint the HL2 graphics are not the best overall.
 
Jakeic said:
TES4 looks to be a huge disappointment, as in the article they said they were spending more time on the graphics and less on the story/plot/gameplay aspects of the game than they previously had.

The Elder Scrolls 4: The Sellout Eddition.
Click to expand...

I dont undertsand what they are saying at all, Bethesda spent a HUGE amount of time on the graphics in morrowind, that game looked pretty spectacular when it came out.

I'm not going to even get close to judging the game until its out anyway, you might be right and the game could be terrible, but thats neither here or there we are talking about graphics in this thread.
 
Jakeic, in Tes 4, they may be spending time on alot of graphics and making a world thats a tad bit smaller than morrowind.
-Everyone else has there own lives, they will eat, sleep, go to work, take a lunch break, steal, do everything.
-Very Interactive, the story sounds SuberB out of what i read.
-Graphics look great
-And so on....

Morrowind had ground breaking graphics, they spend alot of time on them. They spent alot of time on those graphics.

There pretty much improving all the problems in morrowind.
Though to do this in a reasonable timeframe they would have to cut alot. Like alot of npc's, and landmass. I mean if you building data for NPC's to act like humans and go to work and everything im pretty sure that will take a while for a 1000 NPC's.

But it's not like there gonna MAJORLLY cut it. For god sakes dude. It's not like there gonna complete cut the story or add some crap one in. They have obviously designed the story to be very pleasing.

Bethesda owns for single player rpg's don't judge a game till you have lots of info\till its out\till its reviewed\till youve played it.
Damn dude, get overyourself.

You act like it's story is gonna be something like Diablo 2's.. Get overyoureself.
 
I don't like the HL2 graphics as much as i did 1,5 year ago, but still nice :)
 
Yes, HL² does look very nice. Way better than Doom 3 IMO, there is a huge difference in looking good and looking technically advanced.
 
Those images are mind blowing! Cant wait! I thought 'holy shit' about half a dozen times looking at them.
 
I saw the Unreal vid, and i thought to myself OMFGOMFGOMFGOMFG...Then i thought... who in F*ucking hell would be able to run that, even in 2006...
The point is, this game is going to be for the seriously hard core gamers, i mean people who keep up with the technology, people who buy a new videocard every year (or whenever one comes out). This makes me believe gaming technology is soon going to surpass the average gamers technology, making a whole bunch of average gamers very,very,upset...
 
I'm not quite sure how to write my thoughts into a well-organized essay of grammatic and poetic fury, so I'll put it this way: Doom 3 is the Goliath to Half-Life 2's David.
 
If some people think good graphics make a game..then you shouldn't buy Half-life 2. IMO graphics make a game to a point...after that it's about gameplay..you know..Half-life 2 would suck without the physics and the Manipulator...THAT'S what everybodys waiting to do in HL2...just get the Manipulator gun and fire everything you see......I'm done :p
 
HL2 looks very nice.

Valve uses technology for subtle effects, and this is what makes it more noticeable. The range of emotions in the HL2 characters looks stunning - just one character model (alyx) had a masculaine, feminine, hardened, soften, e.t.c. look. It's always animation that steals the show - and HL2 is full of it!

Valve also seems to have improved backdrops - the buildings look so much more believable. It really has improved a lot after an year.

Of course, I still believe D3 is still the better game (graphically), it has better lighting/shadowing, pixel shading and more complex geometry - but HL2 isn't that far behind. :)

Also, HL2's art direction rocks, I don't like corridor crawlers!
 
L337_Assasain said:
This makes me believe gaming technology is soon going to surpass the average gamers technology, making a whole bunch of average gamers very,very,upset...
Click to expand...
Which means what? You'll have to buy a new videocard, just like most of us did to play HL2/Doom3/FarCry? Tech moves forward, games move forward,. and we, as consumers have to keep up. Nothing is changing here,. this is the same as its been for the last 20 years.. for example,. when Doom came out, it didnt run so hot on my 386,. in fact, none of my friends could play it very well. But a year later we got 486's, and it was the shit.

The faster the industry moves forward, the faster new hardware becomes affordable/second tier. Sure you cant game like the rich kids, but you can still game far better then you could previously.

How can you possibly complain about progress? I dont get it.



And BTW. U3 engine looks like CRAP.. (compaired to the 2008 game engines)
 
Shiiet! Ok. HL2 graphics ar great. But I dont want it for it's graphics. I want HL2 only for the GAMEPLAY and the game itself. thats what counts.
But crap! Those unreal 3 pics are amazing. I can't imagen that a game can look like that. at least i'm sold. But thats nothing to care about yet. It will probably taka a while before u can see some progress on that game.

HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2HL2
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[I'll explode sooner or later if i cant get HL2 sooooon!!!!]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dekstar
Counter-Strike: GOing Deep - Part 1
Replies
17
Views
5K
Ennui
Ennui
S
Getting HL2 to look ugly
Replies
24
Views
2K
Solver
S
A
HL2 lost its magic?
2
Replies
57
Views
3K
Andy
Andy
Gorgon
Unreal Engine 3
Replies
11
Views
1K
EVIL
EVIL
CptStern
reputable retailer lists Sept 2nd for HL2?
Replies
10
Views
954
CptStern
CptStern
Back
Top