Possible IGN story 12am PST...

Can someone please explain why this: http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/512/512580/half-life-2-200405081121500.jpg

shot is apparently so terrible? I can understand being underwhelmed with solid looking buildings with weak textures though we don't know what is going on with LOD there, but that shot looks pretty damn good to me. There isn't a lot of lighting interaction going on but if you think that shot looks terrible then you need a head check for being the superficial graphical nitpicker that you are....
 
There is nothing wrong with this http://users.pandora.be/desert/hl2/half-life-2_051004_005.jpg
shot either. AA isn't on and the ground texture looks pretty oridinary but everything else looks good.

Anyone would think Stalker or Far Cry could never have shots which aren't their best representation:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/stalker/screens.html?page=385
http://www.gamecaptain.de/showScree...=8&PHPSESSID=4836774256c6d0a2ac2b8f39f51ecfe8
It's not like either of them DON'T use ugly low poly monsters in comparison to their superlative environments with animations worse than HL2 either....
 
x84D80Yx said:
PvtRyan im sorry that your graphical standards are so high, only one screen shot out of plenty (including on many gaming sites, not just the ones i picked) impressed you.
Click to expand...

My standards are high? I'm just saying that still images mean nothing about how a game actually looks. I think HL2 looks great and it's second on my list after S.T.A.L.K.E.R. graphics wise.

like Mr-Fusion said, there are videos out from this year. and they look buggy as hell. i know they are small and crap quality but i dont see anything impressive besides the gameplay (phsyics and interaction).
Click to expand...

They showed quite a bit of detail though, although it was too dark to see clearly. Nothing wrong with them. And HL2 isn't completely done with content, the students mentioned they worked on high res models (presumably to make normal maps out of 'em)

i dont think e3 will show us the final hl2, strictly because its just there to persuade the crowd. we shall see when hl2 hits stores.
Click to expand...

If ATI has any hope of impressing people with the X800, they better show a final HL2.
And that brings me to another point: why exactly did ATI choose for Valve with HL2 to promote their new cards (the 9800 XT and X800) if it looks like shit?
 
Wolf - my personal beef with that screenshot is that the zombies arent on the ground! Thats the only one of the new screens that really dissappointed me. To be honest I expected the graphics to look significantly better than they do, but I'm not at all pissed off at how it does look, because it's still nice to look at, and I'm sure the game will play out really well.
 
Wolf said:
Can someone please explain why this: http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/512/512580/half-life-2-200405081121500.jpg

shot is apparently so terrible? I can understand being underwhelmed with solid looking buildings with weak textures though we don't know what is going on with LOD there, but that shot looks pretty damn good to me. There isn't a lot of lighting interaction going on but if you think that shot looks terrible then you need a head check for being the superficial graphical nitpicker that you are....
Click to expand...
I'll tell you how it could look better.

-It looks really plain. Some rubble around the place, tumbleweed, barrels, boxes, broken wood, dead zombie bodies leaning against walls would add a lot of detail to that scene.

-This is supposed to be an semi-apocolyptic setting yet the ground looks as if it has just been cleaned with a mop. Surely it would be screwed up with, scratchy texturing, imperfections, pieces of grass/weeds/moss growing through the cracks???

Though it could be just that scene that's lacking a bit of detail. Who knows? Most of the stuff from the bink videos looks fine in terms of environmental detail.
 
If ATI has any hope of impressing people with the X800, they better show a final HL2. And that brings me to another point: why exactly did ATI choose for Valve with HL2 to promote their new cards (the 9800 XT and X800) if it looks like shit?

Maybe they to, realise that a games true depth is not skin deep :E

And they could garuantee alot of units out the door with the XT promotion ...

... am i becoming a cynic?! :|
 
PvtRyan said:
And that brings me to another point: why exactly did ATI choose for Valve with HL2 to promote their new cards (the 9800 XT and X800) if it looks like shit?
Click to expand...


the question is. why did gabe use last years strider vid for the showing of the x800 on hl2? why couldnt he of used a video of what valve is clearly showing all these websites?

maybe it was too soon
maybe ati or gabe thought 2003 hl2 stuff was better graphically
maybe it was the "design decision" and not a "technical limitation" of the show
maybe they thought it was just better to compare what we have already seen on new hardware.

who knows. we will find out in the final version.

we already know last years e3 was scripted just to show off the source goodies. why wouldnt the same thing happen? we will find out in the final weather the graphics are sub-par or amazingly gifted. until then i guess ill stop talkin about hl2 graphics so much.

its just i find so many hl2 screenshots impress me (and others) more last year, than this year's screenshots.

we shall see in the final. you can quote me on that ;)
 
x84D80Yx said:
the question is. why did gabe use last years strider vid for the showing of the x800 on hl2? why couldnt he of used a video of what valve is clearly showing all these websites?

maybe it was too soon
maybe ati or gabe thought 2003 hl2 stuff was better graphically
maybe it was the "design decision" and not a "technical limitation" of the show
maybe they thought it was just better to compare what we have already seen on new hardware.

who knows. we will find out in the final version.

we already know last years e3 was scripted just to show off the source goodies. why wouldnt the same thing happen? we will find out in the final weather the graphics are sub-par or amazingly gifted. until then i guess ill stop talkin about hl2 graphics so much.

its just i find so many hl2 screenshots impress me (and others) more last year, than this year's screenshots.

we shall see in the final. you can quote me on that ;)
Click to expand...

[babbling]
well the framerate of the strider video at last years E3 wasnt all that smooth.....maybe they were using it because it was the most demanding demo they had, also this years E3 presentations are going to be videos, not looping demos. in addition, they probably want to save the E3 stuff for E3, and they didn't want to use some random demo at WinHEC because they're trying to keep much of the game under wraps until the game is released. [/babbling]
 
x84D80Yx said:
the question is. why did gabe use last years strider vid for the showing of the x800 on hl2? why couldnt he of used a video of what valve is clearly showing all these websites?
Click to expand...
Easy the 2004 E3 demo loop wasn't finished and regardless you don't blow your load before the time is right. Valve may have crap marketing, but they are sure as hell going to save their best teaser punch for E3 to maximise impact.

Think about it for a second - remember in HL1 how the battle scenes progressed from you being against a few aliens, then a few grunts, and then more chaotic with everyone on everyone until finally it was all out war. Do you remember being wowed by the scale of that war in terms of a steady build up of impressive action set-pieces? Now put that idea into context here - we haven't seen jack shit yet! Think about it - what have we seen: two striders at once, a half dozen Combine with some separate encounters with a handful of lesser aliens... You people are nitpicking background details when clearly the only precedent we have to go on indictates that we are going to be in the middle of a WAR with some kind of city muching colonisation force AND a bunch of aliens.
 
Everyone needs to stop basing their opinion on screenshots without any true knowledge of what is going on.

I am sure valve waited 1 whole year so they could tone the game down so that BETTER technology can run it faster. That seems logical :rolleyes:

Stop bickering about things that you honestly have no right to base judgement on. Wait for E3, then bitch if the graphics suck.

Something tells me they won't though.
 
Wow I hate to be the pessimist of the bunch yet again but that pic with the zombies has to be a joke. They aren't even standing on the freaking ground right!

Dunno about anyone else but I'm gonna be awfully pissed if the footage at E3 is of the levels all the magazines got to play.
 
I'd be a little disappointed but not pissed. HL1 didn't have any trouble winning GoTY awards left, right and center because it lacked Q2's coloured lighting or something superficial like that - it was a benchmark of gameplay and sophistication for a long time...

Personally I think it will look a lot better in motion with a lot going on anyway. I think we'll get a better idea come E3 regardless...
 
Soundwave said:
Wow I hate to be the pessimist of the bunch yet again but that pic with the zombies has to be a joke. They aren't even standing on the freaking ground right!

Dunno about anyone else but I'm gonna be awfully pissed if the footage at E3 is of the levels all the magazines got to play.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too. ;(

2morrow is a big day. :thumbs:
 
Wolf said:
I'd be a little disappointed but not pissed. HL1 didn't have any trouble winning GoTY awards left, right and center because it lacked Q2's coloured lighting or something superficial like that - it was a benchmark of gameplay and sophistication for a long time...

Personally I think it will look a lot better in motion with a lot going on anyway. I think we'll get a better idea come E3 regardless...
Click to expand...

You have to remember there has to be a suspension of disbelief. HL2 will not win any game of the year awards if it has basic graphical flaws like floating models. Yes, it may have the best gameplay in the world, but it needs to have the graphical power and consistency to back it up.
 
Wolf said:
I'd be a little disappointed but not pissed. HL1 didn't have any trouble winning GoTY awards left, right and center because it lacked Q2's coloured lighting or something superficial like that - it was a benchmark of gameplay and sophistication for a long time...

Personally I think it will look a lot better in motion with a lot going on anyway. I think we'll get a better idea come E3 regardless...
Click to expand...

I know dude, I don't have a problem with graphics much at all, I still play alot of older, some would say crappy-looking games, but that problem with the zombies is kind of pathetic. So few new screenshots and they let that one slip out, with floating models. Just kind of weird.
 
sweet mother fo christ.....

People QUIT moaning about the graphics and wether they will or will not suck.

Im a veteran Gamer, ive played the Beta, ive seen 1st hand what a 2.8 P4 with a 9600pro can do.....

I am NOT dissapointed in the gfx one bit.

So for those of you basing your "facts" off some screenshots please shut the hell up?
 
If that was directed at me, I'm not complaining about the graphics, it looks pretty good. I'm complaining that the zombie models are like a foot off the ground. It just looks weird
 
Wolf said:
There is nothing wrong with this http://users.pandora.be/desert/hl2/half-life-2_051004_005.jpg
shot either. AA isn't on and the ground texture looks pretty oridinary but everything else looks good.

Anyone would think Stalker or Far Cry could never have shots which aren't their best representation:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/stalker/screens.html?page=385
http://www.gamecaptain.de/showScree...=8&PHPSESSID=4836774256c6d0a2ac2b8f39f51ecfe8
It's not like either of them DON'T use ugly low poly monsters in comparison to their superlative environments with animations worse than HL2 either....
Click to expand...
That was the hardest lie of the day for you?
 
Dougy said:
sweet mother fo christ.....

People QUIT moaning about the graphics and wether they will or will not suck.

Im a veteran Gamer, ive played the Beta, ive seen 1st hand what a 2.8 P4 with a 9600pro can do.....

I am NOT dissapointed in the gfx one bit.

So for those of you basing your "facts" off some screenshots please shut the hell up?
Click to expand...

Heh, I was one of the people who stayed up for the release of this preview. That preview was released 6 hours ago, and I am up again doing a project. You might guess I am a little tired and cranky.

But there is certain graphical flaws that have to be addressed. You have to imagine Valve would only give IGN the best looking screenshot available. Yet these screen shots are inconsistent. One has floating models. Another has building with beautiful curved geometry to only have it look weird because the building behind it is completely flat.

I know they will get it right. But I don't see how they will make a summer release if they have a whole bunch of graphical inconsistency that need to be fixed and balance the gameplay.
 
That image with the floating models could be anything technical related. It could be a floating point collision test on the models to test their buffer allocation on the maps terrain. It could be a demo playback mode problem where models float off the terrain brush. It could be a brush unit clip. It is something. This is the only screenshot with this problem. I could name 100 design interface things that it could be.

The image with the flat windows in the background is obviously an LOD scale, or is part of the 3-D sky, which has a 16:1 scale. They are not going to offer horrible textures and world brush units just to piss you off. They are not making things so people can say, "wow, you really suck Valve". We don't know, you don't know, and saying that you do know is irrelevant. What we do know, is that Valve isn't going to dumb down the game because technology got too advanced...
 
Horrible Trilinear rendering.... they should have enabled Anisotropic Filtering and then they would have been more impressive.

Texture clarity on High resolution textures = the win.
 
Dougy said:
sweet mother fo christ.....

People QUIT moaning about the graphics and wether they will or will not suck.

Im a veteran Gamer, ive played the Beta, ive seen 1st hand what a 2.8 P4 with a 9600pro can do.....

I am NOT dissapointed in the gfx one bit.

So for those of you basing your "facts" off some screenshots please shut the hell up?
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. Nothing disappointing.

Sure, that zombie shot they released was meh, but the rest looked decent enough
 
Xtasy0 said:
Wednesday May 12th is the first day of E3, today is Monday May 10th.........
Click to expand...

The conference starts tommorow, so maybe valve may talk to some people, you never know lol, but yes Wednesday is when the good stuff comes.
 
You'd assume that game companies would give out the best looking shots to the press, but thats almost never actually true. I don't know why either, but anyone who read Penny Arcades recent tirades on the subject get what I'm talking about.
 
Valve wasn't running the game at highest detail....on a P4 3.4 ghz, Radeon 9800XT.....
Click to expand...

What computer the magazine guy played has no relation at all to what they did for the screenshots.
 
You'd assume that game companies would give out the best looking shots to the press, but thats almost never actually true.
Click to expand...

As I noted in the PGGamer thread, almost all the of the shots in magazines are for some reason in low detail with terrible AA settings. The shots of Far Cry in their review of Far Cry make that gorgeous game look like complete crap with muddy blurred out textures, jaggies everywhere, and low poly everything. I don't know why there are low quality setting screens released for these games, but there just are. It's not limited to HL2.
 
iamaelephant said:
Wolf - my personal beef with that screenshot is that the zombies arent on the ground! Thats the only one of the new screens that really dissappointed me. To be honest I expected the graphics to look significantly better than they do, but I'm not at all pissed off at how it does look, because it's still nice to look at, and I'm sure the game will play out really well.
Click to expand...
Look at the texture clash on the right hand wall too. :|
 
eww :( i take back what i said a year ago. about doom 3 looking bad. doom 3 looks better than half life 2 now /sniff :(
 
ofcourse doom3 looks better than halflife, it only has corridors.

not much to render.

but then again were juding these uber-low quality shots. and we know how scalable this engine can be.
 
Man, if I just saw these and not the shots that Source is capable of, I would almot say that it was a mod of the HL1 engine, lol.
 
i wouldnt be surprised if the source engine is an updated half life 1 engine.
 
lmao ok now ure just trollin valve-ray. do you really need 1280 16xfsaa 16 af shots of hl2 leak to stop doing so?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Warped
Perseid Meteor Shower Time!
Replies
12
Views
981
dfc05
dfc05
Kschreck
Everything We Know About Fable 2!
Replies
7
Views
2K
Kschreck
Kschreck
T
possible hint
Replies
0
Views
737
[TBUK]apo
T
D
- Stormwreck - A Half-Life RPG
2 3
Replies
85
Views
4K
Jintor
Jintor
CrazyHarij
  • Locked
Thought I'd do a proper good-bye thread..
2 3
Replies
86
Views
4K
Farrowlesparrow
Farrowlesparrow
Back
Top