Half-Life 2 Steam Preloads

Half-Life 2 Fallout (thanks GameSpot) has more news from their forums as Gabe Newell made a post yesterday indicating that today is the day Half-Life 2 assets will begin pre-loading for some customers over Steam:
HL/2 pre-load will begin tomorrow. It was ready yesterday, but we decided to use the bandwidth to get out the VST first since I get pelted with zillions of questions from people asking how their PC will run Half-Life 2.
View : : :
68 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 3.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older
28.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 14:22
28.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 14:22
Aug 19, 2004, 14:22
 
it beats Doom 3 on lighting for god sake its supposidly strong point

So that would explain the complete lack of dynamic light in Counter-Strike: Source? I'm sure the source engine will be more fully implemented in Half-Life 2 but what I'm playing in CS:S isn't that impressive.

and has particle effects that are astounding real.

The smoke grenade looks great but is still far from "astounding real" (sic).

Texture quality is good but not great looks close to real but just not there which when you take the rest of the engine in comparison is a let down

This is perhaps the best part of the graphics in the CS:S beta. The textures are universally sharp, unlike a fare amount of Doom 3 textures.

All in all the Source engine is a great engine

From a flexibility standpoint I'm sure this is true. In a graphical comparison between the Counter-Strike: Source Beta and Doom 3, Doom 3 wins hands down.

27.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 14:05
27.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 14:05
Aug 19, 2004, 14:05
 
Dude, sorry to disagree with you, but the engine (on the graphics side) doesn't look half as good as Doom 3. Maybe it's their texture choices, but everything looks washed out. Not to mention that the lighting in Doom 3 looked more realistic in my opinion. I'm not saying that DOOM3 is better, I don't even want to go that way with this post. And we all know the PHYSICS engine in HL2 is what's REALLY going to rock. But I'm a little put off by the graphics, considering how much time this thing has been in development. About as put off by how little plot/character involvement there was in Doom 3.
I'm guessing HL2 won't be as fantastic as everyone thinks it will, because we've had 4 years to hype it up and it will most likely be a let down. I guess we'll mos tlikely have to see what other game companies can do with the engine after release and until then, I'll probably just play WoW.
In any case, WHO CARES about CS:Source. It's the same 5 year old game with updated graphics. That the same thing as CSZ, which everyone HATED. So why claim CS:Source will be awesome . . . its like spraypainting a Pinto with pretty little multicolor, $50 a gallon paint . . . in the end it's still a god damn Pinto . . and your the f@g driving it.

26.
 
Re: No subject
Aug 19, 2004, 14:04
26.
Re: No subject Aug 19, 2004, 14:04
Aug 19, 2004, 14:04
 
I would hope most of you arent tooling around in 8 gig drives anymore.

well i should hope not as my steam directory is nearly half that and i don't even have half the games for it installed.

25.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:34
25.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:34
Aug 19, 2004, 13:34
 
Okay I finally was able to join a CSS server and I've figured out why performance is so much better than Doom 3: it doesn't look nearly as good. While there are some cool particle and shader effects for the most part this could just as easily be a Quake III engine game. That's not to say it looks bad, just that the graphics in CSS arn't a huge leap past the graphics in CSCZ. For the most part CSS is just a slight improvement in graphics coupled with a floatier feel than the original CS.

Have you been looking at the same game as the rest of us ??? Slight improvement in graphics ??? its got about the best graphics engine there is... it beats Doom 3 on lighting for god sake its supposidly strong point, and has particle effects that are astounding real. Texture quality is good but not great looks close to real but just not there which when you take the rest of the engine in comparison is a let down

All in all the Source engine is a great engine, which if its as scalable as Valve say could easily become the standard graphics engine.

24.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:28
24.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:28
Aug 19, 2004, 13:28
 
Half-Life 2 "assets", does that mean THE GAME?

For now, just 'lil, initial parts of it.

"pre-load"? Does that mean steam users will be able to download THE GAME?

Theoretically, that is the whole point of Steam. It will be interesting to see when Half-Life 2 becomes available on Steam, local retailers will not be happy with online delivery and Valve does want to try and push that CE version, but we are heading toward completely downloadable games/programs.

"will begin tomorrow", does this mean THE GAME will be available tomorrow?

No, just the first bits of Half-Life 2 and, for the ATI/CS/Cyber cafe people, the ability to play the early version of CounterSMACK Source along with the VST.

Hating when teammates infect me :(,
Ray

-----
HAIL ALL PLANET ZYGON...ER...THE RAY MARDEN OF THE BLUE'S NEWS.
http://users.ign.com/collection/RayMarden
http://www.dvdaficionado.com/dvds.html?cat=1&id=ray_marden
I love you, mom.
Everything is awesome!!!
http://www.kindafunny.com/
I love you, mom.
Avatar 2647
23.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:27
23.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:27
Aug 19, 2004, 13:27
 
"Okay I finally was able to join a CSS server and I've figured out why performance is so much better than Doom 3: it doesn't look nearly as good. While there are some cool particle and shader effects for the most part this could just as easily be a Quake III engine game. That's not to say it looks bad, just that the graphics in CSS arn't a huge leap past the graphics in CSCZ. For the most part CSS is just a slight improvement in graphics coupled with a floatier feel than the original CS."

Yeah but who knows what pixel shading version it's using in the preview, that option isn't an implemented toggle. It could be using 1.0 for all we know.

22.
 
Re: Re: Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:27
22.
Re: Re: Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:27
Aug 19, 2004, 13:27
 
Yeah, Doom 3 is definately quite better graphicswise than CS:S.
However, de_dust has never been a pretty map
bovan
21.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:14
21.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:14
Aug 19, 2004, 13:14
 
Okay I finally was able to join a CSS server and I've figured out why performance is so much better than Doom 3: it doesn't look nearly as good. While there are some cool particle and shader effects for the most part this could just as easily be a Quake III engine game. That's not to say it looks bad, just that the graphics in CSS arn't a huge leap past the graphics in CSCZ. For the most part CSS is just a slight improvement in graphics coupled with a floatier feel than the original CS.

20.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:09
20.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:09
Aug 19, 2004, 13:09
 
It's loading the pak files basically. You can't play it until they send the engine. You can cancel it, and you dont' have to use Steam, so quit complaining you goddamn whiny children.

19.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 13:07
19.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 13:07
Aug 19, 2004, 13:07
 
CS:source will be preloading to ATI coupon holders and CS:CZ purchases, the HL2 data will probably pre-load to those first too.

no-ones getting the game itself (HL2) early, it's just the data (maps maybe, certainly textures) the game uses, content that wont be changed before (or after) the game goes gold. you can't play it without final EXE's/DLL's and they won't be pre-loaded.

18.
 
Re: preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 12:56
18.
Re: preload? Aug 19, 2004, 12:56
Aug 19, 2004, 12:56
 
reply to #16:

I'm confused about the statement too, it says "Begin pre-loading for some customers". Does that mean some customers will get the actual game to play? Or just a "package" that won't work until whatever the date of HL2 release is?

Never used steam so I have no idea how it is, but from what I've heard I almost want to not get HL2 because of that crap.

17.
 
Re: No subject
Aug 19, 2004, 12:50
17.
Re: No subject Aug 19, 2004, 12:50
Aug 19, 2004, 12:50
 
And so it begins...

no...it ends now.

16.
 
preload?
Aug 19, 2004, 12:48
Jim
16.
preload? Aug 19, 2004, 12:48
Aug 19, 2004, 12:48
Jim
 
Am I the only one a bit confused over what this statement actually means?

I know what steam is, but...

Half-Life 2 "assets", does that mean THE GAME?

"pre-load"? Does that mean steam users will be able to download THE GAME?

"will begin tomorrow", does this mean THE GAME will be available tomorrow?

Jim
15.
 
Re: No subject
Aug 19, 2004, 12:14
15.
Re: No subject Aug 19, 2004, 12:14
Aug 19, 2004, 12:14
 
Reading all of your whining about steam every single valve post is amusing. You do not HAVE to have steam. If a game required it, again, you have a choice to not have steam and not play that title.

To me, Steam works great, I can choose what I get/want/download when I want. And for impatient gamers like me, the ability to click something and have it asap is great.

Bitching about hard drive space? Jesus Christ, what day and age are we in? You mean to tell me you have the latest pc hardware to play these games well and you are nickel and diming over hard drive space? I would hope most of you arent tooling around in 8 gig drives anymore.

This comment was edited on Aug 19, 12:15.
14.
 
Re: On a side note...
Aug 19, 2004, 12:11
14.
Re: On a side note... Aug 19, 2004, 12:11
Aug 19, 2004, 12:11
 
1 gig of ram. Maybe it's not a mediocre machine, it's just that I've had it for about a year & ½ ... and a year in computer terms is like 5-10 years, heheh. 1024 is good enough for me, it's a nice trade-off between performance & visuals.

(I'm just curious to see what real world performance will look like. As I was watching the stress test I just couldn't help but feel the real thing won't perform as nicely.)

You're right, it probably won't. You'll have AI doing its' thing & firefights at certain points, but I still think it will run better than most people imagine. probably better than Doom3 also
This comment was edited on Aug 19, 12:16.
13.
 
Re: On a side note...
Aug 19, 2004, 12:10
13.
Re: On a side note... Aug 19, 2004, 12:10
Aug 19, 2004, 12:10
 
and I averaged 56fps on the test. I'm pretty happy. Doom 3 is a pig by comparison.

I'm just curious to see what real world performance will look like. As I was watching the stress test I just couldn't help but feel the real thing won't perform as nicely.

12.
 
Re: On a side note...
Aug 19, 2004, 12:05
12.
Re: On a side note... Aug 19, 2004, 12:05
Aug 19, 2004, 12:05
 
I got some surprising results from the Source engine benchmark they included yesterday. An average of 70 fps @ 1024x768 (highest details, no AA or AF) on a mediocre machine. (AMD 2600, 9700 pro)
It doesn't look like an upgrade is necessary at all


Good to hear as I'm planning to squeeze 6 more months out of my 9700pro. How much ram have you got?

11.
 
Re: On a side note...
Aug 19, 2004, 12:02
11.
Re: On a side note... Aug 19, 2004, 12:02
Aug 19, 2004, 12:02
 
Yeah...

AMD 2000
512 RAM
Gef4 TI4200 128

and I averaged 56fps on the test. I'm pretty happy. Doom 3 is a pig by comparison. I'll be curious to see how they both do when I build a PCIE rig.


And Ray Charles was shot down, but he got up to do his best.
- Van Morrison
"And then, suddenly and without warning, it turned into a real-life case of hungry, hungry hippos."
- Stephen Colbert
10.
 
No subject
Aug 19, 2004, 12:00
10.
No subject Aug 19, 2004, 12:00
Aug 19, 2004, 12:00
 
if you don't want to preload, you don't have to preload, so what's the fucking problem? jesus

9.
 
Re: On a side note...
Aug 19, 2004, 11:45
9.
Re: On a side note... Aug 19, 2004, 11:45
Aug 19, 2004, 11:45
 
I wouldn't exactly call that a "mediocre machine". It's better than 90% of the crap that's out there.

68 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 3.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older