It might be because it released at a period where we shifted from low-polygonal count to high ones, and from SD to HD resolutions. The game tries hard to look realistic, but at the same time, there are visible polygons and flat surfaces everywhere, and vehicular levels (which I assume Valve did to pad out the game more) only make those stand out more like a sore thumb. Ravenholm also has a janky skybox that encloses everything in a small place (such as trees in the background being sprites, and the city being cut off), even though it takes place on rooftops. That, and the textures seem to be extremely low quality. Maybe Valve did that to push out an Original Xbox release, but compared to major graphical showcases before or since, Half-Life 2 just looks awkward. If it released one year before, it would have been the best looking game of all time at that point and the textures and polygons would have been more excusable. If it released a year later, they could have pushed out more polygons and better texture work as an Xbox 360 launch title. But it released at a strange time where it was trying to be next-gen, but last-gen limitations reared its ugly head. Contrast that to Crysis, where it practically looked and played like an early 8th Generation release, even though it was a good 6 years too early for that.
Half-Life 2 just feels weird, sitting right between the 6th and 7th generation, while feeling like neither.
 |
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
|
I recently replayed HL2 with the VR mod, and the character models still looked more immersive than Russell from a game released 15 years later and actually intended to be seen up close in VR.
Was anything changed other than it being in VR?
Considering it's close to 20 years old, then it has taken many many years for it to really show it's age. So I'd say it's the definition of aging gracefully.
Also, I can't remember a presentation of a new game that had people audibly gasp over what they were seeing (the e3 tech demo). It was absolutely mind blowing at the time. Yeah tech has advanced, but that was the last time I watched something that had my jaw on the ground.
It feels like the work of known scammers who commit false advertising and fraud.
Valve screwed over the Artifact fanbase by cancelling the Artifact 2.0 beta without even allowing users to invite friends like they said they would in January 2021 and does not deserve your financial support for these gross consumer-unfriendly practices.
the environment is sparsely detailed, thats why it has that uncanny source engine look
Why didn't they at least update the polygon count massively for the PS3 and Xbox 360 ports? It looked and ran like ass on the Xbox, but Valve did it because they didn't think or expect Steam to be anything but a minor DRM thing due to licensing issues with Sierra. Then other studios piled on, and then Gaben became a bizzionaire, and could eat as much McDonald's as he wants to (which is impressive for a guy who never learned how to count past 2).
I can count to more than 2, but I have no money and live with my parents at 35, so what good did it do learning to count to more than 2?
It's time for you to commit suicide then, since you are a failure and a fat guy that thinks Sesame Street is too complex for him, is the word's biggest success story.
poly count is the least of hl2's problems, visuals wise
They should have kept it in City 17, in close quarters, like Half-Life 1 and its expansions. Instead, they tried doing the complete opposite, and it looked sparse in comparison, and not having a coherent look throughout the game, especially since the first few chapters were dense in comparison.
That would require a ton of work and the game wasn't actually that old at the time.
It could do a remake. Like Black Mesa and that other remake for Blue Shift.
These days yes, but not back in 2007.
Guess what other game released in 2007?
Nobody could run Crysis in 2007 so that's such a disengenous thing to say. Crysis was moreso released in 2010 or so when hardware caught up to it.
>Nobody could run Crysis in 2007
It ran fine on 2006 office PCs in glorious 800x600
zoomers
Black person I ran crysis in 2007 on:
>single core athlon 64
>1 GB DDR2 dedotated WAM
>radeon x1600pro with 256 MB VRAM
Did it run well? Frick no. Did it run buttery smooth on the lowest settings? Frick yes.
no, you didn't do any of that. you are a zoomer.
You're a zoomer who believes the myth nobody could run crysis on release whereas in actuality anything with a dedicated grafix card from the last couple years WILL run it
Barely anybody could run crysis on ultra settings much less smoothly or at 1600x1200 or whatever the frick 1080p equivalent used to be before widescreen became the norm, that IS correct
Don't believe me? Fish out a used and abused cheapo 2006-2007 PC from a dumpster and if it still works, it will run crysis at a playable framerate
zoom zoom
Not an argument.
>Nobody could run Crysis in 2007
zoom zoom
there's a glitch going around where you can fake youtube upload dates, you uploaded this today.
0/10
holy shit you're obsessed
Crysis is incredibly well optimised for the low end and incredibly poorly optimised for the high end
Anything can run it, and nothing can run it well. Physics stress test included with the game brings modern CPUs to a crawl.
I don't know about the xbox version but Valve notoriously hated coding for the PS3
They should have dumped Half-Life 1 on that compilation as well, for good measure. Sure, the game's plot still doesn't make any sense, but they could have slapped it on there for minimal cost.
It aged like gorgonzola if you actually discount the changes.
For an 18 year old game it still looks really good. Hell I'd argue that Episode 2 can still compete.
Yeah, especially considering you had Halo 2 come out the same year. I loved Halo 2, but Half Life 2 has aged incredibly in comparison to other huge games of the time.
FULLY
It's old and didn't push tech hard in its time. The Source engine was meant to be efficient, which is why it looks almost PS2-like and extremely dated. Half-Life needs a serious facelift or a sequel.
The source engine is an order of magnitude beyond the PS2. Even the Xbox struggled to run it.
It aged well, although the original 2004 release of HL2 would look very visibly 2004 despite the great art direction.
HL2's orange box lighting and shading enhancements can make it look deceptively good.
It is you. I don't know any other game that holds up graphically as good as HL2.
When was the last time you played it?
Not far ago, and I played VR mod.
Will they deliver?
graphics dont age. it looks as good as the day it came out.
No. I played Half Life 2 for the first time like 2 years ago and I was actually amazed how good it looks despite its age. It can easily compete with PS3/X360 era games and maybe even PS4.
Zoomer thread
YABBA MY ICING!
Your icing?
Shutup
https://files.catbox.moe/5gc0lq.mp3
The route canal section doesn't really hold up, everything else does though
Play Water Hazard or Highway 17. You can see how sparse they are, and they look on par with PS2 games, if not even lower than that.
>they look on par with PS2 games, if not even lower than that.
The hilarious bullshit Ganker will say to slam HL2
You clearly never played a ps2 game, zoomer
I think the graphics still look really good, as for the gameplay though...
Chell would beat the shit out of Gordon and you know it.
They aged great, it's just gmod gave people a way to frick with them and make them be seen as less serious.
Games don't age.
This post uses the options field.
Half-Life 2 is alright, but HL1 is clearly 10x better.
Good art direction is timeless
Which HL2 doesn't possess since it's all photos of eastern europe, bulgaria or some place
see
It's you
Too much of the game takes place in rubble for my tastes. I wish we could go back to oversized underground laboratories made from repurposed missile silos again.
It looked fine even by 2008. Not even Modern Warefare looks that great replaying it.
The 7th generation was when polygons became less noticeable due to it being more numerous, real-time lighting began to become of importance, and visual fidelity looked like a primitive form of photo-realism. It wasn't perfect, but it was a good enough first-step that games actually started to take so much power from their consoles, they ran horribly, with sub-HD resolutions, excessive screen tearing, framerate dips, and general instability, all because developers were trying to push the consoles beyond what they were meant to do. That stopped in the previous generation, and in this one (with the exception of the Switch because it is extremely underpowered).
Half-Life 2 tried to be like a "next-gen" title, but it was hampered with last-gen limitations, and as a result, it had a bizarre look and feel to it, that it didn't feel like a 6th or 7th generation title, but a strange half-step, especially considering that the game was created all because of its visuals.
Bait
>Is it me, or did Half-Life 2's visuals NOT age gracefully
Not just you.
Recently there a big HL2VR mod came out that allows you to play HL2 with HL ALYX like controls... and frick me, does HL2 look like fricking shit.
Its really easy to forget how nonsense and idiotic the level design unless you are right there and have scale reference. Fricking nothing makes sense, hallways ho nowhere, rooms the size of closets, everything clips into itself, half the corners unfinished and untextured.
You can really feel how rushed the development was, and once you get to the citadel? Frick me, you better not look up or down.
HL2 had the dual misfortune of both being stuck between those old 1998 era shooters and a new wave of much more detailed games, as well as having a rushed development hell dev cycle with multiple changes of art style and story direction.
stop bumping your shitty thread, op
you have shit taste
Make me
Alyx already was surprisingly mostly a horror title, it slows down a lot from hl2 and the lack of veachicles helps this a lot too.
Though nowadays its all about open world, so i wouldnt be surprised if HL3 if its made is more hub based fps.
In an alternate reality where Gabe Newell can count properly, I would want a Half-Life 3 that returns to the roots of the first game and its two expansions. Not 2. It's still a good game, but Half Life 1 is superior in all ways.
except gameplay, graphics, etc
One of 2's biggest problems was the over-reliance of physics for sequences and puzzles. Half the time I think that there will be a bug and the objects moving independently will just not work at all.
I like the grainy photo-scanned look of HL2. So I disagree.
anti hl2 gays are mentally ill and will not never convince the board of their narrative
You're the one that is mentally ill, since Half Life 2 has a severe identity crisis since it released between two generations and tries to do both at the same time.
not really, but keep believing that schizo
No one cares about the graphics nerd. Take it or leave it.