Finally saw some Half Life 2 screenies from a link at GG. Crap. They look REALlike. Like they can be real /… as in real life has the best graphics folks.
Colors are dilluted and grainy but the textures and models look so lifelike… mmmm is this game using the Doom3 engine? Did Valve just make an engine to top Carmacks baby!!!
ANybody know?!?!
etc
No, it uses an internally developed engine that Valve has been creating. There is no id code.
I’m most intrigued by the target machine, they’re saying that, what, a 1.7ghz with a Geforce 4 will run the game at max detail. If you can get that visual clarity at those specs its far more important than actually being the top graphic game.
I just saw a pic from CG mag from VE3d… hehe the title of Bauman’s Half Life 2 article?
“SHOCK and AWE”
CG Mag rocks!
BTW, Half Life didn’t exacltly have the best graphics on release… Unreal and Quake 2 were better (technically) but the best feel was Half Life. I guess it’ll be the same for Half Life 2. Doom 3 for the visuals, HAlf Life 2 for the mood and gameplay.
Though I have a feeling that Doom 3 will suprise people with its ‘slower’ gameplay. If the game gets it right… it could bethe first survival horror MOVIE-quality visuals game!
etc
real life has the best graphics folks.
real life has the best graphics folks.
real life has the best graphics folks.
real life has the best graphics folks.
real life has the best graphics folks.
“BTW, Half Life didn’t exacltly have the best graphics on release… Unreal and Quake 2 were better (technically)”
Unreal definatly yes, Quake 2? No. Maybe it was the way they used the engine but stuff like the beginning accident scene was better than anything Quake 2 showed. The animation in HL was also better.
I don’t know, it really depends on your system. If you’re running an 80-year old system, the graphics are going to be noticeably worse than something that’s only been around for 20 years.
Then, of course, real life is approximately 87% bound to human plasma protein over the range of concentrations of 0.05 to 25 T g/mL.
What’s the overdraw? Are the textures high res? What about the polycount, and can I turn on antialiasing?
:D
Loyd Case
and can I turn on antialiasing?
Just smear vaseline on your glasses. Or grow old…
Would someone like to post a link to some screenshots that are actually up?
Not gonna happen. PC Gamer is gonna let loose with the lawyers.
It’s kinda funny, actually. If I’d seen the screens I’d probably pick up the issue and see what other info they had on it. As it is, it just sounds like bloated hype.
I’ll read PC Gamer at the library to see the pix.
–Dave
Can one of the lawyers pipe up here? I can see how posting an article might be considered a violation, but a scan of a screenshot? Isn’t that covered by “fair use”? Especially if there’s original text discussing the shot and attribution saying where it was taken from? Or is this actionable because PCGamer could argue that dissemination of those shots would adversely affect sales of that issue?
Just curious.
Are you serious? You don’t see how taking scans from a magazine and putting them online would be copyright infringement?
We got a polite email from Rob Smith asking us to take down the posted scans. I didn’t think twice about obliging him. PC Gamer, and the other magazines for that matter, are in the business of selling their product. This month’s slew of exclusive Half-Life content is clearly part of that business.
-TomBub, maybe Supertanker or Desslock can answer this one with more knowledge than me. But my take is that those issues are just vague enough to be arguable, which has always been plenty reason enough for lawyers to threaten litigation. FWIW, I’m dubious over the validity of any claim to intellctual property in a depiction of someone else’s intellectual property, which, after all, is what a screenshot is.
Adding to my last post, Tom’s post makes it clear that PC Gamer has an exclusive, which I take to mean that they have, for these purposes, an exclusive license to post the Half-Life shots. That would be intellectual property they could protect without much question.
Well it’s lucky for me that I didn’t find a link and see them all right after I put up that post then.
Those lawyers sure put a stop to that pesky Internet!
Here’s a less clumsy question:
Is it legally problematic to scan the screenshots and send them to your friends? I don’t have any of the magazines in question, but if I wanted to scan the shots to show them to my buddy in Poughkeepsie, would that be actionable?
Actually, I don’t have a scanner either, but still…
-TomTom, of course I’m serious. I’m just curious about the validity of any legal threat here. Because I really do think it falls under Fair Use. For example, here’s a loophole for you, I could scan the shots and write an article about the whole process of magazine exclusive screenshots. Wouldn’t that be fair use?
FWIW I would have honored Rob’s request and taken them down as well if he asked me to.
Now, are you being serious? It’s Fair Use so long as you aren’t selling it or sending it to a mass audience. That’s why I can have some friends over to watch Pay-Per-View but I’m not allowed to do that at my local bar (without paying for a license).