Half Life 2: Lost Coast Impressions

You won’t get any HDR in DX8, at all. It doesn’t support the necessary data formats.

And a 5200 is going to be WAY too slow (for almost anything, anymore).

Yeh, no shit. :wink:

After I posted those shots I forced the game to run in DX9… and wow that bitch was slower than a dog with no legs. The game was reporting 13 frames per second but I’ve got a feeling there was meant to be a dot between the one and three. FX5200’s suck at DX9 so hard that most of the time it didn’t render the water correctly, though that’s always been an issue with Source.

I’m very slowly saving up for a 6600GT but with Xmas coming I have a feeling that anything I save will be going on gifts.

Seems to run better than F.E.A.R on my rig, and it yelled at me about requirements too.

I appreciate the fact that this level was free… but damn. 5 mins of some average looking HDR level? (the church showed it off, but other than that it was pretty pointless) For about 6-12 months worth of hype?

It’s nice to see HL2 like this, but I guess I’m spoiled when I consider Far Cry did the same damn thing… to their Whole Game.

FX5200’s suck at DX9 so hard

All the FX series sucked at DX9-level shaders. They were fuckers of cards. The Ti series was faster at DX8 than the FX series, and while the FX series could theoretically do DX9 shaders (which the Ti’s could not do), they did them horribly slowly.

Best upgrade will be that GF GX->6600GT upgrade. I have that card, and it was a steal. (Not so much now that there’s barely any difference between a 6600GT & 6800 in price.)

Alright, since no one answered my previous question I’ll just post my impressions.

Yeah, it was pretty short, but the effects were nice and it rain well (though just at the recommended settings). I’d like to try it again and jack all the settings to max and see what happens. On a side note, Valve has said that they just cut this portion from the Highway 17 part, but how would they have put it in there in the first place?

Yawn. So this whole HDR thing simulates your iris, or something.

It’s a crock of shite, then, innit?

I’d rather have HDR than Lens Flare… that shit was annoying even when it was new and exciting.

I don’t care what they say, it makes more sense to me to sit it between Half Life 1 and Half Life 2. ( Despite having access to all the weapons )

I would appreciate it more if Valve would spend time making the Source engine take less than 2 minutes to load a level instead of adding a feature that slightly increases visual fidelity in exchange for a 25% less FPS.

I liked the HDR tech well enough I think it’s subtle enough that it will enhance gameplay without it being the next lens flare.

I liked the commentary and talk about the level design and why they did certain things in certain parts a lot more.

Also, the level itself was beautiful.

All of that said, yeah, that’s a lot of hype.

I strongly believe that instead of expecting miracles from valve you’ll try upgrading you CPU.

That said my Ti4200 is quite old so my machine refuses to hsow HDR in any kind. (Nice level though)

-Shiroko

Actually I recently did and while 2 minutes is an exaggeration it’s still a fact that HL2, or really any comparable game nowadays, takes WAY longer to load a level than a game like Quake or Doom did on a comparably advanced machine in its day. I really wonder when gamers will be fed up with it, or if in another ten years we’ll be watching the little bar slide across the screen for a solid five minutes before we can ooh and aah at the pretty pictures.

Sure, part of this can be pinned on developers (not caring enough about load times to make optimizing them a priority).

But the main issue is that hard drives are very slow.

As CPUs have gotten faster, and gotten more memory, hard drives have gotten bigger, and they have gotten a little faster, but not nearly enough to keep up. Now, hard drives are pretty frickin’ slow and they’re only going to get slower, unless we move to some other medium or have some kind of dramatic breakthrough.

I find that excuse highly acceptable. I had a 7200 rpm drive back in '99 and I’ve still got a 7200rpm drive now… now I don’t know too much about the inner workings ( I know where bits go and how to fix things when other people fuck up ) but for some reason I agree that we need HDD companies to start working on speed as well as space.

( Wasn’t there some kick ass hard drive tech out not too long ago… ?)

Yes, because 10k RPM SATA drives don’t exist. You guys with 2 minute load times should dump the 300GB 5400RPM IDE Drives and pick up a couple 72GB 10kRPM SATA’s and see the difference.

Yes, because 10k RPM SATA drives don’t exist. You guys with 2 minute load times should dump the 300GB 5400RPM IDE Drives and pick up a couple 72GB 10kRPM SATA’s and see the difference.

Word. I love my raptor drives but IMHO they are too fucking expensive. Thats just me though.