PDA

View Full Version : Half Life 2 Interview


Nav
02-09-2003, 10:17:13
PCZone have a two part interview with Valve Software's Doug Lombardi. Part One (http://www.pczone.co.uk/news/news_story.php?id=95556). Part Two (http://www.pczone.co.uk/news/news_story.php?id=95628).

Hands up if you going to spend a 1000/$1500+ on a new PC for this baby!

fp
02-09-2003, 10:26:01
*keeps his hands down*

The game does look awesome, but I don't have that kind of money. My brother will be getting it for his XBox so I'll make do with that for the time being.

Funkodrom
02-09-2003, 10:33:20
Don't need to:

As far as minimum specs for Half-Life 2 are concerned, are you still aiming for a 733Mhz CPU?

Lombardi: Yeah, and then 128Mb RAM and a DirectX 6 graphics card, so like a TNT 2.

I'm double the minimum specs. Should run OK.

fp
02-09-2003, 10:48:36
I'm loathe to believe Valve's hype about how well the game will run on low-spec machines. Definitely something I'd have to see before I believed.

Venom
02-09-2003, 12:56:11
I can beat those specs, but hey maybe I should just get a new machine anyway.

maroule
02-09-2003, 12:58:45
do they announce when the xbox version will come out?

fp
02-09-2003, 13:06:36
Not yet, as far as I know. There was some confusion a while back as to whether there would actually be one, but I believe Valve confirmed there would be.

Aredhran
02-09-2003, 16:26:56
Originally posted by Funkodrom
Don't need to:

As far as minimum specs for Half-Life 2 are concerned, are you still aiming for a 733Mhz CPU?

Lombardi: Yeah, and then 128Mb RAM and a DirectX 6 graphics card, so like a TNT 2.

I'm double the minimum specs. Should run OK.

That's a load of bull.

My PC has almost exactly the specs above, except I've got a slower (667MHz) CPU, and it already skips frames when playing Half Life / CounterStrike (almost wrote Counterglow there ;) ), and I'm only running it on 800x600

I'm getting a new PC that's for sure.

Sean
02-09-2003, 16:34:13
What the hell? I could play Half-Life fine on a Celeron 366!

Venom
02-09-2003, 16:38:03
Surely he must be confused. Half-Life came out when 500s were the cream of the crop.

Sir Penguin
02-09-2003, 19:17:36
Hmmm... might have to get a Radeon 9800 Pro sometime this month.

SP

Nav
02-09-2003, 20:27:20
The point is to play it with all the effects and at high resolution, you'll need a fast PC with a current generation 3D graphics card.

Funkodrom
02-09-2003, 20:33:59
Yeah but who needs that? It's the gameplay that matters. :beer:

Nav
02-09-2003, 22:08:38
would be a shame though to play it at 640x480 with fuzzy textures... :)

btw Will you change your avatar! I keep thinking you're Red...

Funkodrom
02-09-2003, 22:20:05
Nope. :)

Sean
02-09-2003, 22:57:50
I had the converse problem: I thought people were making fun of Funko for the DYI typo. It was disappointing when I realised the truth :(.

Funkodrom
02-09-2003, 23:09:20
Do you see me talking about cheese and clocks?

No longer Trippin
03-09-2003, 00:09:27
HL2 won't be nearly as taxing as Doom 3 for most options enabled along with eyecandy. Valve never hit the D9 code limitations on certain features, Carmack hit the wall on nearly all of them (hence why he liked the FX as it allowed for extra - a lot of extra headroom, but after seeing and hearing it, he didn't bother expanding the code more as he knew it wasn't going to sell, and he was right). The original HL ran fine on the average machine of the time, Carmack's engines have always been a bit ahead of their time.

I'd say if your worried about how HL2 runs, don't. If you have an nvidia card you can through AA out the window as it really can't do it since it doesn't support centriod sampling and will use excess pixel shader bandwidth - but there isn't much available at all, except on the 5900fx - and thats a whopping 500 bucks and it still won't get you good AA - you will still pull good framerates with a G4 128, but you won't be able to do AA on it without killing the card. So if eyecandy is something you like and you have an nvidia card, that would and should be your main concern, getting an ATI.

As for as just running it. 1.2 ghz, a decent amount of ram 256 min., more for XP, and a 128 meg card should do fine for most options on I'd imagine if they are going by the same pattern of their first engine release - mainstream.

Sean
03-09-2003, 00:15:22
‘A bit less’? Who’s going to have 500mb RAM :)?

No longer Trippin
03-09-2003, 00:20:19
Own Goal :)

I editted it after reading how low his mem specs are - read it wrong the first past. Most machines ship with 256 or 512 (512 upgrade is often free) for the past year now and those are budget machines... I have 1.5 gigs in my machine, had 2 gigs in my previous machine. Hell, I've worked on workstations that had 512 megs plus of memory on the graphics card alone.

Though at the end he did mention that if you want everything yor going to have to look to the latest stuff from AMD/Intel and ATI/NVIDIA. Still though he referred to it as if your really hardcore - and those that are already have that hardware. But from how he's talking it doesn't sound like have a P4 3.2C 2 gigs dual channel ram and an ATI 9800 Pro 256 will be all that much better than a 2 ghz P4B with 512 ram and a 128 meg card.