http://img51.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img51&image=d1_town_01a0001.jpg
This game is excellent. In this picture I demonstrate the ability to hit zombies with paint cans, and then chop them up using the gravity gun and a buzzsaw.

It's the most involving, graphically impressive, beautiful and dramatic FPS out of there. It makes Doom 3 look boring. It makes the original look caged. It makes Halo 2 look boring, and small on scale.

Also, the combine would so win in a fight with the covenant. Damn aliens. Wish they'd just leave us the hell alone.

I only had an hour to spare today to try out the game, but I still wound up playing for three hours. As a result, I'm now sleep-deprived and suffering from severe anxiety. Must... play... more...

Am I the only one yet to play the oriiginal?

Am I the only one yet to play the oriiginal?

Yes.

Yes you are.

Domm 3 looks Plastic compared to Half life 2. Halo looks too colourful. Half life can be considered the Father of all modern FPS, Half life 2 rocks my world!

Half life can be considered the Father of all modern FPS

So, we're just disregarding Wolfenstein 3D, Doom and Quake are we?

Half-Life was the first FPS with an engaging story. There's a difference.

(Half-Life is still the best PC FPS of all time, don't get me wrong - and once i've actually got enough money and bought Half-Life 2, that'll be my new favourite, too)

Why is the monster in the picture all shiny..?

I just threw a can of paint at him. He is covered in paint.

Ah I see, Because if it had that shine effect all the time, I probaby wouldnt like playing it..

Anyway, Im now installing it, so I cant wait to dive back into my fave game again!

Yes.

Yes you are.

No he isn't, I've never played HalfLife before and I don't intend to anytime soon. =d

Then it's just the two of you.

I enjoyed Red Faction a lot more than Half Life, myself. Though I have yet to get around to playing the sequel to that, as well.

I wouldn't bother. The first one would've been legendary if it had just been longer, but the sequel was a big disappointment.

Okay my PC only handles it on low spec, and it still jumps every now and then, and then handles okay for a while.

Also the loading screen takes a pain staking long time.

And due to me having dial up, starting the game up is annoying.

Maybe its just because I have a bad system for the game.

P4, 2.01 ghz

Geforce FX 5600 XT 128mb

256mb RAM

Direct X 9.0c

Is it just my system, or are there some programs out there to help run it alot better, My driver is up to date.

Other than that, the game is beutiful.

Your system is a bit behind the times to run a game like that. At the very least, you should look into getting more RAM. That should keep your framerate more stable.

My system is a P4 2.8Ghz with 512 Mb RAM and a Radeon 9200 128MB video card. It runs the game magnificently, even if I can't turn the graphics all the way up. Of course, that'll be fixed when I get a new video card next weekend.

Oh well, I can't afford to upgrade my system right now, maybe I will get a new PC in 5 years time.

I guess Half Life 2 will be on my shelf, unplayed, until then.

So, we're just disregarding Wolfenstein 3D, Doom and Quake are we?

Half-Life was the first FPS with an engaging story. There's a difference.

(Half-Life is still the best PC FPS of all time, don't get me wrong - and once i've actually got enough money and bought Half-Life 2, that'll be my new favourite, too)

Okay, I suppose that it varies from person to Person but I feel that the Above three games should not be considered the father of FPS but rather the Grandfather of FPS. I also did say that Half life was the father of "Modern" FPS. This means that Im thinking of the games that could be said to be inspired by Half life. Example would be Red Faction, SOF II..... yadda yadda.

Doom and Wolfenstien 3D help inspire games like what....... Redneck Rampage and Outlaw. So Personally, I would Consider it to be of a "different" Category of FPS

I would Consider it to be of a "different" Category of FPS
The kind were you don't run around and blow shit up?

I finally got Half-Life 2 ^^;

It is a brilliant, brillliant game in everyway... i spent the first 5 minutes flinging things at combine soldiers and running away. And when I actually got to the fighting... magnificent!

After I was slightly miffed by Halo 2's 'just a little bigger than the original', Half-Life 2 surpasses the original by leaps and bounds. The scripting, the pacing, the situations... all brilliant.

I'm running it on a Celeron 2.0Ghz with 380mb RAM and a Radeon 9600XT 256mb, and performance is mixed - it takes about 5 minutes to load the game (why?!), and in-game loading screens about 30 sec - 1 min. Walking around in a closed environment with about 2 or 3 enemies sees me about 30 fps, while outdoor environments lag up a little, sometimes down to 15-20 fps. It's still playable though, but it will be much nicer when I get a new processor.

The game makes me so freakin dizzy DAMN DANGALERS!

The kind were you don't run around and blow shit up?

Not exactly Hogan, the kind that is of the older model where they use sprites and very basic graphic engines like that of the Doom engine.

yeah i need to check this game out

I don't believe Half Life 2 is better than Doom III graphically. Is it a better overall game? Who knows, I think it is a personal preference. If you want some game that will scare the shit you of you while you have the volume pumped and the lights off all by yourself then play Doom III. If you want an incredibly involving game with a deep story line then play Half Life 2. Getting back, Doom III still has better graphics in my opinion, but the two games really can't be compared, they are totally different from eachother. I have played both on a 50" HD TV via S-Video and they are both amazing.

I don't believe Half Life 2 is better than Doom III graphically.

Oh really? The realistic animation and movement isn't enough to sway you? If that's the case, how about the large outdoor environments with light-maps 100 times bigger than Doom 3. Or what about the refractive water effects, or the particle spray? The graphics are better than Doom 3 because they don't look like 'good graphics' - they look real.


Is it a better overall game? Who knows, I think it is a personal preference. If you want some game that will scare the shit you of you while you have the volume pumped and the lights off all by yourself then play Doom III. If you want an incredibly involving game with a deep story line then play Half Life 2.

Basically, Doom III is run around in the dark and wait to get raped, fight back, find a health pack ammo, get raped again, repeat. Half-Life 2 changes game style so quickly you can't keep up - Ravenholm is more frightening than the entirety of Doom III.


Getting back, Doom III still has better graphics in my opinion, but the two games really can't be compared, they are totally different from eachother. I have played both on a 50" HD TV via S-Video and they are both amazing.

You're right, they are different - one is a very well presented, good looking game of the previous generation, while Half-Life 2 is the wave of the future.

Don't get me wrong though - i loved Doom 3. But it doesn't have the same efffect as Half-Life 2 - basically, I didn't think any game would make me think Halo 2 was tired and bland-looking, but Half-Life 2, not Doom 3, did that.

I don't believe Half Life 2 is better than Doom III graphically. Is it a better overall game? Who knows, I think it is a personal preference. If you want some game that will scare the shit you of you while you have the volume pumped and the lights off all by yourself then play Doom III. If you want an incredibly involving game with a deep story line then play Half Life 2. Getting back, Doom III still has better graphics in my opinion, but the two games really can't be compared, they are totally different from eachother. I have played both on a 50" HD TV via S-Video and they are both amazing.
Didn't Ravenholm freak you the fuck out?

D3 (which I have beaten all the way through twice) is actually an incredibly linear, frustrating, and boring game.

You KNOW that the next door is going to have an imp behind it. You KNOW it's going to cause you some damage. Oh no. Another soldier hiding in the dark. Oh no. Another big dog monster that will inevitably corner you. Atmospheric and dramatic on the first playthrough? You bet. But original or non-linear it aint.

The only surprise is the final battle, which is also ridiculously easy.

Oh really? The realistic animation and movement isn't enough to sway you? If that's the case, how about the large outdoor environments with light-maps 100 times bigger than Doom 3. Or what about the refractive water effects, or the particle spray? The graphics are better than Doom 3 because they don't look like 'good graphics' - they look real.



Basically, Doom III is run around in the dark and wait to get raped, fight back, find a health pack ammo, get raped again, repeat. Half-Life 2 changes game style so quickly you can't keep up - Ravenholm is more frightening than the entirety of Doom III.



You're right, they are different - one is a very well presented, good looking game of the previous generation, while Half-Life 2 is the wave of the future.

Don't get me wrong though - i loved Doom 3. But it doesn't have the same efffect as Half-Life 2 - basically, I didn't think any game would make me think Halo 2 was tired and bland-looking, but Half-Life 2, not Doom 3, did that.

All that technical hogwash really means nothing to me, and I'm glad you shared your opinion in a manner that tries and make mine look "stupid." In any case I saw what I saw and you saw what you saw. I've played them both and I think Doom III looks better. Simple as that. They are both great and different and really not comparable.

As far as Doom III getting boring? That could be for some. It being not original? Could be. However, you have to think about what the game was trying to accomplish, and that is nothing but scaryness. Sure it's the future and the guns don't have night vision, who cares, I wouldn't want it in this game. That would be terrible to have, and Id knew what they wanted and it was to scare the shit out of me, and they were very successful especially when I'm all by myself with the volume pumped and the lights out. It's intense. That's how it was meant to be played as well. Id has said, don't play this unless you can be by yourself with the lights out and the noise cranked. Valve did exactly what they wanted too, Half Life 2 is just as amazing to me as Doom III, but in totally different ways.

All that technical hogwash really means nothing to me, and I'm glad you shared your opinion in a manner that tries and make mine look "stupid." In any case I saw what I saw and you saw what you saw. I've played them both and I think Doom III looks better. Simple as that. They are both great and different and really not comparable.

I assure you, you're probably the only one. Doom 3 is a beautiful game, and definately has a lot of visual tricks - they use normal mapping and heat effects quite well. But then again, if you're set in your ways, then you are entitled to your opinion - but I assure you, they are and must be compared. They are the latest two big First Person Shooters on the market, and both are aiming for an atmospheric gaming experience - you have to consider which one delivered.


As far as Doom III getting boring? That could be for some. It being not original? Could be. However, you have to think about what the game was trying to accomplish, and that is nothing but scaryness.

I give it that - when I started playing Doom 3, I couldn't play it alone with the lights out. It is a very, very freaky game - at the start. Like MMM said, the scares never change - you begin to predict when the next zombie is going to jump out at you. Still, I believe it's an excellent game - but that doesn't change the fact that Ravenholm, one small part of Half-Life 2, manages to keep you on the edge of your seat the whole time. It also makes the oppresion weigh down on you far more heavily than Doom 3 did.


Sure it's the future and the guns don't have night vision, who cares, I wouldn't want it in this game.

I agree with you. Switching between the flashlight and guns was part of the game experience - it gave you the feeling of fumbling for your gun in sheer terror.


That would be terrible to have, and Id knew what they wanted and it was to scare the shit out of me, and they were very successful especially when I'm all by myself with the volume pumped and the lights out. It's intense. That's how it was meant to be played as well. Id has said, don't play this unless you can be by yourself with the lights out and the noise cranked. Valve did exactly what they wanted too, Half Life 2 is just as amazing to me as Doom III, but in totally different ways.

I agree with you, except in the fact that they are equal - I just need to feel that Valve are given the props they deserved. For a company that took Quake 2 and created a game with immersion and story, they revolutionized the FPS genre. Doom III can be considered the epitome of the genre that Half-Life created.

Half-Life 2 is the start of something new, something different. I can't wait to see where Valve takes us next.

I agree with most of what you said except I still don't believe they can be compared on all levels. Yes they are both first person shooters and they are both trying to acheive an atmospheric gaming experience, however Doom III just wasn't looking to have an in depth storyline like Half Life 2. It wasn'y suppose to be as engaging like that. In any case, I can't wait to see where Id and Valve both take us because surely it will be amazing.