New To PC Gaming Questions
- Thread starter Goodtwin
- Start date
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I was hugely disappointed by it. I played it immediately after the original Far Cry and HL2 felt like several steps backwards from the huge, open dynamic world I'd just explored. I've never replayed it.HL² is really good, did age well, almost like good wine
I enjoy both games (FC and Hl2), I certainly enjoyed FC1 a lot more than all the non Crytek Far Cry games that I tried to play (FC instincts, 2 and 3);
but I've played and replayed both more than once and I think Hl2 holds better today, the open world in FC is not that open, there are several big maps (and quite like it, like on Crysis you can approach a "village" or something for a fight in different ways), but it still pretty linear, and it's no like HL2 doesn't have some big maps with stuff to explore here and there... I just think in terms of gameplay/campaign and even visuals (and sound) overall Hl2 holds better, sure FC1 have some great looking stuff, but at the same time the character models and animations are a lot worse, and the whole art style from Hl2 I think works better for me... also both games feel longer than they should, but I felt a little more tired and facing unbalanced fights on FC after 30% or half of the game, Hl2 is a lot more polished.
but those valve games are a really weird regarding vsync, I've played "opposing forces" recently, and just enabling vsync would give me a bad input lag, forcing fps_max 59 or something like 61, 63... seems to help... another alternative to remove tearing but not use the standard vsync is to run games on borderless windowed mode, but I think you need to add a launch command on steam for that on Source engine games, like -windowed -borderless or something
but I've played and replayed both more than once and I think Hl2 holds better today, the open world in FC is not that open, there are several big maps (and quite like it, like on Crysis you can approach a "village" or something for a fight in different ways), but it still pretty linear, and it's no like HL2 doesn't have some big maps with stuff to explore here and there... I just think in terms of gameplay/campaign and even visuals (and sound) overall Hl2 holds better, sure FC1 have some great looking stuff, but at the same time the character models and animations are a lot worse, and the whole art style from Hl2 I think works better for me... also both games feel longer than they should, but I felt a little more tired and facing unbalanced fights on FC after 30% or half of the game, Hl2 is a lot more polished.
but those valve games are a really weird regarding vsync, I've played "opposing forces" recently, and just enabling vsync would give me a bad input lag, forcing fps_max 59 or something like 61, 63... seems to help... another alternative to remove tearing but not use the standard vsync is to run games on borderless windowed mode, but I think you need to add a launch command on steam for that on Source engine games, like -windowed -borderless or something
Indeed HL² is a linear story, but it has a number of interesting settings and "interludes", there's an atmosphere hardly found in other games, and the gameplay is tightly controlled, plus first game with integrated physics.I was hugely disappointed by it. I played it immediately after the original Far Cry and HL2 felt like several steps backwards from the huge, open dynamic world I'd just explored. I've never replayed it.
I like Half Life 2 because it's modern, but without the hand holding that most shooters incoprate these days. I loved cruising around on the air boat, some of the areas were gorgeous, and the world really had a believable post apacalypitic feel to it. It's really a testament to Valves work that a game developed over a decade ago still holds up this well, and in many ways does things better than games today.
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
I purchased Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor on Steam today. It was on sale for $10. I figure this will be an opportunity to really benchmark my PC. If my PC can't run it worth a crap, then I will know for sure to stay away from any newly released games. I'm hoping to be able to match Xbox One quality and cap the framerate to 30. I won't be able to test until Friday, I will report back with my results. Wish me luck.
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Not modern but you should really play Half Life 1 oh and Deus Ex
Early test run with Shadow or Mordor are positive. I am able to run at 1080p, 720p raised my max framerate during the benchmark, but did nothing to raise the minimum. I am capping it at 30fps for consistency, and have my settings mixed between medium and high. My minimum during the benchmark with these settings was 39fps, with a max of 63fps. When using the auto config, the game must shoot for 60fps, because my max was 110 and minimum for 45, but it was pretty ugly. Meshes loading in way to late was the biggest eyesore. This game must be failry well optimized for AMD cards. I was shooting for parity with the console versions, and I think I have that. Now I got to run some long play sessions while keeping an eye on my thermals. I will let you guys know if my PC burst into flames. LOL
Update:
I can honestly say that after two hours of play time, the game runs nearly flawless. It looks nice and I didn't have any stutter at all. The game doesn't seem to be all that CPU intensive. My cores were typically at 50% or less. The 30fps cap seems to be the trick for a budget PC line mine.
Update:
I can honestly say that after two hours of play time, the game runs nearly flawless. It looks nice and I didn't have any stutter at all. The game doesn't seem to be all that CPU intensive. My cores were typically at 50% or less. The 30fps cap seems to be the trick for a budget PC line mine.
Last edited:
Similar threads
