Thrawn
Emperor
Yes, I think he means the updating process via Steam stopped at 66%, and now it won't run, so he can't play it. 
Half Life 2
- Thread starter andvruss
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
No - its a CD install version.steviejay said:
HL2 is controlled by a program called "Steam". Basically what happens is that you have to start steam, and it then connects to the valve server, and checks for updates etc. The problem appears to be that when a new patch is released for HL2, when steam connects to the server it sees that a new patch is available. It looks at the size of it, and based on that tells you how "complete" your HL2 install is.
In short - the release of a new patch appears to stop you from playing until that patch has been downloaded and installed.
Whilst this is a complete pain in itself, the worse bit is that if the server is too busy, you cannot download the patch. There is no apparent way of forcing steam to retry the download either, without shutting it down and starting it back up again. And this restart process takes about 5 minutes in itself (it has to re-log you in to the server).
The other annoyance is that this steam program starts with windows, and is supposed to set itself as an icon in the system tray. When I start windows, it starts and (presumably) looks for the server before the icon appears. For some reason, it doesn't necessarily fnd it (slow internet connectin maybe). Generally I have to ust ctrl-alt-delete to shut it down (as a process, not an application), then restart. It takes a few times doing this before I can (finally) get a "connecting to server" message.
IE - last night I finally got my game to update to 100% so that I could play it, and this process took 4 hours (on-and-off) before I could get a successful connection and a successful download. At that time it was too late, so I haven't even tried playing.
Considering that this whole endeavour (connecting to the internet to check for updates) was to fix a crash problem, if that's not fixed and there's another patch, I'm back to square one.
I would much prefer a system that let me download patches from work (T3 cable connection), then install them at home. When I want to! Not when Valve wants me to!
steviejay
Now in Black and White!!
ainwood said:
Oh yeah, I had alot of problems with that too. when I installed it I had to go on the net to download some stuff but it was way to busy so the only way I could play HL2 is by being on the net. because I hadn't been able to register my copy it wouuldn't let me go into offline mode.
You have a T3 connection. that must rock
TrailblazingScot
I was kittenOFchaos
Steam is evil...booting up to play some CS: Source means waiting for ages for STEAM to startup, worse when it goes authenticating your game, pfft!
Took me over six hours to install and download patches etc. and who knows what else. As ainwood says, I'd like to do that in my own time when I want to.
Having just bought the game it'd be nice to have a quick play and then download the patch overnight, but oh no.
Anyway, I was also wondering what the state of the art was with graphics cards etc. these days. I'd love to be able to play at 1024 (or even better 1280) with full detail and everything set to max. What would I need to be able to do that? Do I need to wait another few years for computers to catch up?
At the moment I have hyper-threading 2.4GHz Pentium4 with 1GB RAM and a GeForce 4 MX 440 AGP 8 (128MB) graphics card. On Doom3 I can only really get 640x480 and on hl2 800x600 (although I haven't tried pushing hl2 yet).
Having just bought the game it'd be nice to have a quick play and then download the patch overnight, but oh no.
Anyway, I was also wondering what the state of the art was with graphics cards etc. these days. I'd love to be able to play at 1024 (or even better 1280) with full detail and everything set to max. What would I need to be able to do that? Do I need to wait another few years for computers to catch up?
At the moment I have hyper-threading 2.4GHz Pentium4 with 1GB RAM and a GeForce 4 MX 440 AGP 8 (128MB) graphics card. On Doom3 I can only really get 640x480 and on hl2 800x600 (although I haven't tried pushing hl2 yet).
steviejay
Now in Black and White!!
Doom3 demands so much more graphically. I ran it at 800*600 and it did lag occasionally with my AMD 3000+XP with 512RAM and 128mg graphics card. With HL2 I was able to push it right up to 1024*768 and it ran really smoothly. I probably could have pushed the envelope further but it might have started to degrade game play
). HL2 runs fine at medium detail in 1024x768, although all the directx9 features are off (anti-aliasing, detailed water reflection etc)
Akka
Moody old mage.
Personnal opinion about HL2 :
- The engine is really impressive. Beautiful, and still able to run very smoothly on low-end computers (with a 3000+, 1 Go of RAM, and a Radeon 9700 non-pro, I was in 1280x1024, all option maxed but FSAA and aniso that were disabled, and it ran very smoothly, with barely a little drop in FPS during HEATED fights).
- The physical engine is well done, and widely used.
- The IA is what you can expect from a HL game.
- There is quite a lot of inventivity in the game.
BUT...
- The game is too short.
- It's still not as inventive as the first HL.
- There is this abomination of Steam, which alone make this game not worth it.
- It's linear as HELL.
- It always feel "a game". Immersion is quite low. Mainly due to the linearity, which make you looking for "gamish" progression.
- More than anything... The storyline SUCKS. Big time. You're catapulted right into the game, with no idea what happened, no idea who people are and what they want, and you sheepishly follow direction 'till the very end, without ever getting even the ghost of a scenario. Even Far Cry, with it's ultra-predictable and unimaginative storyline, had much, much more scenario (and freedom of play). The end is simply catastrophicly pathetic, there is no other word for it. My jaw was dropping from the sheer ridiculousness of it, dripping with commercial mind and attempt to milk the franchise. Bleh...
All in all, HL2 is a pretty good game, but which doesn't live up to all the hype. It's one of the best shooter of the year, but I put Far Cry and Doom III above it.
- The engine is really impressive. Beautiful, and still able to run very smoothly on low-end computers (with a 3000+, 1 Go of RAM, and a Radeon 9700 non-pro, I was in 1280x1024, all option maxed but FSAA and aniso that were disabled, and it ran very smoothly, with barely a little drop in FPS during HEATED fights).
- The physical engine is well done, and widely used.
- The IA is what you can expect from a HL game.
- There is quite a lot of inventivity in the game.
BUT...
- The game is too short.
- It's still not as inventive as the first HL.
- There is this abomination of Steam, which alone make this game not worth it.
- It's linear as HELL.
- It always feel "a game". Immersion is quite low. Mainly due to the linearity, which make you looking for "gamish" progression.
- More than anything... The storyline SUCKS. Big time. You're catapulted right into the game, with no idea what happened, no idea who people are and what they want, and you sheepishly follow direction 'till the very end, without ever getting even the ghost of a scenario. Even Far Cry, with it's ultra-predictable and unimaginative storyline, had much, much more scenario (and freedom of play). The end is simply catastrophicly pathetic, there is no other word for it. My jaw was dropping from the sheer ridiculousness of it, dripping with commercial mind and attempt to milk the franchise. Bleh...
All in all, HL2 is a pretty good game, but which doesn't live up to all the hype. It's one of the best shooter of the year, but I put Far Cry and Doom III above it.
Thrawn
Emperor
Akka said:
Deliberate. Everyone else in the game assumes you know what happened. Helps to have played HL1 as well, which I haven't.
Although I agree with you about Steam.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Well, I did play HL1 (several times in fact). But the world in HL2 is really not like the one in HL1 (really). That we start knowing nothing, is not bad in itself. It can adds to the immersion, with the "damn, where am I, what's going on ?" and so on.
The problem is that, there is absolutely no scenario (unless "kill the bad guys and go to the next level"), so nothing get really explained but the obvious. Bad for commitment, bad for immersion.
You, of coure, get to understand and guess a bit more if you did HL1 beforehand, but in itself doesn't go a long way to get what's happening in HL2, and the subtleties of all.
Perhaps it will be done in the add-on, but it's quite a joke to not even have a stand-alone story for a 60 game (or even a 15 in fact).
And the end is, really, really, LAME.
The problem is that, there is absolutely no scenario (unless "kill the bad guys and go to the next level"), so nothing get really explained but the obvious. Bad for commitment, bad for immersion.
You, of coure, get to understand and guess a bit more if you did HL1 beforehand, but in itself doesn't go a long way to get what's happening in HL2, and the subtleties of all.
Perhaps it will be done in the add-on, but it's quite a joke to not even have a stand-alone story for a 60 game (or even a 15 in fact).
And the end is, really, really, LAME.
You're calling Doom 3 BETTER than Half life 2?
Game short- took me 16 hours to complete on easy. I then spent 2 hours on the first level messing with the physics and scripting. I estimate 50 hours for medium and hard to be done. One gets so much more out of a game playing it more than once.
All, or most sequels, fall short in storyline due to being a continuation. I also feel that HL1 had a better stroyline just because it was original.
Steam wasn't annoying at all for me, but I can see how people have many problems with it.
Linear....not at all. Of course there has to be a guiding sense, or else the game wouldn't have progression. I felt that many freedoms were given to solve many problems, and it was not linear at all.
Storyline: Of course one might not get the stroy the first time if they whip through, and don't lookin around and listen for the progression of the plot. It was made like so for people not just to play it once, and say' Hmm, that was nice', but for people to play again, especcially if they didn't understand it. Completeion the game once, and then starting a new one greatly helps because one sees the stroyline backwards.
Game short- took me 16 hours to complete on easy. I then spent 2 hours on the first level messing with the physics and scripting. I estimate 50 hours for medium and hard to be done. One gets so much more out of a game playing it more than once.
All, or most sequels, fall short in storyline due to being a continuation. I also feel that HL1 had a better stroyline just because it was original.
Steam wasn't annoying at all for me, but I can see how people have many problems with it.
Linear....not at all. Of course there has to be a guiding sense, or else the game wouldn't have progression. I felt that many freedoms were given to solve many problems, and it was not linear at all.
Storyline: Of course one might not get the stroy the first time if they whip through, and don't lookin around and listen for the progression of the plot. It was made like so for people not just to play it once, and say' Hmm, that was nice', but for people to play again, especcially if they didn't understand it. Completeion the game once, and then starting a new one greatly helps because one sees the stroyline backwards.
HAND
Armchair Philosopher
I can't wait to get my teeth into CS:Source..... I was born to play that game.. 
Can't get Steam to work over the uni network I'll play that to death when i get home.
Can't get Steam to work over the uni network I'll play that to death when i get home.Similar threads
