Because disagreeing with anything Valve / Steam automagically makes it wrong these days, believe it or not. Tis the current mentality, and I do fear the future of gaming at the rate we're going.
I play on a AMD XP 2000+, Geforce 3, 512MB ram and it runs great. 1024x768, high everything except medium textures. Get some custom video drivers with improved image quality, and you won't mind medium textures at all.
HL2:DM on the other hand, could use some serious tweaking. It's quite playable though if you do a clean boot in XP. (Google it, MS has page about how to set msconfig.)
Despite the fanboys lining up to flame this poor poster, he's absolutely right about the lack of FPS. I have a midrange system, and a substantial drop in FPS in important. I get great FPS in CS:S and HL2, but horrid (5-15) FPS in HL2:DM. If I do a clean boot with absolutely nothing else running, I can get it playable. (Same thing I have to do to fix the studdering problem in HL2.)
Quite simply, the amount of polish is, again, nil... it's just another 0.1 release in Valve's forever-beta known as Half Life 2. The good news is, depsite all this, it's hilariously fun regardless. I look for the community to make it playable.
"whats with not giving us jewl cases for a $55 game?"
That really drove me nuts. I keep all my games in their jewel cases, in multiple stacks. Now what the heck am I suppose to do with these white slips? Even Unreal Tournament 2004 gave you a nice jewel-case sized paper box to store the slips in.
>>"Cheap paper sleves are for Drivers, not AAA >>title games."
>"Complaining AFTER you BOUGHT the thing does >nothing."
Mind telling me how the heck someone is suppose to know what kind of jewel case (or, in this case, none) is in the box, [b]before you buy it[/b]?
And by the way, [i]not buying the game[/i] does nothing as well. Valve will get along just fine without one sale. (times however many 10's of people agree.)
I've never got the "people don't care" arguement... Firefox is gaining a huge amount of ground lately among the "People that Do Care", and that should be all that matters. People That Care will recommend it to the layman users, push for it on the systems they control, etc. The rest don't care to begin with so what does their support matter?
It's the same argument I hear with extensions and it really bugs me.
FF1 and FFX? Good grief man, how does that happen? Now, don't get me wrong... FFX is a far better game than say, FF8 or FF9, both of which aren't half bad on the grand scale of console RPGs. And FFX-2 is even better if you're a member of the target audience. But for the love of buster swords man, get yourself a copy of FFVI and FFVII.
Such people have probably never done much mountain climbing.;-)
One of the problems with this whole idea is that people throughout history have figured out the shape (and sometimes even the approximate size) of the earth without any high-tech equipment.
Indeed, but that's just the extent of some of their 'belief based fact'. See here for more information, and that mountain I was talking about: http://www.skepticreport.com/creationism/thingscre ationistshate.htm#flat
"Oh, yes, there are still some around, and they make young-Earth creationists uncomfortable, because their risible, crackpot notions are based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. In fact, they take the Bible even more literally than most creationists, assuming it means what it says about corners, foundations, and pillars of the Earth, and that mountain from which one could see the whole Earth"
> The fuss is that some people read "God's book" with a literal eye. The bigger fuss is that the strongest nation on earth is now led by one of those people.
Indeed, that is the problem with the debate. First off, there IS difference between Creationist and Christian. Secondly, there is a big difference between the 'literal type', hardcore, Christian types and the rest of us. Many hardcore Christians and Creationists see the bible as 100% PURE UNCHANGEABLE FACT, and nothing will -ever- change their idea of that. (I've had this debate a few times.) Some still believe the world is flat, I hear. Something about a mountain one can climb and see everything. Seek out the article 'Things Creationists Hate' online.
These Creationists can not comprehend or won't even attempt to comprehend that one's faith, one's idea of faith, can evolve and change over time -just like science does-, and not be some kind of infidel heathen. Yes folks, it's possible to not believe every word of the Bible, but merely take it as a well meaning guide, and still have true faith! It's not all or nothing, Creationist or Atheist.
I believe strongly in science, but I also have strong faith. To me, the bible is simply man's understanding of faith and religion a few thousand years ago. It is a wonderful tool, but believing it word per word as infailable law is every bit as far off in my opinion just as if a scientist were insisting that the scientific theory of two thousand years ago is still 100% accurate today. There is absolutely no reason why a logical person's understanding of their faith can't grow with their understanding of the world.
Needless to say, this too is unacceptable by the 100% crowd. I'm considered some kind of fake Christian by closed minded friends, just because my views are willing to grow and change. I'd rather not have my views limited to the understanding, politics, and stories printed in a series of books ages ago, or told to me by a church. Faith sure seems rather weak to me if you need a book or a church to tell you it's true in order to believe in it.
But folks, the alternative to Creationist thinking is -not- only atheism. I see too many friends put off by the narrow mindedness of religion and giving up on it. One can be both religious, and open minded. They are not mutually exclusive in any way, no matter how many people decide that they are.
Booyah! I ADORE my mx700, it is indeed the best mouse I've EVER owned in all my years of computer and gaming... but it's had left button problems for months now. Won't click and drag well at all, probably wore out some part in it.
With this, I wouldn't mind replacing it. *drools* It's not quite sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads... but it's the next best thing!
This really is one ugly, ugly mouse. And I do so hate the "artsy" ads and way they spell T with a +. It's worse than 1337 or people who use != when they obviously have no business doing so. (Because it's trendy.)
I'll take my Logitech MX700 any day. Most beautiful mouse I've ever owned, and amazing functionality.
The sad thing is, the athletes may be the only people left to whom it's not about the money. To everyone else, from the comity to the broadcasters, to the merchandise makers, it certainly is. But thanks to moronic decisions like this, we don't get to hear from the people who actually care. Instead, we get to hear from people who are paid to tell us how they feel, and how they believe we should feel.
"I'd have to put myself in the "Not getting the CS attraction" camp.
Every time I've played online it just seemed dull. There's no bullet flight-time, so you just put the crosshairs on the head and press fire."
I hate to admit it, but I pretty much completely missed the CS craze. I tried one or two rounds, watched it for a bit, but just didn't see the fun in it. I love FPS games, played UT religiously, but CS just didn't have it for me.
This is all the more reason I'm looking forward to CS:S. What may be old hat to a lot of jaded gamers is my chance to get in on the action, without having to fill in all the blanks of what I expect to actually happen with imagination and forgiving a very old engine. It's my chance to see the game as the folks who love it do.
If it ain't broke, tweak it. I love UT2004 mainly because it's an up to date UT, (2003 varied too far) I'll love HL2 as a up to date HL, and I believe I'll enjoy CS:S for the same reasons. If not, I'll personally dislike it for the same reasons and move on as I did the first time around.
Slashdot Mirror
Because disagreeing with anything Valve / Steam automagically makes it wrong these days, believe it or not. Tis the current mentality, and I do fear the future of gaming at the rate we're going.
Depends on your firewall. Blocking it with most firewalls won't work, Steam will simply wait forever for a responce.
You actually have to disable your network adapter just to get Steam to give you an offline mode, and that more than anything is what ticks me off.
I play on a AMD XP 2000+, Geforce 3, 512MB ram and it runs great. 1024x768, high everything except medium textures. Get some custom video drivers with improved image quality, and you won't mind medium textures at all.
HL2:DM on the other hand, could use some serious tweaking. It's quite playable though if you do a clean boot in XP. (Google it, MS has page about how to set msconfig.)
Despite the fanboys lining up to flame this poor poster, he's absolutely right about the lack of FPS. I have a midrange system, and a substantial drop in FPS in important. I get great FPS in CS:S and HL2, but horrid (5-15) FPS in HL2:DM. If I do a clean boot with absolutely nothing else running, I can get it playable. (Same thing I have to do to fix the studdering problem in HL2.) Quite simply, the amount of polish is, again, nil... it's just another 0.1 release in Valve's forever-beta known as Half Life 2. The good news is, depsite all this, it's hilariously fun regardless. I look for the community to make it playable.
"whats with not giving us jewl cases for a $55 game?"
That really drove me nuts. I keep all my games in their jewel cases, in multiple stacks. Now what the heck am I suppose to do with these white slips? Even Unreal Tournament 2004 gave you a nice jewel-case sized paper box to store the slips in.
>>"Cheap paper sleves are for Drivers, not AAA >>title games."
>"Complaining AFTER you BOUGHT the thing does >nothing." Mind telling me how the heck someone is suppose to know what kind of jewel case (or, in this case, none) is in the box, [b]before you buy it[/b]?
And by the way, [i]not buying the game[/i] does nothing as well. Valve will get along just fine without one sale. (times however many 10's of people agree.)
I've never got the "people don't care" arguement... Firefox is gaining a huge amount of ground lately among the "People that Do Care", and that should be all that matters. People That Care will recommend it to the layman users, push for it on the systems they control, etc. The rest don't care to begin with so what does their support matter?
It's the same argument I hear with extensions and it really bugs me.
"however mathematicians remain hopeful that the proof can be corrected."
Sounds a lot like Republicans.
FF1 and FFX? Good grief man, how does that happen? Now, don't get me wrong... FFX is a far better game than say, FF8 or FF9, both of which aren't half bad on the grand scale of console RPGs. And FFX-2 is even better if you're a member of the target audience. But for the love of buster swords man, get yourself a copy of FFVI and FFVII.
Such people have probably never done much mountain climbing. ;-)
One of the problems with this whole idea is that people throughout history have figured out the shape (and sometimes even the approximate size) of the earth without any high-tech equipment.
e ationistshate.htm#flat
Indeed, but that's just the extent of some of their 'belief based fact'. See here for more information, and that mountain I was talking about: http://www.skepticreport.com/creationism/thingscr
"Oh, yes, there are still some around, and they make young-Earth creationists uncomfortable, because their risible, crackpot notions are based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. In fact, they take the Bible even more literally than most creationists, assuming it means what it says about corners, foundations, and pillars of the Earth, and that mountain from which one could see the whole Earth"
> The fuss is that some people read "God's book" with a literal eye. The bigger fuss is that the strongest nation on earth is now led by one of those people.
Indeed, that is the problem with the debate. First off, there IS difference between Creationist and Christian. Secondly, there is a big difference between the 'literal type', hardcore, Christian types and the rest of us. Many hardcore Christians and Creationists see the bible as 100% PURE UNCHANGEABLE FACT, and nothing will -ever- change their idea of that. (I've had this debate a few times.) Some still believe the world is flat, I hear. Something about a mountain one can climb and see everything. Seek out the article 'Things Creationists Hate' online.
These Creationists can not comprehend or won't even attempt to comprehend that one's faith, one's idea of faith, can evolve and change over time -just like science does-, and not be some kind of infidel heathen. Yes folks, it's possible to not believe every word of the Bible, but merely take it as a well meaning guide, and still have true faith! It's not all or nothing, Creationist or Atheist.
I believe strongly in science, but I also have strong faith. To me, the bible is simply man's understanding of faith and religion a few thousand years ago. It is a wonderful tool, but believing it word per word as infailable law is every bit as far off in my opinion just as if a scientist were insisting that the scientific theory of two thousand years ago is still 100% accurate today. There is absolutely no reason why a logical person's understanding of their faith can't grow with their understanding of the world.
Needless to say, this too is unacceptable by the 100% crowd. I'm considered some kind of fake Christian by closed minded friends, just because my views are willing to grow and change. I'd rather not have my views limited to the understanding, politics, and stories printed in a series of books ages ago, or told to me by a church. Faith sure seems rather weak to me if you need a book or a church to tell you it's true in order to believe in it.
But folks, the alternative to Creationist thinking is -not- only atheism. I see too many friends put off by the narrow mindedness of religion and giving up on it. One can be both religious, and open minded. They are not mutually exclusive in any way, no matter how many people decide that they are.
Booyah! I ADORE my mx700, it is indeed the best mouse I've EVER owned in all my years of computer and gaming... but it's had left button problems for months now. Won't click and drag well at all, probably wore out some part in it. With this, I wouldn't mind replacing it. *drools* It's not quite sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads... but it's the next best thing!
This really is one ugly, ugly mouse. And I do so hate the "artsy" ads and way they spell T with a +. It's worse than 1337 or people who use != when they obviously have no business doing so. (Because it's trendy.)
I'll take my Logitech MX700 any day. Most beautiful mouse I've ever owned, and amazing functionality.
Indeed. There hardly seems the need for a long debate on this one.
The sad thing is, the athletes may be the only people left to whom it's not about the money. To everyone else, from the comity to the broadcasters, to the merchandise makers, it certainly is. But thanks to moronic decisions like this, we don't get to hear from the people who actually care. Instead, we get to hear from people who are paid to tell us how they feel, and how they believe we should feel.
This is pathetic to an outrageous level.
If it ain't broke, tweak it. I love UT2004 mainly because it's an up to date UT, (2003 varied too far) I'll love HL2 as a up to date HL, and I believe I'll enjoy CS:S for the same reasons. If not, I'll personally dislike it for the same reasons and move on as I did the first time around.