Quote from Radu12 hours ago, Radu said:
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
been on my list for a while, haven't tackled it yet because of its length. You watched? Thoughts?
Yeah, I watched both versions. He's on point for most of the time and would recommend the analysis to any hl fan. But it's a bit of a loaded gun, as in it kind of makes you angry with valve for leaving the series fall by the wayside for so long.
Decay is missing 
Quote from D3ads13 minutes ago, D3ads said: Decay is missing
It's the REVISED version... that has Decay in it
Quote from RaduOn 1/31/2021 at 11:38 PM, Radu said:
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
Great video. I'm now back to craving another numbered entry into the Half-Life universe. I get so fucking nostalgic over HL1 and the goldsrc days. They were some of my best years of gaming and they'll always hold a special place in my heart.
I do wonder if Valve would really wait until VR is widely adopted before releasing a numbered sequel. Would they really want HL3 to be a VR exclusive title? Alyx was great, I loved it, but I still think I'd prefer a traditional Half-Life. But then, Valve has always pushed the envelope with Half-Life, just plug it into my brain already!
Anyway, I could listen to that guy talk about Half-Life all day.
Quote from Beck56 minutes ago, Beck said: Great video. I'm now back to craving another numbered entry into the Half-Life universe. I get so fucking nostalgic over HL1 and the goldsrc days. They were some of my best years of gaming and they'll always hold a special place in my heart.
I do wonder if Valve would really wait until VR is widely adopted before releasing a numbered sequel. Would they really want HL3 to be a VR exclusive title? Alyx was great, I loved it, but I still think I'd prefer a traditional Half-Life. But then, Valve has always pushed the envelope with Half-Life, just plug it into my brain already!
Anyway, I could listen to that guy talk about Half-Life all day.
Have you seen this one?
Quote from duxOn 1/24/2021 at 7:00 AM, dux said: Controversial opinion: Adding HD to old games to "improve" their appearance in-fact makes them look worse.
Support for 4k, FOV options, better input and key mapping. Done.
The only remaster I have seen done right is the command and conquer remaster.
Agreed.
While I am biased for obvious reasons, take DoD Source vs. the original Day of Defeat. The original had a dirtiness to it. It just felt better and was actually more immersive despite the lower poly everything and blurry textures compared to it successor. The grit just made your mind do more of the suspension of disbelief. DoD Source felt too much like a game as opposed to an experience.
Pretty sure someone put a long video explaining it better than I can.
Quote from Izuno19 hours ago, Izuno said: Agreed.
While I am biased for obvious reasons, take DoD Source vs. the original Day of Defeat. The original had a dirtiness to it. It just felt better and was actually more immersive despite the lower poly everything and blurry textures compared to it successor. The grit just made your mind do more of the suspension of disbelief. DoD Source felt too much like a game as opposed to an experience.
Pretty sure someone put a long video explaining it better than I can.
YES! Thank you!
While the overall texture resolution was definitely improved in DOD:Source and geometry overall was of a higher quality, I always felt like DOD:Source looked and felt like a bit of a parody of the original game. Bright saturated colours, bloomy lighting, barely any dirt or grime despite all the broken down buildings everywhere. I still prefer DOD:Classic over Source, and not just because I worked on it... it just has better atmosphere in my opinion.
Quote from kleinluka2 hours ago, kleinluka said: YES! Thank you!
While the overall texture resolution was definitely improved in DOD:Source and geometry overall was of a higher quality, I always felt like DOD:Source looked and felt like a bit of a parody of the original game. Bright saturated colours, bloomy lighting, barely any dirt or grime despite all the broken down buildings everywhere. I still prefer DOD:Classic over Source, and not just because I worked on it... it just has better atmosphere in my opinion.
The noiseless art style made it very easy to play so I suppose it was a conscious choice. I do agree with the argument that original DoD felt more raw... it's hard to carry that over to the 'current gen' and maintain the visual clarity, though.
I think DOD:Source had that mix between brushes and models that didn't mix and blend as well as opposed to the original where almost everything was done with brushes and had a consistent texel density all around, that I much rather prefer.
Quote from Buddy3 hours ago, Buddy said: The noiseless art style made it very easy to play so I suppose it was a conscious choice. I do agree with the argument that original DoD felt more raw... it's hard to carry that over to the 'current gen' and maintain the visual clarity, though.
This is a great point, we need to remember DoDS came out while they were working on TF2 and the whole clarity/silhouette discourse was going on. I can imagine this game was a bit of an early test and/or there was kinda of a blanket mandate.
As a total addict of DoD, can only agree that the lack of “soul” was a factor in making me less passionate, it made it easier to stop playing, but the biggest negative was how the gun handling was changed, as well the movement. Of course the worst was the lack of players.
I thought DoD:S had beautiful key art and concept art pieces, but I also really appreciate the grit and the raw feeling of DoD. I'm not sure how compatible the two styles are, but some kind of synthesis of the two would be cool.
[Blocked Image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bb/DODSourceCover.jpg]
imo the weakness looking back on DoD:S is the same as CS:S, the player models really did not age well and they look very hunched over like they have extreme scoliosis or the worst posture known to man. This is quite unflattering in motion.
[Blocked Image: https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8b67c98076298e1b5a2d47e2750f160c-1200-80.jpg]
The levels don't look too bad, but there is a lot of asset re-use and as a result they can look a bit samey. Compared to CS:S the DoD:S levels have aged quite well.
Thought we had a topic on Boreal Alyph, anyway project is being shelved and possibly assets will be made open source
Not Half-life 3 related, but any HL news is welcome at this moment
https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/half-life-2…t-not-by-valve/
[Blocked Image: https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cgLbkdDrgJQ96b7ZuCHJcW-970-80.jpg.webp]
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
