Holy Shizzle - Half Life 2 goes Gold!

K

Kabn

Guest
#7
i never thought i'd see myself type this but:

i'm actually looking forward to World of Warcraft more than Half Life 2. and i'm traditionally a hardcore fps player who makes fun of rpg'ers.

maybe i'm just not over the letdown that was Doom 3.
 
#11
Drool-Boy said:
One preview I read said it runs pretty well on mid-range PCs.
Mine runs doom3 and farcry well enough, so it should be ok for this I think.
What's considered mid-range these days? I have an Athlon XP 1600 oc'ed to a 1900 with a GeForce 3 200Ti, it runs UT2004 at the lowest settings and it's playable....
 
S

shockthemonkey

Guest
#12
I.C.Water said:
took ya all day to notice this?
i didnt know until i saw this thread. i think that makes me less of a nerd than the rest of you *does a little happy un-nerd jig*
 
K

Kabn

Guest
#14
ChikkenNoodul said:
What's considered mid-range these days? I have an Athlon XP 1600 oc'ed to a 1900 with a GeForce 3 200Ti, it runs UT2004 at the lowest settings and it's playable....
bring the graphics card up a generation, and you'd probably be considered midrange.
 
S

shockthemonkey

Guest
#15
Kabn said:
bring the graphics card up a generation, and you'd probably be considered midrange.
agreed. you can probably get even a 6800 (non-gt) for a good price now.... it'll do you wonders.

my laptop is a p4 2.4, 512mb ddr, radeon mobility 7500 64mb and it runs ut2004 fine at 1024x768 with middle/low settings.

my other comp plays all games at the highest settings (with the exception of doom3... i dont have a 512mb video card ;) )
 

shamwow

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
66,888
709
113
Marklar
0.40₥
#16
man, I HAVE to get off my ass and build a new comp...my axp/2400 w/ti4400 only lets me play doom at 8x6...it's only going to get worse
 
S

shockthemonkey

Guest
#17
why_ask_why said:
man, I HAVE to get off my ass and build a new comp...my axp/2400 w/ti4400 only lets me play doom at 8x6...it's only going to get worse
sad but true... my comp cost me about $1500... but i overpaid for the vid card by alot
 

shamwow

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
66,888
709
113
Marklar
0.40₥
#18
shockthemonkey said:
sad but true... my comp cost me about $1500... but i overpaid for the vid card by alot
mines 2 years old now and cost me about $800...chip was free thanks to amd roadshow...I have an opteron I got free from the amd server roadshow that came through atlanta a few months ago...clock speed isn't very high on those though...might just sell it off and get something else
 
S

shockthemonkey

Guest
#19
why_ask_why said:
mines 2 years old now and cost me about $800...chip was free thanks to amd roadshow...I have an opteron I got free from the amd server roadshow that came through atlanta a few months ago...clock speed isn't very high on those though...might just sell it off and get something else
AMD has interesting shows, but i haven't been to one in years.... of course they really bugged me when they set up UT kiosks comparing AMD to Intel, and the intel comps used intel video cards, while the AMD ones used top of the line nvidia cards.

opteron = :drool:
 

Ryokurin

Erect Member
Oct 15, 2004
1,598
0
36
38
www.ryokurin.net
Marklar
0.00₥
#20
shockthemonkey said:
AMD has interesting shows, but i haven't been to one in years.... of course they really bugged me when they set up UT kiosks comparing AMD to Intel, and the intel comps used intel video cards, while the AMD ones used top of the line nvidia cards.

opteron = :drool:

kind of stretching it but it was typical. Only reason why Intel is #1 in video cards is because everyone uses their video. The only thing that doing what AMD did then was further cement them as the choice for gaming, which is good but still bad. You hear it tons now, the AMD is good for games, but the Intel is for real work... its almost like the Apple/IBM debate of the 80s.

anyhow, im anxious to see how my 9600xt handles out. if not so well, ill just wait for a 6600.