Ok, this is ridiculous. For every 5 to 10 minutes of gameplay, I'm experiencing load times of about 10 to 20 seconds. It's VERY disruptive to the gameplay and I'm quite surprised that the reviews I read never did bring this up. It's such a huge issue. I'm only about an hour into the game but will this ever improve? If it doesn't, then WTF? Or is it a technical issue?
Half-Life 2: TEH LOAD TIMEZZ!!
- Thread starter ElyrionX
- Start date
You can also check this (previously sticky) official HL2 thread
http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=23283
I have checked with my watch and my load time on average > 30 seconds.
http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=23283
I have checked with my watch and my load time on average > 30 seconds.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
maskrider said:
I very much agree. All the other games that caught flak this year for their sequels...and this took 6 years? Meh.
maskrider said:
That's the only part that makes a difference...
That basically sets up a large cache file for the game. However, if you do not have enough system ram free at the time, the game will crash. You mentioned earlier that your PC has 1gb of ram, so it should have worked just fine...
Welcome to Half Life 2.
If you have less than a gig a ram, don't use that heapsize setting. I only have 512 mb so I used -heapsize 384000 and that gave me a decent boost. Loading times improved but it still took me about 10-15 seconds to load (It was more before). I got used to the loading after awhile, but sometimes it would get annoying sometimes because they placed a health or armor station right before the area you load into. So that meant if I wanted to go get some health when I went back I would have to wait for the area to load again. :/ Very annoying. So I ended up just pushing forward the entire game because of this.
If you have less than a gig a ram, don't use that heapsize setting. I only have 512 mb so I used -heapsize 384000 and that gave me a decent boost. Loading times improved but it still took me about 10-15 seconds to load (It was more before). I got used to the loading after awhile, but sometimes it would get annoying sometimes because they placed a health or armor station right before the area you load into. So that meant if I wanted to go get some health when I went back I would have to wait for the area to load again. :/ Very annoying. So I ended up just pushing forward the entire game because of this.
Actually, I read the PC Gamer (US) review and it totally did not mention this at all. I believe the loading had such a huge impact on the gameplay. If I were to rate Half-Life 2 a 9.5, the loading issue alone would easily bring my score down to 8.5. This is ridiculous. 10 to 20 seconds of loading for every 5 to 10 minutes of gameplay is simply UNACCEPTABLE. I can't believe Valve got away with this shit......
buck naked
Member
I'll have to look into that tweak - these frequent load times have bored me and I've found myself getting distracted by everyday things (doing the washing, calling people on the phone). Not even a gig of fast ram and a 10,000rpm hard disk can crush these load times.
V
Vennt
Unconfirmed Member
That tweak (heapsize) - cut my average between loading times dramatically at the expense of greater initial load time. (Down to 5-6 seconds average, rather than the 20-30second previously.)
Mrbob said:
The loading scheme would have been fine (great even) had the loading actually be short. I much prefer Valve's solution to games that throw up separate load screens. It worked perfectly in the original game as well...
However, the maps simply take too much time to load this time around.
DaCocoBrova
Finally bought a new PSP, but then pushed the demon onto someone else. Jesus.
Yeah, the loading is pathetic for a PC game.
Plus steam is a pile.
Plus steam is a pile.
When I played through the game the load times didnt bother me too much. I like taking everthing in and taking my time. I let my mate play it though and he is an impatient gamer. I couldnt believe how often the game was loading new areas as he whizzed through the first hour or so. Very annoying, for him
Drey1082 said:
Yes, it really does not show up very often during gameplay...and when it does, it generally only appears on the most distant of structures. It is very noticible during cutscenes, I can't deny that, but it hardly ruins the experience.
The loading in HL2 constantly interrupts gameplay.
I'm the opposite. I wish they added in a black screen or a loading screen while I wait for the textures to fully load. I find it really jarring and hideous.Drey1082 said:
I think the HL2 load times vary depending on your system, anyway.
All the bitching about load times on these boards are funny. It's like you've guys never played PC games before. I remember Sam and Max having load times between screens on my old 486 =P
Speaking of load times, from someone that used to play SWG, the first time I booted up WoW I almost feel off my chair. That game is like ZOOM.
tahrikmili
Member
dark10x said:
And which high-spec FPS released in the last yead had seamless level progression?
boredJonathan
Member
The difference between Halo 2's pop in textures and HL2's loading is a big one. I wished that Halo 2 would not get dragged into all of these discussions because it strikes me as a lame attempt to shift the focus of the discussion from 'wow there are some serious faults with this engine game' to a versus memtality.
That being said, I too would much rather take the limited texture pop in during Halo 2 to avoid all of the loading in Half Life 2. I never noticed the pop in during actual gameplay of Halo 2, and it kept me immersed in the world, while the times that the pop in would occur in the cinematics were jarring, I was watching the game at that point and I found it alot less distracting at that point. (If it had happend more during actual gameplay I would have been pissed just for the record.)
Half Life 2's loading happens at the most unfortunate points. I remember waiting for Steam to unlock it, and then diving into the game thinking 'Well who knows when I'll stop to take a breath now.'. Then about an hour later exiting the game to go and post my impressions on GAF. I don't think I blinked during my first 3 hours of playing Halo 2. Why was this experience so much different? I could not get involved in the gameplay.
Over the next few days I complained about alot of the technical aspect of the game in the stickied thread and because of that I probably focused a bit too much on them. But I would never have even stopped to pay attention to all of the smaller techincal faults if I could have had an immersive experience in the game. HL2 tries so damn hard to keep the action intense and constantly shuffling you from location to location. However the intense feeling was destroyed everytime that little "LOADING..." box popped up.
For instance the first level of the game. You start out unarmed, running around City 17. About 5 min into the game the Combine are onto you and start chasing you. My heart rate kicked up, and I began to feel pressured to keep moving. (I think I remember actualy saying, 'This game is so gonna rock.' at that point.) Only to run smack dab into a 30 sec load time. Ok.. well that was unfortunate, but I've got to keep moving the Combine are on me. (Realize this is before I figure out just how scripted this game is, and the fact that I could move like a turtle in this section and still be ok.) So I keep running up a set of stairs, I make it to the top and go down a hallway. Loading. Ok.. grr. Run down the rest of the hallway, and out onto the roof. Drop down from there and.... Loading.
Immersion was totally destroyed. Perhaps if I played this game for the gunplay, or if I could simply be held over by graphics alone, I would not have minded to so much. But Half Life 2 wants to be an action movie. To give you an idea on how playing Half Life 2 felt to me, go watch any movie and pause it every five minutes. Wait 20-30 seconds and then keep going. (Oh and it would help if you could scratch up the disc a bit so the sound would skip occasionally too.)
/end rant.
That being said, I too would much rather take the limited texture pop in during Halo 2 to avoid all of the loading in Half Life 2. I never noticed the pop in during actual gameplay of Halo 2, and it kept me immersed in the world, while the times that the pop in would occur in the cinematics were jarring, I was watching the game at that point and I found it alot less distracting at that point. (If it had happend more during actual gameplay I would have been pissed just for the record.)
Half Life 2's loading happens at the most unfortunate points. I remember waiting for Steam to unlock it, and then diving into the game thinking 'Well who knows when I'll stop to take a breath now.'. Then about an hour later exiting the game to go and post my impressions on GAF. I don't think I blinked during my first 3 hours of playing Halo 2. Why was this experience so much different? I could not get involved in the gameplay.
Over the next few days I complained about alot of the technical aspect of the game in the stickied thread and because of that I probably focused a bit too much on them. But I would never have even stopped to pay attention to all of the smaller techincal faults if I could have had an immersive experience in the game. HL2 tries so damn hard to keep the action intense and constantly shuffling you from location to location. However the intense feeling was destroyed everytime that little "LOADING..." box popped up.
For instance the first level of the game. You start out unarmed, running around City 17. About 5 min into the game the Combine are onto you and start chasing you. My heart rate kicked up, and I began to feel pressured to keep moving. (I think I remember actualy saying, 'This game is so gonna rock.' at that point.) Only to run smack dab into a 30 sec load time. Ok.. well that was unfortunate, but I've got to keep moving the Combine are on me. (Realize this is before I figure out just how scripted this game is, and the fact that I could move like a turtle in this section and still be ok.) So I keep running up a set of stairs, I make it to the top and go down a hallway. Loading. Ok.. grr. Run down the rest of the hallway, and out onto the roof. Drop down from there and.... Loading.
Immersion was totally destroyed. Perhaps if I played this game for the gunplay, or if I could simply be held over by graphics alone, I would not have minded to so much. But Half Life 2 wants to be an action movie. To give you an idea on how playing Half Life 2 felt to me, go watch any movie and pause it every five minutes. Wait 20-30 seconds and then keep going. (Oh and it would help if you could scratch up the disc a bit so the sound would skip occasionally too.)
/end rant.
tahrikmili said:
Halo 2 did, but that's a console game...
I'm not asking for seamless level progression, but I would appreciate something in line with Far Cry or even Doom 3. I did not care for Far Cry's gameplay, but it did offer extremely large maps that prevented you from seeing load screens very often. You would often spend well over an hour just playing through ONE map. The actual loading times between those maps were about on par with HL2 as well...
That's my problem. HL2's maps are too small. I can deal with loading, but not when the areas between load points are so small. Deus Ex Invisible War had the same problem. DX1's liberty island was massive and almost every area on the island (outside of Unatco) was a part of that one map. In the sequel, that island is a fraction of the size...but is now broken up into six different maps (each with an annoying load point between them).
Doom 3's maps certainly weren't massive, but you were able to play for quite some time before hitting a load point.
Considering I had played Halo 2 directly before HL2, though, I'd say I was spoiled by the system they chose. There was ONE load screen in Halo 2, and it was actually very stylish looking to boot. Once you've entered the game, however, you never seen another loading screen...
Good lord, I know! That scene was incredible...but those awful loading points REALLY were a kick in the throat. It just pulls you out of the game. When I go from living the moment to watching my HDD light flash and wishing the game would hurry up and load, there is a problem. I didn't WANT to think about that, I wanted to be involved in what was happening...
tahrikmili
Member
dark10x said:
And it's something so linear that if it was actually released for the PC the same month as Half Life 2 people would have made fun of it.. As a result in most levels of Halo 2 you can't backtrack between subsections, whereas in Far Cry you have a whole island to explore and Doom 3 preloads the whole level, etc. Actually, I believe the game's linearity is due to hardware restrictions that make it impossible to load larger maps at once..
Doom 3's level loads were TEH IRRITATING.. I agree about Far Cry, of course. My appreciation for CryTec increased after going through both Doom 3 and Half Life 2..
The hell? You CAN go back and forth between areas. Not only that, the game is no more linear than Half-Life 2 (probably less so). HL2 takes you along through VERY specific pathways and allows virtually no room for deviation. Why would people laugh at Halo 2 for being less linear than Half-Life 2? That doesn't make any sense...
Halo 2 loads areas as they are needed. There is no reason why it can't reload an area you've already visited (which it absolutely CAN do). I don't believe simply loading individual maps (which you seem to imply is a good thing) into memory is the best approach either.
Are you drunk, sir?
They still beat the snot out of the two Source engine games. You get a decent chunk of gameplay for each map load and, on my machine, Doom 3 loads up nearly as fast HL2. I'm running a 3.2 GHz P4, 1gb PC3200 ram, and multiple 7200 RPM HDDs BTW. People with faster machines are not seeing better results, really...
boredJonathan
Member
Huh? Halo 2 is as linear as Half Life 2. Did you not notice how alot of the loading sections came after you'd make a jump down to a section where you could not make it back up? Now in relation to FarCry, I would agree. That game left the entire island open for you to plan how you wanted to finish the level. Which is great, but both Halo 2 and Half Life 2 are not set up that way. They have a story they want to tell and need to keep things more in a point A to point B mindset. The only reason I think anyone is bringing up FarCry, Doom 3, and Halo 2 is not because of gameplay devices, but because of the Loading issues and how each game handled it.tahrikmili said:
tahrikmili
Member
I found Halo 2 to be more linear than Half Life 2, but I didn't play Half Life 2 all that much yet, so I may be wrong. I'm currently in the first half of the game. However, I'm pretty sure that in many levels of Halo 2 you can't go back because some door shuts behind you forever etc. not to mention that bodies and weapons scattered around disappear at each checkpoint or something..
tahrikmili said:
No, you're wrong. You CAN go back at most points.
Half-Life 2 is a whole lot more linear due to the fact that you are often on a very specific path. Both games have choke points for loading more data, but in HL2's case, it takes quite a bit of time. In between those choke points, Halo 2 tends to offer larger environments with a greater variation in the progression of combat.
So, both games are designed to offer large areas divided by load points. Halo 2 demonstrates almost no visible loading during these points while Half-Life 2 requires the user to sit and wait while the game loads more data.
The areas in Halo 2 between these load points are less linear than those in Half-Life 2.
How on earth could you say that Half-Life 2 is less linear than Halo 2, let alone so much less linear that Halo 2 would be laughed at?
edit - NOW, if you are talking about Halo 2's CO-OP mode...you are correct. In CO-OP, the game DOES close off previous pathways due to the fact that the system does not have enough memory to load up two different areas at the same time. It's no different on the PC, though. It is obvious that it would be impossible to load two different HL2 maps at one time and allow full gameplay in each one.
Foreign Jackass
Member
Good god, people are such whiners. Welcome to PC gaming fellas, where game mechanics are deeper than console gaming, but where there are loading times every 20 minutes. Wake up and smell the coffee. HL2 is the best FPS I've played in a long time, and the variety in the gameplay is equal to none in any FPS I've played ever (excluding stuff like Deus Ex and SS2, which had to make huge compromises in the action department to make place for those deeper aspects). And please don't put Halo 2 in the same conversation. The gameplay is ten times more repetitive than HL2.
Name me one FPS that has the same level of variety in the level design, weapon design, enemy AI and design, moods and environments. You can't, and that's the point.
Name me one FPS that has the same level of variety in the level design, weapon design, enemy AI and design, moods and environments. You can't, and that's the point.
Load times for me are very very nice in HL2. I'm averaging around 5-10 seconds sometimes even less. What i do not like is the fact that HL2 takes forever to get started. I'm waiting like 3 minutes just to get to the main menu. But oh well, when in game loads only take 5 seconds its nice.
This game runs great at 1600x1200 with a solid 30fps which is nice.
Bz' rig:
AMD 64 3200
1gb of pc 2100
ATI 9600xt
very fun game, like it a little more than HL. Its fun if you get the gravity gun early on and pump up some of the models so they are lighter you can have all kinds of fun throwing shit around and building shit. My latest work of art is a house made our of cardboard boxes. Lots of fun to be had in the source engine.
Ok i'm off to class.
This game runs great at 1600x1200 with a solid 30fps which is nice.
Bz' rig:
AMD 64 3200
1gb of pc 2100
ATI 9600xt
very fun game, like it a little more than HL. Its fun if you get the gravity gun early on and pump up some of the models so they are lighter you can have all kinds of fun throwing shit around and building shit. My latest work of art is a house made our of cardboard boxes. Lots of fun to be had in the source engine.
Ok i'm off to class.
Halo 2's core gameplay IS deeper than Half-Life 2, though. Honestly, Doom 3's is deeper than Half-Life 2 as well. Honestly, I found the combat, weapon set, and enemies of HL2 to be quite disappointing. The game experience was amazing, but the combat itself certainly was not...
You clearly have a different definition of depth than most people...
You clearly have a different definition of depth than most people...
Foreign Jackass
Member
What deeper means? I'm not talking about the pure "fighting" which has been done better in other FPS. I'm talking about vehicules, environment interaction, the number of ways you can go through fighting situations (not only the "shooting" engine or whatever you're talking about when you're talking about the core gameplay).
The fact that you're bringing DOOM3 in the core gameplay conversation pretty much brings forth the fact that you absolutely don't know what "depth" is. The AI in DOOM3 is pretty much RUN TOWARDS THE HERO for 90% of the monsters. The combat is deep? There are mostly 2 enemies at once, and they're used in cheap spawning ways where there's always an enemy spawning behind you. That's not DEEP sir. That's freakin cheap.
In fact, it's all about being the best complete package.
The fact that you're bringing DOOM3 in the core gameplay conversation pretty much brings forth the fact that you absolutely don't know what "depth" is. The AI in DOOM3 is pretty much RUN TOWARDS THE HERO for 90% of the monsters. The combat is deep? There are mostly 2 enemies at once, and they're used in cheap spawning ways where there's always an enemy spawning behind you. That's not DEEP sir. That's freakin cheap.
In fact, it's all about being the best complete package.
boredJonathan
Member
Huh.. funny.. I don't recall Doom 3 or FarCry screeching to a halt every 10 to 15 min (AT BEST) like Half Life 2. I think that this has been our point all along. That Half Life 2 fails at being a modern PC game in technical design. It looks gorgeous, it has a great (if limited) physics engine, but all of that is pointless because the very thing it is designed to do, and that is be an enjoyable game, are wasted away at the loading screens.Foreign Jackass said:
You sir have never played Halo 2. Beyond that, the gameplay in HL2 wouldhave been fantastic if the immersion could be suspended for something greater than 10 min. Read my earlier comment about HL2 wanting to be an action movie, I obviously agree with you in that respect, it's in the execution of the ideas that bothers me and brings the overall game down.Foreign Jackass said:
Was Half Life 2 the only FPS you played this year? Variety in level design, while I think it's debatable, could go either way. Having actually played Halo 2 I would give that the edge personally as the levels are not all Earth based which lets the developers go outside the norms. Weapon design, well considering that more than half of the weapons were ported straight from the orginal Half Life, I don't know how great a feather that is to put in your cap. Don't get me started on enemy AI because if you honestly think that HL2 has great enemy AI, you sir need to play more games. The environments are great at setting up the mood, it is largely wasted because that mood is destroyed when there is a loading screen every 10 minutes. That is what we have been discussing!Foreign Jackass said:
Foreign Jackass
Member
Can't we steer the discussion elsewhere? Yes, there are more loading times in HL2 than in other games. Some people care, some don't. Let's end the whole thread here, I guess.
Good lord, people are so dumb.
I was talking about VARIETY in level design and AI. VARIETY. Not who has the BEST ONE. VARIETY as in DIFFERENT AIs for DIFFERENT experiences in the SAME GAME. Do I have to explain the meaning of every word I use?
Good lord, people are so dumb.
I was talking about VARIETY in level design and AI. VARIETY. Not who has the BEST ONE. VARIETY as in DIFFERENT AIs for DIFFERENT experiences in the SAME GAME. Do I have to explain the meaning of every word I use?
Foreign Jackass
Member
In fact, I think most people who whine about loading are attention-deficit-disordered people who value total immersion over every freaking feature in a game. When you get a girlfriend, or friends or whatever, you'll see that a game being completely uninterrupted by anything isn't something very valuable in itself if the game isn't even worth playing (read DOOM 3, which I admittedly couldn't complete).
boredJonathan
Member
Variety in AI.. hmm.. Stand there and get shot for the better part of the game, then later actually react when being shot. Yeah I guess that's more variety in AI then most.. You've got me there Jackass.
As for your comment about wanting immersion over everything else, you are so completely missing my point that it makes me cry inside that someone could not comprehend such a simple discussion. The reason that the lack of immersion is such a bid deal is not because we are some ADD social introverted retard. It's because Half Life 2 comes so damn close to being the game that it was talked up to be. And it falls only because of its lack of immersion.
I agree that having total immersion is pointless if the game is worthless. But Half Life 2 does not have enough other great features to move it beyond this lack of immersion. since the whole point of the game is to feel like an action movie which gets interuptted every 10 minutes.
As for your comment about wanting immersion over everything else, you are so completely missing my point that it makes me cry inside that someone could not comprehend such a simple discussion. The reason that the lack of immersion is such a bid deal is not because we are some ADD social introverted retard. It's because Half Life 2 comes so damn close to being the game that it was talked up to be. And it falls only because of its lack of immersion.
I agree that having total immersion is pointless if the game is worthless. But Half Life 2 does not have enough other great features to move it beyond this lack of immersion. since the whole point of the game is to feel like an action movie which gets interuptted every 10 minutes.
Here we go LOL now the fun really starts.
In terms of gunplay action - IMHO it's Halo2 > HL2 (by a hair) > Doom3.
Even though I don't own an Xbox, I agree as a shooter Halo2's mechanics beat out HL2 - in that there's a few critters in Halo2 that genuinely makes you work at killing them ( the annoying Jackals with the shields, the goddamn Jackal Snipers, etc..etc).
In terms of pure combat weapons the Battle Rifle in Halo2 feels way betterthan any weapon in HL2 (even though it's basically just the old magnum pistol recycled from Halo1).
The Gravity Gun is fun and all, and a bit unique in a sense. But at the end of the day it's just not that practical and doesn't deliver that satisfying sound of a gun cracking and the target dropping dead does.
In terms of overall as a game, I'd put Halo2 and HL2 on the same tier, with Doom3 a bit behind them.
If you enjoy a puzzle here and there as a break from shooting monsters in your FPS, build houses out of barrels and boxes, and play around with rag doll physics all day HL2 fits that bill rather well.
Despite all the Doom3 post-mortem hate, I did find the "zombie jumping out at you shooting gallery" gameplay to be fairly entertaining at the time.
Heh I find it odd that anyone in questioning the variety in Halo2's level design and AI as it was as every bit as diverse as Half Life was.
IMHO Halo2 and HL2 are once again on the same level in terms of pure variety in both territories.
I didn't find Half Life 2's AI to be all that impressive over what I saw in Halo2. Least not better to the extent that I'd place one over the other.
Foreign Jackass
Member
This whole "action movie" point is dumb. Every FPS is trying to be one.
Did you play the game on hard? I dunno, but the AI was pretty good to me. And variety wasn't in the "dumb"-"not dumb" way. If you thought that, I don't know what game you were playing. I'm talking about the differences between enemy thinking patterns, enemy design if you will. Headcrabs are obviously dumb. Combines are not. And those running zombies were cool as hell. Fighting those was always giving me different experiences. But hey, different strokes I guess. I just hate DOOM 3 and think that Halo and Halo 2 are above all uninteresting, although well executed.
Did you play the game on hard? I dunno, but the AI was pretty good to me. And variety wasn't in the "dumb"-"not dumb" way. If you thought that, I don't know what game you were playing. I'm talking about the differences between enemy thinking patterns, enemy design if you will. Headcrabs are obviously dumb. Combines are not. And those running zombies were cool as hell. Fighting those was always giving me different experiences. But hey, different strokes I guess. I just hate DOOM 3 and think that Halo and Halo 2 are above all uninteresting, although well executed.