Hey everyone! I'm thinking about making part 2 of this video, in which I'll be lowering the specs of the PC I used to run Half-Life. Anyways, here's a quick Q&A for all that are interested: Q: Specs of the PC? A: CPU: Intel Pentium-MMX 133MHz RAM: 32MB PC66 RAM GPU: ATI 3D Rage II+ DVD 4MB PCI Q: Why was it so "crunchy"? A: It was most likely the combination of the monitor's crappy built-in speakers and the quality of the sound card in the PC. Q: Why Windows 98 SE instead of Windows 95? A: In retrospect, I'm really not sure why I didn't use Win95. In the next episode, I will downgrade to Windows 95 and use worse hardware. Q: Why did you blur out the CD key? A: I honestly thought it would add to the humor of the video. I now know that you can bypass the key, thanks to commentors on this video. I'll post more answers to questions as they come in. Thanks for all the support!
That was LITERALLY my PC specs back then in 1999 dude. You still can get lower config with a 1-2MB Trio Savage S3, i updated the graphic card 4 times playing this game, and CPU twice over the years. Everything overclocked, fans added, airducts...
Ohhh, a part 2 will be interesting! I assume you will need to find ways to increase the game's performance though. I wonder what optimization could be done to Windows 95 or 98 as well.
i just imagine a 13-14 year old waiting until his parents went to bed to play this cool new game he heard about for the first time and while installing he just hears an alarm go off at the volume of a jet engine knowing he’s screwed and his computer just goes „did you hear the sound?”
I think it's scarier from the parent's perspective You're just about to go to sleep, but then, right as you begin to doze off - an alarm starts blaring loudly
not really more like this is what is required to run the game on minimum setting at 720p at between 30 and 60 FPS. whit lots of dips down into 20FPS. (that is if the game is not 1-2 years old and patched where by its hopfully 720p min settings(one or two on low) 35-70 FPS whit dips at 25FPS.
@@VGamingJunkieVT I think its more that today you can´t play the game at 30 FPS. like try and play a gametoday at 10-15FPS it will crash or you will be locked somewhere and not be able to continue. back then HL1 at 7 FPS no problem might not be as fun but you could do that. bet space marine 2 at 7 FPS will just get you soft locked at the first boss because you can´t do enouth DPS on it.
I remember playing doom 3 on the family computer. I thing I played it at 720p on the lowest settings(bump mapping took a lot of resources) and I got maybe 18-40 fps
@@VGamingJunkieVT if you don't bump the minimum requirement, then customers will blame your company when the game runs like garbage on their zombie hunk of e-waste that somehow hasn't found its way to the bin yet. Work games tech support, and you'll see all sorts of angry people blaming you for their mistakes, especially if you try to read reviews or forum posts to check if there's tech support to be done. There's a reason "minimum" specs are no longer actually the bare minimum to keep the game from crashing.
IBM or compatible 386 or better, 4mb RAM, VGA graphics card; Hard disk drive. A 486 or better computer with a sound blaster pro or 100% compatible sound card is reccomended.
Bro, Doom SUCKS on minimum specs. It's literally unplayable. I remember playing it on a 386 and you either ran it on the smallest window size possible, in which case you could barely even see the game, or you had it running like a slideshow.
@@filip_sedlak my first time playing HL2 was on P3 800 MHz, 256 MB ram and GeForce 4 MX 440 64 MB and it ran on minimum settings,was the happiest lad that I could play it lol
@@grindycore3438 I had the same gfx card and 256mb ram, but I had an AMD Athlon XP 1.6Ghz. HL2 Was plenty playable on it. Though GeForce 4 mx 440 is GeForce 4 in name only, it's a repurposed GeForce2 chip, so it only had dx7. I remember my friend had a newer card with dx9 and the difference is visible from the start. On DX7 most of the special effects in the intro alone don't work. I always thought it was weird that GMAN stops talking for few secons, but with all effects enabled he becomes mostly transparent in those moments.
@filip_sedlak I run my Half Life 2 on TNT2 card, it runs smoothly around 40 to 50 fps. To be honest, i was shocked. The card was something I got from E-waste back when HL2 came out. But I did pair it with newer LGA 775 dual core at that time. Stuttering was bad but 70% of the time, it was smooth after 1 minute loading.
Yes! I played HL2 on office computer, and as a smol kid, I had no idea that graphips are directly affecting frame rate. So I played a half of the game on medium graphics and 4-12 fps, then dropped it as "unplayable". Couple of years forward, my big brain lowered the graphics to low, and finished the game with comfy 40 fps.
I will never, EVER, forget the sound test "alarm.wav" at the age of five. I'm surprised but disk versions still work (mostly) on modern systems which blows my mind
what's funny is that it kinda makes sense that they do, cus iirc every windows version is based from a previous version, just updated to make better. fairly certain that's why ur even able to put ur stuff from win 7 to win 10 (this could be not even close to true this is just what I remember hearing from like a year ago or smtn and it's 1 am)
@@dayfelin3244 Yeah man, there's still code from windows 3.1 (and every version of windows after that) in windows 11. There's videos about it, you can still find dialog boxes and stuff from windows 3.1 on a fresh windows 11 install. So it makes sense that old software still runs fine.
Its crazy to think that the graphics and the game logic all run via the CPU, and that nothing graphically is being run on a GPU of any kind, truly one of the craziest games at the time where you could theoretically run it on your grandma's PC.
Here are true original 1998 release of Half -Life minimum specs for Windows 95: *Pentium 133Mhz. *24MB RAM. *16Bit Colour. *2 x CD -ROM Speed. *400MB Of Free Hardrive Space. (No 3DFX required).
Yeah, I didn't even try it on my 486 PC and stuck with DOOM instead. Part of the reason was that I had 500 MB of HDD space in total. I did have 48 MB of RAM though, which was very neat.
Not much for the story but for the tech. GoldSrc was a pretty big leap back then, Half Life redefined the FPS genre like Doom and Quake did before. A true milestone
@@pizzaman-fx3xx Bioshock: Infinite, Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons, "I have no mouth and I must scream" (point and click adventure one), Assassin's Creed 4,there many more other games that has story done simply better, but it'd take too much time to mention them.
@@kovy6447 A heavily restricted version is required. In order for the PlayStation to run Half Life, the second generation had to come out because Half Life is a very complex game designed for the computer.
My CRT from my TF2 on Minimum Reqs video died, so I had to make do with what I had. I might be able to film part 2 on my trinitron for part 2 of this series, though.
when it just came out I played and finished it at around 15 fps average, was too young to figure out graphics settings, but still had absolute breathtaking experience
@@mryurix The half life 25th anniverssary main menu definitely looks like the WON menu, and a lot better than the original steam half life, But I still like how half life 1 WON has those silly other menus that xash3d copies exactly.
An original Half-Life CD? No need for a valid CD key, type "123456789" multiple time and you're good too go. I used to play deathmatch with others students in the "network" room at high school. All without 3D acceleration and running on Windows NT 4.0 with a 233mhz CPU. Good times 😊
about CD key, Valve did change the cd key system when the game transferred to Steam. The WON version key are formatted like this: "3333-33333-3333" (btw that key does work through), and early Steam version (when installed from disc), accept keys in this format "AAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAA".
I feel like it would better inform the audience to break down the exact specs of the PC being used. That said, still always cool to see games run in a period-appropriate way.
@@trabant601e Seems like it doesn't work on freshly installed OS where Steam was installed for the first time. A month ago I saw one Japanese youtuber's videos who refused to leave Windows 7 where she showed that Steam on her PC still works just fine.
I so wish they'd finally add a no-DRM option for the games that can be downloaded from DRM-free platforms anyway. Pretty silly to be forced to buy games twice once the DRM-free release shows up just to get rid of that silly ad-launcher and service hell...
Yup, still using W7 in one of my PC's because I'm too lazy to switch it to W10 and Steam is running just fine. Any game that depends on some other launcher besides Steam like the ones by EA or Ubi can be a bit tricky to run tho.
Daaaamn, I was unaware just how low spec of a PC can play Half-Life 1! Especially in software mode, which does the graphics entirely on the CPU. I thought my old compaq, on which I played HL and its expansions, was bad with its 500MHz Pentium and 200MB of RAM. It did have performance issues with see-through textures, would be interesting to see how your machine handles that. And also was incapable of selecting any of the other rendering options except software, probably because the integrated GPU in it is trash.
I remember trying to play half life 1 on my AMD k6 2 500mhz... the experience was close to the one we see in this video.... even with 3d acceleration... didn´t convince me, I waited a year or two then played it on a faster pc
@@aleksandarlazarov9182 yeah had 3d acceleration but was not good really. If I remember correctly it was a geforce 2, but it was Pci not Agp, because of my motherboard and its limitations. Believe it or not, I remember enjoying more the games on that pc in software mode than the ones I could play with direct 3d, but I am exagerating probably, it was a good machine 😁. Half Life was finally played on a pentium 4 with integrated S3 graphics, nothing fancy, but enough for 60 fps on 640x480, in the year 2004 ☝️
@@rodrigoacosta9708 I know the feeling, my compaq also has only PCI slots too, which is why it has only iGPU. As for software rendering, if I remember correctly, the textures are unfiltered making them look blocky rather than smoothed. In most old 3D games the blocky ones look much better, much sharper and crispier. I've also never heard of the company S3 before, I guess I am too young to know them! 😂
GPU must have been the problem. I played it on a Pentium 1 200mmx with 48mb ram and a Voodoo2 12mb and it ran perfect. The Voodoo was lightyears ahead of software rendering performance.
At the time, Half-Life's requiring nearly 400 MB of hard drive space was a little disconcerting, I remember. It was well worth it, though. One thing, though - if you were running Half-Life on it's minimum required specs, then wouldn't you use Windows 95 instead of 98?
The Elder Scrolls Chapter II: Daggerfall (1996) had a fairly massive install size for its time if you chose the full/“huge” install option, coming in at around 450 MBs.
Software rendering entirely uses your CPU to handle the graphical rendering. It's weird Direct3D or OpenGL doesn't work... what was the video card in this thing?
@@christiangomez2496 Many Ati were integrated too. I think I have seen more Ati than another brand. Usually a Mach64 or equivalent, or its ancestor. But not exactly the same Mach 64 the Rage Play had, which had real 3D.
D3D still needs some hardware support. Of course (and even nowadays) you can run D3D via software mode (called WARP in the newer versions), yet the performance is sub-par (hence it is called a reference rasterizer - the thing is not supposed to run fast, but will draw everything like your hardware should, so if any glitch disappears under WARP, you can simply blame the bad drivers, not your own code). On the other hand, if Valve didn't try to facelift a very old engine (it is Quake 1, do forget not), and would just rely on a modern solution (either Q2 or Unreal), things would come way better. Say, UE1 has a great scalability, although even maxed-out (yet in 320x200) it can give some neat framerates even on a 133 MHz PC. With HLs really tiny and barely any detailed maps I'd easily expect 20+ FPS maxed out on UE1.
@@karehaqt No, as the OGL support in Quake1 was a very quick thing made "just because everyone does this": no full-bright colors, no water warping - the only good thing was the Glide support you get along with one thanks the dedicated library, and higher framerates compared to the SW mode (which I prefer over Quakes OGL anytime). DX, however, was pretty limited those days (what was it, 5 or probably 6?), so no idea what would be a better choice...
Runs better here than when I first ever played it on my Nana's computer. It was so unbelievably laggy, but as an excited kid, I was just happy to run the game, full stop.
Had an emachines 366mhz machine with 32 megs of ram. A buddy gave me an old video card to get opengl support. It wasn't pleasant, but it was playable back in the day. Also probably why I'm not phased by a little bit of lag in games.
what's kind of cool is there's still a bunch of active multiplayer mods for these older games. sure, nowhere near as active as they used to be it's just cool that some of these games/mods have lasted as long as they have. if you built a cheap desktop you could play all that
Oh dude, I wanted to play Half-Life 1 back in the day SO MUCH. I had even lower specs I think, it took me like 10 minutes to load the game, I even seen first few frames of the tram ride and then the system froze. So sad.
hah the game is so pixelated the reception/entrance at 08:50 feels like you're playing Theme Hospital in first person... Staff Announcement, incoming patients with bloaty head
I don't think I've ever seen the Direct3D mode in this game work properly, even in the newer versions (before they removed it completely). When I did see it working at all, it was significantly slower than the Software renderer.
The context is important. Most 3D accelerators from first generations did not have OpenGL drivers. OpenGL was a thing from the world of professional fifty thousand dollar workstations, and the only part of specification those cheap cards implemented was rasterising a polygon with a single texture. On the other hand, Microsoft insisted on Direct3D as single model of operation of all 3D accelerators. It was a multi-step rendering process, initially all software, but with a option for hardware to step in, and replace one or more steps. As a result, accelerators did the rasterisation (final drawing), but the rest of the polygon setup, sorting, etc. was done by Direct3D code on CPU. So for those cards, the difference is not “software vs. hardware”, it's “software vs. software plus maybe some hardware steps”, and that's why using single purpose rendering code optimised for the specific game beats using general purpose code that has to support incompatible cards, and also transfer data from host to accelerator. Initial versions of Direct3D happened to be shots into the darkness, same as initial 3D accelerators were. It started to make sense when the progress consolidated around two winning companies, and new versions simply matched functions of their hardware. However, that caused the “universal” standard to have “nVidia functionality” and “ATi functionality”, “nVidia shader model” and “ATi shader model”, and so on, for half of the decade. So Direct3D option in Half-Life was made to let users test those accelerators (and play on more recent ones). “Test”, not “use”, because most of them did not worth their money, and investing the same amount into faster CPU would give better fps, and actual playable game. A dozen or so console variables also exist to bypass their bugs, or prepare the data in a way that results in less performance degradation. However, when someone uses Direct3D with full-featured fast accelerator from later generations (most likely, also with a way faster CPU), it's a configuration that was hardly imagined by anyone making the game, so there are bugs. And OpenGL works because it's old, conservative, and backward-compatible (too conservative, as history has shown).
I ran this in 1999 with a Pentium 120 and 16MB of memory. I remember I measured the loading times between levels to be 3 minutes. The machine eventually had a Voodoo 2 card but I think I ran it without. Also it took most of my 1GB hard drive space.
My first experience with Half Life was on my 166mhz computer. It was pretty slow, but I made it all the way through the game. My hard drive would only hold 1 game at a time so I'd go back and forth from Half Life to SimCity 2000.
You gotta remember: HL1 ran on a modified Quake 1 engine, which itself was released before 3D acceleration (aka dedicated 3D video cards) were a common thing, not to mention necessary. Thus, being able to play most games in Software rendering mode was crucial. Also, I noticed that you're using the "HQ" models that came with the Blue-Shift. This unironically might make the game run more choppy.
I had Pentium 133MHz, 32MB RAM and Voodoo 4MB, maybe 1200MB of harddisk space. Voodoo helped at lot but, later parts of the game were nightmarish. Somehow I managed to complete the whole game. And global offensive and blue shift. It was strange to see when I got riva tnt 16MB pci, the game actually ran worse than with voodoo 4MB. Maybe my cpu bottlenecked my riva tnt. It felt like I set riva tnt free from it's cage when I updated to Athlon 700MHz and used the same graphics card with it.
You can still give your family a similar experience to what you felt when you first booted this up on your PC by not exposing them to any games published before 1998 and then suddenly having them play this game without any prior context.
I was able to have a playable frame rate using my 6x86 PC that has a VGA monitor at 320x240 at Full screen. Fun times back during the 90s. I miss those days. Thanks for bringing me back during my childhood.
I remember running the Uplink demo on a 486. If I lowered all the settings and reduced the window to the size of a postcard I got roughly 25fps. Good times.
Yep, this is how I played it. My laptop in the early 2000’s was a Pentium 233 MMX. I probably had 32 mb of RAM, and certainly no 3D accelerated graphics. I ran it at 400x300 (half of my laptop panel’s resolution). It probably ran at 20 FPS. I was amazed by it from start to finish. What an incredible game for the time. Not captivated me like that until I played Halo in late 2003.
Remember playing Half Life 1 back in 2000s because i found it in the files of another game i managed to pirate. It was a Pentium 4 PC with 1gb ram and no graphics lol.
note the D3D option might have better luck. Plus dont remmber if you need to fiddle whit the setting under the 3d3 option at 7:01 to tell the game what GPU type your using. think stuff like is it a AMD or Nvideo graphic card back then you needed to tell the game today that game figure that out on its own (if it matters). and back then it did like COD1 I think had Nvideo fog vs AMD and other card who just cut everything at max distance off. Nvide sort of faked a fog (looked better).
That 12 FPS Resonance Cascade made it all the more scary (cuz even crappy computers back then cost waaaaay too much, and I knew if Half-Life broke ours, my dad would kill me)
The first machine I ran this on was a 100mhz pentium (can't remember how much RAM) and a 2MB Matrox mistique gfx card, so the cpu was below the minimum requirements however it still ran. Was about the same peformance as the setup in your video. The biggest problem was just being hard to play, especially when soldiers start shooting and the frame rate drops to ridiculous lows.
Hey dude I don’t know if you remember me but I used to watch a lot of your Mario 64 streams just wanted to say congrats on almost 100k views Banger Videos
I remember running the demo (Half-Life Uplink) on a P75 system with 16MB of RAM... At least I tried. I remember I was able to finish it. I don't think I actually had a graphics accelerator back then. It was 320x240 for sure. I also remember when OP4 came out and I tried to install it on a 800MB hard drive. Thankfully I had a beefier Celeron or AMD CPU back then + a Riva TNT. I had to hack the base game and remove all unnecessary files - like base maps etc - just to install it. Then I had to alt-tab to remove autosaves on the fly, so it didn't run out of space. That game and community pulled me in for a good 10-15 years.
Like it was yesterday...i listened to Aventura - Obsession in the background while it installed and got hooked asap. Its my very first fps on PC (First one was Medal of Honor on the PS1) and i played it in an Internet cafè in Poland when i was 8, brother told me "This game is garbage with the 20 min train ride, play something different" just when Barney entered the code to unlock the door we had to leave the Café and idk why but i just loved that expirience. Bought HL2 when it came out, installed crappy green Steam and waited 4 hrs to download the game (together with CS:S) and it wouldnt even start bc of my crappy PC. Hl2 was a huge dissapointment, never interested in Alyx and i think HL3 will be pretty bad. If you read that, get a life.
I played the Uplink demo on my 486. I think I got something like 5 fps, but the game time ran slower as well, so I could still fight and survive, in slow motion.
If a 2024 game ran like that on listed minimum hardware, there would be a meltdown on social media. PC gaming really was an hard thing back then. I'm running half life on an athlon 1400 and ati 9200 PCI, and the game still goes below 60 fps in several instances, even using the faster opengl renderer.
I remember playing HL1 on the family computer. it was a 2001 pre-built from Compaq (still have it) It was only capable of playing HL1 and other GoldSrc games on Software render, but it was fun enough for me. even though i didn't knew anything about upgrading PC hardware, i loved being able to just play with what i had.
Can you test the steam version on mine specs? Just curious because of the updates it’s had over the years, especially the 25th anniversary update. Also do HL2 next!
Even updates back then started to tank performance. I had a Pentium 166 MHz with a Voodoo3, and I had to play a certain version of the game, as newer versions had a lot worse performance.
Hey everyone! I'm thinking about making part 2 of this video, in which I'll be lowering the specs of the PC I used to run Half-Life.
Anyways, here's a quick Q&A for all that are interested:
Q: Specs of the PC?
A:
CPU: Intel Pentium-MMX 133MHz
RAM: 32MB PC66 RAM
GPU: ATI 3D Rage II+ DVD 4MB PCI
Q: Why was it so "crunchy"?
A: It was most likely the combination of the monitor's crappy built-in speakers and the quality of the sound card in the PC.
Q: Why Windows 98 SE instead of Windows 95?
A: In retrospect, I'm really not sure why I didn't use Win95. In the next episode, I will downgrade to Windows 95 and use worse hardware.
Q: Why did you blur out the CD key?
A: I honestly thought it would add to the humor of the video. I now know that you can bypass the key, thanks to commentors on this video.
I'll post more answers to questions as they come in. Thanks for all the support!
That was LITERALLY my PC specs back then in 1999 dude. You still can get lower config with a 1-2MB Trio Savage S3, i updated the graphic card 4 times playing this game, and CPU twice over the years. Everything overclocked, fans added, airducts...
@@arcadiabarguadalajara1464 im the one behind that profile, i shoulded start youtubing way before
Ohhh, a part 2 will be interesting! I assume you will need to find ways to increase the game's performance though. I wonder what optimization could be done to Windows 95 or 98 as well.
@@aleksandarlazarov9182 I was thinking for part 2 I would try to find the worst pc hl1 can run on
@@8-BitHacker define "run" 😂
Do you mean load into the game, even if it runs at 1fps?
If someone from that time saw me playing on 500fps in 4k their eyeballs would fall off or sum
I remember talking with a friend, expecting one day we could play in 1024x768 at 50 fps :)
@@nalinux with upscaling and frame generation it might become a real resolution and fps games would run at.
@@nalinux😂
If only I knew one day I could emulate this game on a fucking hacked Nintendo handheld.
@MrEdioss Games like doom 3 any quake including live the half life games basically any game over 13 years old can achieve this framerate on a good gpu
"Did you hear the sound file?"
Yes and everyone else in the neighborhood did too.
@@zenniththefolf4888 That soundcheck during Installation was pretty hilarious, I already forgot that.
i just imagine a 13-14 year old waiting until his parents went to bed to play this cool new game he heard about for the first time and while installing he just hears an alarm go off at the volume of a jet engine knowing he’s screwed and his computer just goes „did you hear the sound?”
exactly my thought lmao
dude I swear this exact thing happened to me. I had the headphones plugged into the microphone input ...
I think it's scarier from the parent's perspective
You're just about to go to sleep, but then, right as you begin to doze off - an alarm starts blaring loudly
Hence the chapter title "unforseen consequences" XD
@@flflflflflfl it was probably the integrated piezo speaker that most pcs had
Minimum requirements back then: This is what'll take for the game to start up.
Modern Minimum Requirements: This is if you want 1080p 60fps.
not really more like this is what is required to run the game on minimum setting at 720p at between 30 and 60 FPS.
whit lots of dips down into 20FPS.
(that is if the game is not 1-2 years old and patched where by its hopfully 720p min settings(one or two on low) 35-70 FPS whit dips at 25FPS.
@@Zack_Wester Eh, seems like too many games nowadays have minimum requirements that seem obsessively high.
@@VGamingJunkieVT I think its more that today you can´t play the game at 30 FPS.
like try and play a gametoday at 10-15FPS it will crash or you will be locked somewhere and not be able to continue.
back then HL1 at 7 FPS no problem might not be as fun but you could do that.
bet space marine 2 at 7 FPS will just get you soft locked at the first boss because you can´t do enouth DPS on it.
I remember playing doom 3 on the family computer. I thing I played it at 720p on the lowest settings(bump mapping took a lot of resources) and I got maybe 18-40 fps
@@VGamingJunkieVT if you don't bump the minimum requirement, then customers will blame your company when the game runs like garbage on their zombie hunk of e-waste that somehow hasn't found its way to the bin yet. Work games tech support, and you'll see all sorts of angry people blaming you for their mistakes, especially if you try to read reviews or forum posts to check if there's tech support to be done. There's a reason "minimum" specs are no longer actually the bare minimum to keep the game from crashing.
Now Do DOOM on Minimum Specs.
so basically u want him to play it on actual potato
IBM or compatible 386 or better, 4mb RAM, VGA graphics card; Hard disk drive. A 486 or better computer with a sound blaster pro or 100% compatible sound card is reccomended.
@@Naif92XX play it on an XT
Bro, Doom SUCKS on minimum specs. It's literally unplayable. I remember playing it on a 386 and you either ran it on the smallest window size possible, in which case you could barely even see the game, or you had it running like a slideshow.
I clearly remember Doom coming out. Had a 486 DX with 50MHz and 4MB of RAM and a Diamond Stealth graphics card back then. It was terrible.
Back then when HL2 came out I finished it on a GeForce 2 MX. It looked like HL1 and was barely playable, I still loved it.
@@filip_sedlak my first time playing HL2 was on P3 800 MHz, 256 MB ram and GeForce 4 MX 440 64 MB and it ran on minimum settings,was the happiest lad that I could play it lol
@@grindycore3438i player on a P3 1GHZ 384mb of ram and ati radeon 7200
Was somehow smooth
@@grindycore3438 I had the same gfx card and 256mb ram, but I had an AMD Athlon XP 1.6Ghz. HL2 Was plenty playable on it. Though GeForce 4 mx 440 is GeForce 4 in name only, it's a repurposed GeForce2 chip, so it only had dx7. I remember my friend had a newer card with dx9 and the difference is visible from the start. On DX7 most of the special effects in the intro alone don't work. I always thought it was weird that GMAN stops talking for few secons, but with all effects enabled he becomes mostly transparent in those moments.
@filip_sedlak I run my Half Life 2 on TNT2 card, it runs smoothly around 40 to 50 fps. To be honest, i was shocked. The card was something I got from E-waste back when HL2 came out. But I did pair it with newer LGA 775 dual core at that time. Stuttering was bad but 70% of the time, it was smooth after 1 minute loading.
Yes! I played HL2 on office computer, and as a smol kid, I had no idea that graphips are directly affecting frame rate. So I played a half of the game on medium graphics and 4-12 fps, then dropped it as "unplayable". Couple of years forward, my big brain lowered the graphics to low, and finished the game with comfy 40 fps.
I will never, EVER, forget the sound test "alarm.wav" at the age of five.
I'm surprised but disk versions still work (mostly) on modern systems which blows my mind
what's funny is that it kinda makes sense that they do, cus iirc every windows version is based from a previous version, just updated to make better. fairly certain that's why ur even able to put ur stuff from win 7 to win 10 (this could be not even close to true this is just what I remember hearing from like a year ago or smtn and it's 1 am)
@@dayfelin3244 Yeah man, there's still code from windows 3.1 (and every version of windows after that) in windows 11. There's videos about it, you can still find dialog boxes and stuff from windows 3.1 on a fresh windows 11 install. So it makes sense that old software still runs fine.
Its crazy to think that the graphics and the game logic all run via the CPU, and that nothing graphically is being run on a GPU of any kind, truly one of the craziest games at the time where you could theoretically run it on your grandma's PC.
As a kid, I finished this game on my Pentium II 233, without videocard, in software mode, with 320x240 resolution. It was fun anyway
Always thought the software renderer was a neat thing
I also had a Pentium II 233mhz! I did have a videocard, but it was barely a thing, it had 2 MB of memory and didn't support hardware acceleration.
Here are true original 1998 release of Half -Life minimum specs for Windows 95:
*Pentium 133Mhz.
*24MB RAM.
*16Bit Colour.
*2 x CD -ROM Speed.
*400MB Of Free Hardrive Space.
(No 3DFX required).
this is what i had exactly back then.
It was great for quake but that was the bare maximum
@@fadjeb8254 I think i only had 16MB RAM, did not try Half -Life on these specs, but like you say, Quake runned really well on P133.
HL should support the Voodoo card, that should be the gamechanger for this setup.
Yeah, I didn't even try it on my 486 PC and stuck with DOOM instead. Part of the reason was that I had 500 MB of HDD space in total. I did have 48 MB of RAM though, which was very neat.
Half-Life changed the way we think about storytelling in games. It’s a must-play for any gamer who appreciates a good narrative.
Are you sure about that? There are games that done storytelling much better.
@@АнтонМриглод There are movies with better storytelling than the incredibles, its still a good movie.
Not much for the story but for the tech. GoldSrc was a pretty big leap back then, Half Life redefined the FPS genre like Doom and Quake did before. A true milestone
@@АнтонМриглод Such as?
@@pizzaman-fx3xx Bioshock: Infinite, Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons, "I have no mouth and I must scream" (point and click adventure one), Assassin's Creed 4,there many more other games that has story done simply better, but it'd take too much time to mention them.
5:00 never seen Half-Life looking this much like Metal Gear Solid 1 before
It has been 20 something years since I ran that installer, but when the alarm sound went off I instantly knew.
At that resolution and without texture filtering, it looks like a really nice PS1 game. Without the wobble, of course.
Unfortunately this game was too big for the PS1.
@@senisevmek1993maybe a shortened homebrew version?
@@kovy6447 A heavily restricted version is required. In order for the PlayStation to run Half Life, the second generation had to come out because Half Life is a very complex game designed for the computer.
@@kovy6447 It barely runs on PS2. I doubt it's possible.
I remember being blown away when games that had ragdoll physics
yeah, ragdolls always were a little treat while gaming
@@SlingerMarshall i was blown away when you were able to wallbang in cod4
Blomie had the audacity to play on an LCD monitor, i can't 😭
My CRT from my TF2 on Minimum Reqs video died, so I had to make do with what I had. I might be able to film part 2 on my trinitron for part 2 of this series, though.
@@8-BitHacker it's not like the monitor really matters much.
Well, by 1998 standards it's quiet playable )
Though even I was blessed to have a slightly better PC back then
In 1998 I played Half Life with only 16MB of RAM... loading took ages. Then I upgraded to 64MB - best upgrade ever.
its crazy even seeing half-life run under 120 fps 😭
when it just came out I played and finished it at around 15 fps average, was too young to figure out graphics settings, but still had absolute breathtaking experience
The software renderer is what I imagine an N64 version would look like
More like PS1 (minus the vertice wobble), N64 already had Texture Filtering.
@@nelistaja And anti-aliasing on all games! N64 titles looked so clean on contemporary CRT TVs.
thats pretty cool. i feel like its my first time seeing the real WON menu, xash3d really simulates it perfectly
@@milymilo Valve thankfully bought it back recently to the steam version as well.
@@mryurix The half life 25th anniverssary main menu definitely looks like the WON menu, and a lot better than the original steam half life, But I still like how half life 1 WON has those silly other menus that xash3d copies exactly.
An original Half-Life CD? No need for a valid CD key, type "123456789" multiple time and you're good too go.
I used to play deathmatch with others students in the "network" room at high school. All without 3D acceleration and running on Windows NT 4.0 with a 233mhz CPU.
Good times 😊
I did not know this. Thanks for the heads up!
@@connardman That or 333-33333-33333.
all letter A is better hehehe
about CD key, Valve did change the cd key system when the game transferred to Steam. The WON version key are formatted like this: "3333-33333-3333" (btw that key does work through), and early Steam version (when installed from disc), accept keys in this format "AAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAA".
I feel like it would better inform the audience to break down the exact specs of the PC being used. That said, still always cool to see games run in a period-appropriate way.
yeah, I probably should've done that. In part 2, things will be a bit more hardware focused. Thanks for the input!
1998. I'll never forget it...
Cool fact: you can still use fully use steam on windows 7. It just lets you. It even checks for updates when I open it
Doesn't work for me, when it finishes installing itself it tries to check for updates but claims it can't find a network
@@trabant601e Seems like it doesn't work on freshly installed OS where Steam was installed for the first time. A month ago I saw one Japanese youtuber's videos who refused to leave Windows 7 where she showed that Steam on her PC still works just fine.
I so wish they'd finally add a no-DRM option for the games that can be downloaded from DRM-free platforms anyway. Pretty silly to be forced to buy games twice once the DRM-free release shows up just to get rid of that silly ad-launcher and service hell...
Yup, still using W7 in one of my PC's because I'm too lazy to switch it to W10 and Steam is running just fine.
Any game that depends on some other launcher besides Steam like the ones by EA or Ubi can be a bit tricky to run tho.
@@ayskudo6771 i wonder if theres a way to trick it
Daaaamn, I was unaware just how low spec of a PC can play Half-Life 1! Especially in software mode, which does the graphics entirely on the CPU. I thought my old compaq, on which I played HL and its expansions, was bad with its 500MHz Pentium and 200MB of RAM. It did have performance issues with see-through textures, would be interesting to see how your machine handles that. And also was incapable of selecting any of the other rendering options except software, probably because the integrated GPU in it is trash.
I remember trying to play half life 1 on my AMD k6 2 500mhz... the experience was close to the one we see in this video.... even with 3d acceleration... didn´t convince me, I waited a year or two then played it on a faster pc
@@rodrigoacosta9708 yours had 3D acceleration? You were very lucky! What were the specs on the faster PC?
@@aleksandarlazarov9182 yeah had 3d acceleration but was not good really. If I remember correctly it was a geforce 2, but it was Pci not Agp, because of my motherboard and its limitations. Believe it or not, I remember enjoying more the games on that pc in software mode than the ones I could play with direct 3d, but I am exagerating probably, it was a good machine 😁. Half Life was finally played on a pentium 4 with integrated S3 graphics, nothing fancy, but enough for 60 fps on 640x480, in the year 2004 ☝️
@@rodrigoacosta9708 I know the feeling, my compaq also has only PCI slots too, which is why it has only iGPU. As for software rendering, if I remember correctly, the textures are unfiltered making them look blocky rather than smoothed. In most old 3D games the blocky ones look much better, much sharper and crispier. I've also never heard of the company S3 before, I guess I am too young to know them! 😂
GPU must have been the problem. I played it on a Pentium 1 200mmx with 48mb ram and a Voodoo2 12mb and it ran perfect. The Voodoo was lightyears ahead of software rendering performance.
oh my god I forgot about the blaring alarm audio test thing in the installation. nostalgiaaaa
At the time, Half-Life's requiring nearly 400 MB of hard drive space was a little disconcerting, I remember. It was well worth it, though.
One thing, though - if you were running Half-Life on it's minimum required specs, then wouldn't you use Windows 95 instead of 98?
Which is funny when you think about how Final Fantasy 7 came out just a year prior and took up 4 entire CDs xD
@@beardalaxy
CD tracks and videos takes lots of space 😅
Pretty sure most people did not upgrade OS before Windows 98 Second edition (Summer 99)
The Elder Scrolls Chapter II: Daggerfall (1996) had a fairly massive install size for its time if you chose the full/“huge” install option, coming in at around 450 MBs.
@@ConkerTS
To be fair average computers sold in 98 had hdds in 4-6 tb size
Software rendering entirely uses your CPU to handle the graphical rendering. It's weird Direct3D or OpenGL doesn't work... what was the video card in this thing?
Probably an S3 Trio, like in many computers :)
@@nalinux I heard they also had integrated S3 video hardware on LOADS of '90s and '00s boards.
@@christiangomez2496 Many Ati were integrated too. I think I have seen more Ati than another brand.
Usually a Mach64 or equivalent, or its ancestor.
But not exactly the same Mach 64 the Rage Play had, which had real 3D.
@@nalinux Oh, I forgot about the whole 'Rage' brand of GPUs. They got shoved in ***EVERYTHING*** in the '90s.
The video card in this unit was a ATI 3D Rage II+ DVD 4MB PCI GPU. I don't know if it supports OpenGL or not.
i think if valve properly implemented D3D support, it would've ran much better on lower end systems at the time.
D3D still needs some hardware support. Of course (and even nowadays) you can run D3D via software mode (called WARP in the newer versions), yet the performance is sub-par (hence it is called a reference rasterizer - the thing is not supposed to run fast, but will draw everything like your hardware should, so if any glitch disappears under WARP, you can simply blame the bad drivers, not your own code). On the other hand, if Valve didn't try to facelift a very old engine (it is Quake 1, do forget not), and would just rely on a modern solution (either Q2 or Unreal), things would come way better. Say, UE1 has a great scalability, although even maxed-out (yet in 320x200) it can give some neat framerates even on a 133 MHz PC. With HLs really tiny and barely any detailed maps I'd easily expect 20+ FPS maxed out on UE1.
As it's the Quake 1 engine OpenGL was the way to run it.
@@karehaqt No, as the OGL support in Quake1 was a very quick thing made "just because everyone does this": no full-bright colors, no water warping - the only good thing was the Glide support you get along with one thanks the dedicated library, and higher framerates compared to the SW mode (which I prefer over Quakes OGL anytime). DX, however, was pretty limited those days (what was it, 5 or probably 6?), so no idea what would be a better choice...
9:13 You're like the third person I've seen replaying this game that's forgotten to hit the button. lol🤣
Love the druagua 1 reference. I can feel his BLAZING presence in your videos. Its up to you to carry the torch now
Thank you, druaga1 was a big inspiration for these types of videos on my channel. I miss him
@@8-BitHacker Me too man, me too
Well, aside from the readme file, you could also see the specifications in the old archived HL site. The site's got a lot of stuff to show too.
That's how I remember playing HL using software rendering on my Pentium 133. The day I got a Voodoo card changed my life.
1:02 Steam RUNS on Win7/8 with 0 issues.
For another 2 years and dies
@@LinguisticMirage for another 5 years if we're talking about Win8
@@LinguisticMirage it is not necessary to install newer windoes, just install linux when support dies. windows 11 is atrocious
@@Main_Protagonist it is but why dont you move to linux now lmao
@@LinguisticMirage I actually did a year ago, its alright!
What a glorious PC. I have a few from the 90s in a storage unit myself. I'm becoming that weird old 30s hobbyist that used to freak me out as a child.
You're literally playing my middle school days back in 1999. It's time to install the voodoo 3d acceleration card
Runs better here than when I first ever played it on my Nana's computer. It was so unbelievably laggy, but as an excited kid, I was just happy to run the game, full stop.
Had an emachines 366mhz machine with 32 megs of ram. A buddy gave me an old video card to get opengl support. It wasn't pleasant, but it was playable back in the day.
Also probably why I'm not phased by a little bit of lag in games.
366(!) with just 32 MBs? Scary lol, I'd expect somewhat 128 at the very least...
@@TheBypasser I upgraded it to 128. And a sweet 20 gig hard drive 😂
@@DNFINST 366+Voodoo (even not a V2) was a mad rig tbh!
@@TheBypasser I upgraded it to 128 megs after having it for a little bit. Got that and a big ole 20 gig ide hard drive for it.
Depends on what actual CPU you had. Pentium II and Celeron-A were at least twice as fast as Socket 7 CPUs per clock. In this game more like 3 times.
It has such a nice charm at such a low resolution
I've felt physical pain watching this
This is EXACTLY how I played Half Life when it came out!
What does that "Retro Inside" sticker mean seen at 1:54?
@@ridiculouslysoftdog4844 it's just a custom sticker for old PCs for flair
Homie whipped out the big booty latina monitor for this
LMAO
what's kind of cool is there's still a bunch of active multiplayer mods for these older games. sure, nowhere near as active as they used to be it's just cool that some of these games/mods have lasted as long as they have. if you built a cheap desktop you could play all that
Oh dude, I wanted to play Half-Life 1 back in the day SO MUCH. I had even lower specs I think, it took me like 10 minutes to load the game, I even seen first few frames of the tram ride and then the system froze. So sad.
Wow! I can play Half-Life in my Microwave!
Magnusson won't forgive you that!
8-Bit Hacker, cool video I loved it
Give it a decade or so and I bet we'll see someone recreate this video but on a computer made in Minecraft
hah the game is so pixelated the reception/entrance at 08:50 feels like you're playing Theme Hospital in first person... Staff Announcement, incoming patients with bloaty head
I don't think I've ever seen the Direct3D mode in this game work properly, even in the newer versions (before they removed it completely). When I did see it working at all, it was significantly slower than the Software renderer.
@@Flopster101 valve very jankily implemented D3D support basically
The context is important.
Most 3D accelerators from first generations did not have OpenGL drivers. OpenGL was a thing from the world of professional fifty thousand dollar workstations, and the only part of specification those cheap cards implemented was rasterising a polygon with a single texture. On the other hand, Microsoft insisted on Direct3D as single model of operation of all 3D accelerators. It was a multi-step rendering process, initially all software, but with a option for hardware to step in, and replace one or more steps. As a result, accelerators did the rasterisation (final drawing), but the rest of the polygon setup, sorting, etc. was done by Direct3D code on CPU. So for those cards, the difference is not “software vs. hardware”, it's “software vs. software plus maybe some hardware steps”, and that's why using single purpose rendering code optimised for the specific game beats using general purpose code that has to support incompatible cards, and also transfer data from host to accelerator.
Initial versions of Direct3D happened to be shots into the darkness, same as initial 3D accelerators were. It started to make sense when the progress consolidated around two winning companies, and new versions simply matched functions of their hardware. However, that caused the “universal” standard to have “nVidia functionality” and “ATi functionality”, “nVidia shader model” and “ATi shader model”, and so on, for half of the decade.
So Direct3D option in Half-Life was made to let users test those accelerators (and play on more recent ones). “Test”, not “use”, because most of them did not worth their money, and investing the same amount into faster CPU would give better fps, and actual playable game. A dozen or so console variables also exist to bypass their bugs, or prepare the data in a way that results in less performance degradation. However, when someone uses Direct3D with full-featured fast accelerator from later generations (most likely, also with a way faster CPU), it's a configuration that was hardly imagined by anyone making the game, so there are bugs. And OpenGL works because it's old, conservative, and backward-compatible (too conservative, as history has shown).
This is indeed a Certified Hood Classic
Thanks PandaKnives :)
Installing and playing half life 1 in 1998 must of been a magical experience
Nobody I knew even had a 3D video card, let alone a crappy one, in 1998
I ran this in 1999 with a Pentium 120 and 16MB of memory. I remember I measured the loading times between levels to be 3 minutes. The machine eventually had a Voodoo 2 card but I think I ran it without. Also it took most of my 1GB hard drive space.
My first experience with Half Life was on my 166mhz computer. It was pretty slow, but I made it all the way through the game. My hard drive would only hold 1 game at a time so I'd go back and forth from Half Life to SimCity 2000.
You gotta remember: HL1 ran on a modified Quake 1 engine, which itself was released before 3D acceleration (aka dedicated 3D video cards) were a common thing, not to mention necessary. Thus, being able to play most games in Software rendering mode was crucial. Also, I noticed that you're using the "HQ" models that came with the Blue-Shift. This unironically might make the game run more choppy.
Lol the ducking long jumps in the tutorial got ya
Back in time we didn't care about graphic details as long as it did work, low details was the standard
I forgot how big the text/UI was meant to be in that era, looks better imo than the scaled tiny text with our gigachad PC's nowadays.
I had Pentium 133MHz, 32MB RAM and Voodoo 4MB, maybe 1200MB of harddisk space. Voodoo helped at lot but, later parts of the game were nightmarish. Somehow I managed to complete the whole game. And global offensive and blue shift. It was strange to see when I got riva tnt 16MB pci, the game actually ran worse than with voodoo 4MB. Maybe my cpu bottlenecked my riva tnt. It felt like I set riva tnt free from it's cage when I updated to Athlon 700MHz and used the same graphics card with it.
You can still give your family a similar experience to what you felt when you first booted this up on your PC by not exposing them to any games published before 1998 and then suddenly having them play this game without any prior context.
If you played this game or others from that era and it was not lagging. You do not know what is love…
Look at that subtle colouring. The tasteful thickness. Oh my god, it even has a watermark
actually ran smoother than I expected
Playing games in the early 2000s was something entirely different when all you had was lowest settings.
I was able to have a playable frame rate using my 6x86 PC that has a VGA monitor at 320x240 at Full screen. Fun times back during the 90s. I miss those days. Thanks for bringing me back during my childhood.
that's how I literally played it back in 1999
I remember running the Uplink demo on a 486. If I lowered all the settings and reduced the window to the size of a postcard I got roughly 25fps. Good times.
Yep, this is how I played it. My laptop in the early 2000’s was a Pentium 233 MMX. I probably had 32 mb of RAM, and certainly no 3D accelerated graphics. I ran it at 400x300 (half of my laptop panel’s resolution). It probably ran at 20 FPS. I was amazed by it from start to finish. What an incredible game for the time. Not captivated me like that until I played Halo in late 2003.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane. I remember trying to get half life to play on my hand me down pc. Lol quake 3 arena too. What great times.
Remember playing Half Life 1 back in 2000s because i found it in the files of another game i managed to pirate. It was a Pentium 4 PC with 1gb ram and no graphics lol.
Fair play to ya Ryan you’ve done very well on this vid viewership wise pal 🤙🏾🔥
note the D3D option might have better luck.
Plus dont remmber if you need to fiddle whit the setting under the 3d3 option at 7:01
to tell the game what GPU type your using.
think stuff like is it a AMD or Nvideo graphic card back then you needed to tell the game today that game figure that out on its own (if it matters).
and back then it did like COD1 I think had Nvideo fog vs AMD and other card who just cut everything at max distance off.
Nvide sort of faked a fog (looked better).
i love the bringus style of editing
That 12 FPS Resonance Cascade made it all the more scary (cuz even crappy computers back then cost waaaaay too much, and I knew if Half-Life broke ours, my dad would kill me)
cant believe how cool this game looks after so many years
The first machine I ran this on was a 100mhz pentium (can't remember how much RAM) and a 2MB Matrox mistique gfx card, so the cpu was below the minimum requirements however it still ran. Was about the same peformance as the setup in your video. The biggest problem was just being hard to play, especially when soldiers start shooting and the frame rate drops to ridiculous lows.
It feels great seeing it running on real hardware. I did a whole playthrough on 86Box with this config, but this looks even more painful somehow.
Hey dude I don’t know if you remember me but I used to watch a lot of your Mario 64 streams just wanted to say congrats on almost 100k views Banger Videos
I remember running the demo (Half-Life Uplink) on a P75 system with 16MB of RAM... At least I tried. I remember I was able to finish it. I don't think I actually had a graphics accelerator back then. It was 320x240 for sure.
I also remember when OP4 came out and I tried to install it on a 800MB hard drive. Thankfully I had a beefier Celeron or AMD CPU back then + a Riva TNT. I had to hack the base game and remove all unnecessary files - like base maps etc - just to install it. Then I had to alt-tab to remove autosaves on the fly, so it didn't run out of space.
That game and community pulled me in for a good 10-15 years.
Cool! Our family just got a new pc that early that year, I believe it was a Pentium 200Mhz with a 3dfx Voodoo Rush card, this game ran pretty well.
when HL2 came out I had a HORRIBLE Radeon card.... the little onboard 50mm fan was the loudest fucking thing in the universe. great memories.
I like how he made a whole Cascade just because he wanted to try Direct3D mode
Half-Life 1 fan excited to play the game for the first time
this is a very good video actually u gained my subscribe
hi! thanks for this amazing video! what's the sound at 3:04? sounds so familiar
You're welcome, and thanks for the kind words! That sound is the Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 Shutdown Sound.
Like it was yesterday...i listened to Aventura - Obsession in the background while it installed and got hooked asap. Its my very first fps on PC (First one was Medal of Honor on the PS1) and i played it in an Internet cafè in Poland when i was 8, brother told me "This game is garbage with the 20 min train ride, play something different" just when Barney entered the code to unlock the door we had to leave the Café and idk why but i just loved that expirience.
Bought HL2 when it came out, installed crappy green Steam and waited 4 hrs to download the game (together with CS:S) and it wouldnt even start bc of my crappy PC. Hl2 was a huge dissapointment, never interested in Alyx and i think HL3 will be pretty bad.
If you read that, get a life.
i have been wondering this for years
THX
I played the Uplink demo on my 486. I think I got something like 5 fps, but the game time ran slower as well, so I could still fight and survive, in slow motion.
moral of the story never go by minimum system requirements old or new, only follow recommended or better
If a 2024 game ran like that on listed minimum hardware, there would be a meltdown on social media.
PC gaming really was an hard thing back then. I'm running half life on an athlon 1400 and ati 9200 PCI, and the game still goes below 60 fps in several instances, even using the faster opengl renderer.
also 400MB was a lot back then so many had to delete almost everything in their hard drives to fit this game
I remember playing HL1 on the family computer. it was a 2001 pre-built from Compaq (still have it)
It was only capable of playing HL1 and other GoldSrc games on Software render, but it was fun enough for me.
even though i didn't knew anything about upgrading PC hardware, i loved being able to just play with what i had.
Can you test the steam version on mine specs? Just curious because of the updates it’s had over the years, especially the 25th anniversary update.
Also do HL2 next!
Even updates back then started to tank performance. I had a Pentium 166 MHz with a Voodoo3, and I had to play a certain version of the game, as newer versions had a lot worse performance.
the lighting makes it look like a quake mod
You really need a 3D accelerator to do that game justice. A Voodoo 1 works miracles on a Pentium 133.
Watching it install was a weird blast from the past with the strange 3 loading things on the left hand side and the blasting warning signal. So weird!
Finished it when it came out on my Pentium 166 16mb RAM, 320x240 software mode and from what I remember maybe 15-20 average FPS max, great experience!
takes me back. what a good fucking game