My humble opinion on the matter.
First, I must say I was amazed, positively amazed to discover how well the Source Engine runs and looks on a mediocre configuration such as mine (Radeon 9600SE, 512MB Ram, PIV 2.8Ghz). I was able to play at a very acceptable framerate with models, textures, shaders, shadows on high, 1024x768 w/AA4X (looks awesome) and AF16X. As a matter of fact, I still settled for medium textures, low shaders and shadows, trilinear filtering and AA2X as the only effect I could perceive was an amelioration of performance.
Yes, that was a refreshing experience, because after having tried The Elders Scrolls: Oblivion on my system, I thought I would eternally be stuck with older games: it just wouldn't run decently. It was the graphics, or the framerate, but never both. Source delivers everything even through a low-end system, and that blows.
I was also amazed to find out that unlike Oblivion, HL2EO used an HDR technique that my video card could do. Finally, I could see with my own eyes, in real-time, how it looked like!
I must say I wasn't impressed at all. In fact, I was happy to go back to normal lighting, gain a few precious fps back and also a much more natural, realistic lighting.
From what I've seen on screenshots, HDR seems to do a fantastic job in Oblivion, whereas normal lighting looks pale, static, and not convincing. (I could only try normal and bloom, and definitly settled for bloom).
In HL2EO, it is a different matter. Valve had already designed original HL2 with only normal lighting, and tried their best to make it look realistic: and HL2 looks actually very good even though it doesn't have HDR. Yes, they now added it on top of everything. And is it good? No.
My biggest concern with HL2EO HDR is that every light source becomes a 2000W projector that can set you on fire from a respectable distance. For example, as we (Gordon and Alyx) were crawling in a basement, we discovered a little computer room with a small vertical neon on the wall. And of course, there was a patch of blinding, intense and pure white light on the opposite brick wall, and you had to stare at it for about 6 seconds before you could see any detail; and even then, it had that radioactive-retina-burn-green shade. How ridiculous is that? Switching to normal lighting, the light was much more diffuse, soft and realistic.
If you want to see for yourself, watch the "Half-Life 2 High-Dynamic Range Rendering Demonstration" at gamespot. The light is way too pure, too intense, the contrasts between light and darkness are ridicoulsy exagerated. You never see that in real life except if you stare at the sun. (Actually, the scene when you are staring at the sun looks really good in HDR).
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3760/hdr6zo.png
And that's really the only thing HDR does in this game, except for lowering your framerate. Right now, this technique is just show-off; it lacks realism, moderation and precision. It make the world look like you're watching it through night vision goggles, getting blinded at every single decent light source.
Now for some screenshots:
Comparison 1:
Normal
HDR
Here, the HDR screenshot looks more alive than the normal one, though less detailed.
Comparison 2:
Normal
HDR
While the normal screenshot looks believable, though a little too dark in the foreground, the HDR, while it does a good job of lighting up the foreground, is a total disaster in the background. It might look funny, but it's not realistic.
HDR effect:
Blinded by HDR
3 seconds later
The first screenshot is a total lighting mess; and that's just because I stared at the (slightly) darker sky for 5 seconds before taking it. The blinding effect fades out in a strange way, but 3 seconds later it looks good.
I didn't take more screenshots because switching from HDR to normal is a 2-minute torture for my system.
First, I must say I was amazed, positively amazed to discover how well the Source Engine runs and looks on a mediocre configuration such as mine (Radeon 9600SE, 512MB Ram, PIV 2.8Ghz). I was able to play at a very acceptable framerate with models, textures, shaders, shadows on high, 1024x768 w/AA4X (looks awesome) and AF16X. As a matter of fact, I still settled for medium textures, low shaders and shadows, trilinear filtering and AA2X as the only effect I could perceive was an amelioration of performance.
Yes, that was a refreshing experience, because after having tried The Elders Scrolls: Oblivion on my system, I thought I would eternally be stuck with older games: it just wouldn't run decently. It was the graphics, or the framerate, but never both. Source delivers everything even through a low-end system, and that blows.
I was also amazed to find out that unlike Oblivion, HL2EO used an HDR technique that my video card could do. Finally, I could see with my own eyes, in real-time, how it looked like!
I must say I wasn't impressed at all. In fact, I was happy to go back to normal lighting, gain a few precious fps back and also a much more natural, realistic lighting.
From what I've seen on screenshots, HDR seems to do a fantastic job in Oblivion, whereas normal lighting looks pale, static, and not convincing. (I could only try normal and bloom, and definitly settled for bloom).
In HL2EO, it is a different matter. Valve had already designed original HL2 with only normal lighting, and tried their best to make it look realistic: and HL2 looks actually very good even though it doesn't have HDR. Yes, they now added it on top of everything. And is it good? No.
My biggest concern with HL2EO HDR is that every light source becomes a 2000W projector that can set you on fire from a respectable distance. For example, as we (Gordon and Alyx) were crawling in a basement, we discovered a little computer room with a small vertical neon on the wall. And of course, there was a patch of blinding, intense and pure white light on the opposite brick wall, and you had to stare at it for about 6 seconds before you could see any detail; and even then, it had that radioactive-retina-burn-green shade. How ridiculous is that? Switching to normal lighting, the light was much more diffuse, soft and realistic.
If you want to see for yourself, watch the "Half-Life 2 High-Dynamic Range Rendering Demonstration" at gamespot. The light is way too pure, too intense, the contrasts between light and darkness are ridicoulsy exagerated. You never see that in real life except if you stare at the sun. (Actually, the scene when you are staring at the sun looks really good in HDR).
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3760/hdr6zo.png
And that's really the only thing HDR does in this game, except for lowering your framerate. Right now, this technique is just show-off; it lacks realism, moderation and precision. It make the world look like you're watching it through night vision goggles, getting blinded at every single decent light source.
Now for some screenshots:
Comparison 1:
Normal
HDR
Here, the HDR screenshot looks more alive than the normal one, though less detailed.
Comparison 2:
Normal
HDR
While the normal screenshot looks believable, though a little too dark in the foreground, the HDR, while it does a good job of lighting up the foreground, is a total disaster in the background. It might look funny, but it's not realistic.
HDR effect:
Blinded by HDR
3 seconds later
The first screenshot is a total lighting mess; and that's just because I stared at the (slightly) darker sky for 5 seconds before taking it. The blinding effect fades out in a strange way, but 3 seconds later it looks good.
I didn't take more screenshots because switching from HDR to normal is a 2-minute torture for my system.