Metacritic states"Half-Life 2 is the highest rated FPS of all time. Flawles

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's also an unfair assumption to say that Half-Life 2 is my favorite game just because of what I said.

I'm just saying what I see with PC gamers today. In 2004 Half-Life 2 was universally praised among gamers (hence the high scores). Though now it seems that people like to hate it and say it's overrated for whatever reason. I'm chalking this one up to a new mentality with PC gamers. Nothing is ever good enough for them and popular games are bad.

It's one thing to have a complaint with the game, but i've seen the opinion of the community take a complete 180 turn on this one. I don't think I've ever seen a game go for years being praised as the king of all games to being overrated and boring.Maybe Half-Life 2 being ported to the consoles had something to do with it too. People get all crazy when they lose their precious exclusives...

jakes456

Well I can say my self that I actually prefered FEAR1 to HL2 which was released like a year later.. But unlike FEAR.. HL2 was just a complete package with CSS.. Not to mention the endless slew of mods.

FEAR is much better than HL2 hands down.

Imo FEAR failed on what it promised to have. It came out in 2005 in the same month with Condemned: Criminal Origins and Call of Cthulhu and it was the least scary. Then the expansions (and later FEAR 2 and 3) came out and destroyed any hope for the series. Same thing happened with Far Cry 2 and Crysis 2.

HL1 and HL2 were both great games. But I am sure if HL3 is very bad everyone is going to forget about them.

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"][QUOTE="AFBrat77"]

I would say none of those on that list are better, but Deus Ex, original Max Payne and Battlefield 2 are up there with it

realguitarhero5

Personally, I think Id Software's 1994 DOOM 2was the best FPS ever, with HL2 in 2nd place.....but I doubt many will agree with me.

[QUOTE="realguitarhero5"]

But Halo is better than Half Life...

sleepingzzz

So is Call of Duty ( all of them and don't even like the series that much )

Batttlefield 2

Counter Strike

Left for Dead

The chronicles of Riddick

Deus Ex

Team Fortress

Max Payne

Portal

... and several dozen more.

I disagree with Riddick and the newer Call of Duty games. Sure, I played the newer Call of Duty games more than Half-Life, but Half-Life was a more fun experience for the time I spent playing it.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="realguitarhero5"]

But Halo is better than Half Life...

realguitarhero5

Half Life was fun. For a while. But it never made me care and it never really got my attention. Halo did that from the first moments of the first intro to the firstgame. And you can give all the examples that you want about why Half Life is better, but the simple fact is, I have never bothered to finish it because it wasn't fun enough and the story just didn't make me care.

EDIT: I am talking about the series as a whole, not a specific game. IMO Halo Reach was a huge letdown and I have heard that HL2: Episode 1 wasn't too good either.

You're what we call a console gamer. We don't expect you to understand. It's not so much what platforms you use as it is a mentality that makes you a console gamer. Thinking that Halo is a better game than Half-life is one of the most reliable symptoms of consolitis among gamers.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's also an unfair assumption to say that Half-Life 2 is my favorite game just because of what I said.

I'm just saying what I see with PC gamers today. In 2004 Half-Life 2 was universally praised among gamers (hence the high scores). Though now it seems that people like to hate it and say it's overrated for whatever reason. I'm chalking this one up to a new mentality with PC gamers. Nothing is ever good enough for them and popular games are bad.

It's one thing to have a complaint with the game, but i've seen the opinion of the community take a complete 180 turn on this one. I don't think I've ever seen a game go for years being praised as the king of all games to being overrated and boring.Maybe Half-Life 2 being ported to the consoles had something to do with it too. People get all crazy when they lose their precious exclusives...

jakes456

Well I can say my self that I actually prefered FEAR1 to HL2 which was released like a year later.. But unlike FEAR.. HL2 was just a complete package with CSS.. Not to mention the endless slew of mods.

FEAR is much better than HL2 hands down.

The only thing they have in common is that they're both first person shooters. Other than that, they're completely different games. FEAR was amazing at what it aimed to do. Half-life 2 is every bit as good at what it was meant to be.. maybe better.

[QUOTE="jakes456"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Well I can say my self that I actually prefered FEAR1 to HL2 which was released like a year later.. But unlike FEAR.. HL2 was just a complete package with CSS.. Not to mention the endless slew of mods.

hartsickdiscipl

FEAR is much better than HL2 hands down.

The only thing they have in common is that they're both first person shooters. Other than that, they're completely different games. FEAR was amazing at what it aimed to do. Half-life 2 is every bit as good at what it was meant to be.. maybe better.

[QUOTE="sleepingzzz"]

[QUOTE="realguitarhero5"]

But Halo is better than Half Life...

AjaxNeron

So is Call of Duty ( all of them and don't even like the series that much )

Batttlefield 2

Counter Strike

Left for Dead

The chronicles of Riddick

Deus Ex

Team Fortress

Max Payne

Portal

... and several dozen more.

I disagree with Riddick and the newer Call of Duty games. Sure, I played the newer Call of Duty games more than Half-Life, but Half-Life was a more fun experience for the time I spent playing it.

Gotta love how this forum gets riled up by a Metacritic topic. Are you serious? Any true gamer, pc or console knows not to trust anything that comes out of that ****

[QUOTE="realguitarhero5"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Hahhahahahaha. That's an awesome joke. hartsickdiscipl

Half Life was fun. For a while. But it never made me care and it never really got my attention. Halo did that from the first moments of the first intro to the firstgame. And you can give all the examples that you want about why Half Life is better, but the simple fact is, I have never bothered to finish it because it wasn't fun enough and the story just didn't make me care.

EDIT: I am talking about the series as a whole, not a specific game. IMO Halo Reach was a huge letdown and I have heard that HL2: Episode 1 wasn't too good either.

You're what we call a console gamer. We don't expect you to understand. It's not so much what platforms you use as it is a mentality that makes you a console gamer. Thinking that Halo is a better game than Half-life is one of the most reliable symptoms of consolitis among gamers.

Well here on GS Crysis out scored it. And to me Crysis destroy HL2. Not saying HL2 wasnt good but but in terms of gameplay, graphics, atmosphere, sound, the only thing HL2 has better than crysis is the storyline and better weapons. To me when I see sites list top 100 pc games of all time and they rank Crysis like # 66 and then rank HL2 # 5 it bothers me because Crysis give me a better experience then HL2 to me.

It was a amazing game, but it had it flaws. Most of the weapons felt lacking which made the gunplay a little weak and the vehicle controls were pretty stiff.

Well here on GS Crysis out scored it. And to me Crysis destroy HL2. Not saying HL2 wasnt good but but in terms of gameplay, graphics, atmosphere, sound, the only thing HL2 has better than crysis is the storyline and better weapons. To me when I see sites list top 100 pc games of all time and they rank Crysis like # 66 and then rank HL2 # 5 it bothers me because Crysis give me a better experience then HL2 to me.

J-REAL

exactly. Crysis stomps HL2 into the mud.

The game was great but not that great. Of the big three of 2004 I preferred Farcry.

Also WTF with Glitchspot with all the gateway timeouts and butchering my posts. :x

[QUOTE="J-REAL"]

Well here on GS Crysis out scored it. And to me Crysis destroy HL2. Not saying HL2 wasnt good but but in terms of gameplay, graphics, atmosphere, sound, the only thing HL2 has better than crysis is the storyline and better weapons. To me when I see sites list top 100 pc games of all time and they rank Crysis like # 66 and then rank HL2 # 5 it bothers me because Crysis give me a better experience then HL2 to me.

jakes456

exactly. Crysis stomps HL2 into the mud.

[QUOTE="jakes456"]

[QUOTE="J-REAL"]

Well here on GS Crysis out scored it. And to me Crysis destroy HL2. Not saying HL2 wasnt good but but in terms of gameplay, graphics, atmosphere, sound, the only thing HL2 has better than crysis is the storyline and better weapons. To me when I see sites list top 100 pc games of all time and they rank Crysis like # 66 and then rank HL2 # 5 it bothers me because Crysis give me a better experience then HL2 to me.

FelipeInside

exactly. Crysis stomps HL2 into the mud.

HL2 has a more interesting story, but not by much.

Crysis is 10x the game HL2 is.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="jakes456"]

exactly. Crysis stomps HL2 into the mud.

jakes456

HL2 has a more interesting story, but not by much.

Crysis is 10x the game HL2 is.

[QUOTE="jakes456"]

[QUOTE="J-REAL"]

Well here on GS Crysis out scored it. And to me Crysis destroy HL2. Not saying HL2 wasnt good but but in terms of gameplay, graphics, atmosphere, sound, the only thing HL2 has better than crysis is the storyline and better weapons. To me when I see sites list top 100 pc games of all time and they rank Crysis like # 66 and then rank HL2 # 5 it bothers me because Crysis give me a better experience then HL2 to me.

FelipeInside

exactly. Crysis stomps HL2 into the mud.

Crysis is 3 years newer than HL2. Crysis has more impressive visuals, but TBH the Source engine still does it for me. It's sharp-looking (when done right), scalable to almost any hardware, and was far ahead of it's contemporaries. I've played through both games multiple times, and HL2 is far more epic.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="jakes456"]

exactly. Crysis stomps HL2 into the mud.

jakes456

HL2 has a more interesting story, but not by much.

Crysis is 10x the game HL2 is.

That is one of the most absurd statements that I've ever heard. I'm a big fan of both games, but Crysis isn't nearly the game that HL2 is when you take all things into account. The characters were forgettable, the plot sucked, the enemies were North Koreans and cheesy-looking mechanized alien things. HL2 was a much better thought-out game. It ran well on almost any hardware.

Yes Crysis is a more open and customizable game. Yes the graphics are better (when cranked up) and the environment is much more interactive. None of that matters as much as how much fun and excitement a person gets from playing the game. For me (and clearly many others), HL2 was far better in that way.

One is an adventure game, the other a FPS. Try again scrubs.

One is an adventure game, the other a FPS. Try again scrubs.

Socijalisticka

What are you talking about?

It's still up there in my favs, it's no where perfect as people make it out though.

Who cares what Metacritic says?

There is something seriously wrong when a site that only function is to reprint the final score of any given title has as much pull as they do.

Besides, Half-Life 2's high scores are heavily tainted by the absurd levels of worship that were displayed when that game was released. It was almost impossible to find a level headed professional review.

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]

One is an adventure game, the other a FPS. Try again scrubs.

hartsickdiscipl

What are you talking about?

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]

One is an adventure game, the other a FPS. Try again scrubs.

Sentinel112

What are you talking about?

[QUOTE="Sentinel112"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

What are you talking about?

FelipeInside

no you're not dreaming, it's the same nonsense he was spouting earlier in the thread

[QUOTE="Sentinel112"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

What are you talking about?

FelipeInside

Well here on GS Crysis out scored it. And to me Crysis destroy HL2. Not saying HL2 wasnt good but but in terms of gameplay, graphics, atmosphere, sound, the only thing HL2 has better than crysis is the storyline and better weapons. To me when I see sites list top 100 pc games of all time and they rank Crysis like # 66 and then rank HL2 # 5 it bothers me because Crysis give me a better experience then HL2 to me.

J-REAL

Half Life 2 is an adventure game. People would still play it if they stripped the game away from all its guns. People worhip it for the exact same reasons they worship Dear Esther. Half-Life 2 is not really a gamer's game and hence to me it is vastly overrated.Sentinel112

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Sentinel112"] Half Life 2 is an adventure game. People would still play it if they stripped the game away from all its guns. People worhip it for the exact same reasons they worship Dear Esther. Half-Life 2 is not really a gamer's game and hence to me it is vastly overrated.Sentinel112

The exception is that there exists no game with the interweaving of gameplay elements, storytelling, setpieces, the detail behind every environment, pacing or characters as exhibited in Half-Life 2. Let alone those half-assed indie interactive games.

Masterpiece is on sale on steam right now!

It was almost impossible to find a level headed professional review.

Drosa

The game was just that good.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]

One is an adventure game, the other a FPS. Try again scrubs.

Sentinel112

What are you talking about?

Crysis is more of an "adventure game" than HL2. HL2 has a linear story and level design to match. It would be impossible to get anywhere in the game without weapons. In Crysis you could theoretically explore most of the island without a weapon. Both are first-person shooters. Crysis is more of an adventure game if anything.

I played the game back 2009 I think. Good game but absolutely nothing spectacular.GazaAli

You should've played it in 2004/05.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]

One is an adventure game, the other a FPS. Try again scrubs.

Sentinel112

What are you talking about?

The game was just that good.

hartsickdiscipl

Not even close to being the best shooter of 2004.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]I played the game back 2009 I think. Good game but absolutely nothing spectacular.hartsickdiscipl

You should've played it in 2004/05.

And some of those that did found it to be a terrible game. The time frame of it being played should have little bearing on its quality. There have been advancements and additions to the genre(s,) but that doesn't negate anything or everything before them, or how well they're executed simply because of the time frame. If you have to resort to saying "well the game was good back then/you would've had to play it back then," then IMO the game wasn't actually good.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Not even close to being the best shooter of 2004.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]I played the game back 2009 I think. Good game but absolutely nothing spectacular.ChubbyGuy40

You should've played it in 2004/05.

And some of those that did found it to be a terrible game. The time frame of it being played should have little bearing on its quality. There have been advancements and additions to the genre(s,) but that doesn't negate anything or everything before them, or how well they're executed simply because of the time frame. If you have to resort to saying "well the game was good back then/you would've had to play it back then," then IMO the game wasn't actually good.

I played HL2 again last year. I liked it just as much as I did when it first came out. The game is brilliant. Some people DO play a game when it's new and love it, and then feel it's not that great years later when revisiting it. For me, HL2 is not one of those games. For some people it is. You can't deny that HL2 was advanced beyond it's time and introduced some very original gameplay elements. The game had the gravity gun and physics that are beyond some games that are years newer. The story is better fleshed-out than almost any game. It didn't try to be it's predecessor, but instead cut it's own path using parts of the HL franchise that worked for it.

[QUOTE="Sentinel112"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] An Adventure Game? It's not really a gamer's game? Am I really reading this or am I dreaming?Socijalisticka

The exception is that there exists no game with the interweaving of gameplay elements, storytelling, setpieces, the detail behind every environment, pacing or characters as exhibited in Half-Life 2. Let alone those half-assed indie interactive games.

It's alright, nowhere near the best fps of all time to me though.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]I played the game back 2009 I think. Good game but absolutely nothing spectacular.hartsickdiscipl

You should've played it in 2004/05.

I read reviews with a grain of salt, and usually I'm left to disagree completely, or be absolutely disgusted by the lack of honesty and experience of the reviewer.

For me, Half-Life 2 was one of the bigger let downs in FPS gaming history since Halo was introduced. After the success of Half-Life (mostly the success of the highly-edited Quake engine) and the mega success of Counter-Strike, Valve fanboys started getting rather delusional. Many still to this day claim that HL2 is the best game (not just FPS) ever created. CS:Source, CS:GO. Left 4 Dead 1 & 2, Team Fortress 2 and Portal followed. More mediocre games I can't honestly score any higher than a 9.0, well, other than TF2 which is probably in the Top 5 best video games ever created.

As Daniel Dust has just said, I too couldn't manage to finish Half-Life 2 in all the years that I've owned it. It's simply a boring game that is very buggy and leaves some old school gamers wondering what happened to Valve? I mean, they used to make amazing games, then their games just went completely mediocre and bland. Source engine, while technologically advanced, is actually a really sloppy engine for playing competitive FPS games with.

SKaREO

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]I played the game back 2009 I think. Good game but absolutely nothing spectacular.cain006

You should've played it in 2004/05.

FEAR is a great FPS, no doubt. It's half a tier down from HL2 IMO.

[QUOTE="cain006"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

You should've played it in 2004/05.

hartsickdiscipl

FEAR is a great FPS, no doubt. It's half a tier down from HL2 IMO.