Unpopular opinion: I don't understand what makes Half Life 2 so great

I played through it and enjoyed it, along with HL1 back in the day. I've played CS and CS:S competitively and played many mods surrounding HL and Source. But to me, HL2 was a pretty standard shooter. I played it when it first came out and it was fun, but hardly groundbreaking or revolutionary. I shot things and there were a variety of sequences and it added to the HL lore but it wasn't that big of deal.

Why do gamers hold HL2 to such high regard?

It had largely to do with the extremely detailed environments and environmental interactivity. Even today, games environment's and the objects that populate them are a lot less interactive than Half-Life 2. And it's not just the environments that was detailed, but every other aspect of the game as well. It's smart, had jaw-dropping graphics for the time, perfectly paced, has numerous memorable scenarios and set pieces, and an interesting story.

What games were there in 2004 or before that you could kill an enemy by dropping an object on their head? In my eyes, that's a major step up in gaming.

immersion, plain and simple.

You are Gordon Freeman

*that is in addition to nailing and perfecting the fundamentals of FPSs, as well.

What are games were there in 2004 or before that you could kill an enemy by dropping an object on their head? In my eyes, that's a major step up in gaming. KHAndAnime

This exactly. It  was  absolutely revolutionary. I don't understand how people say it wasn't.

Pacing ultimately, teaching the player constantly and having them demonstrate their aptitude. The world is the story,. The game is so good at directing you to areas of importance.

Some simple examples:

1.When you get to ravenholm you see half a zombie resting on top of a saw blade embedded into the wall. Instantly you have a mental picture of what happened and potentially what you'll be using. Later in ravenholm you enter an open area and see a raven in front of you. It gently takes off and floats into the air. Your eyes track it and on the roof tops you see a Fast Zombie shriek and start running towards you... masterful

2. For a few levels, the antlions are dangerous, forcing you off the sand and being a worth adversary en masse. You'll rely on thumpers to keep them at bay while you get supplies. Later, you acquire bug bait to put them to work against your enemies, turning off those thumpers you had previous relied on.. It's not just a different weapon with bugs instead of bullets, it's part of the entire narrative that continues for huge chunks of the story leading to the prison infiltration and showerblock boss battle.

3. When you arrive in the tenements you are exposed to civilians in a dilapidated environment. They are consoling each other, offering you insights into the city over watch and combine. You move through these areas freely until you hear "Miscount detected in you area" It doesn't take a astrophysicist to work out that miscount is you. The tension escalates and you are being chased by enemies, some civlians offer some assistance and get you on the roof tops. Just brilliant.

4. Alyx says "man of few words aren't you"

You know why it doesn't seem so special if you play it now?

Because every FPS since learned from it and based themselves on ideas from HL2.

[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]What are games were there in 2004 or before that you could kill an enemy by dropping an object on their head? In my eyes, that's a major step up in gaming. the_bi99man

This exactly. It  was  absolutely revolutionary. I don't understand how people say it wasn't.

I don't see how you could enjoy a game like HL2 after playing Deus Ex 1.

HL1  had some stealth , you could sneak up on people.

HL2 is just too unrealistic srsly. I stopped playing when guards were shooting at me through walls, this after I was just sitting in crouch not making a sound for some time ( I was testing if stealth works)

It was inventive, it had great puzzles and fvcking mind bending physics for its time. First time you ever attempt that water barrely puzzle was like "Holy sh!t". Also it has an engaging story and characters and is very cinematic with set pieces that didnt' rely on QTEs or forcing the player to do or look at things. It kept the gamer in full control. 

I think it's the pinnacle of FPS games. But I also think some people can overrate it 

It was a superbly paced game with a unique way of immersing a player in a story. The graphics and atmosphere were fantastic for the time and are even good today. Physics puzzles were brand new to gaming and they gave you the gravity gun to play around with the impressive physics engine that had not been seen in a game before.

It did pretty much everything right. Very few games can say that.

It's really easy for people to look back and say it's average or mediocre because it does so many things other games do today but they forget that Half-Life 2 was the innovator and the first to do a lot of the modern FPS conventions we have today. 

Things like physics being a core element to the game play, stories being told from the 1st person perspective, driving sequences that seamlessly blended with the rest of the game, a fantastic game engine that came with a robust set of tools for even inexperianced modders to make maps and mods, the best facial animations we had ever seen in gaming which really brought the unique cast of characters to life, and just the overall structure of the game that set the standard for pretty much everything after.

I thought there was nothing innovative about its gameplay.

I enjoyed it because of its varied,detailed environments and the immersion.

While I feel it over-rated.

I very much enjoyed playing through it (even at a later date) and can see why it did get so much praise.

It has something a lot of games just don't have these days.  Atmosphere. (and the ability to truly allow yourself to be immersed) 

Many devs somehow mistake how many particles, or textures they can fit on the screen = atmosphere.  Yet many games of the past completely stomp quite a few of the more modern games in this department!

The gunplay left a good bit to be desired, but that was really the only thing I found off about it.

The story, setting, pace...  it was all very well done. 

It allowed you to get lost in the world instead of focusing on setting you up in the perfect spot for countless QTE, or some Michael Bay theatrical set piece.

It was atmospheric, well paced and the gravity gun was cool.

Oh and Alyx Vance.

It had no cutscenes, that is a big plus imo and really helps immersion.

Half Life was FAR superior to Half Life 2.Rattlesnake_8

I mean HL2 is great in it's own right, but not even comparable with HL1. 

- Atmosphere

- Physics

- Immersion

- Alyx/Gordon Freeman

I didn't like it in 2004 and I still don't like it. I never even managed to finish it despite trying four times. That being said, I can acknowledge the innovations that it brought to gaming.

immersion, plain and simple.

You are Gordon Freeman

*that is in addition to nailing and perfecting the fundamentals of FPSs, as well.

mrbojangles25

^ To add, mrbojangles hit the nail right on the head. YOU ARE Gordon Freeman. I hate when games give you this stupid, dumb soldier character that says stupid lines. How could you stand playing as a terrible character like that? I prefer mystery. It's just like Isaac Clarke. I preferred it when he didn't say anything. When he started talking, he was an emo crybaby.Elann2008

The wonder of silent protagonists, especially well made ones such as Gordon Freeman.

And I agree, stupid dumb characters really make me disconnect with the character.

[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]What are games were there in 2004 or before that you could kill an enemy by dropping an object on their head? In my eyes, that's a major step up in gaming. the_bi99man

This exactly. It was absolutely revolutionary. I don't understand how people say it wasn't.

The first Deus Ex and Jurassic Park: Trespasser. JP:T was the first game I know of that used a real physics engine, although the game itself was pretty crappy. It was more like a big sandbox with dinosaurs. Deus Ex's physics engine was basic at best, but the RPG elements allowed for a little bit more environment interactivity than other games (i.e. cybernetic strength let you drop large objects on people).

-Byshop

Is it really all that unpopular of an opinion? For every person you can find that says The Godfather was a cinematic masterpiece, you'll find 5 people who says it was boring and sucked. Half-Life 2 is turning out to be the very same way. Not everyone can put themselves in the mindset that lets you fully enjoy the content in front of them, hence these opinions (though possibly malformed ones).

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]^ To add, mrbojangles hit the nail right on the head. YOU ARE Gordon Freeman. I hate when games give you this stupid, dumb soldier character that says stupid lines. How could you stand playing as a terrible character like that? I prefer mystery. It's just like Isaac Clarke. I preferred it when he didn't say anything. When he started talking, he was an emo crybaby.AncientDozer

I played it for the first time with the Cinematic Mod on earlier this year and was pretty impressed by it. If I had played that nearly a decade ago, I would have been completely blown away

People reallydug moving floating barrels.

I'm with you, I played it at release and thought it was terrible compared to the original.

Enjoyed doom 3 much more.

Edit:

It was inventive, it had great puzzles and fvcking mind bending physics for its time. First time you ever attempt that water barrely puzzle was like "Holy sh!t". Also it has an engaging story and characters and is very cinematic with set pieces that didnt' rely on QTEs or forcing the player to do or look at things. It kept the gamer in full control. 

I think it's the pinnacle of FPS games. But I also think some people can overrate it 

seanmcloughlin

I was being sarcastic, but you actually mentioned the barrels. :lol:

It is a very good game, but far from what it is praised to be.  

[QUOTE="AncientDozer"] NOW, this discussion is aimed specifically at the argument that Gordon Freeman is an "amazing character". Wordless/faceless characters don't typically deserve that accolade; it's reserved for those with actual character development and personality like (arguably) Nathan Drake or Booker DeWitt. Commander Shephard's a bit trickier because s/he has visible development and a personality but you can control and guide it.nutcrackr

huh.  I never feel like I am the character unless I MADE the character myself.  No adventure with a set protaganist makes me feel that way.  I don't want it to either.  Miyamoto always says how Zelda is supposed to make you feel like you are link.  I love Zelda, but I never felt that way.  I dont want to feel that way.  Teell me a good story with good characters.

I thought HL2 was fun but I really hated the boat riding parts.  Personally, I preferred Unreal over either HL.  

People reallydug moving floating barrels.

I'm with you, I played it at release and thought it was terrible compared to the original.

Enjoyed doom 3 much more.

Edit:

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

It was inventive, it had great puzzles and fvcking mind bending physics for its time. First time you ever attempt that water barrely puzzle was like "Holy sh!t". Also it has an engaging story and characters and is very cinematic with set pieces that didnt' rely on QTEs or forcing the player to do or look at things. It kept the gamer in full control. 

I think it's the pinnacle of FPS games. But I also think some people can overrate it 

topgunmv

I was being sarcastic, but you actually mentioned the barrels. :lol:

Dude the barrels were the shit. :P

I remember taking quite a while to figure that part out, because I just never thought to try that. Didn't strike me as the kind of thing that would be possible in a game, at the time. When I finally figured out what to do, and did it, I was like "this... changes.... EVERYTHING".

Of course, it didn't change  everything,  but it was sweet, and the game was boss.

It's grown on me since back then. I actually enjoyed Far Cry more that year (except it's terrible story) and I prefer the first Half-Life too but it's still easily a 9.0 - 9.5 game to me.

You know why it doesn't seem so special if you play it now?

Because every FPS since learned from it and based themselves on ideas from HL2.

kraken2109

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

You know why it doesn't seem so special if you play it now?

Because every FPS since learned from it and based themselves on ideas from HL2.

faizan_faizan

I concur, the game was pretty mind blowing compared to everything else, it had story, gameplay, large open areas to move in and a sense of pacing that was way ahead of its time. If you go back today and try to compare it to more recent games obviously its not going to have the same effect on you it did on someone just playing it for the first time in 2004. Almost every modern FPS game has been influenced by HL2, shoot...just about every genre has been influenced just look at any game that uses physics and objects as projectiles or to solve puzzles.

Got to remember it came out in 2004, 9 years ago!blangenakker

I think HL2 is alright. But HL1 is a much better game, even if I were to play them both now.

[QUOTE="blangenakker"]Got to remember it came out in 2004, 9 years ago!JigglyWiggly_