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

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

great for it's time of released and has aged well 

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)

ciorlandenis

Maybe we could enjoy it because we don't look for stealth elements or perfect realism in every game?

It doesn't have any major flaws in and is a very well-rounded game that doesn't fall heavily short on anything whilst having an original, well-told story with the players point of view being limited to what you see in front of you, leaving an air of mystery to a lot of things - like who the G-man is and the lore of the combine and Xen. Not to mention the graphics were superb at the time.

[QUOTE="Mochyc"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] halo 1 aged betterKHAndAnime

[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]

[QUOTE="Mochyc"] Multiplayer definitely, it's timeless and essentially the same formula was used for Halo 3. Singleplayer, I would disagree. It wasn't even that fun when I played it at release (remember the library level? I was about to go insane). Mochyc

If we really want to have 'conversations' with game characters, you better start supporting Kinect then instead of laughing at it. It's taking us closest to that dream.AncientDozer

Kinect is not a requirement for this.

Matter of fact any mic should work...

Rainbow six you could issue orders with it.

You could do the same in the strategy game  Tom Clancy's End Game.

These have been done years ago. While I agree Kinect could do it (probably very well), again it is not the requirement.

No, it is not. But through it we've gotten the closest to that dream of yours. Not simply voice but also motion and so forth. And it works a hell of a lot better than a regular mic.AncientDozer

Actually how do you define regular mic? You can get more competent mics for the price that you would pay for kinect. Great mics have become affordable for a while now, as long as you know what you are doing.  However if you are referring to the normal mics that come with most headsets, then yes I would have to agree.  Can't argue with you about the motion part. Though in the future the options for pc for this will be far more than just choosing Kinect. 

Secondly not really the dream of mine. I think it could be a cool addition, however to have it as the only, or even the main (most widely used interface) that still has some time to come. 

I am not against kinect at all, I think its just a very pre-mature version of something that will actually be useful in the not-so-distant future. However it won't be the only innovation we will see with the way technology is advancing either.  I suspect PC gaming even to adopt LEAP sometime in the near future for a few of their projects, (just mentioning this as a little example, as I am sure you are already aware of things like Oculus Rift)

Matter of fact, people have been experimenting with Kinect (and end even Wiimotes) to compose music in there DAWs in some of the other forums I hang around. Even the head developer of the DAW I use already stated that they will be experimenting with the usefulness of the upcoming LEAP tech.

go back and re-play a couple shooters released pre-2004, then play some doom 3 and far cry 1, and tell me half life 2 isn't great, with all of that fresh in your mind. It's very much about context.

One of the best fps i have played.

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"][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.

AncientDozer

Polish... not to mention the Source engine has proven to be one of the best engines ever made. It's scalable, easy to improve upon over time, easy to use, focused on NPC customization, and just incredibly optimized. The Source engine is not only capable of a wide variety of lighting and physics solutions, it allows devs to have intuitive controls over game design in the alpha stage. But Source engine aside, Half Life 2 features a game where you actually travel a great distance and encounter a wide variety of puzzles and combat situations. The writing is top notch, and the predicaments poor Gordon encounters always feel fresh.donalbane

HL 2 was a great game but the ai was awful and the first big puzzle was plain stupid. The ramp puzzle. The jump distance makes jumping just as physically demanding as mantling that ledge. Gordon looks to be in decent shape, why not just climb up? Or just move the ramp and put it directly onto the ledge?

Its great for one playthrough but a linear game with boring combat is unreplayable. Far Cry was the best shooter of 2004.

Best characters, best story, best environments, best shooting mechanics.

The graphics still have a look about them that is more realistic than all of the plastic looking games of today.  Music was amazing and the sound effects were some of the most memorable ever.  

The game made gamers everywhere orgasm, but I didn't see it, good story an' all, but I didn't go manic over it.

If you played the game and don't get it, I can't explain it to you.  

Best characters, best story, best environments, best shooting mechanics.

The graphics still have a look about them that is more realistic than all of the plastic looking games of today.  Music was amazing and the sound effects were some of the most memorable ever.  

hoola

This is something that I've always loved about the Source Engine, and particularly it's implementation in HL2.  It looks gritty and real, even if the textures and lighting look at bit dated today.  There aren't plasticky textures and overwrought bloom/lens flares everywhere.  I think there were a few games in the 2004-06 era that nailed graphical elements better than anything since.  FEAR, for example, still has the best shadow and lighting effects, and some of the best particle effects to date.  

I would add my opinion here that a lot of people tend to overlook the fact that Half-Life 2 caused loader-client DRMs to proliferate on the computer platforms.

To me, this game marked the reduction of consumer freedom as much as it is a milestone for the evolution of first-person shooters.

I would add my opinion here that a lot of people tend to overlook the fact that Half-Life 2 caused loader-client DRMs to proliferate on the computer platforms.

To me, this game marked the reduction of consumer freedom as much as it is a milestone for the evolution of first-person shooters.

Gelugon_baat

[QUOTE="Mochyc"][QUOTE="KHAndAnime"] Both components were dated by the time the game was even released. How can people so quickly forget that Halo 1's MP component was outright broken in the netcode department. LAN matches were lag fests for christs sakes. Or do you guys just not pay that much attention to things like that?KHAndAnime

Are you saying Steam reduces consumer freedom?nutcrackr

Compared to not having to play games through a loader client or any other form of DRM? Yes, I am saying just that - that, and an entry (#12) in Steam's Terms of Service agreement that asks the user to give up his/her litigation rights in return for Valve giving up its own. Personally, I will never give that up, regardless of Valve's overtures.

Maybe some of us don't see Steam like I do, but that's only because Steam is treating people right for now, e.g. giving Steam community managers and customer relations personnel a very strong say in customer issues. However, I personally see trouble brewing ahead, specifically when Valve's current leadership and their vision of Steam is no longer around.

I'm a bit annoyed (a bit strong, sorry!) at the whole "it was revolutionary for 2004" argument. Look, I pre-ordered HL2. I played it the day it came out. I was impressed by the graphics, physics, and scope/level design. I stated that in the OP. But I didn't come away feeling like it left a mark in my gaming experience, back in 2004. I shot combine dudes, and did it in a number of ways. I had to go from point A to point B, nothing spectacular, but the path from A to B was quite nice.

I do feel like the 'Gordon Freeman is an amazing character' aspect is a cop-out. Yes, you can perceive the world from a blank slate point of view and it can be immersive in that regard. But that doesn't make it any better or any worse, it just is.

I suppose you'd have to have a higher appreciation for the HL universe, and I can understand that.

I'm big on story, too. The main reason I play games now is for a satisfying story and atmosphere. And I know that a lot of the story is built into the HL world as you play through it, butit didn't do it for me.

I felt the same thing in HL1, albeit, I played it in 2001. HL2: Episode 2 was very enjoyable, but didn't change anything for me.

It did a lot of things well, but didn't do anything great.

I suppose most of us will agree to disagree :P

The problem to me is, if a game is really that incredible, it should be able to transcend time barriers. I finished Planescape Torment for the first time two years ago, and it was still mind blowing. Half Life 2, not so much.ArchonOver

^ I really tend to agree with this notion, as well. However, I try to lay off that argument cause sometimes I'm not sure if it's nostalgia that drives me to appreciate the game years later instead of it truly transcending time. I always revert to Deus Ex, and Star Wars: KotOR though because I truly believe those are games for the ages. Those are examples that support the notion.

System Shock 2 is a bit different. I absolutely loved it when I played it and stood by it when I played it in 2003, but I went back to it recently and just felt dated. I still love the game, though! Definitely special.

However, Deus Ex and Star Wars: KotOR, I acknowledge that they have dated elements of course. But the overall experience does not feel dated.

I suppose most of us will agree to disagree :Pa_sh0pping_cart

If only some die-hard Valve-bots would do that. :roll:

I don't give a crap. It's more fun than 95% of shooters, so that's enough for me.

I don't give a crap. It's more fun than 95% of shooters, so that's enough for me.Lost-to-Apathy

At least you are narcissistic enough to make a post here. :roll:

[QUOTE="donalbane"]Polish... not to mention the Source engine has proven to be one of the best engines ever made. It's scalable, easy to improve upon over time, easy to use, focused on NPC customization, and just incredibly optimized. The Source engine is not only capable of a wide variety of lighting and physics solutions, it allows devs to have intuitive controls over game design in the alpha stage. But Source engine aside, Half Life 2 features a game where you actually travel a great distance and encounter a wide variety of puzzles and combat situations. The writing is top notch, and the predicaments poor Gordon encounters always feel fresh.Cranler

HL 2 was a great game but the ai was awful and the first big puzzle was plain stupid. The ramp puzzle. The jump distance makes jumping just as physically demanding as mantling that ledge. Gordon looks to be in decent shape, why not just climb up? Or just move the ramp and put it directly onto the ledge?

Its great for one playthrough but a linear game with boring combat is unreplayable. Far Cry was the best shooter of 2004.

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.

KHAndAnime

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

the_bi99man

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="Lost-to-Apathy"]I don't give a crap. It's more fun than 95% of shooters, so that's enough for me.Gelugon_baat

At least you are narcissistic enough to make a post here. :roll:

Shut up. No one likes you. Go into your corner and cry.Lost-to-Apathy

That's a typical response from a narcissist. :roll:

I have had that kind of retort many times before - always from people who believe that whatever they believe is always right and anyone else who thinks otherwise or doubt them is a loser or worse.

[QUOTE="Lost-to-Apathy"]Shut up. No one likes you. Go into your corner and cry.Gelugon_baat

That's a typical response from a narcissist. :roll:

I have had that kind of retort many times before - always from people who believe that whatever they believe is always right and anyone else who thinks otherwise or doubt them is a loser or worse.

It's just my opinion. Lost-to-Apathy

Well, you could have just said that instead of your previous posts, couldn't you?

[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.

skrat_01

I can hardly see how he 'nailed' it. Most of us, including myself, who don't think HL2 was AMAZING played it in 2004. It wasn't revolutionary, it wasn't groundbreaking, IMO. Was it great? Maybe. Was it good? Certainly.

What exactly did FPSs learn from HL2 that became the basis for the genre? Physics and the great environments, maybe. Level design was linear and dated to me. Shooting was pretty solid. I just don't know what everyone sees in the game.

I just don't know what everyone sees in the game.a_sh0pping_cart

Careful there - not everyone shares the sentiments of those who were so deeply impressed by Half-Life 2 that they can never let go of their fancy towards it.

[QUOTE="a_sh0pping_cart"]I just don't know what everyone sees in the game.Gelugon_baat

Careful there - not everyone shares the sentiments of those who were so deeply impressed by Half-Life 2 that they can never let go of their fancy towards it.

[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.

skrat_01

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][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.

JigglyWiggly_

Ep1 was really bad

I mean, I like my fps games or rather all games to be straight forward, so it really wasn't for me. I don't know why people like confusing level design.
Exception is the STALKER games just because the atmosphere in those games is dat.

Ep1 was really bad

I mean, I like my fps games or rather all games to be straight forward, so it really wasn't for me. I don't know why people like confusing level design.
Exception is the STALKER games just because the atmosphere in those games is dat.

JigglyWiggly_

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]

Ep1 was really bad

I mean, I like my fps games or rather all games to be straight forward, so it really wasn't for me. I don't know why people like confusing level design.
Exception is the STALKER games just because the atmosphere in those games is dat.

kraken2109

idk why you would ever want a game that has bad map design and it's praised

I don't agree with the people saying that Half-life 2 was great in 04/05, but isn't now.  I've played it fairly recently, and it's still one of the best shooters to date. The gameplay is still tops.  

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]

Ep1 was really bad

I mean, I like my fps games or rather all games to be straight forward, so it really wasn't for me. I don't know why people like confusing level design.
Exception is the STALKER games just because the atmosphere in those games is dat.

JigglyWiggly_

idk why you would ever want a game that has bad map design and it's praised