What's so great about Half-Life 1? (Not a rant) Poll included!

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for ilikemyds
ilikemyds

52

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#1 ilikemyds
Member since 2005 • 52 Posts

Just as a word of warning, this is not flamebait, trolling, or whatever you want to take this for, it's simply me asking what seems to be a community where most prefer the original Half-Life over Half-Life 2. I have read numerous posts for quite a while about how innovative and amazing Half-Life 1 is, but I just can't understand it.  I am not biased in any way, I have played both on the PC, but I felt Half-Life 1 lacking compared to its sequel. Half-Life 2 was a revolutionary game, and is undoubtedly the best FPS I have ever played, the gravity gun, the story, the vehicles, the physics, the enemies, the graphics, it was all perfect. The environments were very unique and you really felt like you was on the run from the combine the entire time, the action was intense and was extremely unique.

Half-Life 1 on the other hand, which I bought after enjoying the second one so much, left me wondering how it got the praise that it did. It's boring, the enemies aren't so much smart as they are overpowered, like a whole clip of machine gun ammo to take down ONE soldier, where's the fun in that? you spend most of the time getting frustrated because while you're trying to conserve ammo you have to waste it all to do something like that. People complain about Half-Life 2's lack of bosses, but what's so great about Half-Life 1's? it's not a boss fight, it's a puzzle with a massive monster trying to kill you. The graphics are bad, but i'll let that one slide because it IS an old game. The weapons are also not great imo, people say that the arsenal in Half-Life 1 far surpasses Half-Life 2's, that the alien weapons are "great fun" but after having the gravity gun. not a single one of these weapons felt any good, they all seemed lackluster, inclusing all of the prototypes. My last gripe with the original Half-Life, is the environments, it's just a bunch of labs and deserts, and at the end SPOILER WARNING you end up on an equally dull alien planet, what I thought to be an enjoyable journey like Half-Life 2's turned out to be nothing more than trapsing through labs and sand killing dull, overpowered enemies. The one thing good about this game is the AI, which they should have used in Half-Life 2, the health in Half-Life 2 was far more realistic, the enemies were not though.

Anyway, that's my opinion, so after all that, please, somebody give me a good reason why Half-Life 1 is the best Half-Life to have been released, and why Half-Life 2 pales in comparison. Or, can anyone else who preferred Half-Life 2 give their opinion on why they preferred it.

Avatar image for David719
David719

2187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 David719
Member since 2007 • 2187 Posts

Half-Life 1 was much better IMO

Avatar image for weffer
weffer

1004

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 weffer
Member since 2004 • 1004 Posts
You said it yourself, its an old game. When it came out, like in 98 or something, it was blew everything out of the water. Before that, most Fps's were stale and lacking in compelling stories. Of course you're gonna think Half Life1 is boring after playing the second.
Avatar image for milsvaard
milsvaard

1928

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#4 milsvaard
Member since 2003 • 1928 Posts
At the time, the AI was the most impressive in the industry, I played it back when it was released an I still consider it to the greatest.
Avatar image for weffer
weffer

1004

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 weffer
Member since 2004 • 1004 Posts
You write this as if Half Life 2 came out before Half Life 1.
Avatar image for smokeydabear076
smokeydabear076

22109

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#6 smokeydabear076
Member since 2004 • 22109 Posts
Halflife 1 is so much better.
Avatar image for ilikemyds
ilikemyds

52

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#7 ilikemyds
Member since 2005 • 52 Posts
You said it yourself, its an old game. When it came out, like in 98 or something, it was blew everything out of the water. Before that, most Fps's were stale and lacking in compelling stories. Of course you're gonna think Half Life1 is boring after playing the second.weffer
I understand that, but i'm talking about the fact that, even though Half-Life 2 is out now, people still prefer the original. I do agree with you though, that Half-Life 1 must have been amazingly ground-breaking for its time.
Avatar image for verbalfilth
verbalfilth

5043

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#8 verbalfilth
Member since 2006 • 5043 Posts
You'd have had to play it at its time to understand the greatness that it was. Of course, if you just recently played it, and after playing two to make things worse, you won't be able to understand why this game was and is still praised for its achievements during its era =)
Avatar image for bloodychimp
bloodychimp

933

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#9 bloodychimp
Member since 2006 • 933 Posts
I seem to be out of the norm for hermits as I dont really like either one. The puzzles just dont appeal to me. The challenge in them isn't that they are particularly hard to figure out, but instead derives from whether you can make the freaking controls and physics engine work for you. For example, there is a puzzle in Half Life one where you have to jump on a box up a vent. I dont even know how many times i had to retry it because i would accidently hit the box and make it slide while i was jumping on to it. Thats not fun, its just frustrating.

Even though I dont like the single player, deathmatch, CS, and TFC (and soon TF2 :P) are amazing.
Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#10 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
Let me guess... you played Half Life 2 first, right?
Avatar image for buckfush311
buckfush311

537

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 buckfush311
Member since 2006 • 537 Posts
They are both the best games I've ever played. HL1 = Amazing, innovative, immersive, enthralling, and tons of fun. HL2 = Same thing...because they're not the same game.
Avatar image for SystemShock2
SystemShock2

4172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#12 SystemShock2
Member since 2003 • 4172 Posts
well, i have to disagree with most of what you said. Besides the gravity gun, half life 2's weapons were mostly bland. The half life experimental weapons rocked and the standard weapons were much better than half life 2's because they didn't feel weak, and they were more diverse. The first half life had better level design, better puzzles, was harder, was longer, had more surprises, and it had a lot of atmosphere, and it was revolutionary when it came out. I wouldn't exactly call half life 2 revolutionary like you did because it really didn't push the genre forward.

Also, there was more than 6 types of enemies, and i wouldn't call the boss battles,. besides the tentacles, puzzles. Gargantuas you could kill with explosives, and you had to kill nihilanth by shooting. There are other things i could list, but those are the main things. By the way, i love half life 2.

Avatar image for Golden_surfer
Golden_surfer

5749

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Golden_surfer
Member since 2004 • 5749 Posts
which I bought after enjoying the second one so much,weffer
1998 vs 2004? 2004 FTW. :|
Avatar image for Golden_surfer
Golden_surfer

5749

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 Golden_surfer
Member since 2004 • 5749 Posts
Let me guess... you played Half Life 2 first, right?foxhound_fox
That's what he said.
Avatar image for KingOfTaco
KingOfTaco

154

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 0

#15 KingOfTaco
Member since 2007 • 154 Posts

Before Half Life, most first person shooters divided the game into levels, and when you passed one you couldn't go back. Half Life made the entire game one huge level, one where you could pass back and forth between zones in the level. It also incorporated NPCs into its design, and made the world feel less isolated, and more realistic. The AI for the soldiers at the time was awesome, since most enemies in other shooters at the time would stand there while you gunned them down, and when you took cover they would foolishly move to where you were hiding. But in Half Life, they'd flush you out with grenades, retreat, take cover, regroup with other soldiers, etc. With scripted events like Black Mesa guards fighting aliens, you felt as though you were part of something bigger than the game. Also, there was item placement. Before Half Life, shooters had randomly placed items, like shotguns in the corner of the room, or ammo and health placed directly in the middle of the room. But in Half Life, you could get ammo from dead soldiers, or power up the environmental suit with powerups hanging on the wall.

Plus, it was Valve's first game. Being one of the biggest revolutions in the first person shooter genre with your first game deserves some credit, at least.

Avatar image for ilikemyds
ilikemyds

52

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#16 ilikemyds
Member since 2005 • 52 Posts
well, i have to disagree with most of what you said. Besides the gravity gun, half life 2's weapons were mostly bland. The half life experimental weapons rocked and the standard weapons were much better than half life 2's because they didn't feel weak, and they were more diverse. The first half life had better level design, better puzzles, was harder, was longer, had more surprises, and it had a lot of atmosphere, and it was revolutionary when it came out. I wouldn't exactly call half life 2 revolutionary like you did because it really didn't push the genre forward.

Also, there was more than 6 types of enemies, and i wouldn't call the boss battles,. besides the tentacles, puzzles. Gargantuas you could kill with explosives, and you had to kill nihilanth by shooting. There are other things i could list, but those are the main things. By the way, i love half life 2.

SystemShock2
I understand most of the points you have put across, such as the weapons in half-life 2 feeling weak (which they do) but the enemies in half-life 1 were so overpowered, the strong weapons felt weak anyway, and I didn't think much of the experimental weapons, they were good, but the lack of ammo for them made them next to pointless. Also, about the level design, I felt half-life 1 was pretty bland, deserts, labs, not much diversity. As I said, I have played both, but I played the second one first, I do not understand how that should make me feel bad about another game though, if I played the first one first, chances are I wouldn't have tryied half-life 2 in the first place. Half-life 1 was far more challenging, and had plenty more surprises, some of which made you jump :) and seeing as it came out back then it was definitely a huge revolutionary step. But what you say about better level design, enemies etc, I can't agree with, by the time I got half-way through the game I was already tired of the seemingly endless labs. But I respect that maybe, if I played half-life 1 when it first came out, I would probably appreciate it more, but I still feel i'd have preferred the 2nd one when that did some out.