Ok. I know I'm gonna get punched in the face in a figurative fashion in regards to my review introduction. However, I implore you, please read what I have written...
Back in the early 2000s, Half-Life was confirmed to get a sequel, set about 20 years after the original, in a dystopic Eastern European city called City 17. Playing as our famous bad-ass physicist Gordon Freeman, you have to free the civilians of City 17 from their terror from the ruler of City 17 and the Ambassador to Earth, Wallace Breen.
In terms of narrative, this game is pretty good, and offers a good, cohesive story, and a number of the characters from the original make a return, especially Barney Calhoun and Isaac Kleiner. I like this game's narrative a lot, and it's explained along the way in cutscenes where you mostly maintain control of your character. Speaking of control...
The gameplay, let's be honest, is really basic. This isn't the worst thing ever, but it's still not great. Being a first person shooter, you may expect the most basic of gameplay. However, in the case of Half-Life 2, it doesn't really do much for me at all.
Throughout the game you'll collect 10 weapons and a special item that allows you to call out to antlions. These weapons include the signature crowbar, the handgun, magnum, sub-machine gun, shotgun, crossbow, grenades, RPGs, pulse rifle, and the famous Gravity Gun.
Now, the Gravity Gun gets a special note for being a really unique weapon, being able to pick up objects like small rocks, boxes or barrels, as well as punting cars and dumpsters out of the way. It is pretty useful sometimes, and it is more or less required in some puzzles, making use of Source's physics engine. Unfortunately, however, it's a weapon that is more or less in limited necessity, until the end where it does become an incredibly powerful thing, allowing for grabbing enemies and killing them, and flinging them at other enemies or evaporating them in some sort of thing.
So. This is a PC game. And because PC gamers are...PC gamers, we have to mention the graphics. For 2004, they were brilliant. The animations were smooth and fluid, and it felt like a living breathing world. I say 'world', I mean 'linear-ish corridor'. At least there was some sort of human interaction between the player and the NPCs.
Nowadays it looks meh, but it's still somewhat impressive for a game from 2004, and the Source Engine has since been revamped and reiterated every few years for newer games, like Portal and Left 4 Dead.
I'm done with graphics. How about the enemies? Some of the enemies from the original Half-Life are no longer present, such as Bullsquids, and Vortigaunts are no longer enemies - in fact, they're allied with the humans, this time.
This time, however, there are more enemies. This time around, there are more varieties of zombies, such as Fast Zombies, one of the scariest enemies in games there is. The Combine, too, are also a pretty interesting kind of enemy, though they tend to be just like Nazis, in essence...think about it: dystopian future, in a city policed by Nazis, or in this case the Combine. They're good enemies, but the omnipresence of them can be a bit annoying to some.
Now what to talk about......I'll go into why I think this game is overrated now.
Exhibit A: the gameplay. The game is really basic and pretty bloody easy, even on the normal difficulty setting. I seldom ever die in the game, unless it was something I did, like accidentally shoot an explosive barrel. And why is it basic? Because, as I said earlier, this game is a very linear corridor. Whilst the original Half-Life was also linear, the original Half-Life occasionally included a secondary way of getting past an area in some way. Half-Life 2 doesn't do this, or at least not to my memory.
There isn't even that much in terms of environmental feedback, either. Apart from when you stand on sand in some parts where antlions burrow, you won't see any particular things of interest...if at all.
And the physics puzzles...the majority of them tend to be puzzles where you pick something up that would weigh something down, and weigh something down with that something. The puzzles tend to be really really really simple, and not particularly memorable, either. Not that it matters in that regard anyway, since the puzzles are already easy enough.
Exhibit B: The AI. Ok, for its time, this game's AI was fantastic, and the industry hadn't seen anything like this. However, nowadays, the AI has...kinda aged badly. Combine enemies will not ever go behind cover, and the same goes for friendly AI, especially in the near-endgame, when you have a party of four other allies with you. At least they are decent enough to move out of the way for you...
The enemy AI for the monster-type enemies is actually not too bad, especially the Zombie AI......then again, you can't really do much with zombies anyway. However, the Antlion Guards are pretty mediocre ammo sponges. They take a lot of damage for what is essentially a penis on a load of legs......kinda like Mara from Shin Megami Tensei, only Mara was quite obviously a penis with loads of legs or tentacles or whatever. Now I'm getting off topic again, so moving on...
Exhibit C: Gordon Freeman himself.
SHOCK HORROR, SOMEONE ACTUALLY HATES GORDON FREEMAN! Well, let me explain my reasons before you try to claw my throat to pieces.
Gordon Freeman is a weapon-wielding scientist. Now, "weapon-wielding" and "scientist" don't really fit all that well. Sure, this can be excused back in 1998 with the release of the original Half-Life, as it was a game released in a time where lots of characters looked like Rambo on steroids (hey there, BJ Blazkowicz!). So, whilst a bizarre idea, it was kind of refreshing at the same time. However......
The worst thing Valve coulda done with Gordon was make him silent. A lot of the story is mentioned to you with NPCs talking to you. Wait, "talking TO you"? Lemme rephrase that. Talking AT you. You do nothing, whilst NPCs run their mouths of like it's the Kentucky Derby. Because NPCs are talking at you and not to you, it almost makes it feel like the game's trying to suck you out of its world. It's a really off-putting thing, and I kinda hate it.
Something else I hate about Gordon is that I've heard people say he's an avatar for the player to become, essentially. If that's the case, why does he have an iconic appearance that you cannot change normally? He's bearded, wears glasses, has an orange HEV suit, and carries a crowbar. Apart from cosplayers, name someone else who has all four of these traits. You won't think of many, that's for sure. What's more, he can't be an avatar in that sense anyway, because he has an established backstory, in that he was a scientist who graduated from MIT in theoretical physics. I don't know anyone who goes to MIT personally, neither do I know anyone who is at university studying theoretical physics. Not many people are scientists, so to have Gordon Freeman as an avatar in that sense would be nonsensical to say the least.
I feel like I've rambled on enough, so I will give this game its dues in places. For example, this game has a tremendous set-up, essentially carting us into a world where we are rats to these alien-like beings of the Combine. This game knows what it's doing in terms of atmosphere, and it never lets up. One minute, you're going through the dark and zombie-infested Ravenholm, and another minute, you're fighting a full-scale battle against the Combine to fight for the human race's survival. The atmosphere in this game is second-to-none, and I have to give the designers kudos on those regards.
So, all in all, do I think this game is a great game? No. I used to think it was brilliant, but looking at it now, it's lost a lot of its shine. Even gold tarnishes, ladies and gents.
However, when all is said and done, this game is deserving of some of its merits. It is more or less the base height most sci-fi FPSs aim for nowadays, such as Crysis. Half-Life 2 is a good game, but not if you try to critique it.
64%