The game was way ahead of it's time.

el3m2tigre

In a lot of areas definitely. It's kind of hard to look back at it as it were when it came out but it looked amazing and could run on anything. The physics, sound and atmosphere, AI and voice acting were all top notch, but now as more FPS's have emerged it definitely shows its weaknesses (half life 1 holds up so much better, by far the better game). Enemies are straight up bullet sponges that only flinch when they get hit, which is very annoying, also while some of the guns had excellent sound the impact/feeling of them was just a bit off, they just never felt as powerful as they sounded i suppose. Another thing, the driving elements are awful and need to go away. To get from one point to another doesnt have to require vehicles but something more creative (Half life 1 did it), and as a result would probably make the game a big longer.

Half-Life 1 did so much right, I could never understand how they made a facility so much more interesting to explore than an entire city. Not to knock on Half-Life 2's design because it's athestically better than Half-Life 1's but ultimately i feel like they made such a better use of their environment... (Minus a few awesome places like Ravenholm). I also felt like the marines were FAR more menacing as a threat, you weren't elite or some super soldier, but a scientist stuck in the middle just trying to survive.

[QUOTE="TruestGamer"]People are arguing about some ps3/360 games being subhd, yes but they are still ALL greater than 480p/i which was the previous generation standard, no? If you aren't getting it for the 3D, why get one at all? Isn't a DSi around the same price? Nintendo got arrogant and greedy and their reputation and years of "forgiveness" have caught up to them. If anything, Sony has the most potential to be the "new nintendo". Nozizaki

Because the DSi is WAY less powerful and has a primitive internet and wireless system in comparison. Not to mention the part that the DSi doesn't get 3DS games or 3DS Ware.