Can somebody please explain Why half-life is good

[Trololo Punk]

I remember trying to play it a while back when the orange box first came out, and i couldn't finish half life 2 or the episodes, just got bored. Jumped back into it recently, mostly cause i was ashamed that I owned half life 2, but had never even finished it and had a blast playing it...

 

[laserdroid]

Don't forget they built a physics engine from scratch

 

[Iron Mal]

Well I was about to argue about a few of those games, Especially AVP2 and Dawn of War (Which I NEVER liked), but then I kind of realized that it would be pretty fruitless. Not that I have anything against discussion of games, but it boils down to personal taste.

But here's the thing, when most people make taste based arguements like that, they tend to only cite one example and just say 'because it was good'. For each and every single one of the games I cited above (quite a comprehensive list of a few genres) I could go into a lot of detail explaining why I felt they were good titles and still hold up to today's standards

You weren't wowed by HL2 on launch day, I was. Who is right and who is wrong?
Both, and neither.

I personally find the 'no-one is right' arguement to be something of a cop out, granted, on subjective topics like games and other forms of entertainment and storytelling there is no true right or wrong but this doesn't mean that discussions and arguements aren't worth having anymore (and it's far from making them pointless).

I stand by my arguments for why one might not Half Life today, because I feel they are the only really objective reasons why someone might not enjoy it: If they didn't play it on launch day, they can't grasp what the tech meant for the time.

I did play it on launch day, I did experience the tech for the first time (and considering how my family is reletively poor and didn't have much in the way of technology back then, this kind of advanced physics recreation and detail in a game was bloody impressive to me as a piece of tech) and yet I can also objectively argue why I felt it was lackluster (I am biased, but fair).

Of course that argument doesn't account for personal opinion and taste, but what, honestly, does? I thought the level design, characters, story, and gameplay were, and still are, extremely solid. IF you disagree, I certainly can't change your mind. And I won't bother trying, either. You aren't wrong, you just see it differently.

Why personal opinion and distaste does of course. Saying that you can't change someone's mind on the matter is a fatalistic way of looking at things, several people's minds have been changed on subjects vastly more and less important than games.

I will admit I'm a bit jaded by the repeated threads of 'I don't like this old game, what am I missing?', because, quite frankly, nobody is missing anything. If you don't like a game, you don't like it. Regardless of age. So long as you gave it a fair shot, then no amount of fanboy gushing, or thought out rational discussion, will change your experience to a positive one. I hated: Red Faction, Deus Ex, every Final Fantasy I've ever played (Except number 1), every Legend of Zelda I've played, and numerous other 'much loved' games and franchises. No amount of people talking to me about it, no matter how rationally, will change my experiences, and that's OK.

And here I would have to say that isn't true. I personally am not a great fan of gorey horror films (although I am fine with gorey games, I always found that kind of weird) but after a long time of insistance and persistance, my girlfriend finally got me to sit down and watch SAW and SAW II with her. I ordinarily had no reason to like these films (they're just not my thing) but I actually kind of enjoyed them and thought they were great films (not the best but still pretty good). I still refuse to watch the Final Destination series but now I'm a lot more open to stuff I otherwise wouldn't have even known I liked before if it hadn't of been for my lovely girlfriend going out of her way to try and convince me despite me being set against it.

And I doubt I'm the only person something like this has ever happened to.

Simply: I'm not in the business of trying to change people's mind. IF people want to have a discussion, then let's have a discussion. But don't ask me 'What am I missing?', because it's a flawed question.

'The only stupid question is the one you don't ask'.

 

[Iron Mal]

You don't get battle fatigue? Genuinally interested, I seem to be one of those that don't like constant battle/excitement in games. See the Amnesia Dark Descent developer commentaries about excitement fatigue, they pretty much echo my thoughts exactly.

I have never once experienced 'battle fatigue' in a game.

In fact, if anything, I'm one of those people who demands more enemies and hectic battles (is it possible that I actually come from the Warhammer 40k universe?) and I always found the concept of people experiencing it a tad silly to be honest.

If you're tired of combat in a game then switch to a different game or go do something else. The game itself shouldn't have to change itself just because you're not in the mood to play it.

 

[orangeban]

You don't get battle fatigue? Genuinally interested, I seem to be one of those that don't like constant battle/excitement in games. See the Amnesia Dark Descent developer commentaries about excitement fatigue, they pretty much echo my thoughts exactly.

I have never once experienced 'battle fatigue' in a game.

In fact, if anything, I'm one of those people who demands more enemies and hectic battles (is it possible that I actually come from the Warhammer 40k universe?) and I always found the concept of people experiencing it a tad silly to be honest.

If you're tired of combat in a game then switch to a different game or go do something else. The game itself shouldn't have to change itself just because you're not in the mood to play it.

I think it's more that an exciting bit of a game is a lot more effective if it goes, "Calm, relaxing, relaxing, bit on edge, what's that noise? OHCRAPENEMIESRUNRUNRUNRUNRUNRUN, phew you escaped, have a nice relaxing area OHCRAPTHEY'REBACK" rather than, "RUN RUN RUN RUN ENEMIES ENEMIES RUN RUN ENEMIES ENEMIES RUN RUN"

 

[Iron Mal]

I think it's more that an exciting bit of a game is a lot more effective if it goes, "Calm, relaxing, relaxing, bit on edge, what's that noise? OHCRAPENEMIESRUNRUNRUNRUNRUNRUN, phew you escaped, have a nice relaxing area OHCRAPTHEY'REBACK" rather than, "RUN RUN RUN RUN ENEMIES ENEMIES RUN RUN ENEMIES ENEMIES RUN RUN"

Don't get me wrong, just because I like huge, epic conflicts with hundreds of mean looking dudes with chunky machineguns doesn't mean I don't also appreciate good pacing and quiet moments (I like stealth games as well), I just never found myself thinking 'wow, I'm so tired of fighting all these enemies, I wish I had some light puzzling segments or relaxing driving levels to break the tedium of killing bad guys' while playing Doom or Painkiller (in fact, in my opinion the worst part of those games was when they stopped hurling stupidly large hordes of gibbering monstrosities at you).

 

[Pyramid Head]

It has very good storytelling mechanics and interesting characters and some interesting aliens. It's based on an older FPS format before health regenerated and there was an odd decision that shooting minorities is the way FPS's should be, but some people also prefer that system.
That being said it does have it's weak points. It's not flawless like some people claim, but it's a good game if you have the patience for it. Provided you played it before Portal and set your standards too high.

 

[orangeban]

I think it's more that an exciting bit of a game is a lot more effective if it goes, "Calm, relaxing, relaxing, bit on edge, what's that noise? OHCRAPENEMIESRUNRUNRUNRUNRUNRUN, phew you escaped, have a nice relaxing area OHCRAPTHEY'REBACK" rather than, "RUN RUN RUN RUN ENEMIES ENEMIES RUN RUN ENEMIES ENEMIES RUN RUN"

Don't get me wrong, just because I like huge, epic conflicts with hundreds of mean looking dudes with chunky machineguns doesn't mean I don't also appreciate good pacing and quiet moments (I like stealth games as well), I just never found myself thinking 'wow, I'm so tired of fighting all these enemies, I wish I had some light puzzling segments or relaxing driving levels to break the tedium of killing bad guys' while playing Doom or Painkiller (in fact, in my opinion the worst part of those games was when they stopped hurling stupidly large hordes of gibbering monstrosities at you).

Well we're different gamers I guess. I didn't like Doom, I found it boring and samey. I liked Half-Life 2, I continued playing it to see how the story unfurled, enjoying the combat along the way, appreciating the attempts at doing different things within the game.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I've never understood the praise Half Life receives for its story or its characterizations, both of which are thin to the point of being non existent. Gordon Freeman isn't a character, he's a cipher. The secondary characters run the gamut from broad stereotypes to one dimensional plot devices. However, the game develops a wonderful ATMOSPHERE, which is often the next best thing to an actual story, and the game is steeped in it. You have a genuine sense of place, of sinister machinations running in the background, of a desperate struggle against an overwhelming and alien force. The G-Man might not be a character, but he's creepy lookin' and we can project a lot onto him as a result.

What the Half Life series did better than most shooters is create excellent pacing, momentum and tension without over-relying on scripted set pieces. It's like a well made action film in this regard.

 

[Sjakie]

So you buy a nearly decade old game and wonder why you don't like it by your current standards?
When it came out, Half-Life 2 was critically acclaimed and player adored. The physics, the graphics, the story: It was all fresh and new. And everything that wasn't new was done very well.

Those of us who played it when it first came out remember those times, and therefore still enjoy the game today, because we remember watching the tech-demo at E3 for the source engine with real-time model bending for non-actors (Things like mattresses), and seeing the in-game video-projection, seeing the awesome physics in action, and then finally playing the game ourselves, and just being wowed.

That's why it was a good game, and still is.
You need to look at it through the eyes of 2004, not 2011 (Almost 2012).

That being said, if you don't like the game: Who cares? Go play something you DO like.
It's video games. They're made for fun. Go have fun.

*nods agreeingly in Baby Tea's direction*

 

[Iron Mal]

Well we're different gamers I guess. I didn't like Doom, I found it boring and samey. I liked Half-Life 2, I continued playing it to see how the story unfurled, enjoying the combat along the way, appreciating the attempts at doing different things within the game.

Agin, I also like a good story too, I loved Second Sight and thought The Suffering's way of retroactively forming the past based on your decisions with a total of nine different plot paths over two games was pretty impressive. I plainly found HL2's plot to be largely non-existant and it's way of delivering it to be along the lines of being locked in a room and force-fed level briefings before being allowed to continue.

I enjoy games like Doom and Painkiller because I find the combat fun (and the music to be good, Half Life has nothing on Painkiller's music and I will defend that to the death) but I found Half Life's attempt at doing lots of things resulted in some things working well (the zombie level was pretty good admitantly) and some things being atrocious (driving segments, those two words in the context of Half Life 2 should say more than enough).

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Ok Ok please put down your pitchforks and torches.
So i just got the orange box of steam and then after it downloaded I finish portal and go to play some half life.....and Im not that impressed, ok ok it has a decent story but it was just really really dull for me and I'm trying to understand why Half-life was/is such a great game.

my main idea as to why I didn'y like it is because it was a *you had to be there* thing

I love Valve's single-player games because they tell a story in a way that only a video game can, rather than aping another storytelling medium. So many video games rely on cut-scenes or text to deliver their stories. Some video game stories are so dependent on non-interactive cut-scenes or text that they could be movies or books instead and the story could be just as good, maybe even better. To me, the best video game storytelling is done in a way that only video games can do.

Valve leaves the story out in the open via things like the Dr. Breen speeches on the big screens of Half-Life 2's City 17, or the Rat Dens of Portal where the infamous "the cake is a lie" is discovered. Then, the receiving of that story is on the player. Through interactive observation and participation, the player discovers the story on his own, rather than having it spoon-fed to him all the time. If you blaze through the gameplay, there's a lot of interesting story-related things you'll miss, like the newspaper clippings in the first resistance hideout that talk about the fall of Earth to the Combine.

Also, creating blank characters like Gordan Freeman and Chell allows for a greater sense of immersion into the game. As I was playing Half-Life, I felt that I WAS Gordan Freeman, that this was my story and I was the one driving it. Compare that to say, Red Dead Redemption. That was John Marston's story. Yes, I was controlling him and I was definitely empathizing with his plight, but it was his story, not mine.

I know that I sound like a Valve fanboy, but really, I just love games that tell a story in that interactive way that is exclusive to video games, rather than the usual method (gameplay, gameplay, pause-for-a-non-interactive-mini-movie, then back to gameplay) to get the story across. I also love games that immerse me into the playable character, where I feel like the character is me, rather than someone separate from me. The Half-Life and Portal games just happen to be two examples of games that have these qualities. Other examples: Bioshock, Metroid Prime, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and Shadow of the Colossus.

Don't get me wrong, I can enjoy a game that has a distinct character and uses the gameplay-movie-gameplay way of storytelling. Red Dead Redemption and the Assassin's Creed games are some of my all-time favorites. However, games like Half-Life that focus on storytelling based on the interactivity/observation/participation/immersion model, are, in my opinion, the best that the genre has to offer.

 

[Weaver]

My favorite part about this thread is that it's made about once every week.

 

[redisforever]

Why? Because I had fun. I liked the story, the characters kept me interested, it was immersive, and never broke you out of the world you were in. Sure, it kept repeating puzzles, and set pieces, but since I liked them, it didn't really matter. However, I'm not a huge fan of the first game. Sure, it's good, but I was bored most of the time. And confused. Half Life 2 is one of my favorite games, because I had a good time with it.

Also, Highway 17, the bridge, my favorite part. Fun, fun, fun.

 

[direkiller]

Part of it is it hasn't aged amazingly, and shooters have been stealing from it since it came out, but when it was released, it was a huge leap forward. The graphics (first use of Source engine), the physics (putting a box on a teeter-totter that moved was revolutionary), the narrative delivery, (aka: not just feeding the story through text boxes and cutscenes), and the scope of the game in general were all incredible for its time.

As it stands, it's still a more than solid fps game with a great story (which I wish they'd wrap up already!)

Oh, also A:I. Watch this and tell me that's not impressive for 2004.

f[/youtube]

AI is great no problems there


all kidding aside its deasent AI when you keep your head out in the open

 

[sageoftruth]

Yeah... I don't get what's so good about it either, it's not even as if I first played it in the Orange Box, I had it for the original Xbox and I was a big fan of shooters at this time.
I guess I just couldn't relate to the awful character of Gordon Freeman.
*Flamesuit on*

Yeah, that guy was totally ripping off Crono's character from Crono trigger (not flaming, just couldn't resist).

 

[Weaver]

I've never understood the praise Half Life receives for its story or its characterizations, both of which are thin to the point of being non existent. Gordon Freeman isn't a character, he's a cipher. The secondary characters run the gamut from broad stereotypes to one dimensional plot devices. However, the game develops a wonderful ATMOSPHERE, which is often the next best thing to an actual story, and the game is steeped in it. You have a genuine sense of place, of sinister machinations running in the background, of a desperate struggle against an overwhelming and alien force. The G-Man might not be a character, but he's creepy lookin' and we can project a lot onto him as a result.

What the Half Life series did better than most shooters is create excellent pacing, momentum and tension without over-relying on scripted set pieces. It's like a well made action film in this regard.

In regards to the atmosphere I think this is where a lot of people don't seem to "get" half-life 2. There is a story here, but you are not told it. You need to be perceptive, listen to your surroundings and watch the environments and from all of this intuit the story for yourself. IMO it was a brilliant move and it's quite well done, but it's lost on a lot of people who just stay focused on their chrosshair and run ahead like a bullet.

You need to look at the environments and from this intuit you're in Eastern Europe. You need to listen to Dr.Breen and his speeches to determine what the combine are, what they're doing here and what is happening. You need to look around City 17 and realize it's an opressive police state, etc.

None of this is told to you, and why would it be? What character would just walk up to you and say "By the way, we're in an opressive society in Eastern Eruope"? They wouldn't because they live there, it's their life and they assume Gordon being there would likewise know where he is and the political situation.

There is very little direct exposition and I think it's brilliant; You cannot let the game just take you through the story while just staring zombified at the screen waiting for the cutscenes as a sort of "PAY ATTENTION TO THE STORY NOW" flag while characters spout their dialogue. You need to be paying attention at all times.

 

[Warlokk]

I think what a lot of people are missing here in explaining the coolness of the HL games is how they affected the FPS genre when compared to what was already out there when they came out. The original Half-Life came out in 1998, when the main other FPS games most of us had played by that point were Quake 2 and Unreal, both of which were strictly run-n-gun affairs with no real attempt at all at characterization or story. Then Half-Life comes along, and is suddenly telling an actual STORY, where the character isn't a faceless generic soldier but is an actual character caught up in the events happening. Then they present those events to the player without EVER breaking immersion... no cutscenes, no text explanations... just what you see in-game, as the character. That had never been seen before in 1998, and for those of us who got to play it when it was new, it blew our minds.

HL2 was mostly revolutionary in the technology departments, especially the physics and the way the Source engine handled different materials differently... wood, stone, metal, water, ice, all that stuff had their own material settings, that affected the sound you made when you walked on it, what happened when you shot it or hit it with a crowbar, whether you could move it around... all sorts of things. Again, none of this had been done at that time yet, it was all brand-new and really revolutionary. Then throw on top of that a really well-paced and interesting story, and actual believable characters as NPCs (even the robot dog had a distint personality) and we were all just blown away again.

Coming to either of the games now, with all the other games that have been influenced by them under your belt, I can see how you might miss the appeal of some of this stuff... but if you realize there are just SO many conventions in FPS gaming today that are a direct result of innovations from Valve, and you'll understand why they have the respect of old-school gamers that they do.

 

[GigaHz]

It's possible that it's not your kind of game.

Considering when it came out and all the new concepts it introduced to FPS games, it is well deserving of the praise it received. I remember playing it when it first came out and I was blown away by the physics, the realistic in game character animations, and the excellent dystopian universe the game established. There was NOTHING else like it at the time, where as now these features are less special because it has become the standard. Also, the game was LONG with varied landscapes, game mechanics, and unique set pieces. It never felt as if I was doing the same thing over and over again. Every new encounter felt like a different approach keeping the experience fresh and exciting.

I can see why some people wouldn't like the game though, especially by today's standards. The pace can vary from time to time, sometimes neglecting the action in favour of establishing the atmosphere/story or shifting the focus to platforming/puzzle solving. That, and I know of some people who couldn't finish the game because they couldn't handle the depressing atmosphere. Then there are others who just don't like how the shooting mechanics feel. Either way, not everyone is going to like the game.

But to say something like "Explain why Half-Life is good" (even though you're talking about 2) completely trivializes all the technical innovations the game brought to modern gaming. I don't have to explain to you why Half-Life 2 is good, do some research. What you want me to explain is why you didn't enjoy Half-Life 2. I don't know the reason, but I'm sure it's valid.