Can somebody please explain Why half-life is good

[Hamish Durie]

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

 

[warprincenataku]

Couldn't tell you. I played the series on the Orange Box and only enjoyed Portal and to a lesser extent, Team Fortress.

 

[WinkyTheGreat]

You already said it. It's a shooter with a good story (which explains, in part, what happened after the events of the first Half-Life), and great immersion. The characters are great. And to top it all off you get to kill shit with a crowbar.

 

[zombiekiller1907]

have you played the first game yet?if no, then try to play it. Its kinda long, but its worth it, maybe. If yes, then... um.... maybe its not your type of game?

 

[Baby Tea]

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.

 

[daemon37]

Because it came out 7 years ago. When it was released, the graphical detail, realistic physics and attention to story were revolutionary. But, a lot has changed since then. Go play some of the other games that came out around that time and maybe you'll understand.

The game hold us remarkably well too. I mean, how often have you compared 7 year old games to brand new ones? And for that matter, how often do you buy 7 year old games?

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

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]

 

[Choose a Username]

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*

 

[Bribase]

I'll step up for the first one.

Half life one was truly groundbreaking because it was the first story driven game that didn't borrow heavily from cinema to further the narrative (no cutscenes). Half Life was the first game to maintain a first person viewpoint but maintain a balance between story and action in equal measure. It may look old now but Half Life's true charm is in its sense of immersion in the world. You begin as an employee theoretical physicist and end up saving the world from an alien incursion. No one of the FPS genre did more than start as a soldier, get a larger gun, kill mecha-Hitler before then.

For me HL2s real draw was the physics engine. I don't know of a game that had such a realistic sense of gravity, friction and boyancy and come to think of it, I don't think I've seen one since! Couple that with some gorgeous setpieces, incredible art design and a truly immersive storyline involving characters that you actually care about it makes the game hard to match.

In my mind they are two of the greatest PC games of all time.

 

[Hamish Durie]

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.

yeah that was my main reason for not liking it *you had to be there thing*
and the reason I thought it would be better.......well portal was still fun and fresh and didn't feel dated

 

[lolmynamewastaken]

its a character driven story that gives you a sense of actually liking the characters for the most part. failing that its a step back in time shooter wise in that you can have more guns than hands, and you don't spend most of your time hiding behind a wall waiting for your health to recharge... by that i mean its mostly fun.

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

yeah that was my main reason for not liking it *you had to be there thing*
and the reason I thought it would be better.......well portal was still fun and fresh and didn't feel dated

Portal actually came out three years after Half Life 2. Also, it's harder to make a traditional 10 hour long shooter feel "fresh" than a short puzzler with a novel concept.

 

[Ubermetalhed]

I love the original half-life it's a fantastic game but I didn't find the sequel that impressive either and yeh it was rather dull.

It had its moments but halflife and its sequel might aswell be from a different series of games imo.

 

[LeKiller]

Well if it's the graphics that bug you that's just too bad. Most games aren't for everyone, Half Life seems to be that case with you. I personally adore Half Life and Half Life 2 because of the gameplay and story. The thing is that the first half life presented the story in a new way, no cutscenes, no forced perspective, just you walking and looking at each level as you try to find a way to the next one. Half Life 2 brought the source engine to the gaming community along with the gravity gun. The source engine is almost praised to be very light on resources and thus being playable on lower end systems. Again, every game is not exactly for everyone.

 

[Palademon]

Because different senses of taste?

Playing a shooter that actually has health, different weapons that you find along the way, fun physics etc...

I was late to the party with the Ornage Box. I onyl bought it this or last year, and I found Half Life 2 great fun. I make it to new places without just "How many guys are blocking my way to that general direction?".

 

[Hosker]

I didn't like it much either. I put it down to nostalgia.

 

[Choose a Username]

Maybe you should start playing FPS on the platforms where they can be played without aimbots?

Wait... what?