Can somebody please explain Why half-life is good
- Thread starter Hamish Durie
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think it still stands up to today's shooters.
If you didn't follow it whilst it was new, you're never going to understand the nostalgia that it inspires. I remember watching all the little bits of leaked footage and press releases months before it's release and being very excited. I skipped school to buy it and played it for hours...even the deathmatch, which is fairly weak in all honesty, but the physics were mind-blowing at the time.
If you didn't follow it whilst it was new, you're never going to understand the nostalgia that it inspires. I remember watching all the little bits of leaked footage and press releases months before it's release and being very excited. I skipped school to buy it and played it for hours...even the deathmatch, which is fairly weak in all honesty, but the physics were mind-blowing at the time.
While that is a fair enough arguement I still have to challange that standpoint by virtue of the fact that there are games of a similar play stayle from 2004 and before that I do like (and still do like) but I still have issues with the Half Life series.Baby Tea said:
I bought it as soon as it came out back in 2004 (it remains one of the select handful of games I eagerly bought on launch day), came home and....thought it was alright, nothing too special or worth giving untold praise to.
Other games that came out from then or before that actually still hold up as good games today and don't need to be defended by their age:
The original Dawn of War
Unreal Tournament
Timesplitters 2
Alien vs. Predator 2
Condemned: Criminal Origins (came out 2005 technically but it still holds up today as a great game)
The Suffering
Quake (Hell, Quake should be the only example needed of how people still love a game despite it's age if it's done well)
Sounds like an impressive tech demo for a physics engine considering the time but as a display of what a game is going to be like my response, even back then I would have been impressed by the technology but wouldn't have thought that it'd make it any more special as a game (one of the many advantages of not being very tech savvey is I'm not that easily swayyed by tech demos, when I see a demo of a game I want to see some damn gameplay).
I can't argue with nostalgia and fond memories but this doesn't make the criticisms or complaints of others any less valid just because you liked it (hell, I liked Red Faction, Shadow the Hedgehog and Fire Warrior but I still have to accept that these are widely viewed as bad or unremarkable games, sometimes with good reason).
Others might dispute you over that opinion and stating that the only reason they may disagree with you is 'well of course it doesn't look good now' doesn't hold up to criticism all that well.
While that is a fine sentiment (and I agree with you, people should seek out games they will enjoy rather than fixate on the ones they hate) I would have to remind you that this is in fact a video game forum.
It may seem like a 'who cares?' issue to you but at the end of the day, expressing and sharing our opinions, bitching about the things we don't like and giving unending praise to the things that made us clap like circus seals is more or less why we're here.
It wouldn't be much of a forum without a few heated disputes (most of us are here for discussions and arguements, not mutual agreement).
To all people blaming it on nostalgia... I call bullshit.
I had never played Half Life, none of the games. After hearing about it EVERY FUCKING WHERE, I decided to try it out.
And I was blown away. Putting graphics away, the game was fantastic. The pacing, the story, the characters, the gameplay, the level design. Everything was masterfully crafted.
It is not nostalgia what makes people think the game is awesome. It's that the game is, in fact, awesome.
I had never played Half Life, none of the games. After hearing about it EVERY FUCKING WHERE, I decided to try it out.
And I was blown away. Putting graphics away, the game was fantastic. The pacing, the story, the characters, the gameplay, the level design. Everything was masterfully crafted.
It is not nostalgia what makes people think the game is awesome. It's that the game is, in fact, awesome.
I don't see why the "you had to be there" problem applies to Half-Life 2, or any game, really. Because you ARE there, or at least can be if you play it. Oh, and that's another thing: You are talking about Half-Life 2, correct? The original Half-Life didn't come in the Orange Box, but it is from 1998 and is very different from Half-Life 2. They share a bit in story and several characters, but as far as play and flow they are different in many respects.Hamish Durie said:
Anyway, the main reasons Half-Life 2 and its little offspring are so revered is because everything is of such high quality--ESPECIALLY when compared to other video games. Meticulously constructed levels and pacing to guarantee playability, minimize bugs, and keep the player engaged without exhausting them. Strong visual design that is tweaked to perfection so that it conveys what it needs to while optimizing the player's experience. Top-notch animation and voice acting with a dedication to detail and those little "human touches" that make them less like NPCs and more like people. If you play the Developer's Commentary (available in Lost Coast and Episodes 1 and 2), you'll see just how much painstaking effort and little and HUGE changes they made to, well, everything to make the experience as enjoyable as possible. Portal and Portal 2 have these commentaries, as well.
Most game developers touch on each of those a bit, but don't go nearly as far as Valve does when it comes to perfecting each of those things until they are at their very best. Valve playtests everything to find the right balance. And when they've playtested a level and make some changes based on that, they playtest again to be sure that works, too. Their interest is in the quality of the product they put out, not in meeting deadlines or staying 100% on budget. That is why (if my facts are straight), Valve has never released a title on the original release date they give. Every one of their games has been late in coming out.
Because it doesn't require on cut scenes. The game NEVER takes control from you. You are free to listen like a good little Gordon, or run around breaking boxes with a crowbar looking for ammo. The characters all have personality and are believable (and a girl character who isn't in skimpy clothes, extra applause) and it has great variety. You start out weaponless and running for your life from civil protection, then you get the ability to defend yourself, and run in the sewers looking to escape the city. Then you get an airboat (F'ING fun I must say), then you are escaping zombie death land, then you get a dune buggy (also F'ING fun), break into a prison, lead an uprising against the combine, and destroy the citadel.
And don't say I'm blinded by nostalgia. I got the game this summer during the sale, and I from everything I heard, my expectations were sky high. Not only did it meet them, it exploded over them with awesome sauce.
You want something that beats you over the head and doesn't let up until the end? Go to CoD. Want something more intelligent with actually pacing, and a good story? Stick with Half-Life.
And don't say I'm blinded by nostalgia. I got the game this summer during the sale, and I from everything I heard, my expectations were sky high. Not only did it meet them, it exploded over them with awesome sauce.
You want something that beats you over the head and doesn't let up until the end? Go to CoD. Want something more intelligent with actually pacing, and a good story? Stick with Half-Life.
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.Iron Mal said:
You weren't wowed by HL2 on launch day, I was. Who is right and who is wrong?
Both, and neither.
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.
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.
That being said, I'm certainly not anti-discussion. If people want to talk about what they loved in a game, then knock yourselves out! The OP asked 'What makes HL2 special?', and so I answered as best I could.
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.
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.
And I call bullshit on your calling bullshit.sergnb said:
I was the same way with CoD4 although admitantly the multiplayer in that (as well as many good times laughing and joking with friends while playing it) were enough to have that game keep my interest for a long time.
I was actually excited about getting Half Life 2 and got it as soon as it came out over here (never did play the CS:S that came free on the disc though) but felt somewhat let down overall by the whole experience.
Hell, I wanted it to be good but I just plainly wasn't impressed.
Pacing: Awful (need I mention the driving segments and obsession with randomly throwing in puzzles to 'offset battle fatigue'?).
Story: Largely not there.
Characters: Kinda got on my nerves after a while (Alyx especiallly).
Gameplay: Was an alright shooter, nothing more, nothing less.
Level Design: Again, it was an alright shooter, the levels were ok but certain areas made me want to violently strike the nearest Valve employee.
Not quite masterfully crafted, I'd more just say 'ok shooter'.
Interesting, I found Half-Life 2 one of my favourite games of all time. And I played it before the original.
For me I found: Pace and atmosphere, spot on
Story, simple but with excellent characters.
The villain? One of my favourite villians of all time
And it was well designed, with excellent crafted levels.
For me I found: Pace and atmosphere, spot on
Story, simple but with excellent characters.
The villain? One of my favourite villians of all time
And it was well designed, with excellent crafted levels.
Ok well I don't play cod and I've played half-life and well meh I didn't find it that fun and giving it points for taking away cutscenes, I like cutscenes.FreakSheet said:
Ok escaping the place weaponless was fun but as soon as I heard escaped pet and teleporter.....why was the game delaying me. the airboat it was okay I mean it sure beat walking around sewer tunnels but after I realised that the game wanted me to get out and do stuff to open gates so that I could continue, I just had to stop playing for awhile because it was just so dam..... tedious it was fun flying around on my air boat it isn't fun trudging around shooting peopele looking for a switch to open a gate.
The original is (story telling technique and some AI aside) mired in the worst excesses of 90s FPSs so I wouldn't be surprised if someone coming to it for the first time now wasn't impressed. I am an old school gamer and I still didn't like it much when I played it for the first time last year.
It has it's place in gaming history, definitely, but other older FPSs like Doom and Halo: CE have aged much better.
It has it's place in gaming history, definitely, but other older FPSs like Doom and Halo: CE have aged much better.
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.Iron Mal said: