What people like about half life 2 is the fact that its one of the few first person shooters that requires a little intelligence. It was so refreshing for me to see a first person shooter whose gameplay didn't only include shooting.
Half Life 2 (first impressions)
- Thread starter Etra488
- Start date
Recommended Videos
playing a game with the expectation that it's going to be a masterpiece (no matter what game you're playing) will leave you disappointed every single time. Play a game because you want to play it, not because you feel you should. Don't forget, games are supposed to be fun, taking the fun out of the game will make it feel boring.
I've gotten much much further through the game.
I have the same opinion: the game is very boring.
I am giving this game a good-faith effort to understand and appreciate it. If I'm missing information then Valve did a shitty job with their presentation. You can say I'm not playing the game right all day long - what I'm encountering is just a plain lack of information. I am stopping to listen to all of Breen's propaganda, I do focus when Alyx or Barney say something, I even picked up the Hedy "Hedley" Lamaar joke from Blazing Saddles.
And I'm not asking for anyone to dump a wiki into my lap - I'm asking questions about the game straight up. The story has holes because the writers didn't fill them. You ever put your hand into a cookie jar and was surprised to see you're out of cookies? Half Life 2 is like that; we're all reaching, looking for something that isn't there. But because of all the hype surrounding the game - there must be something and we just "missed it." We weren't "paying attention."
*** *** *** *** *** ***
I get it, there's a story in place and Gordon Freeman doesn't have all the information, I get it.
It doesn't work. It really doesn't work when there are people there, who are your friends, who help you, and you help them, and they still don't fucking tell you. Why all the suspense? Wouldn't it be pertinent to need to know what happened that a government can get away with naming a city after a number? Doesn't that seem like a detail that you'd push people into answering? Not even giving these basic details is plain sloppy.
The problem is that there are gameplay elements that directly sabotage storytelling:
[ul][li]A protagonist that only does one-way communication.[/li]
[li]Gameplay that proceeds in real-time, at all times.[/li]
[li]The desire of the writers to not give the player any detail, no matter how minute.[/li][/ul]
Think about each of these in turn. If you were telling a story, about a great warrior who'd returned to the world from a long disappearance and save the day, how much would it hamstring what you could do if that great warrior could only receive instructions and comply?
Gordon can't acknowledge, disagree, ask questions, or even give the Combine the finger. He is incapable of communicating on the most fundamental level - if you had to work with Freeman at your job it'd be the most frustrating experience of your life. Freeman couldn't tell you what the customer's problem is, who's on the phone, and he couldn't answer your question about what this meeting is all about. And this was a gameplay decision that the writers had to accommodate.
The second bit, the gameplay proceeding in real-time. Again, think about this from a writer's perspective: everything that happens, the sequence of events, must be occurring rapid-fire. There's never a lull in the action, never any downtime. If this were an RPG, then there'd never be an opportunity to check your inventory or look at your map. Just when Alyx explains the Gravity Gun to you, damnit the Combine attacks and you have to flee. You spent the previous two hours of gameplay alone, and get ready to spend two more hours of gameplay, alone. The writer's can't write a conversation where Gordon gets his questions answered because of the frantic pacing - because the game doesn't allow Gordon to slow down and have a glass of water!
Every time a conversation starts, I know an ambush is right around the corner, because the player watching lips move is boring. Fans cheer Half Life 2 for the story and how "smart" it is, but a study of the pacing reveals how shallow it all is. The characters all have motor-mouth and always have something going. And this is because the game designers created a freight-train that can't be stopped. So the writers have to always have something happening.
There's the bit about losing a week in the teleportation out of the Combine prison; the game needed that break so the story could progress. Because as it is, the story progresses in real-time with Gordon's actions. Revolutions don't happen overnight, the game knows this, so it needed to contrive some bullshit explanation for why shit is suddenly now getting down. If the game didn't pull shenanigans like that, then literally all of the Combine, hundreds if not thousands of soldiers, would be killed by a middle-aged geek inside of a weekend. I figure it takes between 20-36 hours for full completion? Alright.
So I'm seeing the frantic pace and awkward timing of in-game events, and it doesn't work. I played the first Half Life, so I know it's a retreading of familiar ground. I stand behind my initial judgement that the conventions that worked in that game just don't work here. A scientist fighting to survive can't be transplanted into space-marine fighting a civil war. You've got the suit of armor, inexplicable military training, and you can mow down enemies by the dozens: Gordon Freeman is a space-marine. Any difference between him, the Doom guy, and the Master Chief in a gameplay sense is cosmetic.
Lastly, the writers gave the player an incomplete story, and then by virtue of the specific gameplay features of Half Life 2, what story exists had to be divided between hours and hours of filler. I can easily go 90 minutes of mindless shooting and puzzle-solving with nothing momentous happening in the story. Mindless shooting and puzzle solving. I've struggled more with the platforming than I have with the puzzles. This gameplay is mindless.
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
I'm not judging this game based on anything outside of it. I'm taking what the game gives me and applying consistency and logic to it's rules. If the game broaches a topic, then I'd like to see the game explore that idea and then conclude it. The Gravity Gun, for example, has tons of uses in the gameplay. You couldn't complete the game without it.
But it's just a toy, and the uses for it are contrived to accommodate it. A few years back, I had the chance to interview some EA developers, specifically the guys who made Medal of Honor: Airborne. That game featured non-linear progression. When you spawned, you were parachuting into the zone and could land anywhere, and you could complete the objectives in whatever order you wanted.
It was a technology breakthrough that allowed them to make a game where the player could basically spawn wherever they wanted on the map. It meant new level-design and new enemy AI that could respond to attacks from multiple directions. And so they made a game that took advantage of these two new things. They started with the tech, and then made up a story that fit.
I imagine a similar event happened at Valve in the creation of Half Life 2. The dev's came up with the tech to have bits like the Gravity Gun and the Portal Gun and then they ran with it. They built the game around this gameplay, and then put the story in after-the-fact. This game didn't have to be Half Life 2; this could have been any shooter with unique, gimmiky weapons. The world is post-apocalyptic, the weapons are exotic and occassionally improvised, and there are anachronistic technologies in play. This game could have been next in the Fallout franchise. There's nothing intrinsically Half Life about it, except that it features Gordon Freeman and the GMan, and those are easily modifiable features.
Especially, given how much filler there is in Half Life 2 - just running around in a linear path, shooting bad guys and moving forward... the story passes so slowly, and always only after clearing no less than 20 rooms of nondescript bad guys... ugh. This game isn't terrible. Maybe the DLCs will be better.
Just like how it's unpopular to criticize Bioware, I'm seeing here that it's unpopular to criticize this game too. Yes, I purchased Half Life 2 based on how good I heard it was. What a crime! Having played it, I've basically concluded that the game is pretty, the weapons are interesting, but it is very very boring. I have no emotional investment in it, I'm basically going through the motions.
Why don't I have an emotional investment? Maybe it's because the protagonist is a mute, the setting isn't explained, and 10 hours in, I've murdered over a hundred people and I'm not even certain if Gordon knows what he's doing. What a surprise that playing a complete stooge to the NPCs would be so boring!
And I'm receiving my own criticisms, that I'm not paying attention or the hype is blinding me. Or maybe it's a mediocre game that happens to have one or two outstanding features that overshadow it's flaws. Just because 7 years has passed doesn't mean the quality of the game has diminished. Citizen Kane is a 70 year old movie - has the improvement in film technology cast a dark shadow over that film? Have you seen that movie? Don't let the hype scare you - it is legitimately a great film. Time and hype will not dull a great piece of entertainment.
It's like what I said in my Red Riding Hood review: reviews, hype, criticisms, all that gets thrown out the window once you sit down and play. If the game is impressive, then it'll impress you. If the game is boring, then it'll bore you. That's the bottom line. How much is Half Life's acclaim resting in it's then-revolutionary graphics? If that's the case, then maybe now's the perfect time to really scrutinize the game, once the players have had the light taken off their eyes.
And the improvements in graphics, ai, and game physics aren't what's holding back Half Life 2. I outlined the problems with the game. Because of it's gameplay, the story and pacing are handicapped.
I have the same opinion: the game is very boring.
I am giving this game a good-faith effort to understand and appreciate it. If I'm missing information then Valve did a shitty job with their presentation. You can say I'm not playing the game right all day long - what I'm encountering is just a plain lack of information. I am stopping to listen to all of Breen's propaganda, I do focus when Alyx or Barney say something, I even picked up the Hedy "Hedley" Lamaar joke from Blazing Saddles.
And I'm not asking for anyone to dump a wiki into my lap - I'm asking questions about the game straight up. The story has holes because the writers didn't fill them. You ever put your hand into a cookie jar and was surprised to see you're out of cookies? Half Life 2 is like that; we're all reaching, looking for something that isn't there. But because of all the hype surrounding the game - there must be something and we just "missed it." We weren't "paying attention."
*** *** *** *** *** ***
I get it, there's a story in place and Gordon Freeman doesn't have all the information, I get it.
It doesn't work. It really doesn't work when there are people there, who are your friends, who help you, and you help them, and they still don't fucking tell you. Why all the suspense? Wouldn't it be pertinent to need to know what happened that a government can get away with naming a city after a number? Doesn't that seem like a detail that you'd push people into answering? Not even giving these basic details is plain sloppy.
The problem is that there are gameplay elements that directly sabotage storytelling:
[ul][li]A protagonist that only does one-way communication.[/li]
[li]Gameplay that proceeds in real-time, at all times.[/li]
[li]The desire of the writers to not give the player any detail, no matter how minute.[/li][/ul]
Think about each of these in turn. If you were telling a story, about a great warrior who'd returned to the world from a long disappearance and save the day, how much would it hamstring what you could do if that great warrior could only receive instructions and comply?
Gordon can't acknowledge, disagree, ask questions, or even give the Combine the finger. He is incapable of communicating on the most fundamental level - if you had to work with Freeman at your job it'd be the most frustrating experience of your life. Freeman couldn't tell you what the customer's problem is, who's on the phone, and he couldn't answer your question about what this meeting is all about. And this was a gameplay decision that the writers had to accommodate.
The second bit, the gameplay proceeding in real-time. Again, think about this from a writer's perspective: everything that happens, the sequence of events, must be occurring rapid-fire. There's never a lull in the action, never any downtime. If this were an RPG, then there'd never be an opportunity to check your inventory or look at your map. Just when Alyx explains the Gravity Gun to you, damnit the Combine attacks and you have to flee. You spent the previous two hours of gameplay alone, and get ready to spend two more hours of gameplay, alone. The writer's can't write a conversation where Gordon gets his questions answered because of the frantic pacing - because the game doesn't allow Gordon to slow down and have a glass of water!
Every time a conversation starts, I know an ambush is right around the corner, because the player watching lips move is boring. Fans cheer Half Life 2 for the story and how "smart" it is, but a study of the pacing reveals how shallow it all is. The characters all have motor-mouth and always have something going. And this is because the game designers created a freight-train that can't be stopped. So the writers have to always have something happening.
There's the bit about losing a week in the teleportation out of the Combine prison; the game needed that break so the story could progress. Because as it is, the story progresses in real-time with Gordon's actions. Revolutions don't happen overnight, the game knows this, so it needed to contrive some bullshit explanation for why shit is suddenly now getting down. If the game didn't pull shenanigans like that, then literally all of the Combine, hundreds if not thousands of soldiers, would be killed by a middle-aged geek inside of a weekend. I figure it takes between 20-36 hours for full completion? Alright.
So I'm seeing the frantic pace and awkward timing of in-game events, and it doesn't work. I played the first Half Life, so I know it's a retreading of familiar ground. I stand behind my initial judgement that the conventions that worked in that game just don't work here. A scientist fighting to survive can't be transplanted into space-marine fighting a civil war. You've got the suit of armor, inexplicable military training, and you can mow down enemies by the dozens: Gordon Freeman is a space-marine. Any difference between him, the Doom guy, and the Master Chief in a gameplay sense is cosmetic.
Lastly, the writers gave the player an incomplete story, and then by virtue of the specific gameplay features of Half Life 2, what story exists had to be divided between hours and hours of filler. I can easily go 90 minutes of mindless shooting and puzzle-solving with nothing momentous happening in the story. Mindless shooting and puzzle solving. I've struggled more with the platforming than I have with the puzzles. This gameplay is mindless.
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
I'm not judging this game based on anything outside of it. I'm taking what the game gives me and applying consistency and logic to it's rules. If the game broaches a topic, then I'd like to see the game explore that idea and then conclude it. The Gravity Gun, for example, has tons of uses in the gameplay. You couldn't complete the game without it.
But it's just a toy, and the uses for it are contrived to accommodate it. A few years back, I had the chance to interview some EA developers, specifically the guys who made Medal of Honor: Airborne. That game featured non-linear progression. When you spawned, you were parachuting into the zone and could land anywhere, and you could complete the objectives in whatever order you wanted.
It was a technology breakthrough that allowed them to make a game where the player could basically spawn wherever they wanted on the map. It meant new level-design and new enemy AI that could respond to attacks from multiple directions. And so they made a game that took advantage of these two new things. They started with the tech, and then made up a story that fit.
I imagine a similar event happened at Valve in the creation of Half Life 2. The dev's came up with the tech to have bits like the Gravity Gun and the Portal Gun and then they ran with it. They built the game around this gameplay, and then put the story in after-the-fact. This game didn't have to be Half Life 2; this could have been any shooter with unique, gimmiky weapons. The world is post-apocalyptic, the weapons are exotic and occassionally improvised, and there are anachronistic technologies in play. This game could have been next in the Fallout franchise. There's nothing intrinsically Half Life about it, except that it features Gordon Freeman and the GMan, and those are easily modifiable features.
Especially, given how much filler there is in Half Life 2 - just running around in a linear path, shooting bad guys and moving forward... the story passes so slowly, and always only after clearing no less than 20 rooms of nondescript bad guys... ugh. This game isn't terrible. Maybe the DLCs will be better.
I disagree completely, and this is a lame retarded cop-out when someone takes their fan-boy blinders off.ZeZZZZevy said:
Just like how it's unpopular to criticize Bioware, I'm seeing here that it's unpopular to criticize this game too. Yes, I purchased Half Life 2 based on how good I heard it was. What a crime! Having played it, I've basically concluded that the game is pretty, the weapons are interesting, but it is very very boring. I have no emotional investment in it, I'm basically going through the motions.
Why don't I have an emotional investment? Maybe it's because the protagonist is a mute, the setting isn't explained, and 10 hours in, I've murdered over a hundred people and I'm not even certain if Gordon knows what he's doing. What a surprise that playing a complete stooge to the NPCs would be so boring!
And I'm receiving my own criticisms, that I'm not paying attention or the hype is blinding me. Or maybe it's a mediocre game that happens to have one or two outstanding features that overshadow it's flaws. Just because 7 years has passed doesn't mean the quality of the game has diminished. Citizen Kane is a 70 year old movie - has the improvement in film technology cast a dark shadow over that film? Have you seen that movie? Don't let the hype scare you - it is legitimately a great film. Time and hype will not dull a great piece of entertainment.
It's like what I said in my Red Riding Hood review: reviews, hype, criticisms, all that gets thrown out the window once you sit down and play. If the game is impressive, then it'll impress you. If the game is boring, then it'll bore you. That's the bottom line. How much is Half Life's acclaim resting in it's then-revolutionary graphics? If that's the case, then maybe now's the perfect time to really scrutinize the game, once the players have had the light taken off their eyes.
And the improvements in graphics, ai, and game physics aren't what's holding back Half Life 2. I outlined the problems with the game. Because of it's gameplay, the story and pacing are handicapped.
Anyways Half Life 2 is meant to have a lot of questions unanswered. It's kinda fuelled by mystery, especially with regards to the Combine.davidarmstrong488 said:
Just try not to question everything so much and try to enjoy the game.
Though I can understand how having so much stuff unanswered can be annoying, so if you don't like the game thats ok I guess. At least you have a decent enough reason and not something like, 'It's made by Valve!', or 'It started on PC!' etc.
Now go back and tell the world how bad/boring FFVI and FFVII are, why Duke Nukem really isn't a great game, and that Deus Ex has aged poorly so it's not worthy of the praise it garnered over the years.
No seriously. People will care.
No seriously. People will care.
" A few years back, I had the chance to interview some EA developers, specifically the guys who made Medal of Honor: Airborne. That game featured non-linear progression. When you spawned, you were parachuting into the zone and could land anywhere, and you could complete the objectives in whatever order you wanted.
It was a technology breakthrough that allowed them to make a game where the player could basically spawn wherever they wanted on the map. It meant new level-design and new enemy AI that could respond to attacks from multiple directions. And so they made a game that took advantage of these two new things. They started with the tech, and then made up a story that fit."
Actualy Novalogic did that in 1997 to now with its Delta Force series. but Delta Force had no story just a mission based single player campaign.
OT:
I reallly think you are not paying attention to they story and expect to to just be told to you instead of discovering ti for yourself.
It was a technology breakthrough that allowed them to make a game where the player could basically spawn wherever they wanted on the map. It meant new level-design and new enemy AI that could respond to attacks from multiple directions. And so they made a game that took advantage of these two new things. They started with the tech, and then made up a story that fit."
Actualy Novalogic did that in 1997 to now with its Delta Force series. but Delta Force had no story just a mission based single player campaign.
OT:
I reallly think you are not paying attention to they story and expect to to just be told to you instead of discovering ti for yourself.
I agree with you, im not saying i want a game to hold my hand through everything, but some more direction would have been nice, i had no idea what was going on, i didnt know why i was doing anything, and for example at that bridge, i got stuck there for ageeeeeees cos i had no idea what i was supposed to be doing.
The story made no sense to me, i thought because i hadnt played the first HL but apparantly that isnt the case, i really tried to like it but i just found the entire thing pretty boring.
The story made no sense to me, i thought because i hadnt played the first HL but apparantly that isnt the case, i really tried to like it but i just found the entire thing pretty boring.
I liked the whole "dumped in a situation" thing Half Life 2 did. And I hadn't even played the original at that stage. It presented you with a world and you were left to try and figure it out. I thought one of the more compelling scenes in the game was at the start when you're in that building that's in the process of being evicted and you have the make your escape across the roof tops. No weapons or anything but you fully appreciated the plight of the civillians and what kind of world you were dealing with. You call this part filler and that take seems to be why in the later parts of the game you seem to have completely ignored everything about the world you're involved in.
I do agree with you on Gordon's non-speaking role. I know he'd been established as the silent protagonist but Godon's inability to speak is becoming more and more obvious as a barrier between the world and the player.
A lot of your criticism seems really nit-picky though. From not really understanding anything I found the cues prety damn obvious and was quickly clued in to what was going on. Your problems seem to stem from you trying to consider the world in a framework it was never made for. I mean it's not hard: Downtrodden humanity taken over by an opressive alien regime, you are the one true hope for humanity's salvation. Down the the bare bones that's it. Not hard to understand. Don't quite know how you got lost on that one.
Not only that but you seem to be ignoring obvious parts of the narrative. You question how D0g was built, Alyx explains this as soon as D0g is introduced, not to mention your worried about robotics and AI technology in a sci-fi world that has working teleportation technology and aliens. You question why you should care about "an elderly man", the same elderly man who's been established as one of Gordon's mentors, the father of the female lead and a key resistance figure. You wonder about the reaction to Gordon's sudden ageless appearence, this is mentioned many times by different characters. It seems to me that you're just not paying attention.
I'm always interested in criticism, and Half Life 2 is by no means above criticism, but this just seems ignorant.
I do agree with you on Gordon's non-speaking role. I know he'd been established as the silent protagonist but Godon's inability to speak is becoming more and more obvious as a barrier between the world and the player.
A lot of your criticism seems really nit-picky though. From not really understanding anything I found the cues prety damn obvious and was quickly clued in to what was going on. Your problems seem to stem from you trying to consider the world in a framework it was never made for. I mean it's not hard: Downtrodden humanity taken over by an opressive alien regime, you are the one true hope for humanity's salvation. Down the the bare bones that's it. Not hard to understand. Don't quite know how you got lost on that one.
Not only that but you seem to be ignoring obvious parts of the narrative. You question how D0g was built, Alyx explains this as soon as D0g is introduced, not to mention your worried about robotics and AI technology in a sci-fi world that has working teleportation technology and aliens. You question why you should care about "an elderly man", the same elderly man who's been established as one of Gordon's mentors, the father of the female lead and a key resistance figure. You wonder about the reaction to Gordon's sudden ageless appearence, this is mentioned many times by different characters. It seems to me that you're just not paying attention.
I'm always interested in criticism, and Half Life 2 is by no means above criticism, but this just seems ignorant.
Superior Mind, I am exploring every area and listening to all the dialogue the game sends my way. If I missed it, then what can I say - I am giving this game a good-faith effort. The presentation is sloppy.
And I get the skeleton of the "story." Yes, there's some revolution going on. The government is acting creepy and so we have to kill them. But doesn't that seem simplistic for this game?
The moment at the start when the guy knocks the trash off the trash can and orders Freeman to pick it up. The game is teaching you how to play it while going about the business of the plot - what a brilliant little moment.
And that's all the details you'll ever be given. The Combine never has a chance to explain themselves or why this is their policies. Sure, dictatorships usually end the same way, but how the society got there is always unique.
So we got the Vortigaunts that were always chill scientists, who just happened to be slaves.
The Headcrabs that are dicks and the Combine deploying them as a weapon.
The Antlions that just kind of appeared and are a pest.
And then a fourth group of aliens that run Overwatch/Combine/whatever.
You know, if you're making as cinematic a game as Half Life 2, is it really a good idea to make a convoluted story and then not tell it? Ideally speaking, I shouldn't have to consult a wiki to know why my character is where he is doing what he's doing. It should be fairly self-explanatory, and it isn't.
Complexity is not a substitution for intelligence. I can stop telling a story mid-sentence and the story isn't brilliant because it's incomplete. In fact, because the story is incomplete, it's irritating for the audience wanting to hear how it ends.
And I get the skeleton of the "story." Yes, there's some revolution going on. The government is acting creepy and so we have to kill them. But doesn't that seem simplistic for this game?
The moment at the start when the guy knocks the trash off the trash can and orders Freeman to pick it up. The game is teaching you how to play it while going about the business of the plot - what a brilliant little moment.
And that's all the details you'll ever be given. The Combine never has a chance to explain themselves or why this is their policies. Sure, dictatorships usually end the same way, but how the society got there is always unique.
So we got the Vortigaunts that were always chill scientists, who just happened to be slaves.
The Headcrabs that are dicks and the Combine deploying them as a weapon.
The Antlions that just kind of appeared and are a pest.
And then a fourth group of aliens that run Overwatch/Combine/whatever.
You know, if you're making as cinematic a game as Half Life 2, is it really a good idea to make a convoluted story and then not tell it? Ideally speaking, I shouldn't have to consult a wiki to know why my character is where he is doing what he's doing. It should be fairly self-explanatory, and it isn't.
Complexity is not a substitution for intelligence. I can stop telling a story mid-sentence and the story isn't brilliant because it's incomplete. In fact, because the story is incomplete, it's irritating for the audience wanting to hear how it ends.
Quoted for truth. I hold Homeworld in my top 5 of the best games of all time. A game that builds an emotional connection where you never see a face and only hear 3 voices for the entire game. Homeworld was brilliant and did so many things right. That's a game that does suffer with how it has aged, but the story and gameplay were fantastic. That game deserves an update.Tomo Stryker said:
It certainly isn't the best game I played. It's just a normal FPS with some more character development than normal and a physics engine attached. I wouldn't kill for it, but the story is note worthy I guess. The first Half Life was awesome, except for Blue Shift it was the best games in the nineties... and Homeworld.
Valve does excellent story telling. You just have to pay attention. The authorities are chasing you because you do not belong in their system and can therefore only be the fabled Dr. Freeman, who disappeared without a trace after single-handedly defeating the leader of the Xenian aliens in Half-Life 1.
In short, the one person who could enkindle hope and the spark of revolution among the populace. The Overwatch broadcast voice says many of these things. "Miscount detected." "You are charged with anti-civil activities level one." "You are now labeled Anti-Citizen. Status: Malignant."
Not to mention Dr. Breens (the bearded guy) broadcasts which expose basically 90% of anything you'd ever need or want to know about the games' setting.
This isn't Mass Effect or any of the like where you get the plot spoonfed to you, no sir, you're gonna have to pay attention. I can understand that isn't for everyone.
(Also, I love Mass Effect.)
In short, the one person who could enkindle hope and the spark of revolution among the populace. The Overwatch broadcast voice says many of these things. "Miscount detected." "You are charged with anti-civil activities level one." "You are now labeled Anti-Citizen. Status: Malignant."
Not to mention Dr. Breens (the bearded guy) broadcasts which expose basically 90% of anything you'd ever need or want to know about the games' setting.
This isn't Mass Effect or any of the like where you get the plot spoonfed to you, no sir, you're gonna have to pay attention. I can understand that isn't for everyone.
(Also, I love Mass Effect.)
I share your feelings, except on textures, mostly that should never be more than a small footnote next to gameplay and story. What I liked in HL1 and did not find in HL2 was the imaginative variety of the enemies and locations. HL2 Is too conventional compared to the first, a real let down.
It doesn'thelp that it's built around the gimmicky gravity gun, that could have worked better as a game called "Gravity", with more complex gravity based puzzles. Now, game where you have BOTH the gravity and portal guns to use to solve problems... could be great.
It doesn'thelp that it's built around the gimmicky gravity gun, that could have worked better as a game called "Gravity", with more complex gravity based puzzles. Now, game where you have BOTH the gravity and portal guns to use to solve problems... could be great.
Wait.. you played Homeworld yet haven't played Half Life 2 till now? I find that strange since Homeworld was in '98 and HL2 came out in like '04, unless you totally detached yourself from the PC gaming scene for all those years. Despite there being an Xbox version of it released as well.davidarmstrong488 said:
Just to reiterate what numerous people have said, it's a very old game now. Things that made it absolutely fantastic were new at the time of it's release. So if you never played it then and try it for the first time after all the more recent ones which borrowed a lot from Half Life, then yes, it's no big deal. I still prefer it over the terrible CoD single players. Please don't feed me that "It's meant to be multiplayer" bullshit, because 60 bucks for a half game is a rip off.
You say that the constant attacks are ridiculous but this is a dictator using everything he has at his disposal to take out the one man who he sees as a threat to his position. Of course the attacks are quite quick paced, the sooner they can take him out the less support he can garner and the easier it will be. That makes sense.
You also moan that nobody ever tells you anything but that kind of counters your complaint that every time you get anywhere you get instantly attacked. They can't tell you all the details because before they get chance the combine attacks. Again, this also makes sense.
I can't help but reading contradictory arguments and thinking troll... that or you're really not paying attention. If you are paying as much attention as you say you are you really should understand.
If you don't like a game then fine, stop playing it and stop moaning. Your opinion is different to other peoples who do see it as a classic. Your opinion doesn't mean more than theirs. Also, playing games because others told you it's good instead of playing it because you enjoy it is a recipe for disaster.
Stop looking for faults and just have fun or turn it off, simple choice really.
Also, what film about being placed in a situation you don't understand dumps 20 minutes of exposition on you explaining everything before having the rest of the film be random action? Releasing bits of information piecewise is just how this kind of story works. Around every corner you get another "oh so that's why!" type moments.
You also moan that nobody ever tells you anything but that kind of counters your complaint that every time you get anywhere you get instantly attacked. They can't tell you all the details because before they get chance the combine attacks. Again, this also makes sense.
I can't help but reading contradictory arguments and thinking troll... that or you're really not paying attention. If you are paying as much attention as you say you are you really should understand.
If you don't like a game then fine, stop playing it and stop moaning. Your opinion is different to other peoples who do see it as a classic. Your opinion doesn't mean more than theirs. Also, playing games because others told you it's good instead of playing it because you enjoy it is a recipe for disaster.
Stop looking for faults and just have fun or turn it off, simple choice really.
Also, what film about being placed in a situation you don't understand dumps 20 minutes of exposition on you explaining everything before having the rest of the film be random action? Releasing bits of information piecewise is just how this kind of story works. Around every corner you get another "oh so that's why!" type moments.
The point being is the plot is a bit subtle. Piecing things together as opposed to just being told it. One involves tons and tons and tons of cut scenes. A movie with the odd bit of player interaction (hello snake). The other involves your having to use that clearly underused bit of grey matter most people would call a brain.
Possibly in your case it'd be better used as a sponge.
Possibly in your case it'd be better used as a sponge.
How come everyone else who played the game didn't think there were plot holes?
Paying attention doesn't bring comprehension
Paying attention doesn't bring comprehension
Here are some answers to your questions
1. The cast being all Survivors of black mesa is to give you a scene of connection to the characters since all main characters look like Hl1 scientist models.
Also Barney, Eli, and Kleiner were all mentioned in Hl1 and its expansions. Kleiner was the person who recommended Gordon for employment at black mesa as said in the opening text in HL1, Barney was the Security Guard shown banging on a door at the beginning tram ride in HL1 who also got HIS OWN EXPANSION PACK, and Eli was the black scientist who you first meet after the resonance cascade the guy who told you the phones were out and asked you to go to the surface.
2. They are continuing experiments yes but not of the same type that caused the resonance cascade in Half Life 1 so there's no real problem there.
3. The aliens in HL1 were salves there game model is called ALIEN SLAVE and they are wearing slave color and wristbands go replay hl1 and pay attention. IT makes Scence they would join the side of whoever freed them aka humanity
4. Black Mesa was disastrous they do mention it and its been 20 years its not much of a big deal they need to shove in your face. they know you were there.
5. is answered by the above
6. its called Black Mesa East because it was made in memory of the original black mesa and its called East because its in Europe which is east of America.
7. If you Read all the news clippings you would see they mention the Combine invasion of Earth, they defeated earth in the 7 hour war also mentioned in the news clippings and Dr. Breen Surrendered earth so humanity wouldn't be destroyed also mentioned on the news Clipping Board.
8. she does know what happened there. Shes really arrogant and thinks that if she had been there the Resonance Cascade wouldn't have happened due to her amazing brain.
9. its been 20 years since black Mesa and Dog came from Eli vance who made it. Alyx mentions this when you first meet dog and Black Mesa had giant robot machines also.
10. Gordons age is mentioned they specifically say he doesn't look like hes aged at all and in Half Life 2 Episode 2 Eli make mention of knowing the G-man thus its logical to assume he knew the G-man took Gordon.
11. Breen was Gordons administrator at black mesa Alyx mentions this literally 5 minutes after you meet her. when Gordon teleported into Breens office Breen recognized him and since Breen was the admin of Black Mesa it makes scene he knows what Gordon did and that hes a threat to the combine. Also Kleiner, Eli, Barney and Alyx all told the resistance members about how Gordon saved the worlds ass at Black Mesa.
All of this is clearly stated in the games you lack of knowledge about it is probably due to your not paying attention. you only have yourself to blame.
ALSO FOR THE LAST TIME GORDON DOES SPEAK YOU JUST DON'T HEAR HIM DO IT. valve has said this time and time again it is implied Gordon speaks you just dont hear him speak so you can put what you would say in that situation to make the character more like you.
1. The cast being all Survivors of black mesa is to give you a scene of connection to the characters since all main characters look like Hl1 scientist models.
Also Barney, Eli, and Kleiner were all mentioned in Hl1 and its expansions. Kleiner was the person who recommended Gordon for employment at black mesa as said in the opening text in HL1, Barney was the Security Guard shown banging on a door at the beginning tram ride in HL1 who also got HIS OWN EXPANSION PACK, and Eli was the black scientist who you first meet after the resonance cascade the guy who told you the phones were out and asked you to go to the surface.
2. They are continuing experiments yes but not of the same type that caused the resonance cascade in Half Life 1 so there's no real problem there.
3. The aliens in HL1 were salves there game model is called ALIEN SLAVE and they are wearing slave color and wristbands go replay hl1 and pay attention. IT makes Scence they would join the side of whoever freed them aka humanity
4. Black Mesa was disastrous they do mention it and its been 20 years its not much of a big deal they need to shove in your face. they know you were there.
5. is answered by the above
6. its called Black Mesa East because it was made in memory of the original black mesa and its called East because its in Europe which is east of America.
7. If you Read all the news clippings you would see they mention the Combine invasion of Earth, they defeated earth in the 7 hour war also mentioned in the news clippings and Dr. Breen Surrendered earth so humanity wouldn't be destroyed also mentioned on the news Clipping Board.
8. she does know what happened there. Shes really arrogant and thinks that if she had been there the Resonance Cascade wouldn't have happened due to her amazing brain.
9. its been 20 years since black Mesa and Dog came from Eli vance who made it. Alyx mentions this when you first meet dog and Black Mesa had giant robot machines also.
10. Gordons age is mentioned they specifically say he doesn't look like hes aged at all and in Half Life 2 Episode 2 Eli make mention of knowing the G-man thus its logical to assume he knew the G-man took Gordon.
11. Breen was Gordons administrator at black mesa Alyx mentions this literally 5 minutes after you meet her. when Gordon teleported into Breens office Breen recognized him and since Breen was the admin of Black Mesa it makes scene he knows what Gordon did and that hes a threat to the combine. Also Kleiner, Eli, Barney and Alyx all told the resistance members about how Gordon saved the worlds ass at Black Mesa.
All of this is clearly stated in the games you lack of knowledge about it is probably due to your not paying attention. you only have yourself to blame.
ALSO FOR THE LAST TIME GORDON DOES SPEAK YOU JUST DON'T HEAR HIM DO IT. valve has said this time and time again it is implied Gordon speaks you just dont hear him speak so you can put what you would say in that situation to make the character more like you.
