Half Life 2 is not a good FPS

[Xvito]

AI is far better than most games had to that point, including games like Operation Flashpoint - a military simulator which was adapted for the military. I'm not sure how long you've been playing FPS games, but I suspect it isn't that long, because it seems that you're judging by the standards of today's FPS games, whereas there was almost nothing that could stand up to it in 2004.

Of course, I think you can tell that I did like it [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.67843#611023], and I've been playing FPS games for a while. A good while, indeed.

I know what could stand up to it in 2004... Unreal Tournament 2K4... Oh yeah.

Unreal Tournament 2K4 is crap, and the only Unreal Tournament game worth playing is UT '99.

Lies! It's all lies!

 

[CheeseSandwichCake]

I still consider it a better FPS than most on the market today. The only gripe I ever had with the game was the vehicle controls, but other than that it's a 95/100 in my book.

I dunno, I actually like WASD vehicle movement to mouse flailing so maybe I should go get checked out by a doctor.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

But then again, no shotgun will ever equal the greatness of Doom's shotguns.

I have a shrine built to the greatness that is the double-barreled shotgun from Resurrection of Evil. I need nothing else.

Wait? I thought we were talking about Doom? Not the half decent Half-Life knock off called Doom 3.

As much as the main game of Doom 3 suffered from monster closets and being entirely too long, Resurrection of Evil was magnificent. Whereas HL2's Gravity Gun, as sweet as it was, was pretty damn limited in its uses throughout most of the game, RoE's Grabber let you pick up and toss around most anything that wasn't too big.

Imp throw a fireball at you? Return to sender!

Evil spiders trying to chew your feet off? Toss om aside!

Cherubs freaking you out? Drown them in delicious boiling magma.

And then there's above mentioned shotgun. It's a god among weapons... delivering its words, in the form of sprays of hot lead, into the ugly faces of Hell's legions. Wunderbar. So much fun.

Alright. I'll accept that. I never played the expansion as I was utterly disappointed by the core game.

 

[crazyjay321]

I brought it with the orange box last year and sll the way through the game/s I thought it was one of the best fps game i have ever played.

Crossbow had an amazing feel when you shot it and pinned a combine to the wall from 100 feet away.

The pulse rifle was great since it wasnt exactly an alien weapon it felt more like a future weapon.

.357 was totaly kickass

 

[Rickyvantof]

Isn't Half Life 2 like ... old?

 

[Vrex360]

It's good for sure, but yes despite some of the good things it has going for it, it really ISN'T a good fps. I'm sick of people always talking about how great Half Life is, this is the truth I played Half Life 2 and I got bored out of my mind by the boring gameplay and frustrating physics puzzles a hint Valve, these things felt like chores because I couldn't proceed and have fun again until I had finished them. People don't like the action being forcibly stopped to do a puzzle whether they wanted to or not, it's a tiresome chore. I like a shooter that actually knows HOW TO BE a shooter and why am I not surprised to see more 'Halo hate' on this thread. Halo I still hold up as an actual FPS and therefore I prefer it to Half Life.

 

[Chris^^]

Go nuts, with every single post you keep reinforcing my point. We wouldn't want you to dig yourself a hole here.

Don't feed the troll man.

I got it a few days ago, and I LOVED it, particularly the way it seemed to switch genre every now and again. Incidentally do those head-crab zombies scare the hell out anyone else, or is it just me?

Yeah, I got into the series late too, and I also love it. And yeah, the zombies, espeically in Ravenholm, and especially the fast ones, scared the hell out of me at first. By the way, how far are you?

I were still using the starting gun at the end of Episode Two, so I strongly disagree with you on that one, but then again, I ALWAYS save my ammo for the very last moment. A moment that never comes. Because the credits are already rolling when I remember that ammo.

Nice to know I'm not alone in doing that. And the SMG really is a good working horse for a lot of the sticky situations. If it turns out to be inadequate there's the shotgun. And nobody will convince me that the shotgun is lame. Or the crossbow.

Ah, the shotgun. My workhorse for HL2 and EPS. I loved that gun.

Nice to know I'm not alone in doing that. And the SMG really is a good working horse for a lot of the sticky situations. If it turns out to be inadequate there's the shotgun. And nobody will convince me that the shotgun is lame. Or the crossbow.

I thought the shotgun was pretty lame, it's only really effective at melee ranges, which is what you have a crowbar for. But then again, no shotgun will ever equal the greatness of Doom's shotguns.

That's because each weapon has a niche, and they get upgraded later. For example, the pistol is your starting, accurate weapon, and it's firepower is upgraded in the magnum, and its accuracy is upgraded in the Crossbow. Similar with the SMG and Assault Rifle (spray-and-pray, optimal when outnumbered in a large area), and the Crowbar and Shotty (close range). The beauty of this approach is that you always have a weapon to fit the current situation, even if you have to temporarily downgrade due to ammo constraints. And if you run out of ammo even then, you have the Grav Gun as a backup.

Still, I can't help but feel that judging a five year old game by current standards is a bit unfair.

i would like to specify that i dont dislike half life 2, far from it, its a very good game, the environments are superbly done especially when one considers when it was made, but it is wrong to judge it solely as an FPS (as this thread is doing), if viewed purely as such it has many failings but that is not what its supposed to be.

for the time it was released it is superb.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

What you are failing at here, like so many others, is understanding that the immersion comes from us feeling like we are Gordon. When Alyx is speaking to Gordon, I don't feel like she is speaking to Gordon, I feel like she is speaking to me.

Most games pull immersion breaking experiences because they switch from gameplay to cut-scene. Your immersion is broken because at one instant you control the character and the next you are watching the character. The flow works in Half-Life 2 because every single instance in the game is seen through the eyes of Gordon, through your eyes. It's the consistency that allows us to remain immersed in the world.

It's kind of crazy how many gamers are completely missing the entire idea and beauty of having a mute character like Gordon whom we control the entire time.

I'm so glad to see that someone feels the same way as I do about Gordon being a blank slate. In fact I would argue that even giving him a face is a bad thing, and as I understand it it was mostly done for marketing purposes.

I'll wager that my Gordon Freeman is quite different than yours. My Gordon is a thoughtful guy who takes a lot of time analysing the situation but still has this flaw at times where he just barges in and gets in quite a mess. He has little caustic remarks to the characters and he is really fond of Alyx. He resents that all this crap is being put on his shoulders and would rather be doing anything else. But he also realises that he is a puppet, even if he is pretty unclear as to whose puppet he really is.
Actually one could argue that even giving him a name is a bit of a problem. He might as well have my name as he is in most respects just an extension of me.
My brothers Gordon is quite different. And that's the stroke of genius. Not a lazy trick to avoid work.

I'll add another example. I am in the process of replaying Hitman - Blood Money. 47 is not exactly a deep and fleshed out character and that's great. It allows me to fill the gaps. When I play him he is quite ruthless but will not accept any collateral damage. In one of the cut scenes 47 shoots a guy delivering a letter, to avoid any witnesses. That totally breaks my immersion. It completely goes against the character I've been playing for the last many missions (and games for that matter). It's a little thing, but it's completely out of character (in my case at least. For others it wouldn't be).
I think that it shows the problem of having an almost empty character and the still removing the player from control, even for a little bit.

 

[Gladion]

You know what, here [http://www.gamesradar.com/f/gordon-freeman-strongest-personality-in-gaming/a-20080118104744203035]. It's a bit biased, but he says it better than I can.

Holy shit. Thank you. That perfectly sums up why the idea of Gordon Freeman works perfectly.

I quit reading after this: "In Gordon Freeman, Valve have very skillfully created the best-realised and most believable protagonist in gaming."
Half-Life's biggest weakpoint is and has always been it's main character - because he is no character at all. Just a camera running around, never answering people or in fact saying a single word at all and he is being loved by everybody. How could this be the most believable protagonist in gaming, and what did Valve do when saying they "have very skillfully created" him? They didn't give him a voice, they just drew some artworks showing his face and wrote a name for him. What took so much skill that they deserve so much praise?

Edit: I tried to read further, but it's not possible - I know the author tries to argue about my point, but it doesn't work for me, I'm sorry.

 

[Trevald23]

Its hard to say that HL2 is a bad game.
But the fact that its a sequel to HL makes it a major dissapointment. Where HL was original, exciting, intense ect.. HL2 was "meh".

Its actually really sad that its a 96% game on metacritics. Makes it obvious what the reviews are about. Its simply not possible that a majority of people would rate it as the best game ever. It got praise for the same reason Quake2´s single player got praised. The mod community and multiplayer for Quake2 actually made up for that one later.. I dont really think the HL2 community did.

HL2 brought nothing new to the table, except an even for its time actually pretty dated engine (that later got better though). Nothing. It didnt even stand up to its predecessor in some ways.

But, its a good game. And then throw in CS:Source as well and you have an excellent package. Its just no way near as good as it "should" have been. A step back really.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Honestly Half-Life 2 is only good through one or 2 playthroughs and doesn't make up for it's retail price, let alone go past it. After that it gets dull and there's nothing to do besides singleplayer because there's no multiplayer. I know you have those other games developed by valve and all on steam but those aren't Half-Life 2. I wouldn't say it's good but it's not the best FPS and nearly close to it either.

It's price?

...

You can get Half-Life 2 and both expansions for $30 with the Orange Box, AND you get Team Fortress 2 AND Portal.

Price is no object here.

 

[Avatar Roku]

Go nuts, with every single post you keep reinforcing my point. We wouldn't want you to dig yourself a hole here.

Don't feed the troll man.

I got it a few days ago, and I LOVED it, particularly the way it seemed to switch genre every now and again. Incidentally do those head-crab zombies scare the hell out anyone else, or is it just me?

Yeah, I got into the series late too, and I also love it. And yeah, the zombies, espeically in Ravenholm, and especially the fast ones, scared the hell out of me at first. By the way, how far are you?

I were still using the starting gun at the end of Episode Two, so I strongly disagree with you on that one, but then again, I ALWAYS save my ammo for the very last moment. A moment that never comes. Because the credits are already rolling when I remember that ammo.

Nice to know I'm not alone in doing that. And the SMG really is a good working horse for a lot of the sticky situations. If it turns out to be inadequate there's the shotgun. And nobody will convince me that the shotgun is lame. Or the crossbow.

Ah, the shotgun. My workhorse for HL2 and EPS. I loved that gun.

Nice to know I'm not alone in doing that. And the SMG really is a good working horse for a lot of the sticky situations. If it turns out to be inadequate there's the shotgun. And nobody will convince me that the shotgun is lame. Or the crossbow.

I thought the shotgun was pretty lame, it's only really effective at melee ranges, which is what you have a crowbar for. But then again, no shotgun will ever equal the greatness of Doom's shotguns.

That's because each weapon has a niche, and they get upgraded later. For example, the pistol is your starting, accurate weapon, and it's firepower is upgraded in the magnum, and its accuracy is upgraded in the Crossbow. Similar with the SMG and Assault Rifle (spray-and-pray, optimal when outnumbered in a large area), and the Crowbar and Shotty (close range). The beauty of this approach is that you always have a weapon to fit the current situation, even if you have to temporarily downgrade due to ammo constraints. And if you run out of ammo even then, you have the Grav Gun as a backup.

Still, I can't help but feel that judging a five year old game by current standards is a bit unfair.

i would like to specify that i dont dislike half life 2, far from it, its a very good game, the environments are superbly done especially when one considers when it was made, but it is wrong to judge it solely as an FPS (as this thread is doing), if viewed purely as such it has many failings but that is not what its supposed to be.

for the time it was released it is superb.

I'm sorry, I don't know what happened with the quote. "Don't Feed the troll" was aimed at someone else, and I was going to tell you something else. My bad.

 

[Avatar Roku]

It's good for sure, but yes despite some of the good things it has going for it, it really ISN'T a good fps. I'm sick of people always talking about how great Half Life is, this is the truth I played Half Life 2 and I got bored out of my mind by the boring gameplay and frustrating physics puzzles a hint Valve, these things felt like chores because I couldn't proceed and have fun again until I had finished them. People don't like the action being forcibly stopped to do a puzzle whether they wanted to or not, it's a tiresome chore. I like a shooter that actually knows HOW TO BE a shooter and why am I not surprised to see more 'Halo hate' on this thread. Halo I still hold up as an actual FPS and therefore I prefer it to Half Life.

It's called "pacing." HL2 was a long game, and if it was only shooting, it would have gotten incredibly boring. That's why they break up the shooting with puzzles, plot events, and epic setpieces (like the turret standoffs in Nova Prospekt or the fight in the Generator Plaza).

You know what, here [http://www.gamesradar.com/f/gordon-freeman-strongest-personality-in-gaming/a-20080118104744203035]. It's a bit biased, but he says it better than I can.

Holy shit. Thank you. That perfectly sums up why the idea of Gordon Freeman works perfectly.

I quit reading after this: "In Gordon Freeman, Valve have very skillfully created the best-realised and most believable protagonist in gaming."
Half-Life's biggest weakpoint is and has always been it's main character - because he is no character at all. Just a camera running around, never answering people or in fact saying a single word at all and he is being loved by everybody. How could this be the most believable protagonist in gaming, and what did Valve do when saying they "have very skillfully created" him? They didn't give him a voice, they just drew some artworks showing his face and wrote a name for him. What took so much skill that they deserve so much praise?

Edit: I tried to read further, but it's not possible - I know the author tries to argue about my point, but it doesn't work for me, I'm sorry.

Thing is, if you read further, you wouldn't be asking this. Seriously, how can you only read the first paragraph and then go on like it was so horribly written and wrong? I mean, you know he explains himself, right? Christ, you don't want to read it, that's fine, but don't try to argue it's points when you don't know what they are.

 

[Gladion]

It's good for sure, but yes despite some of the good things it has going for it, it really ISN'T a good fps. I'm sick of people always talking about how great Half Life is, this is the truth I played Half Life 2 and I got bored out of my mind by the boring gameplay and frustrating physics puzzles a hint Valve, these things felt like chores because I couldn't proceed and have fun again until I had finished them. People don't like the action being forcibly stopped to do a puzzle whether they wanted to or not, it's a tiresome chore. I like a shooter that actually knows HOW TO BE a shooter and why am I not surprised to see more 'Halo hate' on this thread. Halo I still hold up as an actual FPS and therefore I prefer it to Half Life.

It's called "pacing." HL2 was a long game, and if it was only shooting, it would have gotten incredibly boring. That's why they break up the shooting with puzzles, plot events, and epic setpieces (like the turret standoffs in Nova Prospekt or the fight in the Generator Plaza).

You know what, here [http://www.gamesradar.com/f/gordon-freeman-strongest-personality-in-gaming/a-20080118104744203035]. It's a bit biased, but he says it better than I can.

Holy shit. Thank you. That perfectly sums up why the idea of Gordon Freeman works perfectly.

I quit reading after this: "In Gordon Freeman, Valve have very skillfully created the best-realised and most believable protagonist in gaming."
Half-Life's biggest weakpoint is and has always been it's main character - because he is no character at all. Just a camera running around, never answering people or in fact saying a single word at all and he is being loved by everybody. How could this be the most believable protagonist in gaming, and what did Valve do when saying they "have very skillfully created" him? They didn't give him a voice, they just drew some artworks showing his face and wrote a name for him. What took so much skill that they deserve so much praise?

Edit: I tried to read further, but it's not possible - I know the author tries to argue about my point, but it doesn't work for me, I'm sorry.

Thing is, if you read further, you wouldn't be asking this. Seriously, how can you only read the first paragraph and then go on like it was so horribly written and wrong? I mean, you know he explains himself, right? Christ, you don't want to read it, that's fine, but don't try to argue it's points when you don't know what they are.

As I've edited, I've tried reading further - I had gotten through the first three pages when I decided I couldn't go on. This person just kept delaying and delaying what he/she was trying to say without getting to the point.

Now, I've read through all of it, but it still isn't clear to me (and maybe you can explain it to me) what took so much writing-skills that Valve should be praised for making Gordon Freeman the most relatable character in a video game ever.

 

[RyVal]

You don't define an FPS purely by its weaponry.
God knows, fans claim Halo 3 is the best FPS and yet it has the most uninspiring guns load-out in history.
Rather, you define an FPS by how it strings its firefights together, and, since Half-Life 2 manages to maintain consistency throughout its entire campaign while linking between the setpieces and creating enjoyment, Half-Life 2 IS a great FPS.

 

[BolognaBaloney]

You don't define an FPS purely by its weaponry.
God knows, fans claim Halo 3 is the best FPS and yet it has the most uninspiring guns load-out in history.
Rather, you define an FPS by how it strings its firefights together, and, since Half-Life 2 manages to maintain consistency throughout its entire campaign while linking between the setpieces and creating enjoyment, Half-Life 2 IS a great FPS.

It really isn't, don't get me wrong, I don't hate the game; but as a pure fps, it isn't great because it relies on switching up things often to keep it interesting, which is not a bad thing, but as a pure fps, it's not that great. what made it memorable was its combination of gunplay, driving, puzzles.

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

You don't define an FPS purely by its weaponry.
God knows, fans claim Halo 3 is the best FPS and yet it has the most uninspiring guns load-out in history.
Rather, you define an FPS by how it strings its firefights together, and, since Half-Life 2 manages to maintain consistency throughout its entire campaign while linking between the setpieces and creating enjoyment, Half-Life 2 IS a great FPS.

I completely agree, apart from the "uninspiring weapons in Halo" part. The Energy Sword, Needler, Gravity Hammer, Assault Rifle and Energy Pistol are each fantastic weapons which are extremely satisfying to use. Y'know guys, it is okay to enjoy both Half-Life 2 AND Halo 3.

It really isn't, don't get me wrong, I don't hate the game; but as a pure fps, it isn't great because it relies on switching up things often to keep it interesting, which is not a bad thing, but as a pure fps, it's not that great. what made it memorable was its combination of gunplay, driving, puzzles.

And it's art-style, story, characters, attention to detail, innovation and originality. All of which I would argue helps to make it superior to "pure" FPS games because it requires you to do more than blast monsters. If you think about it, most of the greatest FPS games of all time have featured puzzles of one kind or another.

I mean, take Doom. One of the purest FPS games ever made, right? Well even in that you had to search around the place for keys in order to find your way to the exit, which takes some puzzle solving at certain sections. Same with Duke Nukem, Quake, Goldeneye and God knows how many other FPS games. Hell, even Serious Sam required you to go and hunt around for items at points.

'Pure' FPS games have always included simple puzzles. HL2 just expands upon them and uses physics which, as several other people have mentioned, was revolutionary for the time.

 

[Avatar Roku]

As I've edited, I've tried reading further - I had gotten through the first three pages when I decided I couldn't go on. This person just kept delaying and delaying what he/she was trying to say without getting to the point.

Now, I've read through all of it, but it still isn't clear to me (and maybe you can explain it to me) what took so much writing-skills that Valve should be praised for making Gordon Freeman the most relatable character in a video game ever.

All right. He's relateable because he isn't a character: he's us. Valve went out of their way to make scenes that create emotion, so that we feel more immersed in the world, feel like we are Gordon. Which he said here:

The thinking that both are just audio-visual media is often the paper that tries to hide the cracks between the two, but in practice, both experiences are very different and need to be treated differently. It's a common complaint that certain gaming conventions such as cut scenes (particularly ones with crap acting), loading screens and overly elaborate HUDs take the player ?out of the game?, and when extrapolated, that problem of the interruption to the in-game experience extends far and wide.

Valve have taken vast measures to eradicate as many distracting factors as possible from Half-Life 2, and most fundamentally this thinking can be seen at the level of protagonist construction. Gamers create a presence in a game world purely through their own personal effect upon it. Anything forced upon that presence which is not of the gamer's own making reminds them that they are playing a game created by someone else by someone else's design. If a player is told that their character has a certain attitude or reacts to a situation in a certain way which is not their own, immediately there is a degree of divorcing from that character, and through that character, their link to the game world.

Gordon Freeman's neutrality of dialogue and lack of overt personality within the game do not make him a non-character, but are in fact his strength. His lack of preconcieved identity provides not a single barrier with which to distance him from the player;s own personality, making him a blank canvas on which they can imprint their own values and outlook. Valve have even made it impossible for the player to ever see Gordon from a third-person perspective, either through cut-scene or reflection, meaning that in no instance does the effect of seeing a character who does not look like themselves pull the player out of the experience of 'being' him.

But Valve have also made sure that Gordon does not remain an empty set of gun sights. Rather, Half-Life 2 uses purely the events of the game to communicate emotional responses to the player directly, cutting out the middle-man of pre-scripted in-game character response. Players are free to respond to the events they experience in any way which is natural to them, and that subjective element is key to the whole process. Through their own personal interpretations and responses to what is going on around them, the character of Gordon Freeman incubates in the real world inside the player's head rather than on-screen. As the story builds and progresses, Gordon and the player blend and evolve together in a completely natural reactive way as they are affected by the same events for the same reasons. The player is not portraying Gordon Freeman. Gordon Freeman is portraying the player. He's as layered and complex and as individual a little snowflake as you are, so you might want to rethink those accusations of him being boring unless you're pretty dull yourself.

In other words, if our character, who's supposed to be our conduit into the game world, says or does something we wouldn't do, it throws us out, at least a little. With Gordon, they've left us free to react in whatever way we would. That's why they put in those emotional scenes: let's look at the scene where you and Alyx just got into Nova Prospekt and found Eli, but he's behind that window. Some players might be compelled to look on in the same way as Alyx. Some might try to break the glass separating them, even knowing it's futile. Others might act as a sort of watchman at the door, embarrassed by the displays of affection they're not a part of. The possibilities are endless. I mean hell, go on Youtube and watch Freeman's Mind to get some idea of one possible character, which won't exist for most people.

 

[RyVal]

I completely agree, apart from the "uninspiring weapons in Halo" part. The Energy Sword, Needler, Gravity Hammer, Assault Rifle and Energy Pistol are each fantastic weapons which are extremely satisfying to use. Y'know guys, it is okay to enjoy both Half-Life 2 AND Halo 3.

Only played a single level of Halo 3, so can't offer an opinion, but I do feel that the weapons were highly unsatisfying - even if it was a change from Gears of War miniguns with underslung flamethrowers and chainsaw bayonets.
They just felt so 'blah'.

 

[Zefar]

I completely agree, apart from the "uninspiring weapons in Halo" part. The Energy Sword, Needler, Gravity Hammer, Assault Rifle and Energy Pistol are each fantastic weapons which are extremely satisfying to use. Y'know guys, it is okay to enjoy both Half-Life 2 AND Halo 3.

I honestly can't see how you could put the Assault Rifle on that list. It's like any other rifle. Same goes for Energy Sword which is basicly another melee weapon. Havn't tried out Gravity Hammer in Halo 3, Needler reminds me about the alien gun in Half-Life. Energy pistol...Was that the one with charge up ability? If so I found nothing impressive about it either.

Isn't Half Life 2 like ... old?

Half-Life 2 was release sometime in 2004 and it's 2009. So you are bound to get a bit of flaws in it. But during 2004 it was bloody amazing. It still is infact. Better than most games today.

Few games gave me that woah feeling. Some other games that did it was COD4 SP mode, Crysis and Bioshock. They all have their reason but they did SP better than most other games I have played. Including Halo 1 and 2. Which basicly felt like Painkiller and Serious Sam but with a better story.