Speaking as someone who played them years ago and hasn't since then, and therefore won't compare it to modern games. Half Life was original and innovative at the time, and that at least made it interesting. But, Half Life 2 lost the feel of the original and just felt dull and generic with a few gimics tacked on to try and draw people in. At the time I found Halo Combat Evolved to be a much better shooter.
Congratulations, you're the 7000000000th person to discover the wonders of subjectivity, and the 5000000th in relation to the Half Life series. I don't see how any of this needs a question mark over it.
Nostalgia plays a big factor to the praise, though I think it's well deserved praise. I assume you didn't try the games when they were still new.
As for me; I started out with Counter-Strike when it was the big thing everyone played. Later on bought a Half-Life box that came with Opposing Force and Blue Shift. Played the living hell of out those games and loved them a lot. It was something brand new to me since, apart from CS, I had mainly just played platformers and RPGs previously.
When HL2 was released the graphics were beyond amazing. The game sure delivered as well, though I haven't played it in a few years so I can't say I remember everything about it.
I've not read any of the rest of the thread besides the first post, but I will say that I played the entire series a few months ago. I'd already played the Half-Life 2s, but I had not played any of the Half Life 1s. While none of it was anything new, (and it should not be, considering how old it is), I still very much enjoyed it.
I'm going to be honest, I've never really liked the Half Life series. I've tried to play it multiple times and I've never been able to force myself to finish. And before anyone accuses me of having bad taste in games, I've played many great games. System Shock series, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Elder Scrolls, Red Dead Redemption, both Portal games, you get the idea. I've just never found it to be so good that it should receive the praise that it does. It just feels like a generic run and gun shooter. Is there something that I'm missing?
I've always loved the atmosphere of the series, you're placed in this sprawling research facility that borders on the insane while keeping an air of believability.
The atmosphere is actually one of my least favorite parts of the series. Excluding a few moments, I always found the world of HL to be boring, dull and repetitive.
Of course, this game was made in 2004 and we've come along way in that aspect so I don't think it's 100% fair to judge it based on today's standards.
Quality isn't a point on a graph, it's a bell curve. The greatest game in the world will have people whose opinions fall a few standard deviations away from the mean towards dislike, while the worst game in the world will have people who fall a few standard deviations from the mean towards like. Thats how statistics works. If a person happens to be both of those things, you get a person who thinks Duke Nukem Forever is as good as Half Life 2. This is just a natural thing that happens with taste. It neither devalues the persons opinion, forgives Duke Nukem, nor does it demean Half Life. It's just...a thing...that happens. General consensus and intelligent analysis has shown time and time again that Half Life is an exemplary example of it's medium, worthy of critical acclaim. It would be great if you could appreciate the mechanics at work that cause it to be so critically acclaimed. If you don't, hey, we understand, you have more important shit to do.
Also, Half Life 2 is standard in content, but incredible in execution. It's not a cut of rare black angus steak to other shooters ground chuck, it's a master chef making perfect Creme Brulee versus a toddler dumping heavy cream and sugar on an Omelet made out of egg yokes. Same ingredients, ones just crafted much better.
I'm going to be honest, I've never really liked the Half Life series. I've tried to play it multiple times and I've never been able to force myself to finish. And before anyone accuses me of having bad taste in games, I've played many great games. System Shock series, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Elder Scrolls, Red Dead Redemption, both Portal games, you get the idea. I've just never found it to be so good that it should receive the praise that it does. It just feels like a generic run and gun shooter. Is there something that I'm missing?
I've always loved the atmosphere of the series, you're placed in this sprawling research facility that borders on the insane while keeping an air of believability.
The atmosphere is actually one of my least favorite parts of the series. Excluding a few moments, I always found the world of HL to be boring, dull and repetitive.
Of course, this game was made in 2004 and we've come along way in that aspect so I don't think it's 100% fair to judge it based on today's standards.
Eh maybe it was the work of an overactive imagination, to each their own I guess but IMO the Black Mesa Research facility is one of the most interesting game settings. I mean even by today's standards it's amazing, right up there with the HALO and the Aperture facility.
No one's really sure why. It should just feel like a generic FPS, and that's the problem people frequently have with it - but in my opinion at least, it absolutely perfects it. No FPS I've played before or since has had that good of an atmosphere, level design, or gameplay.
Just talking about Half-Life 2 here - the first was a blast, but it really did feel like a generic FPS to me.
Nobody's actually answering the OPs question which was essentially to those who like Half Life, why do you like it/what makes it so good?
I'd actually like to see that answered rather than people just say "it's fantastic", because I'm genuinely interested as to what makes it so good, I get bored very quickly on those games.
Good for you, but I like it. It's sometimes confusing, as in what I have to do, but overall it's still pretty fun. Sure it's a little dated but I frankly don't mind that. This is someone that is about to play Halo:Reach.
Nobody's actually answering the OPs question which was essentially to those who like Half Life, why do you like it/what makes it so good?
I'd actually like to see that answered rather than people just say "it's fantastic", because I'm genuinely interested as to what makes it so good, I get bored very quickly on those games.
I think if you read between the lines it's obvious, ppl like HL1 because it was the first game to successfully marry plot and immersion with action to make a FPS which is both intresting to be in and explore aswell as the combat. Much of what makes the game good is lost from a modern gamers perspective because the same elements can be found in so many 1st and 2nd rate FPS games over the years but i'll list them.
The start, Black Mesa itself is both intresting and varied and the Zen world, the set pieces and scripted dialog (little to no cutscenes), the different factions: scientists, security guards, aliens, army, the man in black. Friendly AI that follows and fights with you, fighting the army and its AI with the tanks and grenades (those sections are like a proto military shooter) the intresting weapons, the intresting monsters and boss monsters like that big one that chases you and you have to dial in its position for an airstikes. The mine cart ride, helicopters, crowbar, crates and ventshafts that are used skillfully in level design which was superb the correct ballance of open and linear (IIRC with no stages, no loading so the gameworld is connected and singular) Oh and the suit itelf. And the multiple choice ending.
HL1 does ALOT of things and ballances it all very well, most FPS's might take elements from HL and improve upon then, but how many are as varied and intresting enough to make 2 addons that is basically the same black mesa and events but seen from a different perspective? The hughly successfull Opposing Forces where you play as an army grunt and not the not so successful Blue Shift that you play as Barny the Security Guard.
For marrying action to a plot and story i'll take a 15+ YO HL1 over the cutscened riddled and badly paced Max Payne 3 any day.
Could be people are getting "worked up" over these types of threads because they're sick and tired of seeing them every week. (seriously, look at almost any weeks worth of threads on here going back to at least 2007 and you'll notice that there's at least one "Half-Life sucks" thread in each week)
Think of it this way. What's your favorite game/movie/show/etc? Well, whatever it is, let's imagine that someone on this forum decides to start a thread wherein the whole point of their post is to lambast your favorite "thing"; calling it horrible/stupid/over-hyped/whatever; and to insult you and anyone else that likes it.
Now, if you were like most people, you'd probably just brush it off. Thinking to yourself, "Meh. Just someone trying to stir up controversy. I can ignore them." However, now imagine you saw this same thread at least once a week for five fucking years straight.
Something tells me you'd get quite sick of seeing them. This is how most Half-Life fans feel on this forum. To use the old vernacular, these threads are "beating a dead horse". Just as bad, any genuine discussion on the topic (like, perhaps this thread) end up getting lost in the sea of vitriolic hate towards the game or fans. Even worse, there almost seems to be a degree of support from the site mods and owners in this over-all zeal to troll the Half-Life fans. I could link you several news posts with titles specifically designed to "troll". (I could, but most were changed due to user reactions)
TheKasp said:
You are wrong. It is that great. You just don't like it...
But didn't you know? Subjectivity is the new objectivity. Something is only "good" if you like it.
In which case, by my reckoning, Bioshock is a horrifically designed game and The Godfather is one of the most piss-poorly directed films ever.
(caveat: they most certainly are not)
shoddyworksucks said:
Ah, here we have another progressive-minded, forward-thinking gamer who isn't afraid to regale us with their insights. Do you want a pat on the back? Yep, you taught us all a lesson about the importance of individuality and going against convention. I'm cleaning up the fragments of my monocle as we speak.
Really? My issue isn't so much that you say that don't like the game, but that you bothered to share this opinion with the rest of the world when the sum of your critical evaluation can be boiled down to, "Uh, it isn't good." How is that supposed to spark a discussion? You haven't bothered to actually analyze the game and your reaction to it and share those issues, be they technical, design-based, art-based, plot-based, etc. Because your opinion doesn't contain any analysis, the only counter-argument one could make is, "Nuh-uh!"
Yes, yes, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and so-forth, but by the same token, no one needs to respect under-thought and/or poorly communicated opinions. If the OP had contained some measure of analysis that explained WHY they feel the game didn't work for them, then that would carry more weight. Without any additional information, it just feels like yet another person on the internet trying to prove their "edgy" bona fides.
Also this. But then, as I've said many times in the past, I've come to expect a "Half-Life sucks" thread just about every week. So...unless the OP is actually genuine in their questioning, nothing new here people. As you were.
(if the OP is, then he/she needs to bare this in mind: "To each their own.")
Quality isn't a point on a graph, it's a bell curve. The greatest game in the world will have people whose opinions fall a few standard deviations away from the mean towards dislike, while the worst game in the world will have people who fall a few standard deviations from the mean towards like. Thats how statistics works. If a person happens to be both of those things, you get a person who thinks Duke Nukem Forever is as good as Half Life 2. This is just a natural thing that happens with taste. It neither devalues the persons opinion, forgives Duke Nukem, nor does it demean Half Life. It's just...a thing...that happens. General consensus and intelligent analysis has shown time and time again that Half Life is an exemplary example of it's medium, worthy of critical acclaim. It would be great if you could appreciate the mechanics at work that cause it to be so critically acclaimed. If you don't, hey, we understand, you have more important shit to do.
Also, Half Life 2 is standard in content, but incredible in execution. It's not a cut of rare black angus steak to other shooters ground chuck, it's a master chef making perfect Creme Brulee versus a toddler dumping heavy cream and sugar on an Omelet made out of egg yokes. Same ingredients, ones just crafted much better.
Well said. I feel I should quote you just so others are more likely to see what you've said; as it bears repeating.
In a lot of ways, the Half-Life series is greater than the sum of it's "parts". While one can nitpick that one part isn't that "amazing" on it's own, the fact that Valve married all of those parts so seamlessly helps that "part" equate to an amazing whole. That same level of craftsmanship is rare in the industry (though certainly not exclusive), so in general we praise it when we see it.
It's the same reason many of us praise the likes of Irrational, Bioware, and Naughty Dog. It's not just because we're fans of their games (and in some cases, not even that), it's because we recognize the quality of their skill in their craft.
It's amazing enough in my opinion, to be a part of my skin as a tattoo. The world and detail is amazing, the characters are likable and not cliche, the story is interesting and the paste it all moves on keeps you on the edge of your seat the whole time, especially in part 2. THe first one leaned more on creating an incredible atmosphere and generating most of the big questions. 2 anwsered some, hinted at some and asked more, all the while having an incredible story about the fight for humanity, rebellion against fascism and police state. Freedom. It's amazing. Truly a one-of-a-kind experience and I find something new to love about it every time I play it again.
EDIT: I would like to link you guys to a show by everyones favorite THe Escapist-columnist, Shamus Young! These guys explain it better than anyone:
well by todays standards....yea its kinda run and gun. back when it was released (keep in mind HL2 was released...what..7 years ago?) it was the cutting edge of....well everything. And the graphics prevent it from aging poorly as it is not photorealistic (which age like liquid crap). Hell, HL2 created a benchmark that wouldnt be surpassed until Crysis 1.
Model T ford is a piece of crap compared to todays cars, doesnt diminish what it accomplished. A lot of the magic that was HL2 has been copied in other games after it was released, so quite honestly i dont hold it against anyone who played that games years after they have been released.
It is like our generation scoffing at black and white movies when, at the time, they were very profound.
Very well said good sir. I just recently (like two weeks ago) finished 2, 2:1, and 2:2 and I quite liked them. But I do see how some games have advanced beyond that. It's still a landmark franchise though. I may not like CoD that much (I used to) but I recognize and respect the impact it has on gaming.
well by todays standards....yea its kinda run and gun. back when it was released (keep in mind HL2 was released...what..7 years ago?) it was the cutting edge of....well everything. And the graphics prevent it from aging poorly as it is not photorealistic (which age like liquid crap). Hell, HL2 created a benchmark that wouldnt be surpassed until Crysis 1.
Model T ford is a piece of crap compared to todays cars, doesnt diminish what it accomplished. A lot of the magic that was HL2 has been copied in other games after it was released, so quite honestly i dont hold it against anyone who played that games years after they have been released.
It is like our generation scoffing at black and white movies when, at the time, they were very profound.
This^
Now it can be seen as a generic shooter, but I remember when I played it right after the release, I was lucky enough to get a new PC that could run it on high quality. Hell, it was so awesome, it wasn't something you see every day, and graphics even surpassed pre-rendered cutscenes in other games which came before and after HL 2. I also remember when I got a CD of HL1: Blue Shift, it was a short game but it was an epic experience with awesome effects and cool gameplay (back then we had Quake and Doom 2) it was hell of a fun... When Episodes came out the graphics was boosted to be first games to introduce radial lighting system, which made my PC cramp whenever I turn on the flashlight, it was still awesome. I guess I wasn't spoiler by today's games back then and I see how many of younger generation can perceive HL series as generic. HL started shooters you see now
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
