Poll: HL2 Cover Systems: Yes or no

[AngryMan]

What the hell do you think that holding items up with the gravity gun to absorb fire is, if not cover?

Half life already has a cover system as long as it has the gravity gun. It doesn't need a bunch of useless cocking up by having you get glued to whatever surface you're slightly near.
Cover systems are useless, QUINTUPLY SO in first person shooters. God, anyone who seriously wants a cover system in an FPS has to get their brain reattached to the fingers they post their crap with.

Interestingly enough, I just finished playing CoD4. Although it didn't feature a "Gears of War" active cover system, that there is one game where you want to make use of every last little piece of cover you can, if you want to survive, so using cover in an FPS works.

The thing is that, in your first-person perspective, you can already make effective use of whatever cover is available just by moving yourself behind it, so an active cover system would be redundant.

I consider CoD4 to be a benchmark example of how to do cover in an FPS properly - have a lot of it about, for the player to make use of, but leave it at that.

 

[shadow skill]

So an Mit ttrained scientest wouldn't think of lowering his profile so a not to get killed?

Gears of War is not the first nor is it the only game to use a cover system and even if it was it hardly means that the mechanic would have to be implemented in the same way by different people.

Propertyofcobra you screaming lodly and calling people who disagree with your ridiculous assertion does not make you right. If you assertion made sense then no one would have ever decided to make such a system in the first place. Its also nice that you assume you would have to be glued to anything in order for this system to work. Yet you are goin to tell other people to get their brain reattached. Especially since in the end a cover system is really just a way to collapse the lean functionality onto two buttons using some kind of modifier instead of just spamming the keyboard like a moron so you end up having to memorize two more movement modifiers in addtion to the eight movement buttons you normally make use of.

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

Well, nearly every game I've played so far with a cover mechanic has involved the player being stuck to a wall at some point or another. And I'm not saying that the cover system hasn't worked for other games. It works rather nicely in GoW. But HL2 is a different kind of game. I admit, however, that I haven't played GRAW or Rainbow 6: Vegas because I'm not a fan of realistic gaming.

The main point I'm trying to make here is that Half-Life, as a science-fiction first person shooter, does not need to implement a cover system. Each of the other games I have mentioned are trying to do different things in different genres. If Gordon needs to hide, he can hide. If he needs to duck, he can duck. There is nothing wrong with the combat and I would be disappointed if Valve did decide to implement one into the next Half-Life game.

 

[unangbangkay]

I don't really mind cover systems in principle, but adding them to Half-Life at this point would be very jarring and ultimately detrimental to the quality of gameplay.

In any case, I certainly don't play/love/worship the Half-Life series for its excellent and deep shooting mechanics, but for its interesting tools (gravity gun, snarks, etc.) and highly immersive experience. I played Half-Life for Alyx, the G-Man, and GLaDOS rather than blindfire or iron sights (though Iron Sights might be an interesting addition).

A good shooter need not require a cover system (i.e. adhesive ass) to be deep, challenging or interesting.

Some other shooters that accomplish this without referring to specialized mechanics include CoD4 (it's less serious than an r6 title) and Crysis (which is closer to Half-Life in the sci-fi/interesting tools sense than nearly any other non-tactical FPS).

 

[shadow skill]

Gears of War is not the game you want to reference or emulate when you talk about a cover mechanic; Gears is an example of how to take a perfectly fine system and destroying it. I would also argue that the only difference between a tactical shooter and a "normal" fps is that a tactical shooter ends your life real quick when you stand out in the open. Frankly most if not all of the "tactics" you use in Tactical shooters, you use in a more traditional FPS with added interfaces for such things in the Tactical shooters that make it easier to do the same kinds of things. The premise of Half-Life really has nothing to do with whether a cover mechanic is a good or bad thing. Suggesting that the cover systems in Tactical shooters are a genre related entity is a bit like claiming that Thief was an action game rather than a stealth game like Tenchu or Splinter Cell because you could not flatten yourself against a wall in Thief like you can in Tenchu or Splinter Cell.

Crysis is also a sci-fi shooter (One I wish wouldn't bring my computer to its knees so I could play more than just the demo.) and its also very "tactical" because you can use the jungle environment to conceal yourself as well as the different suit powers. You can do simillar things in Half Life; if you see Combine and headrabbed people battling you can run in and get shot too, or you can wait to see who wins and save your ammo, or you can sneak up behind an unsuspecting Combine and double barrel shotgun his ass, then grenade his buddies and the headcrabbed people who are busy with each other and don't see the grenade.

 

[mathias53]

100% no! With 32 votes, most impressive, useless poll award?

I just thought I would clearify things with the rest of the forum community, and clearify I did.

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

The premise of Half-Life really has nothing to do with whether a cover mechanic is a good or bad thing.

Well, it kind of does with in this thread. That's what we're discussing. I don't think cover systems are bad, I just don't think Half-Life needs one. It's a console innovation that doesn't need to spread to what is primarily a pc game.

And since cover systems are one of the defining features of most tactical, 'realistic' action games (Gears Of War, Rainbow 6: Vegas, Army Of Two) then it is fair to assume that they are a genre related entity because they are MOSTLY found IN THAT GENRE. When I say 'tactical action', assume that I'm talking about militaristic third person action games with cover-based systems like the previously mentioned games.

And I'm pretty sure you've missed a couple of logic steps with your stealth game analogy because it doesn't make any sense.

 

[Boonesbane]

No, i want it to be a real fps. Not a third person shooter where you sometimes shoot in first person. Any cover system implemented without third person viewpoint is just destined to fail.

 

[Spartan152]

if you want cover in Half Life, take Gordon, and hide him behind a wall, or a box, and OMG! COVER!! same with CoD4 and such. be creative, and use cover even if there isn't a system for it.

 

[Canniballisticduck]

I would want a basic one nohting like gears of war but the current one is clunky and osent always work somthing like the call of duty's sieries of permanent crouch prone or stand would be just fine AND IN HALFLIFE 3 NO MORE 10,000 CRATES JUST LYING AROUND ITS ANNOYING

 

[Abbadiel]

Nah, I like Half-life the way it is.

(although theres a lot that can be improved).

 

[scoobyduped]

no. if it had one, it would require the game to be 3rd person at least some of the time, and then it just wouldn't be half-life.

 

[stompy]

See, I agree with the people who say that Half-Life isn't the type of game that is in need of a cover mechanic.

There are games, like GoW, RV:6 and GRAW, which, due to the premise, and the ease in which you can die, as well as you having a squad, use the cover system, to allow you to survive, and make better use of aforementioned squad.

Games like Half Life, and even Halo and COD4, on the other hand, give you a one-man army (not so much the case in COD), and one man armies usually are too bad-ass to need cover. And the fact they have less use for a cover system, what with them usually being able to absorb more bullets..

 

[stompy]

See, I agree with the people who say that Half-Life isn't the type of game that is in need of a cover mechanic.

There are games, like GoW, RV:6 and GRAW, which, due to the premise, and the ease in which you can die, as well as you having a squad, use the cover system, to allow you to survive, and make better use of aforementioned squad.

Games like Half Life, and even Halo and COD4, on the other hand, give you a one-man army (not so much the case in COD), and one man armies usually are too bad-ass to need cover. And the fact they have less use for a cover system, what with them usually being able to absorb more bullets.

 

[Vigormortis]

Poll should have been: "Should Half-Life 2: Episode 3 have a cover system" as there isn't going to be any Half-Life games after it. That said, I say no. The cover system in, say, Gears of War was a novel idea, but it grows tiresome after a short time as in the end that's all the game is. The cover systems to date are good for what they are, but the rest of the combat has always been tedious or just annoying. Then again, Half-Life has always had a "cover system". It's called the ctrl key. You approach a wall or outcropping, press said key, and presto your behind cover. That said, if there were ever one company out there that could find a way to revolutionize the standard "cover system", it'd be Valve.

 

[night_chrono]

It already has a cover system. Its called use the gravity gun to pick up something big and heavy.

Seriously I have used that strategy plenty of times when getting past snipers. It works very well.

 

[Knight Templar]

I say yes, because its dumb to be strafing left and right behind a wall and having to completely expose yourself in order to fire at enemeis or return fire.

You hated Goldeneye and Perfect Dark than?

I say No. half-Life is a barebones shooter when it comes to the action. It does everything right to make the game challenging. Hell, when you go with a cover system it makes the game ten times easier. I hate cover systems.

If people want cover, play a game that has figin cover!

 

[fix-the-spade]

Fix-the-spade do you not realize that all cover systems are just a way of collapsing the lean keys in some fps' onto one key?
.

That's exactly my problem with it, it compresses all the possible options into one handy button. So instead of having to think about the situation and what might be appropriatte, the game just becomes: Wall=Cover button--->fire

Given that Rainbow six, SOCOM and co manage lean, crouch, run and jump on a controller kind of negates any argument that there aren't enough buttons.

Also, it removes several options because it welds you to the spot until you use it again, you could add a modifier button to movement for a better effect. Pressing iron sights/scope view roots you to the spot, but using the left stick controls lean from first person, let go of the button and movement starts again. It's a similar system, but better for first person.

The ability to see round corners without any risk also irks me. If a cover system is supposed to be tactical, where's the tactics in being able to see everything with no risk? You may as well be able to see through the walls and be done with it.

 

[bor3ds0ul]

Cover systems are not for run and guns like HL. You want a cover system, go play GoW or Rainbow six. Hl is brilliant because it is entirely in first person. Tilting left and right like in CoD 1 would be a nice addition though

 

[Lord Krunk]

No...because that would conflict with the fundamental rule in Half-Life.

Gaming Bible, The Gospel of Gordon, 14:3 > "Thou shalt never play Half-Life in third person view."

Wow, such calming words to the soul. Right on, man!
And...
I want that Gospel!