So with the exception of Half-Life, all those choices are bad ones for movies. Or would require significant
filler to become anything more than a CGI slaughter fest. Have we forgotten
Doom? It came out after Doom 3 was released, and had plenty to draw off of. But was it anything worthy of a movie? Hell no!
What makes a movie compelling is story. Everything else is perks. Special effects, good acting, etc, are elements that add to the compelling nature of a movie. The story doesn't even need to be strong to be good; but there does need to be a story.
Of the choices given Half-Life has a compelling story with which to make something compelling. Filler wouldn't be required. But the vision to bring the world to life.
Games like Team Fortress 2, and Portal, the part that makes these games fun is the interaction. Shooting people in TF2, and the revelry between people. In portal, it's puzzle solving with quirky computers and its namesake (portals). Interaction does not translate into a good movie.
Games like Left 4 Dead... well, look at any zombie movie. Really. That doesn't need to happen. And really, what are you looking for there? The obligitory shout, "BOOMER!!" Followed by gunfire?
Counter Strike has no content with which to base a movie on. Terrorists plant a bomb? A heroic counter terrorist squad moves in to defuse it? I was able to sum up that premise with two sentences. I can add a third if there are hostages. Even still; just go watch the Die Hard series, and inject the random "lol n00b," here and there. When someone is just standing around, yell, "PLANT THE BOMB, *$#@ing n00b" for good measure to get the full CS

S) effect.