Zhukov said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
The first Half Life is still the best first person shooter ever made. Hands down. There is no arguing it. It just is. 100%.
I'm probably going to regret asking this, but why do you prefer the first game to the second?
I realize that you asked someone else, but as someone who strongly prefers the first game to the second game, I might as well give you a few reasons (even if they are not his reason).
Firstly, the original doesn't have a jarring feeling that the world revolves around you. Sure, you act as a major agent of the story, but you aren't instantly recognized by every single solitary person in the world.
Second, the game's combat is a bit more freeform. I know some people might angrily shout "but the Gravity Gun!" Don't get me wrong, I love the gravity gun, but the difference between hitting someone with a table and hitting someone with a box isn't as big as the difference between shooting someone through a wall with the tau cannon and driving enemies into your laser traps with grenades. Sure Half-life 2 has a lot of the weapons that Half-life 1 had, but it's restrictions on ammo essentially allow the game to tell you which weapons to use where.
Third, the game has much more immediate and driving conflict. I know that the combine very clearly made out to be super evil bastards, but to put it lightly, the game always feels so futile. I know that futility can be handled well with themes like "fighting a battle because it's the right one and not one you can win," but the game doesn't really handle the idea well. You're always moving around, winning pretty much every battle, and pretty much never making major mistakes. Yes, other games do this too, but most of them have an obtainable goal in mind, which is what progress implies. Here there is never any logical way for you to win.
Notice how the only improvements to the situation are made off screen? That's because it wouldn't make sense if you saw them first hand. How does a dying resistance all of the sudden have the capacity to topple a force that defeated every military on earth in seven hours? How does a group of scientists come up with unprecedented advances in science in the middle of nowhere? Maybe the underground is absolutely huge, but it seems unlikely when it seems to get slaughtered and destroyed left and right, and it's facilities are slapped together at best. Even if you do win, the planet has pretty much been ruined. Also, the controller... Seriously, I will be shocked if they come up with some way for the Controllers to be fought that isn't the magical immortal-killer-o-matic that we see so often when the writers carelessly decide to raise the stakes too much. Hell, is there even a visible end point to the series anymore?
Contrast this to the original Half-life. There is a huge problem, but because it is talked about before it happens, it is conceivable that it can be dealt with. Every problem you face in the game can be conceivably overcome, and there is a world that is left to save. Every problem is an obstacle to that goal, and there is a conceivable end. It's a far more compelling reason to play through the game.
Fourth, Snarks. Seriously, Snarks. Why are they not in Half-Life 2? They were fucking awesome.