The Orange Box

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Your second sentence is fallacious. As for the Gravity Gun, it was not an essential, or even significant part of the game. Amusing, innovative, but not exceedingly integral or useful. As you are unwilling to support your baseless claims, I needn't further elaborate mine (though if any arbitrary reader is curious, it's not a problem).

I'd also say the Gravity Gun is very useful for the sand level, righting the car, getting rid of the electro mines, grabbing ammo. The Physics Engine allows the car, crane etc. to work properly.
The basic story is a struggle for identity, which is why so little of it is imparted to you; and why he doesn't talk, he's a figurehead rather than a person. Everyone else talks...that's the point.

It'd be like saying "I didn't like Psychonauts because of all the oblique references to meat."

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

Well written review, it's a bit too clinical and I completely disagree with most of it, but it's nice to see someone criticising Half-Life with more than comparisons to Halo or other first person shooters. 6/10 for portal though... Slightly harsh for one of the most original and entertaining games of last year, isn't it? Surely the innovations it makes combined with the top quality black humour and stunning finale mean it deserves more than that?

I also think it's unfair to criticise Portal's puzzles for only having one solution, since that is typically the only way for these sort of puzzle games to work. The puzzles are never unfair and rational thinking will see you through all of them. Yes, Glados helps you through the majority of them, but completing the puzzles is often as much about skill as it is thinking so they are still satisfying to complete.

Anyway, I didn't mean to start criticising you, but you make your points and back them up with reasons (whether I agree with them or not) which is why I've not turned into the rabid Half-Life fanboy that I usually do for stuff like this.

 

[Hanji]

I find it interesting that you find that neither the portal gun or the gravity gun are effective new game mechanics

They are effective mechanics. I repeat, their implementation was the facet of mediocrity.

I have watched others play the Portal puzzles before and found that many times that they would find other solutions to problems that I hadn't thought of or vice-versa.

Unless these solutions were vastly different, it is irrelevant. If they were, it doesn't obfuscate the simple intended paths of the game. Once you know those, other tactics are superfluous.

As for the story...

I noticed this also, though I did not come to all those conclusions, because I wasn't sure if Portal existed in the same canon as Half-Life or if Black Mesa was a fan-service joke. However, these subtleties do not keep the plot from being shallow, illusory, or incomplete.

the objectives of the game: to serve as a playing field for a new mechanic before having to worry about putting it into the main storyline or multiplayer.

That sounds like a technical demo, or a beta. Portal was released as a full game with monetary value. It is judged accordingly.

Last time I checked, the last part of the game is played with nothing but the gravity gun.

I'd also say the Gravity Gun is very useful for the sand level, righting the car, getting rid of the electro mines, grabbing ammo. The Physics Engine allows the car, crane etc. to work properly.

The Gravity Gun at the end of the game could have been easily replaced by an Energy-Sphere launcher. That is its primary use.

Pertaining to segments which require the Gravity Gun, this necessity is not transcendent, it is expected. The developers created a tool, naturally they would shape the game for its use. The failing is that such instances are infrequent, insipid, and could be slightly altered to not even require the gun. Some don't. A significant tool would go far beyond the obligatory uses, the Gravity Gun only does so by means described in previous posts. Hence, worth a mention, not essential.

My logic is simplistic. If Half-Life 2 did not have the Gravity Gun, it would be different, to compensate, but not worse overall.

The basic story is a struggle for identity, which is why so little of it is imparted to you; and why he doesn't talk, he's a figurehead rather than a person. Everyone else talks...that's the point.

It'd be like saying "I didn't like Psychonauts because of all the oblique references to meat."

I completely disagree with your interpretation of the plot, and find the outline you describe to still be mediocre storytelling. I also doubt I can persuade you, so it is an irreconcilable and inconclusive difference of opinion, I believe.
Also, having never played Psychonauts, I don't understand that comparison.

Edit: Stafe Mcgee, you posted during my own writing.

Surely the innovations it makes combined with the top quality black humour and stunning finale mean it deserves more than that?

That begs the question. Is it innovation, or unfulfilled potential? Is the humor top quality, or worth no more than an occasional chuckle? Was the finale stunning, or standard? The quality of the game cannot be asserted by factors which rely on its quality. I believe the later on all three of my questions. Are bad puzzles, accompanied only by quirky monologues and shallow linearity worth more than a 6/10. I think not. Remember, a primary problem was the sheer difficulty (or lack thereof) of the puzzles. This is why I included the end note. I apologize for the preluding fallacy lecture, and am glad you fancied the game despite its mediocrity. Thank you for the level-headed input.

(Contrary to apparent belief, I did enjoy the entire Orange Box)

 

[Joeshie]

The Gravity Gun at the end of the game could have been easily replaced by an Energy-Sphere launcher. That is its primary use.

Completely and utterly irrelevant. Still doesn't change the fact that the Gravity Gun is needed.

 

[Namewithheld]

Your second sentence is fallacious. As for the Gravity Gun, it was not an essential, or even significant part of the game. Amusing, innovative, but not exceedingly integral or useful. As you are unwilling to support your baseless claims, I needn't further elaborate mine (though if any arbitrary reader is curious, it's not a problem).

I wonder how well you would fare to getting through the antlion levels, where you have to construct a pathway across deadly deadly sand.

Which was my *favorite* part of the game because of the way it evoked tremors.

But I have to say, that you managed to review HL2 as a substandard without sounding like a complete dingbat. It's quite an accomplishment. I disagree with almost every single one of your points, but that's not really the point of a review. A review isn't about pandering to what other people think: It's about telling your opinion in a clear and concise manner...

Which you do. So I give your review a 9/10.

 

[Burld]

Pertaining to segments which require the Gravity Gun, this necessity is not transcendent, it is expected. The developers created a tool, naturally they would shape the game for its use. The failing is that such instances are infrequent, insipid, and could be slightly altered to not even require the gun. Some don't. A significant tool would go far beyond the obligatory uses, the Gravity Gun only does so by means described in previous posts. Hence, worth a mention, not essential.

But can you suggest how they can improve upon this and make the gravity gun a 'significant tool' in the game? I certainly noticed many uses for the Gun besides those which are obligatory (examples of these have been mentioned previously). I think the reason why the gravity gun and physics engine is to some extent revolutionary is that before it, first person shooters involved very little manipulation of the game environment. The levels were static playing fields with perhaps a few set instances where it was necessary to move a box in order to reach a certain point or something similar. Half-Life 2 allowed the player to move any object in the environment- an environment that was much more populated with objects that had physical properties and could be manipulated- for his or her own use. Before HL2 it was not possible, for example, to create cover by pulling an object towards the player and holding it in front of him.
If Half-Life 2 did not have the gravity gun, this would not be possible; and while it would be, in my opinion, a high-quality experience without it, with its addition the game is greatly improved.

 

[GoddamnitReddas]

It'd be like saying "I didn't like Psychonauts because of all the oblique references to meat."

Also, having never played Psychonauts, I don't understand that comparison.

I do. It's funny. Ah, that was a lot of meat, wasn't it? Good times.

Anyway, like many others, while I disagree with your review, I must commend you on how you present it. It's a lot better than that one review on GameFAQs that has the author rambling on about how the 'Orange Box was not orange, it was green' several times. To tell you the truth, this one and that one have been the only largely-negative reviews I've seen.
However, I'm glad you enjoyed it anyway.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Pertaining to segments which require the Gravity Gun, this necessity is not transcendent, it is expected.

If you actually talk like that in real life, I'd lay off the thesaurabix. For a start it doesn't make sense.
(Yes I do understand the basic word-use but "In sections that use the Gravity Gun, this needed item is not parallel to the game, but is expected." is still missing the basic point, you can also use it outside of the game parameters : For instance grabbing spare clips off of enemy soldiers, launching rotor-hats into walls, deflecting headcrabs)

Also, "I disagree but we will never agree", is just short of downright snobbery. The usual thing is to try and convince me of your point, rather than denigrate mine.

 

[Hanji]

Completely and utterly irrelevant. Still doesn't change the fact that the Gravity Gun is needed.

My point is that the Gravity Gun is only needed for the completion of the game. That does not guarantee its significance to the quality of the game.

I wonder how well you would fare to getting through the antlion levels, where you have to construct a pathway across deadly deadly sand.

You can just run. Admittedly, that's rather dangerous, but most of the islands (and caches) can be reached without the gun.

But can you suggest how they can improve upon this and make the gravity gun a 'significant tool' in the game?

Something more ambiguous and universal than the occasional 'move this here and jump on it' activities. Something less superficial than improvised projectiles. None of that is bad, but it's nothing special.

If you actually talk like that in real life, I'd lay off the thesaurabix. For a start it doesn't make sense.

I don't know the intricacies of your denotative substitution, but it uses the incorrect, or at least unintended definitions of the words I used. It seems you were including the Geometrical variations of my verbiage.

Also, "I disagree but we will never agree", is just short of downright snobbery. The usual thing is to try and convince me of your point, rather than denigrate mine.

The reason I don't believe I can persuade you (or vice-versa), is that the issue is baseless. Personally, I didn't feel any struggle for identity. Gordon and everyone else seemed perfectly defined. There was no apparent need to send the player on lengthy and indirect routes while the bulk of the story happened in their absence. However, I already wrote all of this and you still had your dissenting opinion of the story. I have nothing new to add and don't feel particularly rebuked. I didn't mean any snobbery by it, this, or anything else.

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

Something more ambiguous and universal than the occasional 'move this here and jump on it' activities. Something less superficial than improvised projectiles. None of that is bad, but it's nothing special.

To be fair, when Half-Life 2 was released the gravity gun was something special. No game had ever implemented anything like it before and it was (at the time) a revolution in gaming weaponry. There really wasn't anything like it in the past. Bioshock's pinched it somewhat for it's telekinesis ability but it's still one of the most original and entertaining pieces of kit games have ever had.

Anyway, can I just ask whether you took price and age into consideration? The Orange Box cost about £40 when it was released over here (depending where you bought it from), meaning that each game only costs £8. Half-life 2's also 3 years old now, so did you take these factors into consideration?

 

[PurpleRain]

If you actually talk like that in real life, I'd lay off the thesaurabix. For a start it doesn't make sense.

I don't know the intricacies of your denotative substitution, but it uses the incorrect, or at least unintended definitions of the words I used. It seems you were including the Geometrical variations of my verbiage.

I hope to god you're joking when you wrote that sentence.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

I'll be honest, I didn't really enjoy your review. I think that your writing is unnecessarily verbose and sometimes I find your choice of words confusing. 'Inane' graphics? 'Precise' voice acting?

Obviously you're entitled to your opinion and I don't want to tell you that you're wrong, but I think that many of your criticisms are based on flawed perceptions. Like you, I thought that HL2 had no story at first, but after I went back to it I realised that the story is there, but what is absent is masses of exposition.

Similarly, Portal and Heavenly Sword do not share the same flaw. If nothing else, Portal is only a tenner. No, Portal isn't very long, and it isn't very hard, but you can't deny that the concept is innovative and that GLaDOS' dialogue is very funny.

Valve have a different philosophy than most game developers, it takes a little getting used to, but I wish more companies would take note of what they are doing.

I also thought that the boat section in HL2 was a lot of fun.

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

I also thought that the boat section in HL2 was a lot of fun.

As did I. One of the only really good vehicle sections I've played in an fps.

 

[Hanji]

Anyway, can I just ask whether you took price and age into consideration? The Orange Box cost about £40 when it was released over here (depending where you bought it from), meaning that each game only costs £8. Half-life 2's also 3 years old now, so did you take these factors into consideration?

I would not involve price in a review unless specifically referencing whether or not to purchase a product, which I am unlikely to do unless in the event of relatively short games. Age involves a complicated judgment with multiple factors.

I'll be honest, I didn't really enjoy your review. I think that your writing is unnecessarily verbose and sometimes I find your choice of words confusing. 'Inane' graphics? 'Precise' voice acting?

Fair enough. I hear the first discrepancy often, and have my reasons for essentially disregarding it. I attempt to keep my writing as contextually precise as possible, in lieu of the vocabulary, but I'll review my exact choice of words more carefully in the future.

...you can't deny that the concept is innovative and that GLaDOS' dialogue is very funny.

I am not denying that the concept is innovative, but games are not concepts, they are execution. GLaDOS's dialogue is not very funny. Most charitably, humor is subjective and I do not use Portal's attempts at it to augment or detriment game quality.

PS. I also liked the boat section.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

If you actually talk like that in real life, I'd lay off the thesaurabix. For a start it doesn't make sense.

I don't know the intricacies of your denotative substitution, but it uses the incorrect, or at least unintended definitions of the words I used. It seems you were including the Geometrical variations of my verbiage.

I hope to god you're joking when you wrote that sentence.

So do I. The primary thing any journalist will tell you is to talk at a level that your audience can understand.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Fair enough. I hear the first discrepancy often, and have my reasons for essentially disregarding it. I attempt to keep my writing as contextually precise as possible, in lieu of the vocabulary, but I'll review my exact choice of words more carefully in the future.

I am not denying that the concept is innovative, but games are not concepts, they are execution. GLaDOS's dialogue is not very funny. Most charitably, humor is subjective and I do not use Portal's attempts at it to augment or detriment game quality.

Look, no offence but you're doing it again. It's not just that you use a long word when a short word will do, half the words you use are either the wrong ones, or used incorrectly. I'm not trying to be vindictive or dissuade you from writing, it's just at the moment it's hard to take you seriously because it looks like you've gone a bit crazy with the thesaurus with only a rudimentary idea of what you're actually saying.

I'm also amazed that you didn't find GLaDOS funny, although if that is the case, then your review of Portal makes a lot more sense. I suppose that slightly sinister black humour isn't to everyone's taste.

 

[Burld]

I hope to god you're joking when you wrote that sentence.

Seconded. 'Verbiage' often means writing or speech that includes many unnecessary words. It only ever applies to words as a collection, so 'verbiage' can never have a definition. Words have definitions.
More to the point, I think you're being a bit too dismissive of the mechanics of the Gravity Gun; but if you don't think that it is as fun or useful a tool as I think it is, then I suppose there's not much that can persuade you.

 

[Anarchemitis]

I basically love anything that makes good use of the Source engine, only complaint being that Sound travels at roughly 300m/s, not 300,000km/s. (Speed of sound, not speed of light)

I'm sure someone that could would make a sound-delay mod to fix that though.