Half-Life 2 and why it isn't even half fun
 

Before christmas I played some chapters of Half-Life 2 (I've so far gotten to the ant-lions or whatever the things are called) and became utterly disappointed and very much bored. There is almost no story element at all in the game (well, there are a few bits, but they come so seldom and has so little information that they're hardly worth mentioning). The game is also completely linear, you're not allowed to deviate anything from the path you must take. There was one point where I thought there at least was a choice of path, but it turned out that one of the paths led to a dead end. The gameplay consists of almost only "shoot everything you see". Sure there is one physics puzzle thrown in now and then, but it's too simple things and too seldom to be very interesting. The only interesting thing is the gravity gun, but that too is rather underused as it's only used to find rubbish to be used as weapons. Another thing that is really odd is that the character you play is completely unable to communicate, which makes it hard to understand the conversations.

Now everything isn't bad about the game. The graphics engine is rather magnificent. But why make such a magnificent graphics engine and then make such a boring world that only has two colours, brown and grey? And the system for making facial expressions on the persons that actually do talk is also very impressive. But I find it strange that they have invented this marvel of a system and then just use it once every other gameplay hour (I doubt it's even that much).

I find this game to be a terrible waste, considering the potential of the graphics engine and other things they have. In short, it is a technical merit, but a rather poor artistic performance.

I couldn't disagree more. I don't know to which games you're comparing Half-Life 2, but I'm sure you didn't play much other First Person Shooters lately. If you feel HL2's gameplay only consists of shooting everything you see, and if you think the game is a poor artistic performance based on technical merits then I wonder how you'd describe a title like Doom 3 or FarCry. :eek:

--Erwin

Genius, IMO. The colour scheme is part of the design and to give the overall feel of a disenchanted world taken over by an oppressive regime. It's actually a colour scheme selected based on the environment, and if you play until later in the game you'll find a variety of different colours suited to what's required by each particular area.

And I speak as an actual artist. :D Yes, we exist.

Doom 3 was worse. Half-Life 1 was worse. HL2 ain't perfect, but it's pretty good in today's standards. And it isn't a great piece of technology, no. Apart from the lip synch, there's nothing new.

I personally couldn't give a rats anus about technology, you can have all the graphical aptitude in the world but if the design isn't right you're building your house on quicksand.

That's why I rate FarCry in terms of sandbox games design above HL2 and both above Doom 3 in terms of worthwhile playtime and use of their technical abilities.

That's what Doom 3 was about. Showcasing a graphics engine instead of making a game. I agree though. Tech means nothing, but to say HL2 is great in that department... uh... Nope.

The facial rigging and use of animation was very impressive though.

Although that's technical proficiency in artistic terms again.

I know what you mean though, it reminds me of an artier Max Payne 2 in terms of the engine. Did you see those see-thru shadows? Eugh!

There was a story, it just seems like some people missed it. HL2 opens with Gordon coming out of the stasis from the Gman and into a world that has changed a great deal. We do not get a back story because Gordon isn't privy to one either. However if you look around the HL2 world there are newsclippings and other bits that kind of fill in the story. Once you get past the opening Gordon's new story begins to develop. You have a decent villain, a love interest and a twist.

Is it a work of art? No.

Is it as good as a lot of other stories out there? Absolutely




"The game is also completely linear, you're not allowed to deviate anything from the path you must take. There was one point where I thought there at least was a choice of path, but it turned out that one of the paths led to a dead end. The gameplay consists of almost only "shoot everything you see". Sure there is one physics puzzle thrown in now and then, but it's too simple things and too seldom to be very interesting. The only interesting thing is the gravity gun, but that too is rather underused as it's only used to find rubbish to be used as weapons. Another thing that is really odd is that the character you play is completely unable to communicate, which makes it hard to understand the conversations."

Why is linear such a bad thing? Did Valve promise GTA HL 2? Personally I have never enjoyed the GTA style. Also, it is not that Gordon can't communicate, it is that he doesn't simply as a choice by the developer. I had no trouble understanding the conversations.


"Now everything isn't bad about the game. The graphics engine is rather magnificent. But why make such a magnificent graphics engine and then make such a boring world that only has two colours, brown and grey? And the system for making facial expressions on the persons that actually do talk is also very impressive. But I find it strange that they have invented this marvel of a system and then just use it once every other gameplay hour (I doubt it's even that much)."

Boring to you, phenomenal to me (and apparently others).

"I find this game to be a terrible waste, considering the potential of the graphics engine and other things they have. In short, it is a technical merit, but a rather poor artistic performance."

That's a shame but I think you are off-base making a universal statement such as HL2 isn't "half fun."

I loved Doom 3 and it seems to be a love it or hate it game. What I find interesting is that several people have complained that the game is a mindless shooter....and yet these same people (and I am not saying you are one of them) praised Panzer Dragoon for being a beautiful old school shooter.

Though I think Half-Life 2 is a great game, I personally enjoyed Far Cry more. I loved the freedom I got to play it my way. Half-Life 2 was like an interactive action movie. One exiting situation after another, lots of action all the way and great production values. Far Cry was more experimental and didn't do everything so well, but it did some things right that most shooters don't even dare trying.

Doom 3? Bah. Painkiller is much better.

I personally hated Far Cry, and thought that was more of a graphics tech demo than a game. The graphics were very impressive but the gameplay sucked. HL2 in terms of gameplay is definitely not shoot everything that moves. It has a lot of ambiance, and there are some sections where you have to actually run away. Plus there's driving puzzles blah blah blah. I personally enjoyed HL2 the most among all the games that I played this year :)

EDIT: Oh and what's wrong with linear gameplay if it is so well done. Everyone is bitching about how the game is linear, but if it is one hell of an experience who cares?

Good lord, adventure gamers complaining about nonlinearity in other genres. Never thought I'd see the day...

Never played it. I didn't care that Doom 3 was mindless, as I can cope with games like that. What I didn't like was that it was repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive repetitive.

;) So I take it you hate adventure games too?

Why don't you play some GTA3, GTA: Vice City, or GTA: San Andreas? Or go play Knights Of The Old Republic.

I'm not an adventure gamer. I'm a gamer.

Fine, gamers who are adventure fans, whatever. I'm clearly a "gamer" as well (I mean I write for a general gaming site); I didn't intend to imply exclusivity to the adventure genre.

So anyway, you think it's strange that people have different expectations of games in different genres? I don't. Though I would like more non-linear adventure games and more adventure games with more than one solution to problems.

Yes it's weird. Considering most adventure games don't take as much resources from your machine as FPS' do, you'd figure people would want adventure games to have multiple ways of doing stuff, not the other way around.

I think, though, that most adventure fans want their games to offer multiple solutions to problems. Pretty much everyone here (I would guess) have experienced times when they've been annoyed because their perfectly logical solution to a puzzle didn't work. But anyway, this thread is about shooters. :)

Just trying to take a point across. I want non-linearity in all genres, anyway.