except it feels incredibly contrived because if Gordon Freeman was a real dude, in the first few minutes of the story he'd be like "Whoooooah, hold up. Someone explain to me what the FUCK is going on here" but we the player are not able to ask questions in the game.
gordon freeman has been kept in suspended animation by the g-man for the entire time between hl1 and hl2 - it's not really that difficult to interpret. people constantly say how he doesn't look any different
This thread did a good job of reminding me how amazing this game is. Thank you for making this thread, moonmang.
I'm fine with people not liking it; I dislike some pretty popular games, too. With HL2 I find myself completely immersed and driven. When I solve puzzles I feel like I'm a genius and nobody else could have done what I did because the solution was so ridiculous, when really it's the only way.
There's nothing in the game that makes me want to play more. A lot of it just comes off as cheesy. I really think the puzzle elements seem tacked on in order to make it more challenging. For a game predicated around being immersive that is an incredibly bad thing. I can appreciate what the engine did for the genre at the time. That is nothing to scoff at and I agree there. The physics and lighting were new and exciting. Someone earlier in the thread said that it was a new thing to have so many mods for a FPS. That is patently wrong because Quake existed long before that and was full of all kinds of mods. Not that such a thing makes the game any better or worse.
here's the part where you tell us what games you think pull off "puzzle immersion" better than the game in question or is that irrelevant? i'm not sure
wait, so putting puzzles in a game to make a game more challenging is a bad thing? in fact, an incredibly bad thing?
this game has maybe the funniest and most adorable side character in videogame history. Dog. How can you not like Dog? But actually, I once had pretty much the same opinion about HL2 like moonmang and then I actually played it
Normally I'd agree with you, but Half Life 2 does not work well on consoles at all. And Half Life 2 didn't do anything with modding that Half Life didn't already do, surely. I remember more good mods for HL than for 2.
there isn't a single instance in HL 1 or HL 2 where Gordon's face is shown. He only appears on the boxart.
we're on the brink of not knowing when we talk about real people or some shitty model with a retarded AI.
I played through Orange Box on Playstation 3 which is unanimously considered the worst rendition and I thoroughly enjoyed it despite the clunky driving controls and the long loading times. Otherwise it was fine, shut up.
i've played i through on both ps3 and pc, and for some reason the console version really is a different experience. it's slower in some parts, so it fucks with the pacing and makes certain sections (ie the water raft bit) drag a lot.
You're right, because it's more than graphics. I'll get a lot of shit for this, but fuck it....most people talk only about what games look on consoles vs pc, but i can tell you that console versions have dumbed down AI, skeleton riggs on models have to be simplified, physics are nearly non existent on current consoles, and all the cloth, liquid simulations have to be really simplified or faked for most cases. If you have one or two enemies on screen, those are smarter then when the processor has to handle 6-7 or more. From a memory standpoint you have to reduce frames in animation, you can't have complex behavior so most characters have basic reactions, but not idle or detailed animations.
Take it to the PC vs Console thread if you want to pursue this argument guys, as I can see it quickly steering the thread away from the real issue of outing Half Life 2 as being not in fact the best game ev4r.
Um, the console vs. PC for this game is 100% completely relevant. Everything that Tepes said is accurate. No one is hating on consoles or PC. Calm down.
Don't take it to any thread. Consoles > PC and elitists can go suck a nut. I don't want to have to sit 2 feet from a screen for hours while I game on a machine meant for typing.
And of course, the three posts after mine contribute nothing to the thread. Well played guys. I wasn't talking about Tepes' post as it was relevant, but I don't see how comparing two versions of the same games proves it's not overated, it just starts setting Half Life 2 fans against each other. To add something to this discussion, the emotional content of Half Life 2 feels forced and falls flat. I feel no attachment to any of the people and have zero motivation for wanting to help anyone apart from to experience the gameplay. The feel of the levels is usually really good, top quality atmosphere and level design for the most part but certain environments get stale. I get that the interiors of houses are meant to be bleak and bland and oppressive but that also makes them somewhat boring to play through. What I wouldn't give for a few signs of life, some beauty hidden amongst the grey would give a reminder of the people whose lives I am apparently fighting to free.
I was just stating some info related to what Talon said. I would love to get the next generation of consoles asap because that would make every game developers life a bit easier. I wasn't trying to start a flame, and if it sounded like that, it wasn't my intention. It was just an explanation on why a game felt different in more ways that graphics wise on different platforms.
The PS3 and Xbox are different beasts under the hood. It's not clear cut about PC vs Consoles, as it's more about what different platforms can do. Some handle physics better, some handle large textures, etc, depending on how many cores the video processors have, how fast is the memory and so on.
I am getting round to them, my original plan was to wait until all three had been released Seriously though, it wouldn't change the fact that Half Life 2 as a stand alone product falls flat on a few things, though obviously people say those have been addressed in Eps 1 and 2
