Can someone explain half-life to me?

[Crash486]

Half-Life gets its praise from us gamers who played it when it first was released. At that time the only other FPS game you could really compare it to was Doom and Wolfenstein. It was the first FPS to feel like something more than just running around killing everything you saw until you reached the end. It also had graphics above and beyond anything else at its release, it had a story.

ok, i think that right there might have convinced me i didnt consider the time period it came out at, it probably wouldve made much more impact on me if i played it back then, most likely explains why i thought goldeneye was so awesome back then, and now think it sucks...

It seems like character development, story and level design bear little meaning in your realm of standards, at least IMO.

What game do you find beats half-life 2? What's your favorite FPS?

Level designs were fine, but the story, whilst still good, wasnt "incredible", also, im not going to say my favorite fps, because even i know they have flaws, and ill get shot down hard... lol

Indeed you are suffering from period gaming woes. Keep in mind that most FPS these days are loosely based on the halflife model, that's why it seems generic. It's basically the mother of the modern FPS.

Halflife 2 brought about the addition of really the first realistic physics engine in a game. Hence why a good deal of the gameplay revolves around physics puzzels. The source engine was really the first FPS engine to introduce these sorts of physics into the game. Wood splinters like wood, it floats, hollow barrels float, heavy objetcs sink mattresses are floppy, just about every entity in the game has it's own distinct weight, density, and rigidity. It doesn't really seem like a big deal now, but before hl2 this was unheard of in games really.

Before halflife 2 there were 2 types of objecs, breakable objects and non-breakable objects, and really nothing in between. Also the graphical upgrade of the source engine was breathtaking, particularly in the character models. Characters actually had "facial muscles" which allowed them to express different emotions. Before this, character heads tended to just be lumpy squares with eyes painted on them.

The AI upgrade was pretty amazing too, enemies would actually try to flank you and try to get strategic ground on you. Prior to this the best enemy ai really did was hide behind cover.

Also, the game itself is just great. Even by today's standards, the puzzels are engaging, the story is good, the weapons are interesting, hell I'm yet to see a walker in a game that's impressed me as much as the Stryder, though some of the giant tanks in Resistance 2 come close.

 

[egwidalin]

See, what makes the Half-Life series so successful is the search button and the countless threads about this very, exact, SAME topic. Why don't you get interested in that.

Though if you really, really don't have the time/patience to do that, let me do a quick TL;DR version:
Have you played them when they were released? No? That's why they suck to you. Because everything you see when playing them is so standard now. But back then see, we didn't have all that many great and fun games like today. So in the end, all this could've been avoided with the aid of the search button. Or probably a time machine. Which you'd probably use to go back in time to make the exact same thread.

uhm, ok? this is my first time ever posting, thanks for giving the warm welcome? And so what if it is a repeat topic? I really dont think i ruined anyones day by doing so, god forbid u read the same thing twice, it was an honest question.

Is it me or is hating Half-Life starting to become the new hating Halo?

No offense, but I'm guessing you're relatively new to gaming, or at least the shoter genre. If you were raised on balls-to-the-wall action games like Halo or Gears of War, (nothing against them though, I enjoy them) I can understand how Half-Life's pacing and less complicated shooting mechanics could put you off. Instead of a cover system, corny dialogue, and epic cut scenes there are puzzles, scripted sequences, and story bits.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with today's high-action, nonstop shooters, I'm just saying they've changed the expectations of newer gamers.

Dont get me wrong, i am not saying this game was bad in any way, just wasnt as amazing as hype led me to believe, also is hating halo just the cool thing to do? lol, it isnt THAT bad, i really could never hate a game like that. (except for superman 64...ugh), and no, actually i play shooters more than anything else, and have been for a long time, the problem is that it seems like its all been done before

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Not saying that Half-Life isn't good. Just saying that it's not the "first to do (X)" where (X) is whatever innovative idea mentioned.

No, that'd be HALO. Allegedly. Did you know they invented enemies to shoot?

 

[Crash486]

Dont get me wrong, i am not saying this game was bad in any way, just wasnt as amazing as hype led me to believe, also is hating halo just the cool thing to do? lol, it isnt THAT bad, i really could never hate a game like that. (except for superman 64...ugh), and no, actually i play shooters more than anything else, and have been for a long time, the problem is that it seems like its all been done before

Obviously you haven't been playing shooters for too long bud... or you wouldn't have asked this question. Half-life revolutionized the genre not once but twice. It's hype is well deserved.

 

[sgtshock]

Dont get me wrong, i am not saying this game was bad in any way, just wasnt as amazing as hype led me to believe, also is hating halo just the cool thing to do? lol, it isnt THAT bad, i really could never hate a game like that. (except for superman 64...ugh), and no, actually i play shooters more than anything else, and have been for a long time, the problem is that it seems like its all been done before

Well, there goes my theory then Keep in mind, like others have said, that a lot of the hype was from the game's release 5 or so years ago, so your expectations may need to be adjusted. But it may just not be your cup of tea.

And yeah, hating Halo seems to be the "in" thing around here, and your thread isn't the first one asking about Half-Life.

Oh, and welcome to the Escapist.

 

[egwidalin]

Obviously you haven't been playing shooters for too long bud... or you wouldn't have asked this question. Half-life revolutionized the genre not once but twice. It's hype is well deserved.

well, i didnt even have a computer back then, i started with console shooters on the n64, so i wasnt around for the revolution =P

 

[Valiance]

Not saying that Half-Life isn't good. Just saying that it's not the "first to do (X)" where (X) is whatever innovative idea mentioned.

No, that'd be HALO. Allegedly. Did you know they invented enemies to shoot?

Dude.
Dude.

xDDD

 

[Crash486]

Half-Life gets its praise from us gamers who played it when it first was released. At that time the only other FPS game you could really compare it to was Doom and Wolfenstein.

Half Life was released on November 19, 1998.

Unreal was released on May 22, 1998.

Suffice to say that I disagree with you.

while this is true, Unreal was also a buggy peice of crap. It had some really pretty textures, especially for its time, but it didn't have the immersion, plot development, or really individuality half-life had.

Unreal played basically like Doom only in a real 3d world. You had to find keys to open doors to advance to new rooms etc. Every once in awhile you'd run into a friendly multiarmed alien, but they would usually get mutalated soon after.

 

[Kstreitenfeld]

You're completely correct.

They're not that great at all, don't believe the hype. Its just standard FPS in the same vein as Halo.

I've yet to see any FPS ever with the story, depth and character development of Half-Life. It's just not about shooting things you know.

 

[Imat]

what people are saying is that the time it was released it was an awesome game it started the bland generic games that we know and love. But by todays standards it isnt that great so if you(me) are new to gaming it doesnt seem that great but it was and people dont let go

People don't let go? Just because every other game is the same as Half Life nowadays doesn't mean we have to stop liking it. That's like saying that you shouldn't like Coke at all because Pepsi is around (Or vise versa). It's not a bad thing to like an original game, and just because newer games are in the same vein doesn't mean it's unoriginal: It's actually the ONLY original one of that vein.

And to the original question: Why do people like Halo? It's less original and yet probably sees more praise. The storyline was interesting, but I never really got into it (The yearlong break probably had something to do with that). And HL2 is more than just a clone with better graphics (Seriously, how many times can they get away with that?). So why like Halo? The same arguments hold for both questions.

 

[Zephirius]

Effective half-life denotes the halving of radioactive material in a living organism by means of radioactive decay and biological excretion. A decay constant is needed to calculate the half-life. It is the sum of the biological and physical decay constants, as in the formula:

With the decay constant it is possible to calculate the effective half-life using the formula:

The biological decay constant is often approximated as it is more difficult to accurately determine than the physical decay constant.

I was going to be a smart ass and explain this as well, but decided against it lol.

The irony in that is it makes you look like a dumbass for obviously not reading the OP.

 

[Iron Mal]

Is it me or is hating Half-Life starting to become the new hating Halo?

No offense, but I'm guessing you're relatively new to gaming, or at least the shoter genre. If you were raised on balls-to-the-wall action games like Halo or Gears of War, (nothing against them though, I enjoy them) I can understand how Half-Life's pacing and less complicated shooting mechanics could put you off. Instead of a cover system, corny dialogue, and epic cut scenes there are puzzles, scripted sequences, and story bits.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with today's high-action, nonstop shooters, I'm just saying they've changed the expectations of newer gamers.

One thing that I notice is that most of the time Half Life fans paint a rose tainted image of this game that actually makes me dislike it more than I normally would it if literally was a reletive unkown (I think a lot of the hatred for Half Life comes from the fact that so many people label it is their 'best game evarr' when it really isn't that good).

The biggest point of smug superiority that's waved about is the 'storyline and dialogue', allow me to burst your bubble here by saying that the plot isn't that great and let's not kid ourselves, the delivery is absolutely terrible. Forcing me to sit about and wait for every NPC to complete their own personal monologue is great for the arty gamers who want to feel like they're part of something special and epic but I personally prefer the mainstream options of cutscenes and objective screens (at least the former is skippable and you can refer to the latter when you need to), during most of the dialogue sections I often found myself not paying much attention to what was being said and muttering 'okay, ou want me to go somewhere now open the damn door'.

I like a game with story and character but I would personally look for a survival horror or RPG if I'm in the mood for narrative, not a shooter (Valve are trying to have their cake and eat it by mixing slow paced drama and fast paced action into the same game, it just comes across as jerky and inconsistant).

The puzzles are nothing to really get excited about (I remember doing the see-saw puzzle on at least two occasions, and most of the other puzzles I remember were other physics based road blocks that served little purpose besides making me come to a sudden stop, jump through a couple of hoops and continue at maxium speed again with little in the way of purpose or justifacation) and often felt tacked on to avoid being labeled as 'another mindless shooter'.

Another point, the characters. Gordon Freeman is essentially the Doom Marine with glasses and a thing for orange while every other NPC who tried to come across as lovable and likeable made me instantly feel uneasy and cynical. I may be alone in thinking this but all the 'charm' and 'kindess' they crammed into Alyx in particular made her feel extremely forced and clich'e (I felt like I was being forced to like her, like when your parents force you to invite the geeky kid from school to your birthday party because 'he's a nice boy if you get to know him').

In most FPS/shooter games I often prefer to not have an NPC of any description following me around unless they are a) someone whom I actual have a fondness or appreciation of (has only happened on rare occasions) or b) they actually prove to be useful (either they fufil a useful purpose like healing me or they dispense ammo/help immensely in combat) so Alyx's addition felt...pointless (okay, she has a pistol with infinate ammo in episode one but I'm still left bitter about that part because I had no choice but to fight with a gravity gun for most of the proceedings).

 

[Broken Orange]

Ok, theres a 100% chance i will get yelled at here, but its worth a shot. It isnt too hard to notice here that the forums on this entire website are huge half life fans, I seriously want to know why? I have played both half life 1 and 2 (not newer episodes) and to me, they were both very generic games, a basic fps in my eyes with no extreme redeeming qualities. I didnt notice 1 thing that felt revolutionary about this game, it was bland. The same goes for portal. Dont get me wrong, the game was extremely fun for what it was worth, and i enjoyed it fully. But it was extremely short, extremely easy, and had a a boring atmosphere. However, here, both are worshipped as greatest games ever, I definately am missing something.

So in general, im asking the escapist, what makes both of these games so special? Keep in mind, Im not saying either game is bad, just think they are overrated here. (dont wanna start any fights on my first post XD)

Some people like it and some don't, that is the same story with every single game out there. Half life 2 (the only one i have played) for me just had a cool story, for a main character that dosn't talk, the pacing is nothing like i have played before. and the game play is AWESOME, if you ask me that is. even though the two episodes are for the most part the same as half life 2, they is good for me because the more half life, the better. That is my two cents worth.

 

[Kstreitenfeld]

The irony in that is it makes you look like a dumbass for obviously not reading the OP.

Sigh...

I'm pretty sure they knew what the OP was asking about.

 

[Name Not Found]

Half-Life gets its praise from us gamers who played it when it first was released. At that time the only other FPS game you could really compare it to was Doom and Wolfenstein. It was the first FPS to feel like something more than just running around killing everything you saw until you reached the end. It also had graphics above and beyond anything else at its release, it had a story.

ok, i think that right there might have convinced me i didnt consider the time period it came out at, it probably wouldve made much more impact on me if i played it back then, most likely explains why i thought goldeneye was so awesome back then, and now think it sucks...

It seems like character development, story and level design bear little meaning in your realm of standards, at least IMO.

What game do you find beats half-life 2? What's your favorite FPS?

Level designs were fine, but the story, whilst still good, wasnt "incredible", also, im not going to say my favorite fps, because even i know they have flaws, and ill get shot down hard... lol

So you willing to rag on other people's favorite games and point out their flaws, but are unwilling to put your favorite game under the same scrutiny? Me thinks you're being a bit hypocritical

 

[egwidalin]

So you willing to rag on other people's favorite games and point out their flaws, but are unwilling to put your favorite game under the same scrutiny? Me thinks you're being a bit hypocritical

in about all of my posts ive attempted to give an assurance that im not insulting the game or calling it bad, it was still good, just overrated i thought, and i figured if i said anything i liked, itd start a retarded flame war, dont want that...

 

[Imat]

(I felt like I was being forced to like her, like when your parents force you to invite the geeky kid from school to your birthday party because 'he's a nice boy if you get to know him').

I don't mean to shock you with this one, but that would be you...

 

[Iron Mal]

(I felt like I was being forced to like her, like when your parents force you to invite the geeky kid from school to your birthday party because 'he's a nice boy if you get to know him').

I don't mean to shock you with this one, but that would be you...

Ah...I see what you did there, you took my statement (that was meant for comical effect) and turned it around to insult me (when I can openly admit I have geeky tendancies).

I do find it somewhat suprising that out of all the stuff I wrote you focused in on that line and nothing else.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

Play the episodes. They are everything that made Half-Life 2 great, but newer, tighter, and improved. The storytelling in the Half-Life 2 episodes is fantastic.

 

[-Seraph-]

snip

(most of)My thoughts exactly.