Does Half Life 2 Hold up?
- Thread starter TheBestPieEver
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I didn't play the Orange Box until about 2 years ago and enjoyed it all thoroughly. I can see where you coming from with the gunplay aspect, it might not be the best but it's still damn good. As for the physics...really? I thought they were awesome, in-fact I don't think I've heard anyone say they were 'pretty shit' before.
However, each to their own.
However, each to their own.
Finished Half-Life 2 for the first time literally last week. I think it holds up pretty easily. If you don't enjoy it, perhaps it just isn't for you. I think it is one of the most substantially "thick" gameplay experiences ever. Most on-rails shooters are 6 or 7 hours at most and Half-Life 2 had very enjoyable sections that were almost half of that time on their own. Alyx Vance and Dog are fantastic characters and I think the game is wonderful. The Ravenholm sequence alone is better than 99% of games.TheBestPieEver said:
The overwhelming approval of Half Life 2 shows that it is a great game, and to say otherwise is to say that the enjoyment of most is trumped by your personal opinion. That being said, every one of us likes some terrible things and hates some good things, because sheer chance means that occasionally the good won't resonate with one of us, while the limited bad is particularly irksome. Much like how everyone probably likes a game that's generally considered bad because it happens to do something interesting that is particularly intriguing to you, and the huge amount of bad just happens to not bother you. A games quality isn't a point on a graph, its a bell curve, and there are always outlier. If it doesn't appeal to you, that is not a bad quality in you, but it DOES mean that you are an outlier. Its fine to be an outlier: There are no fines involved, and no one has any right to criticize your taste, but it might be edifying to understand with as much objectivity as possible WHY it is so appealing.
Half Life 2 Was impeccably designed, and innovative for its time. The Graphics were incredible when it was first released, and the physics were like no one had ever seen. In particular, the facial expressions were amazing, probably unmatched until LA Noir. And when released, the Physics was unbelievably robust. Sure, that stuff looks less impressive over time, but HL2 falls back on some timeless design that does stand up. It is not as over the top bombastic as other games, but it does construct its story and setting with impeccable skill, and perfect use of the medium of games.
It's difficult to explain, since its amazing design is the product of thousands of little things working together: Id recommend the developer walkthroughs (At least the episodes have them) to appreciate the thought that went into the construction. For example, take the scene that introduces Dog: in a few short minutes, we introduce a iconic character, we show a bit of Alyx's past, we deepen her relationship with her father, provide a break to improve the game pacing, show a happier side of living in City 17 that raises that stakes of the narrative, all while providing a variation to gameplay AND providing a tutorial for useing the gravity gun. The walk there foreshadows ravenholm, you start to strengthen the attachment between Gordon and Alyx without resorting to shallow sex-pandering, and manages a character interaction without breaking the immersion factor of playing a silent protagonist. The mechanics working just below the surface are vast, and if you happen to be open to the experience, you feel the effect of every design choice they make. That's why people like it. Theres many reasons why people give it so much praise. If you don't see that, well you have no shortage of other fun games to play, and my enjoyment isn't threatened by your taste, and neither of us have any reason to be upset at each other.
Half Life 2 Was impeccably designed, and innovative for its time. The Graphics were incredible when it was first released, and the physics were like no one had ever seen. In particular, the facial expressions were amazing, probably unmatched until LA Noir. And when released, the Physics was unbelievably robust. Sure, that stuff looks less impressive over time, but HL2 falls back on some timeless design that does stand up. It is not as over the top bombastic as other games, but it does construct its story and setting with impeccable skill, and perfect use of the medium of games.
It's difficult to explain, since its amazing design is the product of thousands of little things working together: Id recommend the developer walkthroughs (At least the episodes have them) to appreciate the thought that went into the construction. For example, take the scene that introduces Dog: in a few short minutes, we introduce a iconic character, we show a bit of Alyx's past, we deepen her relationship with her father, provide a break to improve the game pacing, show a happier side of living in City 17 that raises that stakes of the narrative, all while providing a variation to gameplay AND providing a tutorial for useing the gravity gun. The walk there foreshadows ravenholm, you start to strengthen the attachment between Gordon and Alyx without resorting to shallow sex-pandering, and manages a character interaction without breaking the immersion factor of playing a silent protagonist. The mechanics working just below the surface are vast, and if you happen to be open to the experience, you feel the effect of every design choice they make. That's why people like it. Theres many reasons why people give it so much praise. If you don't see that, well you have no shortage of other fun games to play, and my enjoyment isn't threatened by your taste, and neither of us have any reason to be upset at each other.
I never bought into the, "well it was great for it's time!" argument. I'm sure it was, but it misses the point. I'm not playing it "in it's time" (even if I did when it was released), I'm playing it in the here and now, after playing newer and better games. And in the here and now, no, Half-Life 2 isn't that great. The only aspect of the game I can say is really exceptional is the way the story and the gameplay are one solid piece. Apart from that? The gunplay is boring as all hell, the platforming segments didn't work then, and they don't work now, the gravity gun was fun the first time around but has since lost its novelty, the story itself is fairy generic, the characters are annoying, the art style feels dead to me (especially after playing games like Mirror's Edge) - though admittedly the map design is pretty exceptional, if a bit linear. Is it a bad game? Absolutely not. What is there is polished to a mirror finish. It's just not a particularly amazing game, either. Easily the second most over-rated FPS of all time (behind Call of Duty 4, of course).
EDIT: Now, that being said, one thing it does do exceptionally well is support mods. SMOD Redux is probably my favorite mod for any game ever, and with a few easy tweaks to some weapon script files, it probably has the most realistic gunplay of any shooter ever. Gmod is also quite fun, especially when you settle down on a server for a while and get to know people.
EDIT: Now, that being said, one thing it does do exceptionally well is support mods. SMOD Redux is probably my favorite mod for any game ever, and with a few easy tweaks to some weapon script files, it probably has the most realistic gunplay of any shooter ever. Gmod is also quite fun, especially when you settle down on a server for a while and get to know people.
False appeal to popularity. The majority of the population approved of slavery at one point in history, so therefor, slavery was justified.Xanadu84 said:
Even today HL2 has tons of atmosphere, and great artistic design.Panorama said:
I also love the level design, the shooting mechanics aren't very visceral, but the way places are laid out make them a joy to fight in.
As far as I'm concerned its one of the first fps games to really take strides to try and make you feel immersed in the world. Walking around city 17 and listening to Dr. Breen. Going out into the street and looking up at the imposing Citadel, you can't even see the top of it since it is obscured by clouds. The propaganda posters. It influenced so many developers that are around making games today, to deny that is asinine. Games like Dishonored, Bioshock, and Bioshock: Infinite are evidence of this.
Also, and I'll spoiler this just in case...
Also, and I'll spoiler this just in case...
The game really made me feel like I was on a Journey. Leaving City 17 through the canals and getting to the damn after shooting down that chopper was amazing. No other game has really been able to make me feel like that since, well, Journey. I too played it 2ish years ago. If you don't like it right away give it time, it may grow on you.
"No, what I like is the best thing, everything either sucks or is mediocre at best (so...it sucks). The fact that you like something I don't is a clear sign of your inferiority. As is disliking something I do like. It is my duty to call you out on either of these points and to inform you you are wrong, so you can become better."Xanadu84 said:
Signed: the majority of people who argue back and forth in these threads.
I'm guessing there are some people out there who didn't play Half-Life 2 when it first came out and they still hear great things about it and decide to give it a shot, only to find it doesn't live up to modern "standards", which of course has nothing to do with it being released nearly 10 years and everything to do with it being a bad game, because it's the internet.corneth said:
Also yeh, this thread again. Posting lots of these won't make the technological singularity happen any sooner people, so lay off it already.
Also, the gravity gun (as someone stated) cannot be said to suck by any stretch of the imagination. Hell, that was the only weapon I ever really used in multiplayer - served me incredibly well too. A gravity gun and a filing cabinet is all you will ever need, trust me.
The only thing I can add in support to the Half Life games, that hasn't been said by others, is pacing.
Seriously, It was almost unheard of for an action orientated FPS to have pacing back then, let alone do it well, and even now most FPSs completely forget to set a good pace.
Most modern military shooters, and much of the FPS genre, have this issue of cramming as much action as possible into the game, meaning at the end of the relatively short 3-5 hour campaign you feel burnt out. There is no escalation in the conflict, there is not contrast to the action... there is no variation. They are fast and loud and incessant.
HL2, for its time, did pacing wonderfully. You game escalates from being pursued by corrupt authorities. with peaks and lulls in the action and climaxes at an impressive aerial battle, then after a brief sequence for exposition enters a horror themed environment where you are scrounging for ammunition and fending off hordes of undead husks (very memorable segment, a little short, but brilliantly done). The final moments of this section puts most attempts at zombie horde games to shame.
After this you end up on a journey across a vast stretch of road on approach to a prison facility. While the driving mechanics are awkwardly dated, the pacing of this sequence is superb. Periodic firefights at small settlements (some which can be avoided, but generally it's good to stop and resupply) and regularly being accosted by underground dwelling aliens (who are also aggressive towards other humanoid combatants leading to intense 3 way conflicts), makes the relatively long segment pass fluidly. There are a few intense "boss" fights that make the peak moments pretty memorable. The conclusion of this segment foreshadows the final segment of the game, with you and a band of rebels hold off against a Combine strike team at a lighthouse.
The next major segment of the game puts you on the attack, completely changing the flow of gameplay. Enemies aren't dropping in and harassing you as they did before. Instead you attack entrenched positions that have to adjust to your actions as you catch them unawares. This leads to the next horror themed sequence though the horror is more subdued as the scope and purpose of the alien incursion becomes apparent.
The second last segment of the game ramps of the combat to 11 as you battle your way through a city that is now undergoing an uprising. Rebels and Military combat each other, with alien monstrosities create havoc all around.
Finally the last segment dials the action back but empowers you, becoming a death dealing machine.
And this is just HL2. Episode 1 and 2 have completely different pacing structures that improve on HL2s forumla, though are significantly shorter over all. Each sequence of the game flows organically into the next, so much so you hardly notice the transition but feel the change in other ways. Lulls and peaks of the game make every sequence memorable, contrasting intense firefights with eerie exploration and tension building.
HL2 is a masterpiece when it comes to pacing, an art that truly makes a good game great, but if ignored can make any game shit or average regardless of technical achievements and ambitions. Of all the things modern shooters borrowed from HL2, pacing is the one thing not acknowledged or adapted despite it being exemplary (for games in general, not just FPSs). All the flashy gimmicks that HL2 pioneered mean nothing but that, gimmicky, without the expertly crafted sequences to showcase them.
This is why HL2 feels so good, but why people find it hard to articulate why without sounding hypocritical. Its not all the physics, which are done better now, or the narrative, which there are more interesting of now, or the characters, which were adequate vehicles for the narrative but nothing special, or fundamental gameplay, which most modern games trump handedly.
Its the cohesion... how all of these things, no matter how dated, hold together as one piece. The pacing is the adhesive that ties all these things together to form a memorable experience.
Valve are the grandmasters at this. More narrative heavy games still fail on such a simple concept, but valve nail it EVERY time... even in games with roughly no narrative like Left 4 Dead.
Seriously, It was almost unheard of for an action orientated FPS to have pacing back then, let alone do it well, and even now most FPSs completely forget to set a good pace.
Most modern military shooters, and much of the FPS genre, have this issue of cramming as much action as possible into the game, meaning at the end of the relatively short 3-5 hour campaign you feel burnt out. There is no escalation in the conflict, there is not contrast to the action... there is no variation. They are fast and loud and incessant.
HL2, for its time, did pacing wonderfully. You game escalates from being pursued by corrupt authorities. with peaks and lulls in the action and climaxes at an impressive aerial battle, then after a brief sequence for exposition enters a horror themed environment where you are scrounging for ammunition and fending off hordes of undead husks (very memorable segment, a little short, but brilliantly done). The final moments of this section puts most attempts at zombie horde games to shame.
After this you end up on a journey across a vast stretch of road on approach to a prison facility. While the driving mechanics are awkwardly dated, the pacing of this sequence is superb. Periodic firefights at small settlements (some which can be avoided, but generally it's good to stop and resupply) and regularly being accosted by underground dwelling aliens (who are also aggressive towards other humanoid combatants leading to intense 3 way conflicts), makes the relatively long segment pass fluidly. There are a few intense "boss" fights that make the peak moments pretty memorable. The conclusion of this segment foreshadows the final segment of the game, with you and a band of rebels hold off against a Combine strike team at a lighthouse.
The next major segment of the game puts you on the attack, completely changing the flow of gameplay. Enemies aren't dropping in and harassing you as they did before. Instead you attack entrenched positions that have to adjust to your actions as you catch them unawares. This leads to the next horror themed sequence though the horror is more subdued as the scope and purpose of the alien incursion becomes apparent.
The second last segment of the game ramps of the combat to 11 as you battle your way through a city that is now undergoing an uprising. Rebels and Military combat each other, with alien monstrosities create havoc all around.
Finally the last segment dials the action back but empowers you, becoming a death dealing machine.
And this is just HL2. Episode 1 and 2 have completely different pacing structures that improve on HL2s forumla, though are significantly shorter over all. Each sequence of the game flows organically into the next, so much so you hardly notice the transition but feel the change in other ways. Lulls and peaks of the game make every sequence memorable, contrasting intense firefights with eerie exploration and tension building.
HL2 is a masterpiece when it comes to pacing, an art that truly makes a good game great, but if ignored can make any game shit or average regardless of technical achievements and ambitions. Of all the things modern shooters borrowed from HL2, pacing is the one thing not acknowledged or adapted despite it being exemplary (for games in general, not just FPSs). All the flashy gimmicks that HL2 pioneered mean nothing but that, gimmicky, without the expertly crafted sequences to showcase them.
This is why HL2 feels so good, but why people find it hard to articulate why without sounding hypocritical. Its not all the physics, which are done better now, or the narrative, which there are more interesting of now, or the characters, which were adequate vehicles for the narrative but nothing special, or fundamental gameplay, which most modern games trump handedly.
Its the cohesion... how all of these things, no matter how dated, hold together as one piece. The pacing is the adhesive that ties all these things together to form a memorable experience.
Valve are the grandmasters at this. More narrative heavy games still fail on such a simple concept, but valve nail it EVERY time... even in games with roughly no narrative like Left 4 Dead.
As someone who loves HL2, I agree with this sentiment but for different reasons. I, and a few other people in this thread, played it for the first time very recently and loved it. I think nearly everyone here has plenty of experience with more recent games so, in our case, it hasn't "aged badly." Honestly, looking at the problems people have with it, they probably wouldn't have liked it at the time, either.Dense_Electric said:
The gunplay, for example, had already been surpassed years before HL2 was even released. About the only bit that's aged badly is the way it uses it's physics engine.
Indeed, the game's pacing is basically unmatched, imo. One of my main problems with modern shooters is that they just don't stop. I can't play them for more than 15 minutes without getting really, really bored/burnt out.Ragsnstitches said:
Short answer: Yes
Long Answer:Yes, but here's why
Gameplay: The gun-play in Half Life 2(in my opinion) is tight and controlled. While it's certainly not innovative the controls are tight and the guns themselves are good, but not great. While the gun-play may be a bit underwhelming when comparing it to the praise it receives, ultimately Half Life 2 is about the narrative.
Atmosphere: This area is where the game really shines. One example is in the beginning of the game, during your first tentative steps into City 17. If you walk up to a city watch member they beat you with an electrified club. That moment, for me, sends a message of how oppressive the Combine Regime is. Ravenholme, while my least favorite part of the game,has an extremely creepy and unsettling atmosphere. Constantly seeing severed bodies and hearing the screams of not so distant zombies ends chills down my spine.
Narrative: The game has an uncanny ability to tell a narrative without hours of exposition being tossed at you. You see the direct damage the Combine have done to Earth, you see how oppressive they are, but without a character directly saying so. The game's story flows seamlessly from chapter to chapter, with new information added to the story without any real feeling of the pacing being changed. The characters (especially Eli and Alyx Vance) are people you want to fight for. This is the real strong point of the game as well.
So has the game held up? Yes. I played Half Life 2 just a mere 6 months ago, and yet it's still my favorite FPS to date
Long Answer:Yes, but here's why
Gameplay: The gun-play in Half Life 2(in my opinion) is tight and controlled. While it's certainly not innovative the controls are tight and the guns themselves are good, but not great. While the gun-play may be a bit underwhelming when comparing it to the praise it receives, ultimately Half Life 2 is about the narrative.
Atmosphere: This area is where the game really shines. One example is in the beginning of the game, during your first tentative steps into City 17. If you walk up to a city watch member they beat you with an electrified club. That moment, for me, sends a message of how oppressive the Combine Regime is. Ravenholme, while my least favorite part of the game,has an extremely creepy and unsettling atmosphere. Constantly seeing severed bodies and hearing the screams of not so distant zombies ends chills down my spine.
Narrative: The game has an uncanny ability to tell a narrative without hours of exposition being tossed at you. You see the direct damage the Combine have done to Earth, you see how oppressive they are, but without a character directly saying so. The game's story flows seamlessly from chapter to chapter, with new information added to the story without any real feeling of the pacing being changed. The characters (especially Eli and Alyx Vance) are people you want to fight for. This is the real strong point of the game as well.
So has the game held up? Yes. I played Half Life 2 just a mere 6 months ago, and yet it's still my favorite FPS to date
Glad you liked it. As i posted that, I was conflicted as to whether to go for delaying the singularity or bringing it forward (these also being two of the ending choices for the next Deus Ex game - spoiler alert!) but eventually figured that the good folks here at The Escapist would look forward to the rise of intelligent machines and with our natural optimism, believe they would actually prove a benefit to humanity and not subjugate us/wipe us out entirelyDoPo said:I so love that reasoning!MarsProbe said:I shall adopt this response for future threads I disapprove of "Hurr durr don't post if you don't like it" "No, this thread is hampering the technological progress of mankind, so stop it."
.
And renascence painters shouldn't be considered great since we have Wacom cintiqs and HD printers...Dense_Electric said:
Strawman fallacy (see what i did there). Calling a piece of an entertainment "great" and reinforcing that by saying that the majority like that to, is valid argument when you are talking about something that is valued by subjective tastesDense_Electric said: