Does Half Life 2 Hold up?

Recommended Videos

Ragsnstitches

New member
Dec 2, 2009
1,871
0
0
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.
 

DoPo

"You're not cleared for that."
Jan 30, 2012
8,665
0
0
MarsProbe 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.
I so love that reasoning! :D 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."
 

Vapus

New member
May 15, 2010
94
0
0
while it may not hold up graphically, The mechanics, gameplay and story are infinately better than say , Aliens colonial marines :D
 

ScrabbitRabbit

Elite Member
Mar 27, 2012
1,545
0
41
Gender
Female
Dense_Electric said:
I never bought into the, "well it was great for it's time!" argument. I'm sure it was, but it misses the point.
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.

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.
Ragsnstitches said:
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.
 

Pyromaniacal

New member
Oct 29, 2012
32
0
0
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
 

MarsProbe

Circuitboard Seahorse
Dec 13, 2008
2,372
0
0
DoPo said:
MarsProbe 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.
I so love that reasoning! :D 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."
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 entirely :).
 

Meatspinner

New member
Feb 4, 2011
435
0
0
Dense_Electric said:
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.
And renascence painters shouldn't be considered great since we have Wacom cintiqs and HD printers...

Dense_Electric said:
Xanadu84 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.
False appeal to popularity. The majority of the population approved of slavery at one point in history, so therefor, slavery was justified.
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 tastes
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,518
5,330
118
Yes it holds up, and it will always hold up. Valve games, Half-Life 2 in particular, have a very unique feel to them that no other game has been able to emulate. So even when the pixels become apparent and the controls become choppy, it will still retain its captivating identity.

It's already been said, but HL2 is one of those rare FPS' that paces itself. And brilliantly so. The gameplay is engaging even when it doesn't envolve shooting something. It's able to flesh out its world without the use of cutscenes or even a vocal protagonist. And gives you a terrific sense of place that makes you become aware of the dire situation this world is in.

And the sound design is still among the best in the business.
 

TheBestPieEver

New member
Dec 13, 2011
128
0
0
Ragsnstitches said:
HL2, for its time, did pacing wonderfully.
Well I can see that. I started with no guns and nothing to do but listen to a charismatic dictator. Then I did some platforming and then I was on the run from authorities. Then I got a suit and a crowbar but I was still in no position to fight so I was still on the run but now more equipped for it. After that I got a gun but kept running because it was just one simple gun. Later I got some power ups and started to be able to stand some ground on the authorities, all the while still escaping but now in a more grandiose way. Following that I got to a sewer level where monsters where introduced and a helicopter started chasing me. I got an SMG and subsequently got to man a Mounted gun. So yeah, I can see that even on a smaller scale the pacing it's fairly well done.
 

Dense_Electric

New member
Jul 29, 2009
615
0
0
Meatspinner said:
Dense_Electric said:
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.
And renascence painters shouldn't be considered great since we have Wacom cintiqs and HD printers...
Except a lot of Renaissance artwork *does* hold up to modern digital paintings. The difference between them is negligible. But if you're going to tell that there's essentially no difference between Doom and Far Cry 3, I'm going to have to ask you to step outside.
Dense_Electric said:
Xanadu84 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.
False appeal to popularity. The majority of the population approved of slavery at one point in history, so therefor, slavery was justified.
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 tastes


No. That is not what a strawman fallacy is. A strawman fallacy is when the person arguing deliberately misrepresents or omits key parts of their opponent's argument - NOT when the person arguing merely changes the premise for the sake of analogy. People in general need to learn the difference if they're going to use that term.

As for the rest of what you say, the same can be said of slavery. Though I'm sure everyone here would agree that slavery is wrong, "wrong" is still a subjective value, and therefor the idea that slavery is wrong is subjective. Saying that a lot of people like or approve of something is not, in any way, shape, or form, a sound argument for the quality or value of that thing. Not even as a supplementary argument. A lot of people like Jersey Shore, but I'm guessing most people here will tell you it's the most horrible thing every created.
 

Waffle_Man

New member
Oct 14, 2010
391
0
0
A lot of people seem to be yammering about "it was good for it's time." Really though, plenty people thought that the opening level was weak and that water boat section was shit even when it was first released. It will get better though. I normally hate the "it'll get better" school of thought, so feel free to quit. However, there is a reason people praised it as much as they did when it came out.
 

Meatspinner

New member
Feb 4, 2011
435
0
0
Dense_Electric said:
No. That is not what a strawman fallacy is. A strawman fallacy is when the person arguing deliberately misrepresents or omits key parts of their opponent's argument - NOT when the person arguing merely changes the premise for the sake of analogy. People in general need to learn the difference if they're going to use that term.

As for the rest of what you say, the same can be said of slavery. Though I'm sure everyone here would agree that slavery is wrong, "wrong" is still a subjective value, and therefor the idea that slavery is wrong is subjective. Saying that a lot of people like or approve of something is not, in any way, shape, or form, a sound argument for the quality or value of that thing. Not even as a supplementary argument. A lot of people like Jersey Shore, but I'm guessing most people here will tell you it's the most horrible thing every created.
Wasn't really addressing your Godwin -esque anology. Just saying Xanadu point is completely valid.

Also...

 

dagens24

New member
Mar 20, 2004
879
0
0
I got Half-Life 2 when it was first released and it's probably my most played through game; the pacing is just so perfect that one section flows so perfectly into the next without any slog that I'll boot up a single section with the intent of playing for 15 min and the next thing I know I'm half way through the game. It really does hold up quite well.
 

Poetic Nova

Pulvis Et Umbra Sumus
Jan 24, 2012
1,974
0
0
Played it a couple of times since 2008, didn't age well tbh. And alot of unnescecary glitches and unfinished models.
 

bafrali

New member
Mar 6, 2012
825
0
0
0takuMetalhead said:
Played it a couple of times since 2008, didn't age well tbh. And alot of unnescecary glitches and unfinished models.
unneccesary glitches? Did you happen to find any that is neccessary?

BTW what unfinished models you speak of? If you mean the kind you can only see with noclipping then


 

bullet_sandw1ch

New member
Jun 3, 2011
536
0
0
Ronack said:
Half-Life 2 is the reason why the word overrated was invented.
you know when people make comments like that, they usually give reasons for it so they dont look like an asshat.
 

Doom972

New member
Dec 25, 2008
2,312
0
0
Wait until after you play through the Ravenholm chapter before passing judgement on the game.
 

Poetic Nova

Pulvis Et Umbra Sumus
Jan 24, 2012
1,974
0
0
bafrali said:
0takuMetalhead said:
Played it a couple of times since 2008, didn't age well tbh. And alot of unnescecary glitches and unfinished models.
unneccesary glitches? Did you happen to find any that is neccessary?

BTW what unfinished models you speak of? If you mean the kind you can only see with noclipping then

Viewmodels (guns etc) have missing faces: Pistol doesn't expend it's ammo, Revolver is missing a big part on the right side, smg's clip is never trown out, Pulse rifle can be looked trhough when turning fast enough and Gordon holds it with 1 arm, Crossbow misses a disc and trigger, RL has a completely diffirent world model. Path finding for Alex can be borked sometimes, enemies don't shoot you when you hold something while watching in their direction. Few scripting error's, just to name the stuff that bothers me most.

Overall: Groundbreaking? Yes in 2004, outdated now.

edit: the irony is that the beta doesn't has most of these issues...