Dense_Electric said:
Half-Life 2 is a solid game, but it's also *easily* the second most over-rated game in history behind Call of Duty 4. It's narrative was well-told through the gameplay, and the gravity gun was fun the first time around. Apart from that, though? The gameplay itself was boring, 90's FPS-affair that had already started to go obsolete by the time Half-Life 2 rolled around (and I'm sorry, fellow PC-gamers, but I NEVER found that kind of gameplay fun in the least), the story was pretty weak (though well-suited to a game), and the atmosphere of the game just never resonated with me in the way a lot of other games have.
I see where your coming from but Half Life 2 still did so many things right that 99% of FPS games today completely forget.
It knew how to do pacing and variety
The gameplay narrative of fleeing from the combine to eventually fighting back, punctuated with traversing areas overrun with zombies.
It had the antlions, initially having to play "the ground is lava" leaping from rock to rock and you had to fight if you stepped in the wrong place. Then they were your allies in an assault on Nova Prospect. And the surprise loss of weapons yet gravity gun being suped up.
Most games will get a round of applause if they have any brief break in the gameplay style. Half Life 2 showed how thinks could have been.
It knew how to do faces
Without them looking like they'd been hitting the botox. Why is it almost 10 years later FPS games where you are looking people so closely in the face are full of dead eyed androids wearing human skinsuits? It wasn't that there were particularly advanced graphics, they simply put the effort into the face looking human, and not like some monster from the pit of the Uncanny Valley.
And I think this is such an overlooked thing, as bad as it is for a game to have supposedly relatable NPCs who look like their faces are in the late stages of rigor-mortis is games that skip them out entirely. Games too often lack any sort of humanity, I don't mean being humane, I mean being populated by people rather than simply saying they are people.
Games can cut corners ANYWHERE else, but nothing breaks this as much as getting the human face wrong.
90's FPS games are actually really damn good
I don't know if you've played games from the 90's but they weren't afraid of having a bit of enemy variety, they weren't afraid of having a complex environment.
Check out a typical level of Doom and compare it too a level of a typical FPS today. You cannot find maps of games today as they are so simplistic it's insulting to take the time to map them.
People may knock "find door, look for and find key, unlock door" but at least that isn't as brain-dead as "keep heading forwards no matter what". You had to actually think about your environment and EXPLORE. What people's problem was not the "find way forwards, discover obstacle, search for means to overcome obstacle, then apply means and method" but that it was always "locked door, find key(card)" rather than "weak wall, find explosives, find detonator" or something like that.
Removing all thought and exploration out of the equation was not a solution.
Games like Legend of Zelda are loved because of it's more original solutions to "locked door" challenges that usually involve getting a new weapon then the weapon has to be used in a novel way to progress.
It should not be rare for games to do this yet today it is.
And if a game was going to be on rails and heavily cover based they'd make it incredibly frenetic, put a timer on that shit so everyone dies if you didn't do it as fast as possible... and they'd call it Time Crisis. See, that's a fun 90's FPS game (Time Crisis is First Person... and you Shoot). All I can see with these cover based shooters is a watered down Time Crisis. They might as well be on rails.
You got a HINT of this with Call of Duty 4, the final few levels on timers. Not seen in the series again.
The 90's were full of gameplay innovations that have been discarded for compromises and dumbing down.
What Half Life 2 didn't have was aim-down-sights... which doesn't matter with mouse aim. Aim-down-sights is a mechanic that suits console gamers as the thumbstick alone isn't accurate enough, the aim-down-sights is a useful mechanic to selectively increase zoom, decrease sensitivity and dial up the aim-assist, not needed with mouse-aim. It wasn't a gameplay innovation, it's mostly cosmetic. At worst it encourages camping as with the reduced mobility and restricted vision it limits free movement.
Health Bars aren't obsolete, regenerating health only takes jeopardy out of taking hits since you have infinite health and removes any reason to explore the environment as you don't need health kits. It's as about as innovative as playing with god mode on while sapping momentum to hide every now and then.
I think there is a time and a place for regenerating health, like maybe it's a special item you activate so for a few minutes you're health will recharge. This will be good if you find yourself cornered in a frenetic gunfight, but pervasive throughout the game it becomes a crutch.
Plot matters for games as much as lyrics matter for music
Half Life 2 didn't need an intricate or Pulitzer prize winning plot because it's not like other visual mediums like film. Lyrics can matter a lot for songs, they can be profound and cutting but its not like the song needs them. And the lyrics work with the song, not the other way around.
Doesn't mean it's bad if it isn't for your taste.
But were're not getting lyrics to the songs of our games, were getting dubstep punctuated by audiobook excerpts of Tom Clancy airport-novels. If there is to be any plot in games, it must be weaved in with the gameplay and prospective film-students shouldn't use a game as a medium to foist their failed hollywood scripts.
