kupocake
Tank
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Messages
- 6,127
- Reaction score
- 16
Yes, but why bother? Any of the faceless PCs / NPCs from the Gearbox expansions can be brought back and given that very same purpose, and all are on an equal footing with any number of entirely new character inventions that Valve care to make. What is it that makes Shepherd special in the least? Is it simply just the matter of NPCs calling the player or another NPC by the name of Adrian Shepherd? Because that's all it's going to be if they bring him back. Why is that so great?he has no purpose? thats why when they fit him in the story they'd "give" him a purpose
Possibly, but in a sense, the real 'Main Character' of Half-Life 1 was actually the G-Man, and for a true continuation of the game, you would have to have played someone under the G-Man's control. Freeman was the obvious choice there. Shepherd is useable under that guise, but again, why bother? Why bother doing another story where you control a character under the influence of the G-Man, when you could be playing a game about something completely different that fleshes out some other aspect of the human / combine struggle?sheesh its not like Freeman was as fleshed out and deep into the story before #2, Half-Life 2 would have worked even if it was an entirly new character in city 17.
Anti-Shepherdism isn't about a total dislike of the character. There is so little substance there to shovel dislike upon. It's a dislike of blind devotion to a chraracter who is a merely a name and a few constraining themes, at the cost of a myriad of potentially more exciting possibilities.