Half Life Or Half Life 2? Which Is Better?

[hfk88]

The immersive feel that I think was completely lost in HL2. HL1 gets my vote. HL2 left me with no great memories of great tension, excitement, or amazement.

HL1 was an experience

HL2 was a game.

I so agree with this.

Half-life

 

[Eunoch]

i vote halflife2 because of grav gun and physics

 

[alehm]

Better at what? Half Life beats HL2 in some areas and HL2 beats HL in others.

Each game offers something I like... I loved how HL had 2 settings (Black Mesa and Xen) I had more of a connection to the HL universe with the first one because of this.

However in HL2 I felt the chapters were better paced and perfected over the original.

I like both of them better for different reasons. They are both great games.

 

[CookieCuttah]

HL2 is something a bit more deep in atmosphere than Half-life 1...You gotta play it a few times to get the whole vibe of it...When you start figuring things out and having hind sight. You will see what I mean. HL2 is a slight up in my book.

 

[Thadius Dean]

if HL2 is so much better, then why are there so many complainers?

 

[the_stalker]

I really liked riding around the train in the tunnels ducking out of the way of rockets being fired, and watching the scientist getting headcrabbed after smashing one, and when the scientist got eaten by an itchyo... but the combine have cool gasmasks, and they have cool uniforms, and all that other cool stuff of theres, like dr. breen... half-life 2

 

[kupocake]

Half Life 2 by a Mile. Anyone who says otherwise is tanked up on nostalgia, and anyone with issues about the difficulty needs to remind themselves that 6 years ago, you were 6 years worth of skill levels below what you are now. Play HL1 and HL2 one after the other: you're lying if you believe HL1 is longer.

if HL2 is so much better, then why are there so many complainers?

When a child throws its toys out of the pram, it gets more attention than when it sleeps content in the knowledge that HL2 is the better game. Or something.

 

[f|uke]

HL1 was an experience

HL2 was a game.

To some extent this is true. HL1 was revolutionary because it was an experience. And While HL2 held many of the same traditions, it didnt quite give me the same feeling. Still, in HL2 the story was better and was portrayed much more expressivly.

Perhaps it was the lack of interactivity with the characters, and their pushyness, that made it seem less like an experience, and more like an amusment park ride.

But IMO, the biggest point where HL2 fell short is the gritty, gory, realism and a sense of horror and terror. I remember distinctly when one of my civilians caught on fire, and she gave out a stern, objective "No! No!", which really was pretty weak. When someone is caught on fire, they screem in horror.

HL2: Not horrible enough!

 

[ATI4EVER!]

fluke i just noticed your sig.

The really funny part is when he adds "I see your MIT education has really payed off!" You should add that.

 

[Rupertvdb]

i miss voted and said HL2, i think HL1 is a better game, it was a longer more desperate story, nothing could ever follow that. The freshness of it is something that only a whole new game could capture.

Saying that HL2 is my favorite game right now and the divide between the two is so completely slim that my even mentioning it is over exagerrating.

 

[DrunkPanda]

i thought hl2 was better but my opinion is not completely fair. i first played half life last year, so graphics were extremely outdated and it made the game not as enjoyable to me as it would have if i got it right when ti came out. secondly, i have not finished half life, i stopped about 5 minutes before the teleporter to xen part. it just got boring for me. that's what i like about hl2, the ending is probably the funnest part, not the most boring.

 

[Sparta]

HALF LIFE 1 is better. Just remember the combat with the special forces, the killer-ladies, the puzzles. HL2 is good, especially the physics, but valve a little bit failed to capitalize on their achievement.
The combat in HL2 is too easy, no challenging situations. Only Bridge is a little close to original halfLife.

Open areas in HL2 are good, but THEY ARE EMPTY, almost no enemies to kill.

Yeah i totally agree. Everything in HL2 was too easy.

Most of the area's in HL1 were set-up for interesting fights with the AI and shit, there were always boxes for them to run behind and they could retreat into a different room and such.

In HL2 its just barren.

 

[Zeus]

HL2: Good story: Check
Physics engine: check
great graphics: check
gravity gun: check
____________________

HL1: Good story: check
outdated gfx: check
no physics engine: check
no gravity gun:check

 

[KNoX]

1 thing that made me pick halflife was that when you fight a hard monster in HL2 you run around shooting it. in HL1 you had to do all this stuff. HL1 was WAY more immirsive to me.

and i agree that there wasent enough horror it needs more horror not like scary horror but 1984 horror. like i was like WOW.... when i read 1984 same thing when i played HL1 but in HL2 there is no more WOW

if they had kept some of the cool stuff like we saw in the e3 vidios naby i would change my opinion

 

[Funky Munky]

I enjoyed HL much more than HL2.

If HL had HL2s graphics/physics and the gravity gun it would be the best game ever.

HL2s atmosphere and enviroments suck ass.

 

[Loke]

Half-Life 2.

 

[corkscru74]

OMG - reading the pro HL1 posts is making me want to explain how wrong you all are (but obviously you're entitled to your own opinions - unless they contradict with mine that is )

I can't believe people are saying HL1 story and immersiveness are better than HL2. How is HL1 an experience and HL2 a game? Are you kidding? Check out the HL1 story - You are stuck under ground and must proceed through corridors etc. to escape after an experiment goes wrong. All the while random monsters are teleporting in. Er...I'm sorry, did I just install doom again by accident? And the amazing immersiveness of player interaction? You mean speaking to identikit scientists and Security guards with the options to toggle them to 'follow' or 'not follow'. No matter what decision made, their clones will appear a couple of areas later with the same options.

I don't mean to rag on HL1, trust me I loved it at the time, but HL2 exceeds it's abilities in almost every area.
Horror - Ravenholm. Other than headcrabs HL1 wasn't scary.
Characters - Alyx, Eli, Barney
Interaction - The physics engine
Immersiveness - The first section where you run without a weapon at all, for starters!
Story - C'mon, an imprisoned world, resistance fighting against an oppresive combine or some guy trying to escape a science experiment gone wrong.

One example of Game v Experience I can think of off the top of my head is the Airboat bit just before Black Mesa East. Only after defeating the big gunship did I realise - hey, was that an "End of Level Boss"?

Anyone want to counter any of the things I've brought up I'd love to hear them. Let's get a proper debate going. Also, try to remove nostalgia from the equation - maybe play HL1 again now. Yes it had great pacing but it's nothing compared to HL2.

 

[silverstealth89]

Half Life2 for me

 

[killerteoz]

hl2 :smoking:

 

[Tyguy]

how acn u say Half Life 1. It was a great game, but come on...just cause it's the first of the two doesnt make it better. Half Life 2 is just more technologically "fun"...and you can throw things at people....haha

 

[Mac]

Half-life 1, because it had a longer train ride in the beginning.

What a horrible excuse of a train ride that was in hl2.

 

[hfk88]

HL2: Good story: Check
Physics engine: check
great graphics: check
gravity gun: check
____________________

HL1: Good story: check
outdated gfx: check
no physics engine: check
no gravity gun:check

No wonder hl had inferior physics, gfx and sounds.. Dude the game is 6 years older.

my version

HL, at the time it first came out:

Revolutionary: check
Good graphics: check
Good audio: check
Cool story: check
Killer atmosphere: check
Great, easy and slick gameplay: check
Great modability: check
Epic singeplayer experience wich was just totally awsome: check

HL2, now

Kind of revolutionary: check (source, the physics)
Great graphics engine: check
awsome physics: check
awsome audio: check
OK atmosphere: check
Great gameplay: check
Great modability: check
OK but not so good follow-up story: check
A, at times, very fun singleplayer experience wich shows what the new engine can do: check

If only valve made the singleplayer part of hl2 more creepy, scary, and with bigger more difficult and awsome battles, the game would kick so much more ass!! My guess is valve wanted badly to show off source, rather than thinking up another priceless singleplayer part resulting in a loose singleplayer experience. Probably as part of the fact that they were under a LOT of stress during the production, i dont know maybe they really made the game as they wanted to. Hl2 is still overall a good succesor tho wich just went another direction with things i guess.

Again my vote is HL because it was technically a HL2 at the time with a nicer singeplayer part. It was and still is a perfect game IMO.

 

[alpha_crusis]

My guess is valve wanted badly to show off source, rather than thinking up another priceless singleplayer part resulting in a loose singleplayer experience.

Yea, I agree. Valve's thought was divided between game and engine for Half Life 2 while they could purely concentrate on the game for the first one. I guess that's why the game, although still the best on my list, did not break that much ground.

 

[PhaTox]

Anyway, to drag this back on topic: I absolutely love the gravity gun. The physics in HL2 are amazing and are alone worth the $55 I shelled out.

But I was *much* more satisfied with the atmosphere in half-life classic. It just had something magical about it, something that the sequel doesn't quite capture.

Don't get me wrong, there are parts in HL2 (cue the Tenemets, Citadel, Nova Prospekt, and warzone City17) that are absolutely amazing when it comes to atmosphere, but HL1's atmosphere just seemed to draw me in more than HL2's did.

Eh, they're both amazing games.

I feel the same, but how come? WHY did halflife drag me more into it than halflife2? are we overfed? or spoiled by good graphics? I have no answer to why halflife 1 was magic and hl2 is "only" great and nice, but i am still able to leave my hands off it without a prob...

 

[ViolenceJack]

Half-Life due to the simple fact its harder. Games are getting way to easy these days. Although HL2 is one of the first games ive played in awhile where i didnt use quicksave just to make it that extra bit harder. Although i found HL2 incredibly easy on hard and in comparison HL is a hell of alot harder.

 

[Tim F]

HL2 has no teasing-the-snark animation, but it has a gravity gun. Tie.

 

[PhaTox]

Half Life 2 by a Mile. Anyone who says otherwise is tanked up on nostalgia, and anyone with issues about the difficulty needs to remind themselves that 6 years ago, you were 6 years worth of skill levels below what you are now. Play HL1 and HL2 one after the other: you're lying if you believe HL1 is longer.

When a child throws its toys out of the pram, it gets more attention than when it sleeps content in the knowledge that HL2 is the better game. Or something.

hmmmm, the world can be so easy and we are little children complaining for complainings sake? anyway, who did complain?

 

[PhaTox]

OMG - reading the pro HL1 posts is making me want to explain how wrong you all are (but obviously you're entitled to your own opinions - unless they contradict with mine that is )

I can't believe people are saying HL1 story and immersiveness are better than HL2. How is HL1 an experience and HL2 a game? Are you kidding? Check out the HL1 story - You are stuck under ground and must proceed through corridors etc. to escape after an experiment goes wrong. All the while random monsters are teleporting in. Er...I'm sorry, did I just install doom again by accident? And the amazing immersiveness of player interaction? You mean speaking to identikit scientists and Security guards with the options to toggle them to 'follow' or 'not follow'. No matter what decision made, their clones will appear a couple of areas later with the same options.

I don't mean to rag on HL1, trust me I loved it at the time, but HL2 exceeds it's abilities in almost every area.
Horror - Ravenholm. Other than headcrabs HL1 wasn't scary.
Characters - Alyx, Eli, Barney
Interaction - The physics engine
Immersiveness - The first section where you run without a weapon at all, for starters!
Story - C'mon, an imprisoned world, resistance fighting against an oppresive combine or some guy trying to escape a science experiment gone wrong.

One example of Game v Experience I can think of off the top of my head is the Airboat bit just before Black Mesa East. Only after defeating the big gunship did I realise - hey, was that an "End of Level Boss"?

Anyone want to counter any of the things I've brought up I'd love to hear them. Let's get a proper debate going. Also, try to remove nostalgia from the equation - maybe play HL1 again now. Yes it had great pacing but it's nothing compared to HL2.

good points altogether, but still I remember the feeling playing halflife giving me the impression of it being the best game ever, couldnt resist to go on gaming- in halflife2 i can easily quit, i dont know why ( am I now too old for gaming,huh, strange thought)
the ravenholm-part was scary for me in an artificial way, like in a scary rollercoaster, but the game lost my personal credibility at that point, making it fantasy, not real anymore. the true horror comes from within, the "1984"-plot of the story could have been far more scary, but somehow it didnt work. I hope you could follow my line of thoughts. any comments?
how come the soldiers and ninjas in halflife1 were bad smartass mo-fu`s and in HL2 the combine just love to run into me spraying bullets?

 

[mjr02002]

alright granted i played half life for the first time in 2000 and never finished it but after beating HL2 i started Half Life:Source up and im 3/4 of the way through so far and i don't understand WHY people think the AI is so ****ing good. I honestly can't understand why people think HL has such good AI and Half Life 2 doesn't. I personally don't think either have anything groundbreaking but there were a few instances in HL2 in which the enemies wowed me with their decisions and none so far in HL:S.

I just don't understand why the fact taht each hit of an automatic weapon doing 10 damage to me in original half life makes it have "great" AI. It honestly does not. It just makes it a pain in the ass. Anybody care to explain to me whats so good about the Half Life: AI?

That said, HL2.

 

[Calm_Blue_Ocean]

Well, outside of Doom 1, HL1 was my first fps and it blew me away. I remember thinking when I first played "oh my God, that scientist is looking at me when he talks" and being blown away. It's kinda like losing your virginity, you always remember. Based on that, I'd lean towards HL1. However, if I could play both games again now for the very first time I'm really not sure what I'd say. I think that after a couple years with HL2 (mapping, playing the mods), I may love it just as much if not more.

 

[Warbie]

HL is still the daddy.

Its level of immersion, sense of purpose, and a character/situation we can all relate to, is still unmatched in any fps i've played. Simple and unique story well told.

Technically HL2 blows it out the water (but doesn't impress more than HL did at release) However, Gordon has become more 'master chief' than a scientist (no longer an average joe swept up in a situation out of his control), and the experience (while still fantastic ) feels far more generic - HL2 is a run and gun shooter at heart. HL was a survial game (which at times reminded me of Resident Evil, and vice versa)

Change the name, a few models and weapons, and HL2 could be any title (albeit an excellent one). It doesn't 'feel' like HL.

Put simply, HL felt more convincing, more tense and believable. I was Gordon Freeman, all alone, just trying to survive a day at work gone terribly wrong.

In HL2 i'm uber Gordon, trained by Serious Sam himself, wondering (sometimes aimlessly) around a wonderfully realised gameworld and playing with the physics. The story is fine, but the plot details are lacking - the immediate reasons for your actions are often left open to interpretation. The pacing suffers as a result (especially when compared to the drive HL offered)

The more I play HL2 and notice the little clues the more it opens up and involves me in the game. The difference is - it's taking effort to to get involved. HL grabbed me by the nuts and forced me, there was no choice in the matter. It was just amazing (and will be talked about in fondness long after HL2 has been forgotten ... and not because it was the first, beause it's still the only shooter to really 'make' you - the player - the protagonist)

 

[kupocake]

Technically HL2 blows it out the water (but doesn't impress more than HL did at release)

What the... Ok, I can see how someone could say that HL2 isn't the single most technically impressive game of today (just. Doom 3 and Far Cry may be that bit better from different viewpoints), but when was Half-Life 1 ever a technically impressive game? It was fairly ugly when it was released, I mean, we're talking about 2-year-old Quake 1 graphics that have been slightly tweaked. Games like Unreal, Quake 2 and the rest wiped the floor with HL1's graphics, but for the fact that HL1 had far better design work than those games - that's not technical achievement though: that's artwork. There's a lot of Difference.

I think that's what annoys me a bit about people who say that HL2 is just a pretty game. Like the original, It goes far beyond mere technical graphical excellence: the design work is simply outstanding. (Halo is a very good example of a technically impressive but poorly visually designed game for example)

 

[Warbie]

What the... Ok, I can see how someone could say that HL2 isn't the single most technically impressive game of today (just. Doom 3 and Far Cry may be that bit better from different viewpoints), but when was Half-Life 1 ever a technically impressive game? It was fairly ugly when it was released, I mean, we're talking about 2-year-old Quake 1 graphics that have been slightly tweaked. Games like Unreal, Quake 2 and the rest wiped the floor with HL1's graphics, but for the fact that HL1 had far better design work than those games - that's not technical achievement though: that's artwork. There's a lot of Difference.

HL looked fine in comparison to Quake 2/Unreal etc. What set it aside was the excellent use of set pieces (a feature which is still very strong in HL2) No other titles could even begin to compete with this, it was very impressive (almost awe inspiring - for its time) and one of HL's greatest achievements.

Valves stories have always been fueled by the drama these set pieces create .... they made HL stand out from the crowd. Technically impressive - very much so, and completely blew me away.

HL2 did aswell, but not by offering anything original, but by integrating features other games had 'tacked' on (in an almost gimmick like fashion) with the gameplay. HL2 does absolutely nothing new - it just does everything really well (which is far more important )

 

[Dr. Freeman]

To some extent this is true. HL1 was revolutionary because it was an experience. And While HL2 held many of the same traditions, it didnt quite give me the same feeling. Still, in HL2 the story was better and was portrayed much more expressivly.

and because it was revolutionary, it was an experience.. they both go hand in hand...which also raised the bar so high that would eventually be difficult to make HL2 to live up to these standards.

Perhaps it was the lack of interactivity with the characters, and their pushyness, that made it seem less like an experience, and more like an amusment park ride.

But IMO, the biggest point where HL2 fell short is the gritty, gory, realism and a sense of horror and terror. I remember distinctly when one of my civilians caught on fire, and she gave out a stern, objective "No! No!", which really was pretty weak. When someone is caught on fire, they screem in horror.

HL2: Not horrible enough!

agreed.
in HL1 i felt there was a true panic when things went wrong...not only that, it also felt like when things were just getting a little better, they got that much worse (IE. when u reach the surface, u think the marines are there to help, but wrong u are! )

HL2 didn't quite have that feeling...but still, stands above any other game in the market right now and perhaps even for the next 2-3 years.

edit:

did want to say that the lack of creativity did hurt HL2 some.. in terms of enemies and weapons.. i felt there wasn't enough of both of these but thats just my opinion.

 

[Warbie]

in HL1 i felt there was a true panic when things went wrong...not only that, it also felt like when things were just getting a little better, they got that much worse (IE. when u reach the surface, u think the marines are there to help, but wrong u are! )

Completely agree

It kept you on the edge - the pacing was excellent.

 

[The_Great_Walter]

I voted for HL2, but I realize I made a mistake. Both games are magical in their own way...it's jsut such a hard choice!


rggh...I dunno

 

[PhaTox]

HL is still the daddy.

Its level of immersion, sense of purpose, and a character/situation we can all relate to, is still unmatched in any fps i've played. Simple and unique story well told.

Technically HL2 blows it out the water (but doesn't impress more than HL did at release) However, Gordon has become more 'master chief' than a scientist (no longer an average joe swept up in a situation out of his control), and the experience (while still fantastic ) feels far more generic - HL2 is a run and gun shooter at heart. HL was a survial game (which at times reminded me of Resident Evil, and vice versa)

Change the name, a few models and weapons, and HL2 could be any title (albeit an excellent one). It doesn't 'feel' like HL.

Put simply, HL felt more convincing, more tense and believable. I was Gordon Freeman, all alone, just trying to survive a day at work gone terribly wrong.

In HL2 i'm uber Gordon, trained by Serious Sam himself, wondering (sometimes aimlessly) around a wonderfully realised gameworld and playing with the physics. The story is fine, but the plot details are lacking - the immediate reasons for your actions are often left open to interpretation. The pacing suffers as a result (especially when compared to the drive HL offered)

The more I play HL2 and notice the little clues the more it opens up and involves me in the game. The difference is - it's taking effort to to get involved. HL grabbed me by the nuts and forced me, there was no choice in the matter. It was just amazing (and will be talked about in fondness long after HL2 has been forgotten ... and not because it was the first, beause it's still the only shooter to really 'make' you - the player - the protagonist)

well spoken! that exactly describes my feelings about both games

 

[Darkchyld738]

Half life was/is the best! I found HL2's story to be good, the source engine looks good but overall the game is too short, the techicnical issues too many and Steam really stinks! I hope, if there is a HL3, an internet connection IS NOT required. If it is I will vote with my wallet. ( no buy! )

 

[AmishSlayer]

OMG - reading the pro HL1 posts is making me want to explain how wrong you all are (but obviously you're entitled to your own opinions - unless they contradict with mine that is )

I can't believe people are saying HL1 story and immersiveness are better than HL2. How is HL1 an experience and HL2 a game? Are you kidding? Check out the HL1 story - You are stuck under ground and must proceed through corridors etc. to escape after an experiment goes wrong. All the while random monsters are teleporting in. Er...I'm sorry, did I just install doom again by accident? And the amazing immersiveness of player interaction? You mean speaking to identikit scientists and Security guards with the options to toggle them to 'follow' or 'not follow'. No matter what decision made, their clones will appear a couple of areas later with the same options.

I don't mean to rag on HL1, trust me I loved it at the time, but HL2 exceeds it's abilities in almost every area.
Horror - Ravenholm. Other than headcrabs HL1 wasn't scary.
HL2 wasn't scary by any means to me and same to HL1 - HL1 was definitely more intense and you had the "Holy shit I'm in trouble" feeling
Characters - Alyx, Eli, Barney
More characters != Better immersive factor or better Game
Interaction - The physics engine
HL2 wins here...but only here (apart from gfx of course)
Immersiveness - The first section where you run without a weapon at all, for starters!

Hmmm...for starters? How 'bout for onlys or something? The beginning of the game felt very immersive and I was excited...but it died quickly as (as Warbie mentioned) Gordon became too amazing for his character and everything just turned into firefight after firefight with few cool scripted events HL1 had lots of scripted events which made it such a cool FPS to begin with (not nostalgia...I still think it's cool as hell today). Things fell over when the catastrophe started...pipes broke as you went through them, tram cars err whatever they were went out of control and crashed unexpectedly launching you through the air, marines thew bombs into pipes you were in (and you had to scramble your ass out of there to dive into some water as flames shoot over your head - that moment beats most HL2 moments if you ask me...simple but oh so sweet), marines shot holes in vents trying to get you (also very memorable). There were plenty of these cool scripted events that made the game seem that much more real. Bad things would happen to you and you knew if you didn't do something fast...you were dead. HL2's few scripted events (I remember one good one that I was involved in - the airboat sequence where that smokestack fell) didn't make the game any more intense. I knew when that smokestack fell no matter what I was gonna live anyways...just drive through the gap that was left for me. I knew that when gunships were firing at me...well I have plenty of things to crouch behind and lots of ammo... It just felt like I knew what was coming and I was too well prepared for it. HL1 was all about the unexpected and how you had to deal with the situation with what you had at the time - be it tripmining the area to get rid of those pesky black ops or snarking marines so they'd be distracted so you could kill them easier. HL1 made me feel that I was in Black Mesa and I was fighting for my life to get out.

Story - C'mon, an imprisoned world, resistance fighting against an oppresive combine or some guy trying to escape a science experiment gone wrong.
I choose trying to escape because it was developed further and better than HL2's story. Sure it was a simple idea...but that simple idea gave the player a mindset of getting the f*ck out of Black Mesa whereas HL2 was like...oh...so I'm travelling where now? Why exactly? Ok...whatever.

One example of Game v Experience I can think of off the top of my head is the Airboat bit just before Black Mesa East. Only after defeating the big gunship did I realise - hey, was that an "End of Level Boss"?
Heh...I was asking myself the same thing. That helicopter was too damn easy. I was hoping that wasn't supposed to be a hard boss of any kind and I was hoping more were on the way...definitely a good example of HL2 being more of just a game rather than an experience

Anyone want to counter any of the things I've brought up I'd love to hear them. Let's get a proper debate going. Also, try to remove nostalgia from the equation - maybe play HL1 again now. Yes it had great pacing but it's nothing compared to HL2.
Consider yourselfe countered

See above.

 

[Mister_Pie]

The immersive feel that I think was completely lost in HL2. HL1 gets my vote. HL2 left me with no great memories of great tension, excitement, or amazement.

HL1 was an experience

HL2 was a game.

I completely and respectfully disagree. For me it was the exact other way around. To each his own!