Is hl2 really worthy of the game of the year award?

[Cole]

4)All of the above!

 

[-### HlPwNs ###-]

i say no to steam. i think it is ironic in the game u fight for freedom against autocratic 1984 governmet but to play game u have to sucumb to control...

meow!

see my cat also thinks steam is not good

 

[Hectic Glenn]

i say no to steam. i think it is ironic in the game u fight for freedom against autocratic 1984 governmet but to play game u have to sucumb to control...

meow!

see my cat also thinks steam is not good

What on EARTH are you talking about, steam isn't something thats forced upon every person otherwise they get put in prison. If you want to play the games you need it indeed, but if you don't like steam...don't play the games. Automatic updates, all the games intergrated into one system for easy use. Please steam hating is a dying breed, its time you channeled that hate towards something more constructive, its such a wasted emotion. Valve at no point is trying to 'control' you. Steam just works with the games, i promise to you they are not fascist dictators trying to manipulate you.

 

[-### HlPwNs ###-]

i promise to you they are not fascist dictators trying to manipulate you.

all fascist dictators promise that

no steam is not a bad thing per se, worst it is a nusance (sp?). i also am not worry about illegal copys this works too with steam. but i dont like steam system imagine some day all games will be like this and evil publisher can have spyware on ur pc u need to run games. imagine u buy dvd movie and need account to watch etc. there are good things like support but that can be without need for account. i just dont think it is right thing to do. but this is my thought.

maunz!

my cat thinks so 2.

 

[kenyo]

steam don't bring spyware, and dvds will never need accounts.
i actualy like steam now, and that is becuase when i lose/damage a game disk (like my starcraft game) i am screwed, with steam i can just log in a download, so i love it! (unless someone found out my pass and switched my pass and email info, that would suck, but not as much as my disk braking, with me my disk braken is more likely)

P.S. this is my 300th post

 

[Dynasty]

I think WoW beats out HL2 tbh

*sigh*

i really dont think that HL2 should get game of the year in some cases, but in others i think it should:

physics: well, what else can i say? waht other game is there where you can physically block a route of take down a guard with a sink!!??
graphics: dated, if you think about it they are like 2 years old...
gameplay: pretty good but grenades are tricky sometimes to get right.
sounds: great

the only thing i HATE about it is steam...its such a let down to what shouldve been the best thing since sliced bread. you pretty much cant get your money back, and you HAVE to have a net connection (pretty much bband as 56k takes too long to connect) just to play the bloody thing!!! how ****ed up is that!!!???

 

[PainLord]

It is worthy. But HL1 was better. HL2 was a mission. HL1 was a fight for survival. You were a scientist, who got stuck in a shitty situation and had to fight his way out of it. The game was a struggle for survival. There was something really cool about running through a facility that was in chaos, the place falling apart with dead bodies littering the way.
In HL2 you were a soldier. You were placed there as a mission, not a spontaneous event. It's a damn good shooter in it's own right, but as a sequal im not so convinced.
It is definatley the best game of last year, no contest. But it could have been more IMO.

 

[Duhard]

What games did you enjoy more than half-life 2?

It's silly to make a thread like this and offer no opinion on what should have got game of the year.

it's not silly to say that hl2 has huge ai problems...did I mention that the game was way too easy?

 

[Absinthe]

Umm... what? Just because the AI isn't uber-amazing and lifelike doesn't mean it has huge problems.

The soda can quirk isn't even a valid argument against it. Take any game and you can always come up with bizarre situations that will remind you of one thing: it's a ****ing game. You are not facing humans. You are facing an enemy NPC that operates under specific rules and restrictions. It is not as flexible as an entity with a human brain. And this is not something exclusive to HL2 AI.

And if it's way too easy, turn it up to the top difficulty or something. Personally, I don't care about the game's difficulty. I had fun all the way through.

 

[Ennui]

Personally, I don't care about the game's difficulty. I had fun all the way through.

Completely agree.

 

[JCampbell]

It is worthy. But HL1 was better. HL2 was a mission. HL1 was a fight for survival. You were a scientist, who got stuck in a shitty situation and had to fight his way out of it. The game was a struggle for survival. There was something really cool about running through a facility that was in chaos, the place falling apart with dead bodies littering the way.
In HL2 you were a soldier. You were placed there as a mission, not a spontaneous event. It's a damn good shooter in it's own right, but as a sequal im not so convinced.
It is definatley the best game of last year, no contest. But it could have been more IMO.

I don't understand. Nothing that happens in HL2 gave me the sense of "mission." The original plan was to meet up with Eli via teleport after you're spotted. Lamar ****s up the teleport, so you have to escape to BME and meet up with Eli. BME is raided, so you're forced to take a detour through Ravenholm to meet up with Alyx at Nova Prospekt, where her father was taken prisoner. There are plenty of plot twists and events that, had the actors in the game had their way, would not have happened (if that makes sense). Pretty much everything that happened was spontaneous up until the end where the objectives were pretty clear.

But even in HL1(your comparison supergame), the objectives were fairly simple:
-get to the surface
-get to lambda core
-get to main bad dude
(I know I'm generalizing a bit here)

As for your "it could have been more" comment: any game could have. Hopefully, if a game is good enough, people will stop thinking about what it wasn't and see what it was. HL1 could have been better; Far Cry could have been better; HL2 could have been better. But I think that it's silly to rip apart small inconsistencies on the basis of it being part of a revolutionary gaming experience heirarchy. The SAME people who regard HL1 as the best game ever made say HL2 could have been better. The original could have, too. Why aren't they complaining about that?

 

[Laivasse]

Umm... what? Just because the AI isn't uber-amazing and lifelike doesn't mean it has huge problems.

The soda can quirk isn't even a valid argument against it. Take any game and you can always come up with bizarre situations that will remind you of one thing: it's a ****ing game.

And if it's way too easy, turn it up to the top difficulty or something. Personally, I don't care about the game's difficulty. I had fun all the way through.

I agree with all of that. Re the AI thing: can anyone who has problems with the AI actually bring up some evidence to show what's wrong with it? I've completed HL2 3 times now and not once was I faced with any bugs in the enemy AI. Occasionally I'd end up with a soldier facing away from me in the middle of a firefight - to me this makes sense. They lose sight of you and don't always magically know where you are.

And the can thing isn't even completely true. A can wont protect you at all - holding a barrel will cause them to stop firing...well, they're not going to hit you so why should they shoot? Besides, you can't shoot them while holding the barrel, so it's hardly some miracle way to get through every firefight.

 

[PvtRyan]

it's not silly to say that hl2 has huge ai problems...did I mention that the game was way too easy?

What does difficulty have to do with AI? That's right, NOTHING.

 

[pomegranate]

Occasionally I'd end up with a soldier facing away from me in the middle of a firefight - to me this makes sense. They lose sight of you and don't always magically know where you are.

What, are they supposed to be deaf? Are they oblivious to the Gordon's footsteps
Is it unimaginable that if one soldier can see you approaching his buddy from behind, he might tell him?
'Cos this often seemed to be the case.
I'm not saying these problems were systematic of the AI, but they were bugs that should've been ironed out.

What does difficulty have to do with AI? That's right, NOTHING.

Er. No, you're wrong. If your enemies are dumb, the game is easier right? But if the AI is advanced enough to make your enemies behave like real-life special forces, the game is gonna be harder, right? Come on, it's not rocket science.


Regarding the difficulty question in general: If there weren't problems with the difficulty, no-one would be complaining. No-one is making up the complaint.
There are some parts which are difficult - the turrets siege in Nova Prospekt, and facing off the striders during the rebellion. But that is about it - otherwise, it's really quite easy. I have heard the argument that the game has to be suitable for the majority of gamers - true. But that's why we have varied difficulty options. The hardest setting should be a worthwhile challenge to the most experienced gamers. It wasn't. If it was, no-one would be complaining.

 

[Laivasse]

What, are they supposed to be deaf? Is it unimaginable that if one soldier can see you approaching his buddy from behind, he might tell him?

And he would - if one soldier spots you, the rest soon know about it. What I was talking about was having one soldier left, but not facing you. And in that scenario if you walk too close to him without crouching (for stealth), he will hear you, so they're not deaf.

 

[pomegranate]

And he would - if one soldier spots you, the rest soon know about it. What I was talking about was having one soldier left, but not facing you. And in that scenario if you walk too close to him without crouching (for stealth), he will hear you, so they're not deaf.

Not to argue every little detail, but sometimes I found this wasn't the case - walking normally, I wouldn't neccessarily be heard. My main worry is that sometimes a soldier would be facing me, or turned about 45 degrees away from the direction I was travelling to him at, and I wouldn't be seen.

 

[mabufo]

Steam is bad. What if you were on dialup and wanted to play Half life 2? You know how much of a pain in the ass that is?

 

[Lucid]

I'm just gonna go on all over the place with this so, don't get too confused.

Definitely wouldn't say HL2 is worthy of GOTY...But it could be a runner-up or get honorable mention.
In all honesty, I'd say UT2004 deserved every GOTY, seeing as it everything on my approval list...
- Great graphics
- Solid netcode
- Extreme customizability
- Excellent sound
- Great bot AI
- Alright singleplayer... was awesome for killing time atleast.


But HL2 was awesome as well...
- GREAT voice work.
- Awesome graphics.
- Great singleplayer...although way too short.
- Nice sound.

Now, My main gripe with HL2...is how every multiplayer mod that's out...lags like hell.
Even simple mods like HL2CTF.
If they fix this and that annoying shadow bug...and get rid of Steam...
HL2 would get my GOTY vote.

 

[$niffy]

Gabe + Computer + Buckets of Chicken wings = Best Game ever 11/10

ROFL

http://www.videogamessuck.com/article128.html

 

[clarky003]

omg, basically... if you cant see how much effort went into this game compared to other fps released around the same time and credit it for that, let alone the inginuity of the gameplay and real variety throughout.. then im sorry to say your obviously a doof.

Its more of a condesending tone on the AI, no it wasnt fantastic, but thats because the whole game was so awsomely put together that we expected it to be better than it was surely.. thats not derogatory, thats a compliment. and If you play it on hard the AI is brilliant, they do twice as much hiding and dodging and it can be tough to take them out in interesting ways,, unless people who complain are those who shotgun whore it through the whole game then theres no real excuse.. its far more fun to vairy weapon usage, just for the heck of it, even if its not appropriate.

Its really one of the true games where it lets the player choose to a wider degree on how much fun certain parts can be, if your a boring ass player who storms in with the machine gun all the time and cleans the room out using that, then of course your gonna go.. 'oh the AI wasnt up to scratch there, boring' , if you take your time and roll grenades, lob objects at them, set up traps. the game becomes immediately far more fun, The only limit to the fun that can be had is the players imagination and situation. So really certain crit's can be quite hypocritcial. who really wants brilliant realism with AI in a computer game like HL2 anyway..?, you know it wud just become shit for the majority, unless your a wannabe marine.

 

[Styloid]

I guess this is my explaination:
There are lots of personal opinion (yes, even trolls' opinions count)-- but there can be no right answer which game this year is best. The fact is that nothing in history is universally loved-- Mother Teresa was a great person but there are some people who think she was just another ethnocentric missionary. Reviewers (well... some of them) often look at as many angles as possible.

HL2 was often awarded game of the year because it is the game that introduces elements that will be copied most in the future. Facial animation and characters that act is a must for any FPS beyond HL2. Physics that allow every object to be manipulated and affect gameplay. Incredibly varied gameplay (from riding an airboat to commanding antlions to physics puzzles), breaking away from 'room-clearing'. Scripted sequences miles ahead in complexity to other games (Dog). There are many things in HL2 that you will see (if you're an observant gamer) crop up in other games that HL2 introduced or improved (D3:ROE grabber). Likewise, you are going to really notice when they aren't there (well.. if you're an observant gamer).

Now look at the other contenders: Halo 2, GTA:SA, and WOW (maybe D3). They are enjoyable, very high quality games but they've just taken existing good things and done them right with a few tweaks and own personal style. They don't have many features that make other games without that specific feature less fun. This doesn't mean they are less fun games or bad games.

 

[pomegranate]

So have you actually played any other recent FPSs, clarky? If you had, you'd realise that you're most of what you've said is rubbish.
For one thing, you seem to be suggesting you should use different weapons just to make it harder for yourself or to make it more varied.
Far Cry doesn't allow you to succeed by the machine-gun-blasting method. It forces you to consider different approaches and find what is best for each situation. And yeah, I do vary what weapons I use in HL2. Thing is, there really isn't much opportunity to vary your approach that much - not much opportunities to snipe, no trip-bombs, no ways of tricking the enemy, no opportunity for any kind of strategy, basically.
In the both games, you should be required/able to be put your efforts into solving the challenge of the combat situation, not into how to make each section more fun.

I don't care how much effort went into it, if you ask me they seemed to concentrate on secondary aspects...

 

[Asus]

Steam is bad. What if you were on dialup and wanted to play Half life 2? You know how much of a pain in the ass that is?

My friend on 56k never really had an issue with steam.

I don't care how much effort went into it, if you ask me they seemed to concentrate on secondary aspects...

Your secondary aspects.

 

[pomegranate]

What, so facial animation and physics puzzles are the main factors you go for in a game?

 

[Jintor]

Far Cry doesn't allow you to succeed by the machine-gun-blasting method. It forces you to consider different approaches and find what is best for each situation.

FORCES???

That's not what i want from a game.

In a game you should have the FREEDOM to CHOOSE whether to use the machine-gun-blasting method. Just because I'm a freaky geek sitting here playing a shooting game on a computer dosn't mean i don't want to run around shooting things and laughing.

Have you ever thought about moving around? Generally you don't make too much sound, and if you did - no problem. But the AI isn't SUPPOSED to magically know where you are, so it shouldn't.

And Have you played other FPS's, besides HL2 and FC?

(PS: A chick in a white bikini jetskiing to an island does not a plotline make.)

 

[MarcoPollo]

I liked Far cry. I loved slicing people up.

 

[jimbo118]

omg, basically... if you cant see how much effort went into this game compared to other fps released around the same time and credit it for that, let alone the inginuity of the gameplay and real variety throughout.. then im sorry to say your obviously a doof.

Its more of a condesending tone on the AI, no it wasnt fantastic, but thats because the whole game was so awsomely put together that we expected it to be better than it was surely.. thats not derogatory, thats a compliment. and If you play it on hard the AI is brilliant, they do twice as much hiding and dodging and it can be tough to take them out in interesting ways,, unless people who complain are those who shotgun whore it through the whole game then theres no real excuse.. its far more fun to vairy weapon usage, just for the heck of it, even if its not appropriate.

Its really one of the true games where it lets the player choose to a wider degree on how much fun certain parts can be, if your a boring ass player who storms in with the machine gun all the time and cleans the room out using that, then of course your gonna go.. 'oh the AI wasnt up to scratch there, boring' , if you take your time and roll grenades, lob objects at them, set up traps. the game becomes immediately far more fun, The only limit to the fun that can be had is the players imagination and situation. So really certain crit's can be quite hypocritcial. who really wants brilliant realism with AI in a computer game like HL2 anyway..?, you know it wud just become shit for the majority, unless your a wannabe marine.

funkin gr8 post dude,particurly the 1st paragraph,hl2 is the most polished looking,playing(the odd bug) fps i have next to probably fc which is my 2nd fav fps

 

[pomegranate]

Have you ever thought about moving around? Generally you don't make too much sound, and if you did - no problem.

Er, what? If you're a soldier and you're alert, you'd generally be able to hear some guy in a full body armour suit and carrying about a dozen weapons, approaching, don't you think?

But the AI isn't SUPPOSED to magically know where you are, so it shouldn't.

Um, I already replied to this response. I'm not talking about enemies being psychic. I'm talking about enemies not being able to see you when they're practically facing you, and being able to hear you when you approach them normally. You know, like you'd expect a soldier to?

 

[Langolier]

Um, I already replied to this response. I'm not talking about enemies being psychic. I'm talking about enemies not being able to see you when they're practically facing you, and being able to hear you when you approach them normally. You know, like you'd expect a soldier to?[/QUOTE]

I don't recall ever being able to sneak up on the soldiers unless I was crouching. Which in the first-game, that was specifically supposed to minimze sound.

I find the AI to be fine, but in fairness, I haven't played any FPS's besides HL2 and a little bit of Doom 3. (In a long time I mean)

 

[Sars]

the a.i was predictable and unchallenging. it was, in my opinon, the games weakest attribute.
i think there is so much debate about this topic because this game did not live up to the standard of other GOTY games i.e Half Life 1, Deus Ex, etc but i probably would have awarded it GOTY.

The game was WAAAYYY too overhyped

My 2c

 

[Jintor]

Er, what? If you're a soldier and you're alert, you'd generally be able to hear some guy in a full body armour suit and carrying about a dozen weapons, approaching, don't you think?

Oh yeah.. sorry i was really, really tired when i read this thread, and saying HL2 RULES OMG !!!!111oneoneone looked like a really good idea at the time.

Uh...

I don't the the HEV suit made that much noise, myself. Or Gordon. I don't seem to remember making to much noise, no jangling of explosive grenades or anything like that.

Seriously though, what kind of *idiot* puts a flashing glowing light on a grenade? JEBUS!

Anyway, You responded to the thing about the guy looking the other way and not hearing you with... uh... dammit, i'm not feeling to well. I think the AI was actually pretty smart, but the way levels were designed, they didn't really get the chance to act it out.

Pity, really...

 

[sk0aL]

"This game i ****ing fly up a ramp with a dune buggy POP 2 GUYS WITH THE KICK ASS MAGNUM LAND DO A ROLL GET OUT AND SHOOT TWO MORE AND THEN SHOOT MYSELF."

 

[Lucid]

The game definitely was overhyped.
God, I remember valve talking about how lifelike the ai was going to be...
Where everything was completely unscripted...
And look what we get, the whole game is basically scripted!
They LIED to us.

 

[Sparta]

I think WoW beats out HL2 tbh

Hmmm....played WoW for 3 months straight and i dont know....its a great game and all but WoW also has ALOT of bugs and most of the memorable scenes in WoW are those created with the help of other players.

In HL2 its all just the A.I and shit, and it provides a heck of a lot of fun. And i dont think the A.I is bad in general, i think it was really only the metrocop A.I that sucked ass. If you play Das Roboss you'll constant get your ass handed to you on a plate because of the damn A.I.

 

[-### HlPwNs ###-]

The game definitely was overhyped.
God, I remember valve talking about how lifelike the ai was going to be...
Where everything was completely unscripted...
And look what we get, the whole game is basically scripted!
They LIED to us.

i think too there is problem with hyping games becose it is rare that they then live up to expectations.

and every body claims ai in his game is good it even says on box of doom3 'revolutionary ai' but ai could not even climb ladder or jump down ledge...
also all fps ai is 'dumb' once u know what they do and can predict behavior: exampel like farcry u snipe a merc on roadblock, then some one walks to where u fired shot, u hide in jungle and kill him, more come and u kill all, then only defenders are left on roadblock and u know they will not leave and snipe them too from flank. :sniper:

i think far cry gameplay was more innovative then hlaf life2 becose of whole new strategic jungle guerilla warfare layer. only thing innovative about doom3 was engine, but this is not bad thing i like old skool fps gameplay and whole game looked like made of one cast and had wonderful atmosphear. half life2 has sometime very funny and corny (?) dialoge in cutscene (far cry did even more and had weaker dialoge*g*) like funny headcra(b/p) of doctor. it is like hollywood movie u get satisfying entertainment for ur money. but hlaf life2 is sooo famous like nr 1 in all charts and good sell so maybe just make it goty and get over with it.

and give us heroes that talk and not mute dumb ass.

peace

 

[Dowie]

yes, it is

But I still believe Half Life 1 is better than it, with HL1: Source being the greatest version of the origional (until BMS)

 

[PickledGecko]

Er. No, you're wrong. If your enemies are dumb, the game is easier right? But if the AI is advanced enough to make your enemies behave like real-life special forces, the game is gonna be harder, right? Come on, it's not rocket science.


Regarding the difficulty question in general: If there weren't problems with the difficulty, no-one would be complaining. No-one is making up the complaint.

I don't completely agree with you on the first point. Difficulty is usally achieved by "cheating". Giving NPCs an inhuman ability to shoot you and an ability to take a huge number of bullets. I found Far Cry very difficult, but also very boring, because of this. Its a cop out of game design, its purly done to fill in gaps left behind from weak AI. I do agree, that Half-Life 2 was too easy for a large number of people and the game could have done with another level of difficulty. But its clear to me that Valve wanted to avoid ramming up the NPCs shooting ability and resistance to bullets, instead they attempted to give the NPCs a little more cunning than other FPS games.

Although a lot of people have complained about the AI, I think it was the best in a long while. I felt more like I was outsmarting an enemy than in, for example, Far Cry, where the monsters jump at you with a one hit kill. As it is not possible to kill most monsters with one full M16 magazine, you have to resort to cheap tricks when fighting them. Such as, standing next to a corner, unloading you're mag, as soon as the monster makes its jump, running away and hiding behind the next corner as you reload, repeat until dead. To me, this sort of thing completly destroys any imersion in a game. Another thing that bugged me about Far Cry was the enemy soldiers ability to see me through the plants from 20 metres away, again forcing you to think about what weakness you can exploit rather than any kind of sneaking stratagy.

I never felt this way about Half-Life 2, although it was a bit too easy, it was still the most fun I'd had with an FPS in a long time.

 

[PvtRyan]

Er. No, you're wrong. If your enemies are dumb, the game is easier right? But if the AI is advanced enough to make your enemies behave like real-life special forces, the game is gonna be harder, right? Come on, it's not rocket science.

So basically, games from the 80's are the easiest games (obviously because the AI sucked) and only games of the future will have decent difficulty (as the AI gets better)? Does not compute.

You can make every game insanely hard, so could HL2 be (try a difficulty mod that adjusts weapon damage and accuracy of the enemies) that has jack shit to do with AI. If the enemies were more accurate, then they'd force you to take a slower approach and eliminate your chance to walk up to them and gun 'em in the head.

 

[xiao-x]

I think HL2 its more than worthy game of the year, i mean the graphics are really cool and the physic engine is also one of the best ones, and i love the story...

 

[Styloid]

This is the problem with art, it is too subjective and too open to bias to actually debate about quality and value. A good comparison seems to be the Japanese stroll gardens.

There are well constructed gardens that lead the viewers senses, that use sound, shapes, smells, and colour at predesignated places, that use psychological tricks to make the viewer more relaxed, and all that junk. Then there are thrown together gardens that stick as many colourful trees and flowers into one place as possible. Some people don't notice any difference, some like the designed garden, and some like the thrown together garden. All of them can argue their point and noone could ever win. Ever. Arguing just mentally reinforces their original view point and bias.
So if someone had to choose a "Japanese Stroll Garden of the Year" it would be equally as difficult to come to a consensus. That's art for you.