Negative comments about Half-Life 2?

[VortigauntLover]

This is what someone said about Half-Life 2 on another forum.

]
Half-Life 2 was boring as sin. Half-Life 2 wasn't even half as good as the first game. Half-Life 2 is all eye candy and no substance.

I think he is completely wrong.

 

[Adabiviak]

Without him available to further his argument, there's not much of a debate. His only argument is that there's no substance. Does he elaborate? I would also argue against this in principle, but I'd have to hear why he thinks that to be fair.

 

[VortigauntLover]

Without him available to further his argument, there's not much of a debate. His only argument is that there's no substance. Does he elaborate? I would also argue against this in principle, but I'd have to hear why he thinks that to be fair.

He said he was coming to sign up.

 

[Keane]

There's always going to be some people who don't appreciate a great game.

 

[giant384]

not a very good argument at all.

 

[Mahalis]

Anyhow, sin isn't boring.

 

[diluted]

So some guy on another forum dissed HL2? And this is worthy of a thread why? :|

 

[VortigauntLover]

So some guy on another forum dissed HL2? And this is worthy of a thread why? :|

Boredom. :|

Besides, his friend came and posted 'EP1 Sucks'

 

[Oppressor]

I will never understand why people join a specific forum where they don't appreciate what the forum is all about

 

[Shift]

I will never understand why people join a specific forum where they don't appreciate what the forum is all about

My thoughts exactly, incredibly stupid to go on a Half-Life 2 website which, as the name suggests, is all about Half-Life 2 and where a fanbase resides to talk about the game and aspects of the game, and slate the game off. If they are just going on to argue about something then they must get out more.

Slating the Half-Life games means you haven't a clue about games. End of.

 

[pomegranate]

I think he is completely wrong.

I think this thread is completely pointless.

 

[Neutrino]

I think this thread is completely pointless.

Agreed.


Oh and for the record, I didn't much like Half-Life 2 either. Not much more than a glorified arcade shooter with a few bits of story thrown in here and there.

 

[Narvi]

Agreed.


Oh and for the record, I didn't much like Half-Life 2 either. Not much more than a glorified arcade shooter with a few bits of story thrown in here and there.

I assume you like the plot, as you're a member here.:cheese:

It's true, though. The gameplay is really dull.

 

[Gorgon]

Boredom. :|

Besides, his friend came and posted 'EP1 Sucks'

EP1 owns HL2 :dork:

can't wait for em to sign up here.

 

[pomegranate]

I think HL2 was good but tbh I was a bit disappointed on a number of fronts... but that's all water under the bridge now.

 

[Asknoone]

No substance thing is kind of funny, considering it has the best gameplay around. Combat wasn't anything special but the gameplay was A grade.

 

[Qonfused]

Half-Life 2 was the best overall game of 2004. The AI was spectacular, the story was engaging and it was longer than most FPS. I had a problem with the weapon choices though and the combat, as Samon said. The weapons lacked the boom I was hoping for. Of course, they can be all changed with skins and sounds, but who wants to do that?

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Half-Life 2 was the best overall game of 2004. The AI was spectacular, the story was engaging and it was longer than most FPS. I had a problem with the weapon choices though and the combat, as Samon said. The weapons lacked the boom I was hoping for. Of course, they can be all changed with skins and sounds, but who wants to do that?

Me for one.

 

[Qonfused]

Me for one.

That comment was made out of jest considering: http://www.fpsbanana.com/skincats/118.

 

[Asknoone]

Half-Life 2 was the best overall game of 2004. The AI was spectacular, the story was engaging and it was longer than most FPS. I had a problem with the weapon choices though and the combat, as Samon said. The weapons lacked the boom I was hoping for. Of course, they can be all changed with skins and sounds, but who wants to do that?

Pretty much. Half-life 2 is probably the best game I've ever played due to the sheer polish, pretty much up there with Deus ex. But then, combat in Deus ex was also meh. I don't see why anyone would want to change skins and sounds though. D:

 

[pomegranate]

Combat wasn't anything special but the gameplay was A grade.

Um, how does that work? Puzzles and driving aside, shooting things makes the majority of the gameplay... Or were the puzzles and driving that much fun for you? I'm not being facetious, I just don't understand what you can mean by gameplay besides combat and, secondarily, puzzles etc.

 

[Asknoone]

When someone says ‘gameplay’ about a shooter, they shouldn’t immediately start talking about ‘combat’ ‘AI’. There’s so much more to the gameplay than that, and HL2 delivers in spades. Sure, shooting things pretty much takes up most of the game, but it’s oh so more carefully executed than that. Its what in my opinion makes HL2 the best FPS ever made.

 

[pomegranate]

There’s so much more to the gameplay than that

Such as?
Atmosphere, graphics, music, NPC acting and development, plot, story telling, dramatic timing, all make up the game, but they're not gameplay.


And I thought you liked Ep 1 better than HL2?

 

[Gordon-Shepherd]

I liked it, but it needs more enemies, and the combine just aren't.. alien enough. more xenians would be cool, and more synths too I guess.

 

[Asknoone]

Making your way across the bowls of a bridge, waiting for a cart, deflecting debris on a descending elevator, using turrets to defend, manoeuvring antlions through the prison, not stepping on the sand, knocking down metal panels for Alyx to shoot, avoiding snipers, blocking antlion tunnels, using flashlight to allow Alyx to shoot, defending Alyx from antlions...I could go on, but I'd be listing every scene from both games.

You don't notice it so much but every scene is so carefully crafted. You are doing something different every five minutes. I'll turn the corner and I know I'm not going to be doing the same thing again. It is so much more than moving through rooms filled with enemies.

It's what makes Half-life 2 so good, because there's this mirror perfect shine in almost everything. Gameplay, gameplay, gameplay. It's actually sometimes difficult to put it into words, but its the reason I find HL2 the best FPS ever made.

And I thought you liked Ep 1 better than HL2?

I thought the first two chapters of Episode 1 were of a higher standard than anything in HL2, but overall HL2 trumps it.

 

[L3adCannon]

Was a bit dissapointed in HL2 mysself.
I didn`t get leaning, ironisghts, stuff that is taken for granted now.
I only bought it cause of the hype and mods.
Appart from the gfx and phys-gun it was just an ordinary arcady shooter for me.

I loved HL1 though

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

leaning and ironsights are taken for granted now are they? Maybe in your world.

 

[Zephos]

omg hl2 sux neds a chainsaw baynet.

 

[Shift]

Was a bit dissapointed in HL2 mysself.
I didn`t get leaning, ironisghts, stuff that is taken for granted now.
I only bought it cause of the hype and mods.
Appart from the gfx and phys-gun it was just an ordinary arcady shooter for me.

I loved HL1 though

HL1 didn't have leaning or ironsites either, and HL2 is anything but an ordinary arcady shooter, if anything its the complete opposite.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Woo! Never ever post in this forum, but the thread caught my eye on 'latest post' for some reason ^_^

Err... well, just the feel of it is a bit off for me. The way you move around and jump and everything feels a bit too floaty. Makes it hard to imagine there's anything inside the HEV (although that'd make it easier to store all those weapons... still think it would've been interesting if you could only carry a few at a time as in the early pre-release videos). It's not really a big issue, it doesn't take away from the gameplay at all, but it sort of breaks the feeling they're trying to build up that you are Gordon Freeman. It's weird too, on multiple occasions I've tried to picture his face there while I was playing and it just won't come, doesn't fit somehow...

Besides that, just that it was a smidge too easy (except for one or two segments which nearly had me tearing out hair the first run through).

 

[DeusExMachina]

-Too easy
-Bad weapons
-Gameplay gets pretty boring
-AI really isn't anything special. I think the zombies and Antlions might've had better AI than the actual soldiers.
-Gordon Freeman is a pair of hands

But, none of that's really the reason you play the game. You play it for the immersion and the story. Though, after a few plays, it's all but boring now. Episode 1 had much better gameplay and moved the storyline along and Episode 2 looks to be even better.

 

[nokori3byo]

It seems to me that HL2 was not as universally adored among gamers as it was among critics. And even the critics invariably found a lot to bitch about including:
--Diminished AI (compared with the original)
--Takes only 15-20 hours to complete
--Excessively linear gameplay
--Plot full of holes and unclarified obscurites
--Various outrages vented at Steam.
Significantly though, the vast majority of critics still saw fit to rank the game in the 90% range, with many of them giving perfect scores despite having made criticisms that would have been damning in the case of lesser games.
Personally, I wasn't bothered by the AI. I didn't especially notice it when I was playing and it didn't interfere with my enjoyment of the game.
Since, in my view, 15-20 hours of varied and inventive gameplay is well worth what I paid for the game, I can't complain about that either.
As for the question of gameplay, it should be obvious by now that the experience offered up by the Half-Life series is quite different from that of "sandbox" style games like the GTA series (which I love). But, as far as I'm concerned, both styles--the extremely linear and deliberately non-linear--have their merits and the awesomeness of one doesn't diminish the the awesomeness of the other.
I liked the plot and I actually really liked the downbeat, open-ended conclusion...such as it was. I can see how it could have been frustrating for someone playing back in November of 2004, though.
Lastly, I'll leave the defence of Steam to a more credible apologist than myself.
The only thing that really irked me about the games was an excess of nuissance scenarios which occasionally interrupted the game's more engaging sequences. Did we really need a total of three underground zombie encounters in the urban combat levels? And the presence of three, whatever you do, don't step on the _______ scenarios in the game didn't exactly wow me either.
Then again, the great moments in HL2 are great moments in gaming history. How many games can say that? I'd have to say, on the whole, it was just a better realized, more aesthetically satisfying gaming experience than anything else I've played. Valve holds the artistic high ground in action gaming.

Seriously, though, there's no song, book, movie, or game good enought to please everybody. If someone didn't like HL2, it's no skin off my nose. There's always that temptation to hate what everybody else seems to love.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

Some people like single-player FPSs, Some people don't. Some people are half and half and worthless without coffee. :|

 

[Jintor]

I don't know... if you're a reviewing a game, is it fair to base the score for that game based on a seperate piece of software that you must install/use to play the game?

It's like basing a review on a game with copy protection based on the copy protection encoding...

 

[Asknoone]

It seems to me that HL2 was not as universally adored among gamers as it was among critics.

Oh, I'd say it was. There's a huge amount of people out there who love the game. However, I think when HL2 is looked back upon in the future people will actually see it in more favourable light (even more than it already is), as it's really the only shooter out there worth playing at the moment IMO. Everything else I play is cack (bar a few oldies).

There were no actual plotholes, it was simply the use of narrative. HL2 took a totally different approach to storytelling, achieving true non-linearity in its method, and nobody expected that. People expected things given to them on a plate.
Also, any critic/person who thinks the marines had better AI are truly stupid idiots who should be herded off of a cliff as soon as possible.

 

[nokori3byo]

There were no actual plotholes

Critics' allegations, not mine.

The reviewer at 4 Fat Chicks (see review: http://www.fourfatchicks.com/Reviews/Half_Life_2/HL2.shtml ) complains about the lack of explicit comment within the actual story about "mobile walls", claiming that is was wasteful to allow such an imaginative creation to go without elucidation.

Personally, I think it's cool that elements like this were presented in a way that allowed the player to fill in the blanks. It is, as you say, part of HL2's unique storytelling method. Not everyone felt this way though.

 

[Asknoone]

Critics' allegations, not mine.

I know.

No, people had seen that type of storytelling before, and it is daunting for the average player. Alot of the questions they want answers to, in that link you provided, are actually answered in game. We know how the Combine attacked, we know why and we know what they want. We know why the Vortigaunts are working with humanity, there's plausible reasons behind the fact that nobody asks where Gordon's been (they are all aware of his current position with the Gman) and we know why the Combine have headcrabs.

These are all very easy to answer if you put the effort in. The latter question about Headcrabs is stupid. They are obviously capturing them and using them as bio-warfare.

I also find it hilarious that they seem to think the Combine wall was used to stop Gordon. The wall is used to assimilate areas and is configured to transform into whatever it is told to.

A few plays and you'll understand the story pretty well. Things like the wall don't need to be answered. This is why Half-life 2 achieves true non-linearity in terms of storytelling.

 

[Jintor]

Well, a player who doesn't almost religiously discuss the game on these forums, and who doesn't observe what is happening immediately around them bar action, might just concluded that everything is based around the player and the player solely...

Is that poor game design or a poor viewpoint?

 

[Shift]

Its the beauty of Half-Life story telling that a lot of critics fail to see, you just get what you get in your first play through, the rest is up to you to figure, and like samon said, you play through a couple of times and you start to make more sense of the story, and have you own opinions on certain aspects of the plot. I think its pure brilliance, offers a lot of replayability, and adds more immersion in future Half-Life games.

I mean you can compare Half-Life 2 now to certain new games, but at the time, it was pretty much near perfect, the only things I found wrong with it was the lack of a lean function and yeah, the AI wasn't the best, but they were mere minor flaws compared to the bulk of awsomeness that the game contained. It is and always will be, one of the greatest games ever made.

 

[nokori3byo]

Without a doubt, the fact that so many aspects of the story are more easily grasped the second time through contributed to the "plothole" allegations in some early reviews. Most of these reviews were dated November 2004 and it makes sense that the majority of reviewers would not have had time to absorb the saga of City 17 in one sitting.

It reminds me of the title sequence of the film "Get Carter" in which the title character, played by Michael Caine, is riding the train to Newcastle. Perceptive viewers, watching the film for a second time, are likely to notice a certain startling detail in this scene, but without having seen the film once, there would be no way to grasp the significance of this detail.

See the "Stuff I only noticed the second time around" thread for an elaboration on this theme.