Should Ep.3 have ironsights?

[McCoy]

You suck at rickrolling.


Also, iron sights are totally superficial and have no gameplay effect at all unless the developers specifically make you less accurate when you dont right click. I dont think they're needed in any game.

Well, I think that iron sights wouldn't be needed but would be a nice touch to the series.


And about my rickrolling incident, why does it make it so any link I have to youtube automatically become embedded? WTF:farmer:

 

[Flyingdebris]

"micromanaging rpg crap" is a far cry from having immersion adding features that make combat feel more real.

Whats the big deal anyway, too much work to rightclick for better accuracy and the feeling that you are using a gun correctly? Anyway the story is only fresh through the first playthrough. I'd rather have a game that had a good story and engaging combat rather than a good story and stagnating combat.

Seriously, play one of the smod versions. Bulletime and wacky guns aside, their addition of I.S., bullet penetration, melee, arterial blood spray, and a host of other things, made the combat in hl2 way more interesting and fun.

 

[Laivasse]

I agree with Samon - don't fix what aint broke. Personally I still feel HL2's combat to be very engaging. In set pieces such as the C17 shootout where you're covering Alyx as she opens the generator, or the shootout at Black Forest Gateaux, or the notorious Entanglement showdown, I'll frequently replay the scene multiple times regardless of whether I survive or not, simply because I find it so enjoyable.

There's not one of those sections, either, where I think the addition of ironsights would be a useful gameplay addition. For a start I would never feel as if I had the time to use them. I'm another guy who completed Bioshock without using the ironsights more than a couple of times, even though I did go out of my way to explore all the different types of shootout strategies that were possible.

I'd suggest that if people think HL2's gameplay is getting stale, then perhaps it's because you've been playing essentially three whole different games now that have had near-identical combat mechanics. Sorry, but as long as Valve follows an episodic model there'll be no paradigm shift in terms of combat. If you don't like the fact that "HL2: Episode Whatever" is going to have essentially the same kind of combat as "HL2", then maybe you should take a break from the series. I was among the people who wanted to Valve to just shut up shop for a while and go straight to creating HL3 as a whole new game and scenario, but noooo... yet as long as they are cranking out highly enjoyable story add-ons to HL2 I've got the good sense not to expect gimmicky stuff from out of the blue like weapon degradation, inventory management, carry limitations, yada yada. Ditto ironsights.

 

[Absinthe]

they were added in one of the many versions of smod, and were fun to play with, i don't see why not.

Seriously, hl2's weapon loadout is already showing its age, and has been doing so for a long time. Where other games are exploring different ways of handling weapons, halflife is still stuck in the late 90s mentality.

adding iron sights i think is the least they can do. I mean there are so many immersion adding things that could be done. simulated accuracy systems, weapon specific melees, weapon customization, alternate ammos, loose aiming, bullet penetration, etc. etc.

I'll eat my hat if Valve ever does this with Half-Life. It's an action FPS in the purest sense of the word and you are trying to shoehorn realistic, strategic, RPG-esque features into its combat when Half-Life has never been about that kind of crap. And seeing as how Valve has seemingly made it priority to keep their games accessible in their overhead simplicity, this would only throw a wrench into it.

Most of these belong in a different game. It would change Half-Life's gameplay immeasurably, which would in turn alienate many of the fans the series has already accumulated. Make much sense? It doesn't to me either. Also, considering that what you're playing are essentially Half-Life 2 expansions I think it's absurd to expect them to make such drastic changes for the next episode.

However, objectively speaking here, is their standard gameplay without need of improvement? The line of thinking of "thats a waste of time/not worth it" leads to stagnation. There is always stuff you can do to improve variety and add immersion.

You are mistaken if you think people believe there's no room for improvement.

It's just that these suggestions are exactly the wrong kinds of changes to make.

 

[Jeron]

I actually love the ironsight.

I remember when I first played the Operation Flashpoint demo when it came out, it was awesome. And now I love it in Graw en R6 series. Also COD4 uses it well. In some games it's completely unneccesary and failed, like in Stalker or in Crysis, those games play much better with just shooting around like a rambo.

But in case of Half life, I don't know, I just can't imagine my Half Life with a iron sight. Tell me, when you play HL, do you even think about ironsights? do you play and accidently fire a grenade launcher 'cause you actually wanted to look down the sight? I don't think so!

The game doesn't even have leaning around corner. This was something I noticed when HL2 came out, cause by then every fps had it that it became standard. I found it strange at first, but i haven't needed it, not even missed it, not for 1 second.

And the last thing I want HL to do, is to go pursue other game's succesful formulae.
'cause that's how you fail. The only reason why FEAR, prey and time shift were succesful is because they brought something new and unique to their game. Games that try to be like another game, fail!

And HL is already the best game ever, so why change anything?

 

[Jeron]

(for some reason i don't have permission to edit my own post)

edit:
it's strange how people who like the mechanics of game B, go buy and play game A, and then complain about it not having the mechanics of game B. Why don't they just go buy game B and shut the f up?

 

[Naph]

Yup, Half-life 2 gets compared to CoD4
Crysis gets compared to Bioshock.
Oblivion gets compared to real life.

 

[Druckles]

Considering Half-Life 2 doesn't have a particularly accurate accuracy system as it is (it doesn't work like css), it wouldn't make sense to put such a realistic feature into Half-Life 2. Besides, I'm sure Valve would have a problem with making Half-Life more complicated than it already is.

 

[Stene]

Actually I am getting tired of this "lets keep the gameplay the same it has always been". There are games which add new things to games and make them work, Half-Life just has the same stupid system always.

Half-Life series have been on for almost 10 years, there should be some sort of change happening, other than new fake graphic effects. Take Grand Theft Auto or Super Mario series for example, they always bring something new in the next installment. Half-Life is always the same.

 

[Absinthe]

Yes, because the gravity gun was in both Half-Life games. As were vehicles. As were persistent, competent sidekicks.

Man, some of you people have absurd expectations. These are episodes. These are explicitly continuations of HL2. They are not an official sequel. What the hell made you expect revolutionary gameplay changes in what are essentially expansion packs? If Valve releases Half-Life 3 with nothing new up their sleeve, then your complaints would have some legitimacy. Currently, you're just missing the point.

 

[Jeron]

Like I said, go play game B and stop complaining 'bout game A.

The episode didn't include fake effects, they actually update the source engine with real special effects. You CANNOT deny that the new destruction effects (i don't know the technical name) (which can seen when the bridge fall apart and when striders destroy buildings) are totally awesome and add a great value to the game, as does the new technique to destroy the striders.

The episodes add plenty of stuff we haven't seen in HL2. And not just gfx-wise.

Besides, the sales says it all.

 

[Asknoone]

How has it not changed in 10 years? The gameplay changes chapter per chapter, scene by scene – most other shooters have been clogging out the same stuff for a long, long time. Half-life gameplay is clever because it's changing all the time. They always refresh the scenario and what you're doing. The core gameplay hasn't changed but then so few shooters have. Tweaking it in superficial ways – ironsights, weapon customization – these aren't real changes. You're still putting your player through a shooting gallery.

I could list all the gameplay changes a single chapter in one of the Episodes goes through alone.

 

[Jeron]

How has it not changed in 10 years? The gameplay changes chapter per chapter, scene by scene ? most other shooters have been clogging out the same stuff for a long, long time. Half-life gameplay is clever because it's changing all the time. They always refresh the scenario and what you're doing.

EXACTLY!

When I play COD4 I feel like playing COD2 all over again (which i felt like playing COD1 all over again).
When I play Crysis I feel like playing farcry all over again.
I have this feeling with many games.

This weekend I replayed HL1, op4, blue shift, hl2 + all episodes (marathon).
I can tell you, when playing ep1 I didn't feel like doing things from HL2 again, not even beating that strider, it had a new dimension to it, something more personal, which was great.
Even in HL1, compare the Xen missions to the black mesa ones ...
Even within the xen missions themselfs, now you're outside jumping from platform to platform careful not to fall into the abyss, next thing you're in factory of some sorts, etc.
Even the pace changes, and always at the right moment at the right time, it's just perfect.

Unlike Crysis, where you're in the jungle all the time (even if it looks great) always doing the same all over again. It's like you would replay 1 chapter in HL2 all day long, restart - restart - restart - ...
and when you do finally get inside, the indoors are boring as hell, and so inspirationless. And the iron sights sucks in this game btw. Even the scope!

 

[Stene]

I mean the guns and enemies. The soldiers have always been there, they just have different look each time. The guns except gravity gun are the same, just look different.

The enemies are pretty much same, there is just 4 different zombies in the game, they act always the same way so it is like killing the same zombie again and again.

I don't care if those are episodes, there should be atleast one "new" weapon. Not some strider buster, something like real sniper and so. And maybe change the origins of most view model weapons, when Gordon finds a new crowbar it always looks the same as the past one.

 

[Jeron]

The crowbar looks always the same because it IS and always has been the same crowbar.
The crowbar in HL2 is the same one from HL1, barney has kept it for you.

The strider buster IS a new weapon, and much more original then an ordinary sniper rifle. plus, you already have a sniper rifle called the crossbow.

And weapons like the pulse rifle and bugbait are totally new weapons, not some old ones with other skin. Even the grenades work different than the ones from HL1 (HL2 has the best grenade throwing system than any game I might add).

The 4 different zombies in the game are all totally different and each acquire a different tactic to defeat them.
The normal are the normal zombie, and they are fun because you can massacre them, like burn them or cut them in half or paint them white, etc.
Then you have the runners which runs over rooftops and are very very fast.
Then you have the zombine who runs at you with a grenade a la suicide terrorist.
So they all act totally different.

What do you want? A zombie with a flamethrower singing I'm hot tonight?

 

[Omnomnick]

I dunno about anyone else, but I am getting really tired of people discussing new weapons for Half life 2 and its Episodes. Why do the Guns matter, you have the grav gun, the ultimate weapon. Also, it is the story etc which really matters in a game, yes guns matter in online but not singleplayer. We may see a new gun appear in Episode 3 but there will definatley be no Iron Sights.



None...

 

[Flyingdebris]

the guns matter because its an FPS, an FPS that for the past 4 years has had the exact same guns with only a strider buster added.

after using the same guns for the past 3 iterations of the game, is it wrong to expect to see some new uses for the old stuff, or new weapons altogether?

I'm tired of an mp7 that doesn't make any sense whatsoever, a weightless crowbar, a weak pistol that becomes near useless after aquiring anything else, a pulse rifle that only you know how to reload automatically, and a 357 that is speed loaded via your thumb, and a "double barreled pump action" shotgun. This isn't perfection, far from it.

You've got this rich setting with a strong narrative and characters you really grow to care for, but the weapons are for the most part inconsistant or nonsensical in some cases. Maybe they don't need iron sights, but they do need updating in some form.

 

[SpotEnemyBoats]

I agree with the above sentiment

HL's problem isn't the gameplay, its the combat. Its absolutely dreadfull, it isn't interesting at all. HL story, cinematic sequences, and the scenes are some of the best for any single player science fiction game like Half-Life. That being said, being that HL is a FPS, most of the games are spent on shooting badies than the actual scenes.

HL1's arsenal was pretty bad, worse than HL2's. It was pretty much hit or miss, like the MP5 for example. Half-Life 2 was definately improved over that, especially with a gimmick like the gravity gun to spice up the combat.

I think Warbie, in some other thread suggesting that HL should revamp its combat. I agree, to an extent.

 

[ríomhaire]

I find combat in the HL2 games fun anyway. Whether it be throwing bricks at enemies' heads, dodging hunters or blasting antlions with shotguns.

 

[Stene]

The crowbar looks always the same because it IS and always has been the same crowbar.
The crowbar in HL2 is the same one from HL1, barney has kept it for you.

The strider buster IS a new weapon, and much more original then an ordinary sniper rifle. plus, you already have a sniper rifle called the crossbow.

And weapons like the pulse rifle and bugbait are totally new weapons, not some old ones with other skin. Even the grenades work different than the ones from HL1 (HL2 has the best grenade throwing system than any game I might add).

The 4 different zombies in the game are all totally different and each acquire a different tactic to defeat them.
The normal are the normal zombie, and they are fun because you can massacre them, like burn them or cut them in half or paint them white, etc.
Then you have the runners which runs over rooftops and are very very fast.
Then you have the zombine who runs at you with a grenade a la suicide terrorist.
So they all act totally different.

What do you want? A zombie with a flamethrower singing I'm hot tonight?

And then Barney like, somehow got it back in Episode One, and after you lost it he again got it and stacked to that one elevator. You lost the crowbar first time when grunts kicked you out, then GMan took the next one. Barney probably got the one that grunts took.

 

[Eejit]

Half-Life ain't gun-wank.

It doesn't matter if they aren't realistic or don't make sense to gun-obsessives, as long as they're fun and do they job when they're meant to.
I don't know about you but I consider an unrealistic pistol becoming more obsolete over time fine, as long as it works when you need it..

 

[Absinthe]

I'm tired of an mp7 that doesn't make any sense whatsoever, a weightless crowbar, a weak pistol that becomes near useless after aquiring anything else, a pulse rifle that only you know how to reload automatically, and a 357 that is speed loaded via your thumb, and a "double barreled pump action" shotgun. This isn't perfection, far from it.

You're just throwing a petty hissy fit over unimportant, trivial details for a game that does not strive to be realistic. The pistol is a god damn pistol, and that's all that matters. I don't care if it's not the same as its real life counterpart. Nobody does except nitpickers who can't understand that realism is mostly irrelevant to making it the FPS it is.

Also, anybody who thinks the HL1 arsenal or combat sucked should get out. HL2 may not have been the absolute apex outside the gravity gun, but calling it dreadful or any other exaggeration is simply ludicrous. And to even say HL1 was worse, completely disregarding the raving across the board about its marine encounters that flooded the PC gaming fanbase and critics, could be called a flat-out lie worthy of banishment.

 

[Laivasse]

Also, to say the pistol is becomes useless over time is simply not true. Apart from the crossbow, it's probably the best weapon for taking out enemies at a distance (edging out the .357 due to its more plentiful ammo). With fast weapon switch enabled, the pistol is a perfect fallback when your weapon clicks empty and you don't want to be caught sitting around reloading - just hit 2 and twitch fire at a soldier's head and they'll drop fast.

IMO HL2 struck the balance perfectly in terms of having an arsenal where you continue to use all of your weapons throughout the game, apart from perhaps the MP7. As for reload animation quibbles, who-tf cares. If anything I've always thought they were pretty slick.

 

[SpotEnemyBoats]

Your being obtuse. What I think about HL1's combat is just my opinion. People perfer different things just like you perfer different things, and how I perfer different things.

To me I just find it mundane, as far as shooting is concerned. I don't care if it isn't realistic or have some ironsights (some iron sights can be a pain in the ass to aim), as long is they find a way to make it a bit more interesting.

To contradict myself, one thing I have to say that I like about the combat is the music that plays during it, that gets me pumped.

 

[Asknoone]

Anyone who thinks HL2 would benefit from such features does not understand or appreciate the brilliance of the gameplay itself. It's not about dotting every level with enemies – which is what most shooters do – it's about carefully tuned and polished scenarios. Like, look at Episode 1 – blocking antlion burrows; deflecting debris on an elevator; finding the power and subsequently defending against hordes of zombies; escorting citizens or repairing the Core. That's good gameplay. It's not about just shooting down enemy after enemy.

It's shocking that some people can't actually grasp this and still churn out the same shooting gallery wank fest year after year.

 

[McCoy]

When has ironsights been so bad to a game? It wouldn't take away from anything would it? If they added ironsights you could use it or not, kind of like your appendix or something.

The gameplay is brilliant at that; but I don't think that ironsights would sacrifice anything.

 

[Flyingdebris]

this ain't a hissy fit, this is a solid dicussion on game design specifically related to weapons, i haven't tried to belittle you, so i'd appreciate if the reverse were true.

most of my gripes, anyway, stem from what i see as all this trouble going into making a really believable setting, story, and characters, and then at least to me, they seem to get lazy with the guns.

maybe i expect too much, maybe i spent to much time on 4chan's /k/ board, all i know is that i like my FPS guns to behave or appear consistant and/or believable.

 

[McCoy]

Well, I need to sum things up here, because this thread is getting kind of long.

So what exactly is the problem with ironsights besides the fact that it would be a tad different and maybe weird for a few if Valve sudenly pulled this on us?

 

[chahyunun]

would u want to shoot with open scenery or shoot through a tiny hole? :angel:

 

[99.vikram]

So what exactly is the problem with ironsights besides the fact that it would be a tad different and maybe weird for a few if Valve suddenly pulled this on us?

If Valve added ironsights, they would have to make it useful. Which means ironsights would have to be more accurate than regular fire.
Combat balance = broken.

The reason gunplay in HL2 works is because your guns are innaccurate. Otherwise, the enemies would drop like flies due to their low HP and numbers.

 

[Absinthe]

this ain't a hissy fit, this is a solid dicussion on game design specifically related to weapons, i haven't tried to belittle you, so i'd appreciate if the reverse were true.

most of my gripes, anyway, stem from what i see as all this trouble going into making a really believable setting, story, and characters, and then at least to me, they seem to get lazy with the guns.

maybe i expect too much, maybe i spent to much time on 4chan's /k/ board, all i know is that i like my FPS guns to behave or appear consistant and/or believable.

Sorry, but it seems like you're criticizing it on unreasonable grounds. Making it believable does not necessarily require making it more realistic. It only gives just enough realism to suspend your disbelief, but that's never been the series' primary aim. As it is, most people who play it don't know or care how a particular revolver or machine gun works in real life, at least no moreso than when they're watching Die Hard or any mainstream action film.

I just think you're expecting the wrong things.

 

[Shephard]

No lol, unnecessary.

 

[-Psy-]

Should Ep.3 have ironsights?

Yes. Let's add in a completely pointless feature which adds absolutely nothing to a game which has never been about having perfect accuracy.

 

[lord_raken]

I agree that iron sights are useless and unnecessary. but I was thinking... What if they introduced a C.S type alt aim. you all most likely know what I am talking about (bullpup): you activate the "alt aim", your view zooms in (allowing so see distant targets in more detail), the gun stays where it is (screen remains clear), and your accuracy goes up. possible draw backs... can't sprint while in this mode but once you hit the shift you zoom out and are already booking it.

 

[Druckles]

You might recall that the bullpup has a scope.

 

[Flyingdebris]

If Valve added ironsights, they would have to make it useful. Which means ironsights would have to be more accurate than regular fire.
Combat balance = broken.

The reason gunplay in HL2 works is because your guns are innaccurate. Otherwise, the enemies would drop like flies due to their low HP and numbers.

i'd have to disagree with you, in smod remastered redux they added iron sights and had between custom cvars added in and the old cvars that were already in the vanilla game, you could tweak damage, health, accuracy, and burst duration of the enemies.

If you up the combine health by about 2 or 3 times, increased weapon power to be equal for both you and the combine, and increased their accuracy and burst duration. They made for surprisingly difficult, and very satisfying fights. You could also always add more enemies.

Playing through the singleplayer campaign was at least for me, a whole lot more fun.

As for expecting the wrong things, maybe, still doesn't stop me from wanting them.

 

[freeman1993]

No way it would totally ruin the games first person shooter. I mean think about it now we can use ironsight, no way.

 

[lord_raken]

You might recall that the bullpup has a scope.

you don't use it though.

 

[McCoy]

would u want to shoot with open scenery or shoot through a tiny hole? :angel:

I'm sorry, but this must indicate you only look at stuff when you are fighting; HL series is so brilliant I actually explore the area when I am done fighting, whereas you seem to only fight because of that statement?

Are you saying that scenery is only for the sole purpose of when you are fighting? To me it's that and much more; I don't knnow about you but I savor any new HL game that comes my way. And you'll only have ironsights when you click a button, its not like they will only have ironsights and nothing else.

 

[Absinthe]

Still not seeing any point. Which is what any worthwhile feature should have.