Will Half-Life 2 Revolutionize The PC Gaming Market?

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by Pseudonym_
Perhaps someone could enlighten me, and tell me just what it is about hl2 they think will bring about a major fundamental change in gaming?

..just you wait until you see the..


BIOZEMINADES!

(Huge for emphasis on how ground breaking they are )

 

[Pseudonym_]

Your search - BIOZEMINADES - did not match any documents.
No pages were found containing "biozeminades".

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by Pseudonym_
Your search - BIOZEMINADES - did not match any documents.
No pages were found containing "biozeminades".

..bah, I guess only a few people read that amazon "review" of HL2 =(

 

[Shuzer]

Here we go, I found it:

I've heard rumours that this isnt actually Half Life 2, it is actually half life 1, under a different name, and it has a few new enemies named 'biozeminades' which can make themselves look good, and you have to kill them with spray paint. Apparently, the half life 2 e3 video and trailer were made with frame by frame animation (so it is not the game) by Yago Zebadiah, who is from France. However, this half life 2(1) is still looking good, and i hope that the biozeminades are as good as people say they are

Taken from a user p/review from amazon.com

 

[Styloid]

No body answered the question: what do you think is revolutionary?
It just seems like people just don't have the scope to see beyond current views (like when people thought no vehicle would be able to fly). Everyone is looking for some new technology to be revolutionary. Chances are revolutionary software out there will not be able to fit in a game that can run on current PC's.
Can anyone honestly say that they are content with story telling in current games(FPS mainly)? The empty characters? The same old gameplay over and over? The jittery, unstrcutured pacing?
I'm not saying it definitely will be revolutionary (though from what Valve have hinted at it should be), but those who say it definitely won't just aren't looking.
Revolutionary is NOT AI that can hide behind things or huge environments or physics or whatever feature they can print on a box.
I'd say that when people start emotionally reacting to games as much as books, that is revolutionary.

 

[Iconoclast]

Plenty of games have had stories that have provoked emotional responses in people. I loved Planescape: Torment's story.

To be honest, I'd be surprised if Half-Life 2 had a decent story, much less a good one. A story in a traditional FPS, like HL2 is difficult to pull off. You have to really slow down the tempo of a game to have enough dialogue to even begin having a plot (see Deus Ex) which would kill a "shooter".

People, strangely, seem to say the first one had a good story. It hardly had a story at all - just some well scripted action sequences.

 

[iamironsam]

Originally posted by Iconoclast
Plenty of games have had stories that have provoked emotional responses in people. I loved Planescape: Torment's story.

To be honest, I'd be surprised if Half-Life 2 had a decent story, much less a good one. A story in a traditional FPS, like HL2 is difficult to pull off. You have to really slow down the tempo of a game to have enough dialogue to even begin having a plot (see Deus Ex) which would kill a "shooter".

People, strangely, seem to say the first one had a good story. It hardly had a story at all - just some well scripted action sequences.

But at least you felt like you were part of the story instead of totally being dettached from it. Typical FPSs go like this:

Intro movie --> Run around and kill stuff --> Cutscene movie --> Run around and kill stuff --> Cutscene movie --> Run around and kill the big boss --> Outro movie and credits.

Half Life actually merged all these actions together, which was pretty revolutionary when you think about it. It suprises me that not many games have tried this method since.

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by iamironsam
But at least you felt like you were part of the story instead of totally being dettached from it. Typical FPSs go like this:

Intro movie --> Run around and kill stuff --> Cutscene movie --> Run around and kill stuff --> Cutscene movie --> Run around and kill the big boss --> Outro movie and credits.

Half Life actually merged all these actions together, which was pretty revolutionary when you think about it. It suprises me that not many games have tried this method since.

Ever play ChexQuest? That game > HL/2, hands down.

 

[iamironsam]

Originally posted by Shuzer
Ever play ChexQuest? That game > HL/2, hands down.

Did that come in a Chex cereal box?

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by iamironsam
Did that come in a Chex cereal box?

yep

Pretty cool for a free first person shooter, though.

 

[MultiVaC]

Lol, ChexQuest! I wonder if I still have that lying around. Ahh, the days when you got an FPS in you cereal. Now THAT was part of a balanced breakfast.

 

[iamaelephant]

Back in my day all we got was shitty hologaphic cards with made-up cartoon characters on them.

 

[Sparta]

Is everyone forgetting the AI they had in the first half-life? Not only how the grunts used to flank and out manuever you (If you didn't have a grenade and were camping hoping they would run in and try to kill you, like in every other FPS ever created) But the Special Ops AI is the best compared to any game today.

In Halo, the grunts and the Elites usually were in a team but never acted as one. The grunts would panic and the Elites would do all the work, everybody acted independantly. (I thought the Elites were an All-time bitch)

The Special Ops used to do what the grunts did but were 3 times faster then them and knew exactly how to get you. The female Assasins only had pistols but they were the biggest pain's to kill. They'd jump out of nowhere, shoot at you, run off, you pursue, 2 others come from behind and shoot you, you turn around to defend yourself, they're gone, another pops up to your left, and before you know it you're dead.

Chances are, given 5 years Valve has had to develop the AI FURTHER. I'd say they have improved it. As for this "Freeform" AI you guys are talking about with Stalker and Far Cry, i remember when RtCW was about to come out, i was reading in PCGamer an interview with one of the lead programmers. Can't remember his name, but he said the AI would lob grenades back at you and take cover where ever they could find it. I never once saw that happen. One time a soldier kicked a grenade back but that was about it.

I'm not saying the AI in Stalker and Far Cry wont be good, but i've seen games promise this and that and failed to deliver. Many times before.

 

[PSX]

one thing I'd like to reply to; someone mentioned how great the physics are going to be (no doubt about it), but I am skeptical on how it will affect gameplay much

take Max Payne 2, for example, I only played it for 7-9 hours, but half-way through the game, lobbing grenades behind boxes and chairs got incredibly boring, and it definitely did not help the game in a tactical sense; I don't see how it will be any different in HL2

 

[Sparta]

Have you heard of the Manipulator . A Fantastic weapon, turns almost any object into a projectile. Like a barrel. or a radiator. You just point at it with the gun, click, the gun levitates the item. And now you can walk around with the item in front of you as either a shield, or if you want something to die, you shoot it with the item.

Download the traptown video. Its very cool

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by PSX
one thing I'd like to reply to; someone mentioned how great the physics are going to be (no doubt about it), but I am skeptical on how it will affect gameplay much

take Max Payne 2, for example, I only played it for 7-9 hours, but half-way through the game, lobbing grenades behind boxes and chairs got incredibly boring, and it definitely did not help the game in a tactical sense; I don't see how it will be any different in HL2

Max Payne 2 wasn't about tactics.. it was about being a badass and owning all the enemies while diving through the air in bullet time

 

[PSX]

Originally posted by Sparta
Have you heard of the Manipulator . A Fantastic weapon, turns almost any object into a projectile. Like a barrel. or a radiator. You just point at it with the gun, click, the gun levitates the item. And now you can walk around with the item in front of you as either a shield, or if you want something to die, you shoot it with the item.

Download the traptown video. Its very cool

yeah, gets boring after a while though; it's basically a nice little gimmick to put a twist on gameplay; remember bullet time 1.0 ?

 

[PSX]

Originally posted by Shuzer
Max Payne 2 wasn't about tactics.. it was about being a badass and owning all the enemies while diving through the air in bullet time

err, I'm trying to relate MP2 physics with those in HL2; from what you've said, I might as well say that HL2 isn't about tactics, it's about owning all the aliens/mutants, while being grasped by a decent story; of course, it's not out yet, so I'm not gonna assume

I will take an educated guess though and say that the manipulator is still just a gimmick, like bullet time; it has the potential to change gameplay from otherwise being boring, but the feature will feel so much like second nature to you, that you're not going to think twice about using it, therefore becoming mundane and literally normal

 

[Anwar]

I think it will be a fun game but nothing pushing technology.

And single player games dont intrest me very long.

So no.

 

[PSX]

Originally posted by Anwar
I think it will be a fun game but nothing pushing technology.

And single player games dont intrest me very long.

So no.

you still haven't convinced me that your name is of a norwegian god (or whatever it was)... give it another shot I couldn't find anything on it those months back

anyway, I voted I like food... it's more important than games

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by PSX
err, I'm trying to relate MP2 physics with those in HL2; from what you've said, I might as well say that HL2 isn't about tactics, it's about owning all the aliens/mutants, while being grasped by a decent story; of course, it's not out yet, so I'm not gonna assume

I will take an educated guess though and say that the manipulator is still just a gimmick, like bullet time; it has the potential to change gameplay from otherwise being boring, but the feature will feel so much like second nature to you, that you're not going to think twice about using it, therefore becoming mundane and literally normal

I was joking about the whole Max Payne comment, as you referred to physics not helping the tactical aspects of the game.. just trying to ligthen the situation up

 

[PSX]

Originally posted by Shuzer
I was joking about the whole Max Payne comment, as you referred to physics not helping the tactical aspects of the game.. just trying to ligthen the situation up

yeah, that's what I thought... I mean hell, what's the point of something if it's not going to do anything on the gameplay aspects? sure, it's fun for a while.... just as long as it's not hyped up (hopefully the physics in HL2 have not and will not have been by the time it's released), then it will fail miserably because people will try to overrate it before the game is even out... by creating scenarios in their head (ohhh ohhh, I'm gonna attach a watermelon to the manipulator, shoot it in the air, and have it land on the table, splitting the wood into 47 pieces)... unfortunately, it's not going to work that way

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by PSX
yeah, that's what I thought... I mean hell, what's the point of something if it's not going to do anything on the gameplay aspects? sure, it's fun for a while.... just as long as it's not hyped up (hopefully the physics in HL2 have not and will not have been by the time it's released), then it will fail miserably because people will try to overrate it before the game is even out... by creating scenarios in their head (ohhh ohhh, I'm gonna attach a watermelon to the manipulator, shoot it in the air, and have it land on the table, splitting the wood into 47 pieces)... unfortunately, it's not going to work that way

I agree. My first and absolute first impression when I played Max Payne 2 was that the physics were worthless. It seemed like they tacked Havok on just as eye candy, and had no practical use whatsoever. After pushing a few IV carts over in the hospital and knocking some boxes over, the novelty was gone.

It pissed me off that the physics had nothing to do with anything in the game (except, I suppose, the final boss, although that could've been done without proper physics). Oh well. The only real joy I got out of the physics was in one of Max's nightmares, a corridor was blocked off my boxes, I dived into and they fell in slow motion.. other than that, complete novelty and has no use in games (or, atleast MP2).

Here's to hoping VALVe has some good physics related scnearios and puzzles setup

 

[Styloid]

Iconoclast,
Did you ever stop to think about how well those scripted sequences were implemented? Did you think about how they set tone, set pace, gave variety, initiated transitions, how fun they were? It's a little primitive by modern/upcoming standards but these are all part of storytelling. I have not touched another game that was as well authored as HL1 (consider: Valve used distance as a measure of when and where to place action events and carefully contolled the pace of the game). This is opposed to the random free roaming 'storytelling' of other RPG's (for which I also have respect for). These are the reasons why Valve came up with 'revolutionary' stuff in HL1 like fully connected levels or scripted events. These are also the reason why HL2 is building advanced character models, recording dialogue with professional voice actors and developing their own engine- it's all about story telling.
I guess it's the same way I see movie directing. You don't need to be told you've watched a good movie. You just know it but can't say exactly why until you really look into it.
I must add that if I wrote 'story' in my post I meant 'storytelling'... and yes I loved Planescape Torment.

 

[InsertNameHere]

IMO, HL-2 had a chance to define PC Gaming for Q4 2003 and most of 2004. However, the hacker-related delay caused it to be pushed back so far that other games have taken its place, and I don't think that HL2 will have the impact it could have. Call of Duty had the great guns-blazing teamplay that the City 17 levels looked to have, Max Payne 2 gave us a taste of mind-blowing graphics coupled with the Havok 2 engine. Deus Ex: The Invisible War will be out in a matter of days, and I think the open-ended gameplay and story will carry me well into 2004. Doom 3 is scheduled for early 2004, and that's going to be more mindless killing-spree fun. Let's hope that HL-2 makes that date, but if it doesn't....there's always STALKER, which I'm incredibly hyped for. I just feel like HL2 will have an unfortunate Daikatana release, with the hype all gone and most of the gaming community has already moved on.

That's all assuming the supposed Dec. 11 review of HL2 doesn't actually come out.

 

[Shuzer]

You're still looking foward to DX2 after playing the demo? Honestly, I had high hopes for it, but from the second I started it up, it didn't have a "good game" feel.

Max Payne 2 has awesome graphics, yes, but the physics don't really belong. Give me an example where the physics affected anything in MP2 other than the boss of the game (which, could've been done without proper physics). The physics had no affect on MP2, in the slightest, and were tacked on to make the game look more appealing. Sure, knocking over boxes is fun for a little while, but past that, it's done for.

Doom 3 is scheduled for the exact same April 2004 HL2 release that's been floating around (whether true or not, I can't see the game being pushed back further than that) from Vivendi.

STALKER is still TBA 2004.

The hype behind HL2 may be dying down, for now, however the VALVe fans won't forget about it so quickly. Once a date is announced, everything will start buzzing again. Just watch.

 

[Pseudonym_]

I disagree with you guys bashing MP2 physics, claiming that it was useless since it didn't affect gameplay a great deal.

We are now at a point in FPS gaming where you expect new releases to have advanced physics engines, but does this mean that physics should play such a huge role in the gameplay as it does in, say, HL2? Do we really want 20 versions of the Manipulator Gun throughout the next few generations of FPS games? Is it really important to have physics traps added to every game? I don't believe so.

These things are nice, but the type of gameplay it introduces doesnt fit in a lot of other games.

You bash MP2 physics because they didn't use it to introduce any new gameplay types, but that isnt the point of having physics in the first place. The point is making the game world as authentic as possible. When your in a game and objects react realistically, it makes it that much more immersive. Physics are not just useless if they dont have a lot of physics traps, or a weapon that uses physics. It has a place in a game even if it doesn't affect gameplay much.

 

[Shuzer]

I hadn't really thought about it on the immersion side of things and thinking on that, it is important indeed for games to have physics.

I dunno, I think I was just hoping for more on the physics side of things after getting pumped about HL2's physics interactions, then playing MP2. I still think MP2 could have done with a SLIGHT use of physics (other than that one game room at the abandon carnival), other than eye candy (although, I did love nading large piles of objects and watching them fly around the room )

 

[AmishSlayer]

I think it would've been revolutionary if it had been released on Sept. 30th. Now it'll just be another good game. Not too special.