Half-Life Beats Half-Life 2 Over Time?

Anonymous Coward writes "Tom's Hardware has an editorial up entitled 'Half-Life vs Half-Life 2: No comparison?' It explores the two games, and how they're holding up over time. He states that while the score of HL1 may have depreciated from 'a spectacular 95% to around about an average 70%' over the past couple of years, the score of HL2 'I'd now rate it in the low to mid 80's, or a full five to ten percent drop in a fraction of the time that the original has been around. Why is this?' The reason, he goes on to elaborate, is a lack of characterization. Half-Life was a blank slate modders could use to fill in their own worlds. HL2, on the other hand, has a definite story that ages less gracefully."

Re:Half-Life 2: The FPS for people who hate FPSes

[Anonymous Coward]

In Half-Life 2, you get to drive an airboat, solve physics puzzles, throw barrels, drive a buggy, move planks, order insects around, follow a girl, set up robotic guns, and throw guys like ragdolls.

umm ... that might be a frightening experience for some people around here. There should definitely be a warning on the case or something.

Duhhhh

[MarkPNeyer]

Half-Life 2 decays twice as fast as half-life 1!

Re:Subjectiveness

[IntlHarvester]

Well, yes, but starting by saying "This went from a 90 to a 70" is a really bad way to editorialize your point. My first reaction was wondering what the hell is he was talking about, until I realized it's some sort of game reviewer circlejerk jargon. It's not like joe gamer looks at his collection and says "Doom3, that's an 83!".

Re:Half-Life 2: The FPS for people who hate FPSes

[MjrTom]

I dunno man, I've got quite abit of experience following girls. It gets more fun once they ask you to stop and you have to go all steath commando. /* looks around nervously */