Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Half-Life Beats Half-Life 2 Over Time? 139

Posted by Zonk
from the running-articles-i-disagree-with-is-good-for-me dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Half-Life Beats Half-Life 2 Over Time?

Comments Filter:
  • huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by trigonalmayhem (938527) on Monday April 17, 2006 @10:54AM (#15142136)
    Is he even aware of how many more modding features HL2 has? Maybe he's just pissed that most of the mods are coming out via steam and being charged for, but I say good for the small independent developers who are actually making money off all their hard work.
    • Re:huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by thelost (808451)
      This neither here or there, his story makes alot of valid points which resonate with my own experience of half life 2. My greatest regret and dissapointment with HL2 was the abysmal story progression, and that is his complaint as well.

      Half life was a fundamental change in game philosophy which said that telling a story was important, interacting with your environment and other characters made a difference, you would hope that Valve could carry that through to their new titles but they do seem to have gone d
    • Re:huh? (Score:5, Informative)

      by BAILOPAN (694545) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:31AM (#15142392) Homepage
      Are you an HL2 mod developer? If so, link to your HL2 mod.

      I am one (our project burned out for a while), and I'm far more satisfied with the HL1 modding environment. I don't feel like repeating all of the reasons why, but amongst the developers I know, it's a well shared sentiment. Valve is nowhere near as friendly to developers anymore, especially to us open source ones.

      The HL2SDK is astoundingly disorganized, barely compiles properly on GCC, is poorly supported, not ported to AMD64, and known serious bugs have gone unfixed for over a year.

      Look at the game stats [steampowered.com]. The most popular third party Source mod is a tinker toy called "Garry's Mod". The next highest used Source mod has users that can be counted in one server screen. Not only is independent modding for HL2 a failure, but Valve is directly impeding it.
      • Re:huh? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by MooCows (718367) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:41AM (#15142484)
        I completely agree. The HL2 SDK is a mess.
        A few months ago I tried to start mod development by making the player jump higher when sprinting. Seemed like a simple enough mod. This took weeks to figure out because of 1. the poor design (the code that moves the player up is hidden like 20 methods deep, and fragments are all over the place) and 2. synch problems between the 'client' and 'server' code, which was also badly implemented.
        For comparison, after installing the Doom3 SDK it took me less than 20 minutes to implement a similar mod for D3. Including getting it to compile and run within D3.
      • Re:huh? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by RoffleTheWaffle (916980) on Monday April 17, 2006 @01:30PM (#15143257) Journal
        I'm glad you brought this up. The HL2 SDK is about as clear as mud - hard as a rock, dumb as a brick. Aside from the fact that HL2 is stupidly unoptimized and just really poorly coded for what few new features it truly delivered - Havoc's physics foremost among them - making ANYTHING worthwhile for it is like pulling teeth, from maps to complete mods. You practically have to be a professional and know the program like the back of your hand to even begin to navigate through this garbage, and really to me it just seems like that's Valve's way of saying, "You're not allowed to make your own fun with this one. Only we are."

        Honestly, the biggest reason in my opinion that HL2 isn't aging nearly as gracefully as HL1 is because it's much easier to renew HL1's value even if it does lack a fancy physics engine and good graphics right out of the box. A steady influx of mods, maps, and good development tools for HL2 would've certainly kept my attention on the game, but that didn't happen. The same goes for HL2DM and CSS - the biggest reasons I still play CS 1.5 on WON2 is because of the lack of Steam, the better power balance, and above all else, the sheer abundance of good maps and fun/funny mods and the ease with which you can mess with it. HL2DM and CSS lack all of those - Or in the case of Steam, they have it, and it sucks ass.

        That aside, if HL2 were published five years earlier, it would've seemed dramatically more impressive to gamers regardless. Pretty graphics and good physics have already been done before, and Valve really missed the boat on that one. The graphics and physics of HL2 were its biggest selling points, and the only reason that the Source engine exists - to say that pretty graphics and physics are all that HL2 really has wouldn't be too terribly far off. However, similarly attractive games - especially generic but good looking first person shooters - are in abundance today, and HL2 just didn't have what it takes to remain in the limelight for too terribly long. HL2 was built around an entertaining visual experience, not a challenging and enjoyable gameplay experience. If you do that to a game and make visuals its focus while taking a shit on the level design and gameplay, you make a game that's briefly entertaining, but not enjoyable or satisfying by any stretch of the imagination.

        Not to worry, though. WON2 is reasonably functional, and when CS 1.5 does get old, there are plenty of good freeware games out there to fiddle with...
        • Working as a senior administrator for Mod DB, I get to see a lot of what goes on in the mod world before the general public.

          The thing with HL2 they you must remember is that it is a totally new engine, facing a world where modding for older engines is commonplace. HL was based on an old engine, with limited mods around before, and really made modding take off.

          HL had the advantage of a community with previous experience of similar engines, and no expectations of what a mod should be. Conversely, HL2 was expe
      • Re:huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by 2nd Post! (213333) <gundbear@pacbe[ ]net ['ll.' in gap]> on Monday April 17, 2006 @02:11PM (#15143520) Homepage
        Well then, now you're comparing the SDKs from ID and Valve, aren't you? The original HL was based solidly on Quake, even if the engine was updated by Valve, so a lot of the basic stuff would still be sourced from ID.

        The new HL2 is totally new, so there is no common descent from Quake3 or Doom3. Id's had several years and generations to get this stuff right, and Valve only one generation of development.
        • You mean Valve had one generation to LEARN it. Id doesn't reuse code, at least not enough to explain that discrepancy. In fact, the constant reuse of code has turned the Unreal game logic into a complete mess. Even UT2004 is a layer of derived classes put over the very first Unreal game. The player class (xPawn) has like four levels of inheritance by now.
      • The magazine Computer Games had an article on this recently, with the writer complaining that there was no nude Alyx Vance skin yet. The argument he had was that modding has become more complex by a matter of degree. Reskinning a model in Half-life involved changing a texture map. Changing the shape of a model involved a budget copy of 3d Studio. Now, characters have reflection maps, soft lighting maps, etc (I don't remember what exactly he quoted) and the bar has become that much higher, just for changing
    • Re:huh? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by smooth wombat (796938) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:31AM (#15142393) Homepage Journal
      but I say good for the small independent developers who are actually making money off all their hard work.

      As opposed to the large, non-independent developers who are trying to make money off their hard work, right?

      I know I'll be marked down but I don't care. I'm questioning why the double-standard. Why is it ok for the small guy to make money off their hard work but not for the big guy to make money off what is arguably even more hard work? In both cases someone is producing a product which they want to be paid for yet many on here feel it is acceptable to use pirated versions which they don't have to pay for and which costs the producing company money.

      • Re:huh? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by NichG (62224)
        It's only a double standard if you take all people to be a single entity. Realize that in any sizeable group of people, you should hear conflicting opinions expressed. If you don't, thats stranger than if you do.

        Another explanation is that when large companies do business, their output is often somewhat homogenized since they have to target a broader audience to sustain themselves. Whereas smaller companies/developers can be niche. So a statement like that can be in support of niche development which is opt
      • Uh, no dude. As apposed to small indepedent developers not making money off of their hard work.

        The large, non-independent developers are already making money off of their work... because they aren't independent and a publisher has payed them.

        It seems to me the GP finds it good that people are getting payed for work.
  • 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. However, for maybe 25% of the game you will actually need to point your crosshairs at guys and shoot them. Just a warning.
  • by beavis88 (25983) on Monday April 17, 2006 @10:54AM (#15142145)
    You'll just wish you had your two minutes back, like me.
    • I agree with above poster.

      The writer basically played HL1 Source and got completely wistful about the past and then wrote a snotty article.

      Content-wise, HL2 will not live up to the original because it is a sequel. To continue the plot of the first requires a suspension of disbelief and I commend Valve for trying to do this without just making another HL like Quake 2 + 3, or Duke Nukem 2 + 3, or Doom 2 + 3. And, keep in mind, in HL2, the human race is being shipped off into containers for genocide - it's h
      • Er, last time I checked there is an option to disable Steam starting when you boot Windows, look in the Settings menu...
        • Steam doesn't do any special voodoo to start when Windows does. It's just a shortcut in the "Startup" menu. Delete the shortcut and Steam won't start until you start it. While Steam has many annoying qualities, this isn't one of them.
      • If you want to make it so that Steam doesn't load goto Start ---> Run ---> Type in 'msconfig' ---> Goto the 'startup' tab ---> uncheck the Steam Box, and while you're there most all of the other ones (I only have rundll32 and ctfmon checked).
  • Subjectiveness (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kennego (963972) on Monday April 17, 2006 @10:59AM (#15142167)
    The second half of the article talks about why the author thinks that the fun factor of HL2 isn't nearly as high as in HL1, but as you'd expect this whole "rating" and "depreciation" score thing is completely subjective and made up. I really have no idea why this thing made Slashdot...
    • of course it's subjective, it's written as an editorial. Game reviews are generally subjective, all reviews are, we allow for that when we read those articles. However we still use them as a basis for forming our own opinions, even if it's to disagree.

      The point that he makes resonates with my own experience of HL2 and so I'm glad that he wrote it. It's especially interesting for considering I am waiting expectantly for HL2:episode 1 to be released, with baited breath hoping for a decent story development.
      • 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!".
    • I really have no idea why this thing made Slashdot...

      from the running-articles-i-disagree-with-is-good-for-me dept.
  • My Opinion (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MaestroSartori (146297) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:00AM (#15142178) Homepage
    I loved the original. Just before HL2 was released, I reinstalled and played through it again to refresh my memory (and truth be told polish my FPS skills, it had been a while). I still liked it just as much - as much as anything else, it has character: the NPCs do things or not for reasons, the game seems to have a logical flow to it which takes you from place to place without seeming hugely contrived (although I didn't like Zen much, or the end boss). And it has that indefinable something that just makes it fun to play, even in the crappier bits, you still keep going to see what happens next.

    Fast forward to HL2. I get it on release day and install it, and I've instantly got Steam issues. I won't dwell on them here, but it did leave me in a mood where I was prepared to not enjoy the game which is why I mention it. Anyway, I played through almost to the end over the next day or so, and I did enjoy it. But I was left feeling like the game was a wasted opportunity. For me, it didn't live up to the promise it started with. Most of the game sections seemed to go on for too long, especially the boat and car sections. Many puzzles seemed to be an excuse to show off the physics engine rather than to be there for their own sake (buoyant barrels, seesaws). A lot of it is probably personal taste, I just felt like it wasn't all that good when viewed next to the original. I certainly have no urge to replay it, despite not having reached the end, since I reinstalled it on a new hard disk.

    I'd really like to try HL:Source, the original Half-Life in the new engine, but I don't feel like paying for the privilege. I'll keep an eye on the Black Mesa mod which seems to be a more ambitious project anyway... :)
    • I think the puzzles that you say were there to "show off the physics" were actually taking advantage of the physics. It's like saying the original Star Wars' space battles were showing off the special effects. Actually, no; Star Wars was what it was because of those awesome space battles as much as Half-Life 2's puzzles were interesting and inventive because they used physics. Usually game puzzles are all about flipping switches and making it through doors before they close; HL2 was one of the first games w
      • I think the puzzles that you say were there to "show off the physics" were actually taking advantage of the physics. It's like saying the original Star Wars' space battles were showing off the special effects.
        I think what put a lot of people off was the cinder-block sea-saw at the beginning of the game. I didn't have a problem with it, but some people I talked to thought it was "lame, it's like they just want to show us that they use physics over and over."
    • Re:My Opinion (Score:2, Informative)

      by Mishotaki (957104)
      sadly, HL:Source is half-life 1 with the water of Half-life 2.... the textures seems the same... the physics are the same... you need higher system requirements for no reason... you need Steam AND internet on while playing... i just don't see why i would want to play it again like that... i got it.. i tried it... i hated it...
      • I like HL:Source. Yes, it's exactly the same textures and everything (well, it has the higher-rez textures that came with Blue Shift) - they didn't change the game. However, the new engine was *much* faster on my old GF4 card, and you don't need the internet to play. I had no internet for several weeks after my last move, and I mostly killed time by going through the Valve back catalog - HL, OpFor, BS, all good stuff, no internet required.
    • Half Life Source is disppointing. It would've been the work of days or perhaps just hours to remake the character models. They already had models for several of the aliens used for Half-Life 2, and it wouldn't have been to difficult to take NPC models from City 17 and replace their clothes to get the scientists and security guards. But they didn't even bother with that?

      They released HL:S for the sole purpose of making people think they were getting more stuff and not paying for it.
  • Duhhhh (Score:5, Funny)

    by MarkPNeyer (729607) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:04AM (#15142204)
    Half-Life 2 decays twice as fast as half-life 1!
  • The Difference...IMO (Score:2, Interesting)

    by GmAz (916505)
    Half Life was a freaking awesome game. It set some really high levels of quality for games to come. Though for today's standards, the graphics are way behind and the AI is rather stupid, in its time, it was numero uno. It kept selling very well with addons such as Opposing Forces, Counter Strike and a few others. Half Life 2 however puts the modding capabilities into the hands of the common man. People are creating mods on their own that have rival the same gameplay as the original game, and they are j
    • by Justus (18814)

      It kept selling very well with addons such as Opposing Forces, Counter Strike and a few others. Half Life 2 however puts the modding capabilities into the hands of the common man. ... For HalfLife 1, you could make maps and what not, but modding wasn't as popular is it is now.

      I'm afraid that I think you're entirely incorrect. First off, one of your examples of an 'add on,' Counter-Strike, was initially a user created mod that went through many iterations (7 major public beta versions, for example) befor

      • I remember fondly the small mods that were interesting diversions. Anyone else remember "Rocket-Crowbar" mod where all the weapons changed, but the levels were the same. The jetpack definately made for some interesting firefights...
      • Red Orchestra is not a HL(2) mod. IIRC, it was the idea originally, but they started switching engines and eventually settled on UT2003, then moved on to UT2004 some time after that was released. The standalone game released recently (RO:Ostfront) still uses the UT2004 engine.
        • Ah, my apologies--I recalled playing RO with UT2004 and somehow assumed their latest release was a HL2 mod since it was on Steam.

          Thanks for the correction!

  • One thing I found lacking in HL2 that was there to some extent in the original was dynamic arenas. By this I mean enclosed areas where you have to kill everyone (or almost everyone) to get through, and you'll have to quickload a few times to do so without getting explodered. HL1 and other games like Halo and Call of Duty had these awesome arenas with friends and foes duking it out, and whether or not you participated in the fray there would be a different outcome every single time. Sure there are some su
  • HL2 is just too realistic compared to HL1 and it kills the gameplay. It's no wonder why CS 1.6 is still whats being played. CS Source is just over bloated. HL2 is just one great engine. It would probably had more succes if it didn't come out a year late too...
  • Lack of Imagination (Score:4, Interesting)

    by CogDissident (951207) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:12AM (#15142254)
    Ok, lets look at the plot of HL1 and HL2 for a second here.

    HL1: Main character is average-joe (well, scientist, but certainly a bit out of his element here). HL2: Main character is exhaulted hero praised by everyone (same guy as before, but people worship him now)

    HL1: Scary sequences where you know monsters are slowly picking off people and annihilating the base. HL2: Less scary open outdoor sequences, more of a serious-sam game than before. (except ravenwood)

    HL1: Fighting for survival, and little else. HL2: Fighting for an ideal and grand-purpose of saving humanity.

    See the difference? HL1 had much of a more noir, dark atmosphere. HL2 had more of a "lets shoot stuff and be heroes" kind of atmosphere. The first one tends to draw players in and keep them interested and thinking about the complex story, the second is just too streightforward to keep people playing.

    p.s. (completely unrelated to above comments) Hl 2 multiplayer is woefully poor. I would rather play HL 1 multiplayer. Granted, the physics engine is nice, but you see people dance up ladders (they fall, catch themselves, fall, catch themselves, ect.), see huge lag times even on direct connections, and the physics engine degrades severely in multiplayer play.

    • Ok, lets look at the plot of HL1 and HL2 for a second here.

      Agreed. I liked HL2, but the original was definately more fun (for the most part).

      However, we kind of over-romanticize the original. It kind of tapered off when you start getting more involved with Xen. At some point it simply becomes a run-and-gun killing and endless stream of Xen electricity-spouting slaves and other monsters popping out of cocoon type things.

      The beginning and middle of the original was a masterpiece. The environment,

      • Yes, but the Xen part was relativly short lived, and placed at just the right point where you were at the point where you could realistically annihilate any creepy-crawlies in the dank corners of the base. The only other solution would be to take all your guns away and most people would be very disapointed with that.

        If it had gone on with more dark noir atmosphere, the ending would have had much less of an effect.

        As it is, the game starts out creepy, moves to get a bit darker and scarier, then less scar

        • The only other solution would be to take all your guns away and most people would be very disapointed with that.
          Which they did at one point in the game. And yes, most of us screamed bloody murder at it.

          Some of us take great pride in conserving our ammo and thereby collecting all 231 glass arrows in the game.

      • helping your comrad scientists, etc

        Surely I'm not the only player who made it a point to gib every scientist in the game?
    • by DeafByBeheading (881815) on Monday April 17, 2006 @01:12PM (#15143138) Journal
      HL1: Scary sequences where you know monsters are slowly picking off people and annihilating the base. HL2: Less scary open outdoor sequences, more of a serious-sam game than before. (except ravenwood)

      Um, for what it's worth I completely disagree. As another poster has already stated, HL2 is immensely atmospheric. Maybe 'scary' is not the right word to describe most of HL2, but 'creepy' certainly is. It seems to have that Eastern European WWII-era squalor look down perfectly, and with the Combine, the Striders, Doctor Breen's messages, plus the way zombies sometimes rise up in the distance and shamble towards you, and sometimes just pop out of nowhere, the feel of that game is incredible. Do you remember the first time the fast jumping zombie guys come at you? Among the best OMGWTFBBQ moments in all of FPS-dom.
      • Do you remember the first time the fast jumping zombie guys come at you?

        I said "except ravenholm" (well, ravenwood the first time, because I forgot the village's name). That one area had a good atmosphere to it.

        I'm not saying that the atmosphere was badly done in HL2, just that it had a different kind of atmosphere, that doesn't lend to the same kind of long-lasting appeal.

    • HL1: Fighting for survival, and little else. HL2: Fighting for an ideal and grand-purpose of saving humanity.

      See the difference? HL1 had much of a more noir, dark atmosphere.

      Interesting that you seem to think that was a negative for HL2 and a mark in favor of HL1. For me, I found that "fighting for an ideal" was extremely compelling. The opening scenes of HL2 set the stage nicely -- you saw the hopelessness, the opression, the fear of the people of City 17. When I finally get to take action agai

    • Actually, it's much more than just survival in HL1. You really are trying to save the world, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW IT YET at the beginning. That's what's so awesome about the story.

      As you play, the ultimate objective gradually unfolds. At the start, you're just trying to get the hell out of there. Then you have to deal with the military. You eventually learn that the scientists are still at work, and they've been putting their own lives at serious risk to try to fix the problem. They were about to launch the r
  • There's s threshold where games can start to take themselves too seriously, and I think this was in the subtext of the editorial. The original Half Life comes out and it's fantastic - there's the feeling that there is a larger world, there's more going on than running around shooting creepy things that look like animated Thanksgiving turkeys. You can't interact meaningfully with the environment, or the characters, but what little interaction there is has some character to it. People love it, and they sta
  • by Sporkinum (655143) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:20AM (#15142303)
    Maybe part of it is the big brother called Steam. I didn't buy HL2 because of Steam, even though I loved HL1. I couldn't tell you if HL2 is better/worse, or whatever, 'cause my only exposure to it is watching other people play.

    BTW, Steam has killed our lan gaming events. It takes up too much bandwidth trying to phone home so it ends up killing the network for everyone else. Especially if not everyone is updated before they get to the lan, which is usually the case. The amount of people showing up for an event dropped alot after Steam killed it.
    • I just reinstalled Steam/HL2 - I used to think people's complaints about it were overblown but godamn if it didn't take hours before it was done "updating" everything. It wouldn't go much over 100k down either - why the hell isn't some kind of bittorrent-like bandwidth sharing implemented in Steam?!? Other Steam issues - why don't user profiles contain more info? If I log in to my Steam account it whould remember my favorite servers and load my custom .cfg files - it's a godamn bitch have to recreate my bin

    • BTW, Steam has killed our lan gaming events. It takes up too much bandwidth trying to phone home so it ends up killing the network for everyone else. Especially if not everyone is updated before they get to the lan, which is usually the case. The amount of people showing up for an event dropped alot after Steam killed it.

      Easy fix: Force everyone to update at before connecting to the lan.

      1. Burn .GCF few files to a couple DVD-RW.
      2. Overwrite the GCF files in the Steam Folder.
      3. ???
      4. Profit!

      It's not a prob

    • I have to second this, I was just at a lan party this weekend, and we were all told to make sure steam was completely updated before hand (which took a good while), and I followed the guide to get steam to work in offline mode, yet I was only allowed to play Half-Life 2:DM when in offline mode (I got something like an operation prohibited error on HL/CS/HL2/CSS/DoD). I had to run it in offline mode because we weren't allowed to connect the lan to the internet (it was at a university's campus).

      Also it seems
    • Killed your LANing? What are you on about? I've attended three large (80 person) LAN parties since Steam came out, and the games being played there are Counter-Strike: Source and Day Of Defeat: Source.

      The LAN has a strict rule that all computers and servers are up-to-date as of 10pm the night before. Apart from that, you just have to make sure your Steam is configured for offline use (it's a single checkbox in the prefs pane) and you're good to go.

      It's not frickin' rocket science.
    • While you were whining, I just downloaded (on a fresh machine) Half Life 2, Rag Doll Kung Fu demo, and Counter Strike: Source. All without a CD or DVD in sight.
  • by EvilCabbage (589836) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:27AM (#15142357) Homepage
    How many other First Person Shooters had been released between HL1 and HL2 hitting the shelves?

    I enjoyed both games, but between the two I'd been constantly assaulted with a few hundred more "FPS 2000 +1 EX Edition (Now with zombies!)" and honestly I've become pretty disinterested in the entire genre as a result.

    HL1 hit and it was earth shattering. That nostalgia probably accounts for a lot of its remaining popularity.
  • I'm still upset that I can't kill random scientists, or even the good guys. I wanted to pick one up and shake him with the gravity gun, but noooooo.
  • This should be VERY clear to the folks at valve that the reason people are not going nuts over HL2 is that steam always wants to play monkey in the middle between the players and the game. Why this is not effecting HL1 is a mystery to me. I personaly gave up HL1 as well and dont play HL2 anymore because of the hassle that steam represents.
  • Half-life (Score:4, Informative)

    by ledow (319597) on Monday April 17, 2006 @11:34AM (#15142425) Homepage
    As someone who owns several original versions of each of Half life, Opposing Force, Counterstrike, Blue Shift, Team Fortress, Gunman Chronicles and Condition Zero (as well as Half-life 2, CS:Source as Steam purchases) my reasons would include:

    A P233 with a Voodoo card could run all of the HL1-based games at a very decent speed when they first came out. Even now my 1GHz laptop can still perform more than good enough TODAY on all the above HL1 games without needing a brute of an AGP/PCI-Express card. CS:Source kills it stone dead, as does HL2.

    Each HL1 game provided many hours of play and something completely different each time (even CZ was quite different to CS). Most were designed for offline play for the most part and therefore the single player game was the primary focus. In a time when the Internet WAS 56K modems or less this was a big plus.

    Mods were very prevelant and didn't require extreme 3D graphic skills to get a basic mod running. For HL2 serious physics, enormous maps, complicated AI, professional-level 3D graphics and level design all mean that a casual mod will be next-to-impossible for the average small team to produce on their own.

    http://steampowered.com/status/game_stats.html [steampowered.com]

    That page shows you that I'm not on my own with this. The sum total of all source-based games doesn't come NEAR the sum total of all HL based games. CS alone has 4 times the number of player-minutes compared to CS:S. Then include the fact that even the serious competitions are skipping CS:Source completely because it's been dumbed down.
  • The Author claims he cared more for the Barneys and dozens of cloned Scientists from HL than for the citizens in HL2. From my point of view that warrants a "WTF?". The woman waiting for her husband right at the beginning of HL2 is freaking hot, for crying out loud (Alyx no so much, too much Action-heroine/Booty-babe crossover for my taste), "There is only one way to console a widow. But remember the risk." (From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long). Yeesh, I smell a big case of "In the good ol' days" here (even t
  • by east coast (590680) on Monday April 17, 2006 @12:01PM (#15142628)
    While I do enjoy HL2 there was just far too much vehicle crap, this also killed the single player MOH games too, IMHO, but the MOH multiplayer just rocked.

    HL2 was also a bit short. Aside from that I had a great time.

    But now, my complaint is CSS. What are they thinking or am I the only one who doesn't get it: The new lighting SUCKS. Very much. It doesn't take my eyes 5 seconds to fully adjust from the dimness of looking at the shadow of a building to the sunlit street 25 degrees to my right. It's nearly as effective as a flashbang in some cases when leaving the middle structure in Dust to going into the open.

    Also, they need to have more secondary attack modes. Aside from silenced and scoped weapons there is next to nothing. The reality is that when you swing an AK safty arm the entire way down it goes into semi-automatic mode and not full auto. I'd like to have this option as semi and burst seems to produce better results in accuracy. The Clarion rifle has burst, why can't the AK have semi? Or how about 3 round burst on the MP5 since there is no secondary mode on the weapon?

    Also, the nades are WAY under powered. I'm sorry guys, but if a half a pound of explosives encased in a thin metal canister goes off at your feet you're probably going to die. But on the HE nades in CSS you might take 40% damage... what's up with that? And there is no secondary effect such as loss of hearing or even a minor "shell shock" effect like in COD.

    I recently seen a posting on a message board addressing the lack of nade power and it was laughable that the best responce to it all was that they were under powered because it would make it easy to kill an entire team on some unknown custom map.

    There is probably a way to mod this on some server settings but that should be in the server options and not some obscure .ini file hidden somewhere deep in the valve directory. Make customization of the server more user friendly to give the game better dynamics without having to go through file after file and make adjustments. It also makes it much easier to restore default settings.

    It's great that they keep bringing out new skins, now if they could just make a bot that can actually get a nade through a window and not have it bounce back on a rushing team mate...

    I could probably go on for days. The sad things is this is still just as good as 90% of all FPS multiplayers, but I still find myself playing MOH objective matches 3 or 4 years after the fact because the game seems better than what CS has turned into with CSS.
    • "Also, the nades are WAY under powered. I'm sorry guys, but if a half a pound of explosives encased in a thin metal canister goes off at your feet you're probably going to die. But on the HE nades in CSS you might take 40% damage... what's up with that? And there is no secondary effect such as loss of hearing or even a minor "shell shock" effect like in COD."

      I guess you *TOTALLY* forgot about the HEV suit, didn't you? Hazard suit *AND* impact resistant armor, with built-in medical administration system "War
      • I guess you *TOTALLY* forgot about the HEV suit, didn't you?

        But this is CSS I'm talking about. Actually, if you buy a bullet proof vest/helmet in CSS it makes little difference in your lifespan too. It's really not worth the cash unless you've already maxed out your funds.

        The HEV was a great idea in HL.
    • The new lighting SUCKS. Very much.

      I agree, kind of. The lighting looks good, but it does make it a tougher game, which is why I turn it off when playing CS:S. I figure that turning it off isn't cheating unless everyone else had it turned on, and I was the only one with it off.

    • And there is no secondary effect such as loss of hearing or even a minor "shell shock" effect like in COD.

      I am not sure what game you are playing, but in Counter Strike Source, if you have a flashbang or HE grenade go off near you, there is a definite loss of hearing. All sounds become muted instantly. There is no loss of hearing only in the original Counter Strike.

      strike
    • As another poster has already commented, grenades and flashbangs have definite effects on players.

      If a grenade goes off near you, you'll hear a loud ringing for several seconds that slowly fades out.

      A flashbang causes the screen to white-out and slowly fade in, complete with an after-image to simulate retina burn.

      I agree that grenades should be more powerful, but the other aspects of their realism are fine.
    • To the couple of posters who said that the HE causes hearing damage: I guess I don't recall this. I know the flashbang does. Infact the flashbang is one of the great things in the game. In any case, I still think those directly in the area of a HE discharge should suffer some other aspect of disorientation.
    • First of all, believe it or not, you really do have time to press the three extra buttons it requires to write out 'grenades'.

      Now that we have that settled, you need to realize that counterstrike was never intended to be realistic. Anyone with half a brain who measures it against realism will be extremely disappointed. Of course, it doesn't have fantastic and absurd weaponry of most of the unrealistic first person shooter genre (Doom, Unreal, Quake), so people expect some semblance of realism out of it.
      • Operation Flashpoint was pretty realistic - you could be dead and falling before you even heard the single shot that killed you - and sold well. There is a market for it.
      • First of all, believe it or not, you really do have time to press the three extra buttons it requires to write out 'grenades'.

        I'm glad to see that you have the time to be a critic to anyone who uses an accepted shortening of a term. Oh, sorry, that's terminology. Really, do you go around harrassing anyone who uses "lol", "imho" or "btw"? I'm sure you can fill your time easily if that's the case.

        Now that we have that settled, you need to realize that counterstrike was never intended to be realistic. Anyo
    • It's great that they keep bringing out new skins, now if they could just make a bot that can actually get a nade through a window and not have it bounce back on a rushing team mate...

      Yes, they should get all those lazy texture artists and modellers over to the coding room to whip up some advanced AI real quick!

  • I believe Half life 2 is going to be a classic, much like Half Life 1 is now. Both were fantastic games, but HL1 had less to compete with and was more impressive at the time. I think HL1 will definitely be a longer-lived hit than HL2, but not because of lack of quality in HL2. Counter-strike was a major driving force behind HL1, and I hate to say it, but CS is old-school. It doesn't have the same appeal as it once did. Unless HL2 gets a similar mod created for it, that just blows every other online gam
  • That I got back into TFC !!

    HL R0075 !-!4rd
  • ooookayyyyyy (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MuNansen (833037) on Monday April 17, 2006 @12:37PM (#15142881)
    "Lack of characterization"? Then he says he likes HL1 for being a "blank slate" for modders to work with, and HL2 has a too well-defined story? How in the hell does that make any sense?

    Personally I think HL2 was too far ahead of its time for a good chunk of gamers to get it. Or that it's a genre all its own that players don't yet know how to enjoy. The ass-backwards criticisms are a testament to that. The PC gaming community has become so obsessed with mod-ability (which HL2 actually is first-class in, only beaten by Unreal) that many can't enjoy a linear, non-sandbox masterpiece of a game because you're not allowed to go off in any direction and do whatever you want, GTA-style. Games don't HAVE to be open-ended.
    • I'm not sure HL2 is too far ahead of its time - at least not from a "characterization" standpoint. I think people just resent the fact that Gordon is a busy guy who doesn't have time to ask revolutionary solder #35 what his favourite salad dressing is. How much characterization do you need in a game where you're running like mad from place to place?
  • by Tragek (772040) on Monday April 17, 2006 @12:55PM (#15143004) Journal
    Well I do think he may have been off base on a couple things; he's spot on with other things. The ending of HL left me craving more, but in a way that felt like I had achieved something. On the otherhand, the cop out that was the ending of HL2, made me feel as if everything I had done in the game was really for naught. Now, we know that stuff like that will be resolved in HL2:Episode 1 (aka Aftermath), but to be honest, dropping more cash for something I know will continue ad infinitum is not exactly my cup of tea.

    The most exciting thing in my mind right now is the project Black Mesa:Source [blackmesasource.com]. Playing through the original half life with updated graphics? Kick ass.

  • If Half Life is a better game than Half Life 2 it certainly isn't because of modding or a lack thereof.

    Even though neither is a pinnacle of storytelling the original was more compelling. I think what is a detriment to HL2 is that the emphasis was on the graphics moreso than anything else. So the game was built around providing a visually impressive experience, which inevitably means other aspects of the game suffers.

    Furthermore, there are countless FPS games out there nowadays many of which seem to have emp
  • What are the most popular modable engines, other than Half-Life? Do any x-platform engines make it in there? Which ones do you develop for any why?
  • I disagree (Score:4, Interesting)

    by billybob (18401) on Monday April 17, 2006 @02:25PM (#15143621)
    Half life 2 already down to the low 80's, what? This was the best single player FPS I've ever played. For their time they were both excellent games, but you go back and play HL1 now and it's just awful... I tried maybe 6 months ago and just couldn't get through more than a few hours, the graphics are abysmal and the play control makes you want to die. I'd give it 3 or 4 out of 10. On the contrary I've played through HL2 three times, and I absolutely love it every time, I dont think you could make a better game. There's still nothing that even comes close to competing with it in my opinion. It was 10/10 in November 2004 and it still is today. Just because there aren't as many MOD's for it doesn't make it horrible.
    • You need to learn from your own statements. In the same paragraph you say that Half-Life was good for its time, but would receive low marks now; AND you say that you can't imagine anything being better than Half-Life 2, that it is the pinnacle of its genre.

      Perhaps Half-Life 2 is really only good for its time? Maybe? This reminds me of the statement that everything has already been invented.

      Your imagination has been stunted. Go outside; it's springtime and it's beautiful. There's is always more that you
      • I should have elaborated... while HL1 was excellent for its time, I would never have given it a 10/10... probably 7 or 8/10 at best. HL2 blew me away though. I've never played anything that even came close. I dont see myself spitting on it anytime soon. :)
  • As a mod tool Half Life is truly awesome, but as a game itself I never found it very impressive. Sure, the level structuring was interesting, the whole game was basically just one large level, and the AI is quite good, but thats basically it, the story is hardly worth to talk about and that all NPC locked the same also didn't exactly increase the enjoyment for me, I mean even back then a few different face textures wouldn't have been that difficult. That the whole story is only told through Gordons eyes, is
    • I played the two games and I must admit that I prefered the first one by far. The second was more of a hype than anything else. They promised big graphics, big physics and big explosions, but we wanted great gameplay and a good story. Too bad that's what most game directors are looking for these days. Let's hope Nintendo's revolution changes things a bit.
  • I actually like the story of the OSS FPS Cube. It goes like this:

    "You kill stuff."

  • by kaffiene (38781)
    I hated HL2 after about 30 minutes. Dull as fucking dishwater - it's a shooter on rails. So what if it's pretty and has physics? Pretty != fun.

The reward of a thing well done is to have done it. -- Emerson

Working...