Am I the only one that thinks Half-Life 2 is a little overrated? - Games

you cant say the source engine is outdated but you can say that the version of source in Half Life 2 is outdated [editline]9th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Thechuz1337;27949713]I loved HL2, but it was strange that the alien force that took over the world in 7 hours got defeated by some rebel force.[/QUOTE] The Combine have more powerful troops in the initial invasion which caused the humans to be defeated in 7 hours.After the invasion is over,the troops are sent to their homeworld.

For me it was more about the engine and modding possibilites. I don't know why, but HL2 was just awesome when it was released but some of the mods are/were more interesting.

It's just a game after all lol

[QUOTE=Maloof?;27949785]I've heard a few people mention that a 'band of untrained rebels took down a force that took over the Earth in 7 hours'. It wasn't the rebels. It was Gordon. Rebels were, more or less, at a stalemate with the Combine before you showed up. If not at a stalemate, then losing to the Combine. It was only your actions at Nova Prospekt and at the top of the Citadel that gave the rebels any chance of making progress.[/QUOTE] It was more the G-man and Vortigaunts, really. Without them, Gordon is just a normal scientist.

It is good but overrated, it was basically the crysis of 04. [QUOTE=S1N1337;27946105]you're twelve, you are used to growing up with "realistic" intense games, you see half life 2 and you think "CLASSIC! GENERIC SHOOTER, NOT WORTH MY TIME!" You don't understand growing up with boring fps games which each new "groundbreaking" game would only upgrade in play style. You don't understand how much half life 2 has shaped gaming, and how dear it holds in our hearts as one of the best first person shooters ever. Don't get me wrong, it had it's faults and looking back now they become more and more apparent, but you have to realize that it is still an impressive milestone for gaming.[/QUOTE] Oh shut up...

Half life 2 is fucking amazing. Released 2004. Look at it's competition: [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/25/Reverent_%28Doom%29.jpg[/img] Doom 3, pshaw, average single player experience, fairly decent graphics. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a5/Command_Post.jpg/800px-Command_Post.jpg[/img] Star wars battlefront, fun as hell, but also ugly as hell. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/09/Gta-sa-screen1.jpg[/img] San andreas, pretty rubbish story and graphics, though still fun for some lulz [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/02/Halo2_1.jpg[/img] Halo 2 and it's amazing graphics. Half life 2 looked amazing, had better gameplay than all of these, much more realistic physics, and it actually told a decent story with likeable characters beyond "SPACE MARINE #2032"

I really liked Doom 3's graphics a bit more Well, when I wasn't IN COMPLETE FUCKING DARKNESS THAT IS

Nowadays it dosent seem that great, but in 2004 it was ground breaking. 7 years later, its bound to feel less awesome since alot of games have took concepts from half life.

[QUOTE=CommanderMayhem;27945415]I will admit. It's a solid shooter. But, the gameplay, is it really that amazing? It's kinda generic. The gravity gun is a lot of fun, but that's about it.[/quote] gravity gun is its USP, of course. the standard guns are boring but they get the job done I suppose [quote]And, I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but I really dislike always having all your weapons on at one time. I dunno, Takes away from realism, but it also adds a bit of strategy if you can only have a few on equipped at a time.[/quote] I agree but I don't think it makes half-life 2 less fun. I'd say it makes it faster paced [quote]And, the shooting is always the same, but then there's those godawful clunky vehicle levels. Those are just so bad. Really.[/quote] the vanilla shooting is always the same, yes, but the setpiece-gameplay-to-normal-gameplay ratio is rather high. you have driving hovercraft with a turret mounted on it fighting a helicopter killing zombies in a horror town with random junk launched from your gravity gun throwing grenades into sniper dens running over antlions and combine in your car with a laser cannon mounted defending a lighthouse from multiple gunships (yeah its in plenty of fpses but I think of this one as a better example than most) piling props over sand to not disrupt the antlions hitting combine over with a magnetic crane and dropping crates on them commanding an army of infinitely respawning bugs to invade a prison using turret guns to defend key areas in said prison etc. [quote]The First time you played Half Life 2, did you understand all these details about the Combine, that they kicked ass in 7 Hours, and that they took over the world and turned into this weird communist society, because I did not get it the first time I played. And maybe that was just me.[/quote] I'd say it was just you. I noticed mostly everything on my first playthrough, save for the singing vortigaunt [quote]And everyone always tells me that you have to "look" for Half-Life's story through little clues. And I like that. That's cool. But for me, it was almost too hidden. There needed to be clues or something, to help me get a grip. (I will get flamed for that part too. I know that)[/quote] if the clues were less subtle I think it would break the flow of gameplay, but I understand and respect your opinion [quote]And the last thing I want to mention... Gordon Freeman is seriously the worst character ever. Silent protagonists bug me to hell and back. With Gordon, it's just really annoying, how they're always having him interact with these wonderfull characters with great personalites, and then we got the mute here. It bugged the shit out of me in Bioshock and Dead Space also. Mute Protagonists gotta go.[/quote] now this I agree on [quote]Anyway, None of this makes sense or is coherent. I just wanna know, why is Half Life 2 held in such a high acclaim? Why is it revered as a god amongst petty games?[/quote] because most people found it a fun game.

I've never thought of it as that great of a game. I mean, it's good, and I did have loads of fun, but I've always felt like there was something missing from it. Though to be honest, the first time I played it I was amazed by how you can carry objects.

[QUOTE=CommanderMayhem;27945415] You can check my XBL profile if you give a shit. You'll notice I have BLOPS and MW2 on there. I'm ashamed. It's mostly my brother who plays on my account, but I did finish the MW2 campaign only to hate it.[/QUOTE] :frog: HL2 is shit. It is boring as a fuck, I don't care about your opinion.

Reading the thread did make me think about how the vehicle levels were kinda tedious, the gameplay was mostly shooting and punting.. but it's an FPS. The whole point is to go through, shoot, drive, kill, tell a story.. so I really can't rate the OP agree or disagree. I agree with his points, but it was a revolutionary game, and it's just another FPS, but with great storytelling.

[QUOTE=Ehmmett;27945748]Could you please. Not type annoyingly. You know. A little. Like this. I guess. Yeah, uhm that would be great.[/QUOTE] [img]http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/shine/work/tpsreports_lumberg1.jpg[/img] Also, i totally agree with OP

HL2 was pretty awesome the first time I played it, second playthrough was good too, third was ok, and nowadays I play it only when I'm bored. It's good for killing some time. [QUOTE=Empty_Shadow;27950115][img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a5/Command_Post.jpg/800px-Command_Post.jpg[/img_thumb] Star wars battlefront, fun as hell, but also ugly as hell.[/QUOTE] Back in the day it had the best graphics I had seen :saddowns:

I don't understand why people like half life 2, it's ugly as shit. Let's compare it: Half life 2: [img]http://www.deafgamers.com/04screenshots_a/half-life2pic3.jpg[/img] Crysis: [img]http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Pics-from-in-the-game-crysis-722279_1278_720.jpg[/img] You people must be blind if you think hl2 is better than crysis.

I started playing through Half-Life 2 again and I still love it :3: Everything is so fluent and well made. I love walking around looking at stuff that makes me understand more of the story. The slow pace it gets sometimes just makes it awesome. Also, the AI isn't that dumb. Compared to most games, they show one hell of a better intelligence then the rest. Fucking A+ still in my book.

i can't even play through ep2

Sure, if you play it for the first time today, it might seem overrated, but if you played it back when it was new, it was the shit.

[QUOTE=CommanderMayhem;27945415]Some dumb opinion that most disagree with.[/QUOTE] :frog: Play HL then HL2 story makes sense for a Half life noob.

[QUOTE=Da_Maniac_;27951144]Sure, if you play it for the first time today, it might seem overrated, but if you played it back when it was new, it was the shit.[/QUOTE] Pretty much this. (damn ninjas!) You said yourself op, you played HL2 after playing all the games that came after it - trust me, at the time no other game had the same story driven pacing and genuinly inventive gameplay style. It just had that little extra that will always make it stand out to those that played it as something special. It's a shame that it's now deemed as one of those "You had to be there" things.

Half-Life 2's combat may not be amazing by today's standards, but pure combat was never really the game's focus. What sets HL2 apart is it's atmosphere, storytelling, and multi-faceted gameplay.

The game was released in 2004. At the time, it was the best of the best and practically revolutionised the game industry. Nowadays, there are obviously a lot of games that are up to its standard, but that is 7 years after the game was released.

Yeah, I could imagine if you played it for the first time now, you really wouldn't get what all the fuss is about, but at the time it seemed unreal. It seemed pretty ahead of its time when I first played it and it was just kind of different to a lot of other first person shooters at the time. Like just running through the combine infested block of flats at the start for example, that was something special.

[QUOTE=FreakySoup;27945923]Part of it is the graphics, but you have to remember this was 2004. Here's a shot from the beta, which was probably around '03. [img_thumb]http://www.deafgamers.com/04screenshots_a/half-life2pic3.jpg[/img_thumb] Here's a shot from Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, which was also released in '04. [img_thumb]http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROQnyV1m6bCDP_qqyF12zlk8cqItqxjZSRB4OemGnaf3xEv-_e&t=1[/img_thumb] See, for the time, the graphics were great, and that helped towards its appeal.[/QUOTE] I remember looking at this photo and thinking "Holy fuck ; it's exactly like real life."

You had to play it in 2004 to get what's so good about it

HL2 would be alot interesting with the hl1 guns like Gauss Gun ,Gluon Gun, The Hive-hand, Snark. Too bad they too the out! At rest hl2 is cool for his year. [url]http://planethalflife.gamespy.com/View.php?view=HLGameInfo.Detail&id=8&game=4[/url]

I wish they didn't decrease the amount of weapons so much though. I mean yeah, everything has a reason behind it but a lot of things in the beta would have worked fine in the final game in my opinion. But like I said, everything happens for a reason.

I have played thru all the HL games, but i'm not planning on doing it again. It's not that good.

It's an amazing game. But does it get a little too much praise at times? Yes.

I'm assuming this thread is talking about Half-Life 2 and it's episodes. Therefore, what came out in 2007? So stop saying "The game came out in 2004, give it a break!". Valve has brought nothing new to the series for the past six years. The only thing they have done, is ever so slightly improving the source engine. Sure Half-Life is a classic series but there is nothing cool and innovative about it except for the gravity gun, in which it's fame has died down quite a lot these past years.