PC Gamer's Top 100 PC Games! (WARNING: LARGE IMAGES AHOY!) - Games

Story is a valid argument, but it's also something that not all gamers have interest in. Ultimately HL1's weaker story allows it to keep a more constant pace and allows one to stay more focused on the gameplay. HL2 also sort of guides the player through the story in a semi-forceful manner, much moreso than HL1 does, which can make one feel very restrained. Even if that is the intent, it's not something everyone's guaranteed to like.

HL2 wasn't that fun for me, there is almost nothing to the shooting aspect, the "puzzles" were easy as shit, and the enemies are just to easy to kill for it to be a challenge. The story is good enough though, I guess.

Honestly, Half Life 2 got me into PC gaming. I will always respect it for that.

BF2 at 48, Da fuck?? [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=BigHeaded B;27786855]Honestly, Half Life 2 got me into PC gaming. I will always respect it for that.[/QUOTE] For me it was Half Life 1 First ever PC game I ever played.

[img]http://gyazo.com/09364da5c0eeb04eba481377f08b0193.png[/img] That's a win in my book.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27786171]:words: about story[/quote] I could say this about anything, though. HL does not have a unique story. It's incredibly simple, and the only reason it seems complex is that you want it to seem complex: that's their goal. The game creates the illusion of a rich mythology, but it's just another alien invasion story, the only defining aspect being the way it is presented to the player. Your 1984 example is completely ridiculous, as 1984 essentially introduced that idea to literature. Half-Life did not create the alien invasion. [quote]He is much more than that. He is the driving force behind the story; he is mysterious, but he is there for much more than to simply add a pointless enigma to the narrative. Aside from being an intriguing character, he adds depth to the story, and causes you to question things such as your free will; are you really making your own decisions, or are you being controlled? How is the G-man manipulating you? This is hinted at near the end of Half-Life 2 by Dr. Breen.[/quote] Reznov is much more than that. He is the driving force behind the story; he is mysterious, but is there for much more than to simply add a pointless enigma to the narrative. Aside from being an intriguing character, he adds depth to the story, and causes you to question things such as your free will; are you really making your own decisions, or are you being controlled? How is Reznov manipulating you? This is hinted at near the end of Black Ops by your interrogator. [quote]:words: about sandtraps[/quote] Let me just start by saying that HL2's narrative is 'non-linear' hilariously misled. You might want to look 'non-linear' up in the dictionary. Your analysis of Sandtraps is entirely the product of your own imagination. Now, I commend Valve for creating a game that elicits analyzation from players, but [i]any[/i] game could be made to sound 'deep' or 'complex' if you waste enough breath trying to explain it. If your idea of a good story is one that forces the player to come to his own conclusions, you must think The Graveyard is the best thing since sliced bread. The big flaw with all your arguments is that I could easily replace any mention of 'Half-Life 2' with 'Black Ops' or 'Metro 2033' and it makes just as much sense. [quote]When I talk about multi-faceted gameplay, I am not simply referring to variety. The gameplay was built with the story in mind. The environmental storytelling is proof of this; the hidden messages and clues aren’t there by chance. Valve added them to add more to the game, and elevate it beyond others. Most games have you progress through a linear set of levels, with mission briefings. Half-Life 2, however, seamlessly blends story with gameplay. If you want more information or details, then I suggest you listen to the developer commentaries in game.[/QUOTE] When I talk about multi-faceted gameplay, I am not simply referring to variety. The gameplay was built with the story in mind. The environmental storytelling is proof of this; the hidden messages and clues aren’t there by chance. 4A Games added them to add more to the game, and elevate it beyond others. Most games have you progress through a linear set of levels, with mission briefings. Metro 2033, however, seamlessly blends story with gameplay. Getting the idea yet? And if I have to listen to developer commentaries to hear more info or details, that should immediately tell you it's poorly constructed -- a great piece of literature doesn't need to be explained by its author.

Ahahaha, 2 and 3 are just plain wrong.

[QUOTE=Stupideye;27781725]Valve makes great games but having that many Valve games is kind of dumb imo.[/QUOTE] Valve is overrated.

[QUOTE=postmanX3;27792782]I could say this about anything, though. HL does not have a unique story. It's incredibly simple, and the only reason it seems complex is that you want it to seem complex: that's their goal. The game creates the illusion of a rich mythology, but it's just another alien invasion story, the only defining aspect being the way it is presented to the player. Your 1984 example is completely ridiculous, as 1984 essentially introduced that idea to literature. Half-Life did not create the alien invasion. [/QUOTE] Like I said, before, any story can be seen as ‘simple,’ when you strip away everything. It is the details, the nuances in the storyline, the subtle deviations, which set a story apart. I realize 1984 was the first of it’s kind; that really doesn’t mean anything. Like Half-Life 2, it presented a wonderfully rich, and fleshed out world, and an intriguing storyline. I was simply pointing out the flaws in your logic, as even a story like 1984 becomes simple when stripped down. The problem with you is that you remove all the details, twists, mysteries, and depth, and accuse the story of being simple. If this is true, then I could accuse Metro 2033 for being nothing but a generic 'post apocalyptic' game, and Mass Effect for being another 'humans and aliens fighting in spaceships' game. But it would be stupid to think that way. Half-Life 2 is much more than a simple alien invasion story. If you read the saga timeline, there are all sorts of conspiracies and mysteries: there was the whole section about the Combine driving back the Nihilanth's forces, and leaving them with the back to the wall, on Xen. Xen is a very interesting locale, as it was referred to many times as the 'border world.' There was also the fact that the G-man seemingly orchestrated the Resonance Cascade. What were his motives in doing so? Was it to distract the Combine? Why did the G-Man save Alyx from Black Mesa? What is the significance of the words “Prepare for unforeseen consequences?” Then there is Dr. Breen, who seems to know so much about you. Did he know about the G-Man? What was his involvement in the Resonance Cascade? He was, if you remember, the former administrator of Black Mesa. Half-Life 2 offers a very deep story for those who are willing to look deeper. Sure, on the surface, Half-Life 2 looks shallow. When digging deeper, however, there is much more than meets the eye. I can’t believe that you are still shrugging it off as ‘simple,’ simply because the story isn’t spoon-fed to the player. [QUOTE]Reznov is much more than that. He is the driving force behind the story; he is mysterious, but is there for much more than to simply add a pointless enigma to the narrative. Aside from being an intriguing character, he adds depth to the story, and causes you to question things such as your free will; are you really making your own decisions, or are you being controlled? How is Reznov manipulating you? This is hinted at near the end of Black Ops by your interrogator.[/QUOTE] It's funny; this is one of the most nonsensical paragraphs I have seen in a long time. Reznov is hardly an enigmatic character; he brainwashed you to do his bidding. The end. There is no mystery, nothing deeper; that is all there is to it. Comparing him to the G-Man is ridiculous. In the case of the G-Man, his motives are a mystery. You don’t know what this guy wants, but he seems to have an interest in you. He seemingly got you into this mess, and has been keeping an eye on you this whole time; what does he hope to achieve? Reznov is present in the story for nothing more than to provide a plot-twist near the end. His motives are clearly defined, he didn’t orchestrate the events in any way. If it wasn’t for that one twist, Reznov would be a pointless character altogether. Gman, on the other hand, is a very important character in narrative as a whole, from you 'employment' in Half-Life 1, to your freedom from his grasp in Episode 1. [QUOTE] Let me just start by saying that HL2's narrative is 'non-linear' hilariously misled. You might want to look 'non-linear' up in the dictionary. [/QUOTE] I thought it would be obvious what I meant. That scene was entirely optional; you could completely skip it if you wanted. However, if you choose to take the time, and analyze the picture, it adds so much more depth to the world and storyline. There are a lot more similar scenes, if you are willing to look. They are all in out of the way areas, forcing the player to deviate from the pre-determined course, and explore. [QUOTE] Your analysis of Sandtraps is entirely the product of your own imagination. Now, I commend Valve for creating a game that elicits analyzation from players, but [i]any[/i] game could be made to sound 'deep' or 'complex' if you waste enough breath trying to explain it. If your idea of a good story is one that forces the player to come to his own conclusions, you must think The Graveyard is the best thing since sliced bread. [/QUOTE] These scenes aren’t there by accident you know. Valve added them purposefully, in the hopes that players would see them, and piece together the clues and various parts of the story. There must be a reason that man was lying in such an odd position, hiding from the Combine, with a gun next to him. These scenes were purposely added to strengthen the over-arching narrative, and flesh out the world more. Some people choose to look at them, other ignore them. Like I said before, it is up to the player to determine how much one gets out of Half-Life 2. [QUOTE] The big flaw with all your arguments is that I could easily replace any mention of 'Half-Life 2' with 'Black Ops' or 'Metro 2033' and it makes just as much sense.[/QUOTE] Actually, your copy-pasted ‘arguments’ make very little sense at all. The Reznov - G-Man comparison was absolutely pointless, as they are both completely different types of characters, serving different purposes. Black Ops is also at the complete opposite side of the gaming spectrum, compared to Half-Life 2. It’s just as well, because Black Ops is nothing but the shell of a game anyway. [QUOTE] And if I have to listen to developer commentaries to hear more info or details, that should immediately tell you it's poorly constructed -- a great piece of literature doesn't need to be explained by its author.[/QUOTE] You missed the point completely. I am not suggesting you listen to the developer commentaries to help you understand the story more; I am recommending them, in the hopes that you get a better understanding of how the story and the levels were designed, and intertwined. In the end, the best part of Half-Life 2 is the way the disparate elements blend together so seamlessly. The story and gameplay were designed off of each other. The game manages to include amazing variety, and a deep story, with excellent storytelling. The pacing is impeccable, and the game is one of the most atmospheric games ever made. It all fits together; sure, other games may include bits and pieces of what makes Half-Life 2 so good, but HL2 includes them all, in a very slick and refined 20-hour experience. And really, Half-Life 2 is an experience. Really, as hard as you try to downplay Half-Life 2, you can’t completely undermine all of Valve’s achievements with the game. [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=OutOfExile2;27783037]Metro 2033 had potential to be good[/QUOTE] ...but it wasn't. It was a hilariously mediocre game.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27795031]...but it wasn't. It was a hilariously mediocre game.[/QUOTE] well ok then that's your opinion Also I don't see the point of typing out lengthy paragraphs attempting to justify why a game is good, who the fuck cares what other people think. What are you hoping to accomplish, changing the other person's opinion about a game or proving to yourself that it's a good game?

Where the HELL is Ricochet? These guys haven't the slightest clue.

[QUOTE=OutOfExile2;27799691]well ok then that's your opinion Also I don't see the point of typing out lengthy paragraphs attempting to justify why a game is good, who the fuck cares what other people think. What are you hoping to accomplish, changing the other person's opinion about a game or proving to yourself that it's a good game?[/QUOTE] Like I said before, disliking a game is fine. Coming to false conclusions about it is a different thing entirely. I was simply stating that, in my opinion, Metro 2033 was a mediocre game; postman just went and said that Half-Life's story was bad, and this was a false statement, so I called it out. He argued back, so I am now in a position where I must keep arguing, or I will look like a fool.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27800897]He argued back, so I am now in a position where I must keep arguing, or I will look like a fool.[/QUOTE] No not really, people have opinions. Dragging on a argument like that is completely pointless.

[QUOTE=Mystery Penguin;27800446]Where the HELL is Ricochet? These guys haven't the slightest clue.[/QUOTE] Stop. It hasn't been funny since the first time someone said it.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27800897]Like I said before, disliking a game is fine. Coming to false conclusions about it is a different thing entirely. I was simply stating that, in my opinion, Metro 2033 was a mediocre game; postman just went and said that Half-Life's story was bad, and this was a false statement, so I called it out. He argued back, so I am now in a position where I must keep arguing, or I will look like a fool.[/QUOTE] You already look like a fool because you're writing essays about a video game in response to a forum post, and if he thinks the story is bad you're not going to convince him otherwise and it's entirely pointless. You also seem to have a poor grasp of opinions. If he says the story is bad that's his opinion and you can't claim it's a false statement.

[quote=chosenone54]:words:[/quote] I considered going through your entire post and replacing every mention of Half-Life 2 with Black Ops and then maybe Metro 2033, and perhaps even FEAR or something, but then I realized I'm a lazy fuck, so just imagine it yourself. See, the problem is everything you've said is your own interpretation. It's not the game's; we don't know anything about G-man aside from that he has a speech impediment and magical powers. As such, everything you say is just as legitimate with a quick reversal, because it's just that -- an interpretation. [i]Anything[/i] is deep if you interpret it enough, which is why shit like The Graveyard or One Chance is hailed by some as revolutionary. [QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27800897]Like I said before, disliking a game is fine. Coming to false conclusions about it is a different thing entirely. I was simply stating that, in my opinion, Metro 2033 was a mediocre game; postman just went and said that Half-Life's story was bad, and this was a false statement, so I called it out. He argued back, so I am now in a position where I must keep arguing, or I will look like a fool.[/QUOTE] You're a funny guy. Even if it makes me look like a fool, I'm withdrawing from this argument because I'm arguing with someone that apparently believes his [i]opinion[/i] that Half-Life's story is good is [i]fact.[/i]

[QUOTE=postmanX3;27802424]I considered going through your entire post and replacing every mention of Half-Life 2 with Black Ops and then maybe Metro 2033, and perhaps even FEAR or something, but then I realized I'm a lazy fuck, so just imagine it yourself. See, the problem is everything you've said is your own interpretation. It's not the game's; we don't know anything about G-man aside from that he has a speech impediment and magical powers. As such, everything you say is just as legitimate with a quick reversal, because it's just that -- an interpretation. [i]Anything[/i] is deep if you interpret it enough, which is why shit like The Graveyard or One Chance is hailed by some as revolutionary. You're a funny guy. Even if it makes me look like a fool, I'm withdrawing from this argument because I'm arguing with someone that apparently believes his [i]opinion[/i] that Half-Life's story is good is [i]fact.[/i][/QUOTE] Hm, agree to disagree?

[QUOTE=Legend286;27801257]Stop. It hasn't been funny since the first time someone said it.[/QUOTE] whos talking about funny.. ricochet is one of the best pc games right up there with judge dredd

[QUOTE=BigHeaded B;27804291]whos talking about funny.. ricochet is one of the best pc games right up there with judge dredd[/QUOTE] :downs:

Sounds like everyone's mad that popular industry revolutionizing games won over their favorite obscure "hidden gem" games that most people haven't even heard of.

X-com is too high on the list, it should have been at least in top 5. And I was finding all things wrong with the list, well, I'd be wasting my time. Because this is PC Gamer. Which is pretty horrible magazine, in my opinion. Of course, plenty of people will disagree with me for obvious reasons, such as their own opinions. I respect that disagreement.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27785391]This is probably the most ignorant statement I have ever heard. There is a lot more to the story than that; the mystery of the Gman, and his relationship with the vortigaunts, past events such as the 7-Hour War (which would make a feature length film in itself), the enigmatic Combine forces, the Borealis; you are over-simplifying the story grossly. Disliking a game is one thing. Coming to false conclusions about it is something entirely different. [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] In fact, simply look here: [url]http://members.shaw.ca/halflifestory/timeline.htm[/url] [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] Half-Life 2 is still unmatched in storytelling, variety, immersion, and even minor things such as facial animations. Half-Life 2 transcended the genre with it's amazing approach to storytelling, characters, level design, and multi-faceted gameplay. There is so much variety in the game, that Half-Life 2 almost feels like many different games in one. Just look at it. You go from city streets to sewers to an abandoned ghost town to the coast, to an old prison, and finally into a large alien structure, all while facing many different types and combinations of enemies. Half-Life 2 breaks through the typical genre boundaries by including such variety. It is truly amazing how Valve managed to fit so many shooter styles into one. HL2 does the lone wolf gameplay, as well as the Cod-esque team battles. It does the Resident Evil-esque horror levels, as well as some nail-bitingly intense sections. All this, with virtually no backtracking. You are always on your toes when playing Half-Life 2, and you never do one thing for so long that it gets boring. I'll argue that the shooting in Half-Life could be more engaging, but Valve have done so much to elevate the series beyond the mundane standards of the rest of the shooter industry that it doesn't really matter. Saying Half-Life 1 was better than Half-Life 2 is simply a false statement. It was revolutionary for it's time, but nowadays, it is horribly mundane compared to it's sequel; it is a chore to play through again.[/QUOTE] I played Half Life 1 first after I played Half Life 2. I enjoyed it more then Half Life 2. But hey, I guess my opinion is wrong and everyone should listen to YOUR opinion, [B]RIGHT?![/B]

No PC game should get first. It's not that they're all bad, but nothing is really AMAZING or stands out.

you guys are jealous that can't understand the epicness in deus ex

[QUOTE=spanaren;27809067]But hey, I guess my opinion is wrong and everyone should listen to YOUR opinion, [B]RIGHT?![/B][/QUOTE] Feel free to think that way if it makes you feel better.

See this is why I read Game Informer. They don't do a top 100, they just pick 50 or so of some of the greatest games out there and say "Dude, these are all awesome games. You gotta play 'em."

[QUOTE=gufu;27806870]Because this is PC Gamer. Which is pretty horrible magazine, in my opinion.[/QUOTE]

I think the only games that are "rated" are the 100th and the 1st. The others are just there to be there. To show that they`re good games.

Fuck arguing about which game had a better story. How did Oblivion get anywhere below 20?

WOW should not have been even on the list, new vegas should have been 1.