Half - life 2 is overrated

[AlphaTemplar]

Before you start flaming me, let me say that Half - Life 2 is a good game, probably a very good game. The graphics are awesome, the physics kick ass, the environments are great, the control is tight, and the story's fairly good (I havent beaten the game however)

But it's not a great game. A truly great game has to be different, to be creative, and to be innovative. Wolfenstien, Doom 1&2, Quake 1&2, Team Fortress, Tribes 1&2, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Half - Life, Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Battlefield 1942, Halo, and Far Cry are great games. They did something new

With the Source engine, Valve had the capability to do something new. With the physics engine there's a lot of room for nonlinearity. It has the power to let players manipulate the game world to solve puzzles and defeat enemies in any way they see fit. For example, you could collapse a ceiling in on combine soldiers, stack plywood across a blown out bridge instead of travelling around it, chuck a grenade into a room and light it on fire, or chuck a car at a Strider's leg and make it buckle and collapse. I'm not saying Valve should have created a macrolinear Deus Ex/Far Cry style game or a completely deformable Red Faction world. Merely a series of linear challenges that can be overcome in ways other than what was originally conceived by the level designer while still advancing to the next area and plot sequence.

Secondly, the multiplayer is quite mediocre. CS Source is every bit as good as Counterstrike and has less of a cheating problem. But, for that matter, Frag.Ops for UT2k4 looks almost as good, plays as well, and has even fewer cheaters than CS:S. HL2DM has the same problem, but lets player chuck billboards/toasters/doors/corpses/other objects at each other.

 

[xenophobe]

You mention Doom 2, Quake 2, Day of Defeat, Counterstrike, Far Cry and Tribes. I'm sorry, your opinion means much less to me now. Those games were marginally decent at best. Doom 2 was a rehash of Doom1 and didn't offer anything significant. Quake 2 looked better, but multiplayer was worse than Q1, and the single player was too short and sucked. Counterstrike was just so the same as any other deathmatch.... Day of Defeat... not much different. not my thing. RtCW was much better.

Half Life 2 is the best game that's come out in many years. Best single player game ever perhaps. Multiplayer left me missing UT2004.

I agree about the linear levels, but making a game so long and having alternative levels /routes would have pushed back the release a few more years, and realistically, isn't neccessary, as long as they keep it long and entertaining.

Personally, I'd rather see a company focus on single player, like Valve has done yet again, than for them to focus on multiplayer.

HL2 had great atmosphere, awesome effects, and really was worth the wait.

Anyways, I don't think it's over-rated like a lot of the games you mentioned. It certainly isn't underrated though.

 

[Karmic]

But it's not a great game. A truly great game has to be different, to be creative, and to be innovative. Wolfenstien, Doom 1&2, Quake 1&2, Team Fortress, Tribes 1&2, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, Half - Life, Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Battlefield 1942, Halo, and Far Cry are great games. They did something new

With the Source engine, Valve had the capability to do something new. With the physics engine there's a lot of room for nonlinearity. It has the power to let players manipulate the game world to solve puzzles and defeat enemies in any way they see fit. For example, you could collapse a ceiling in on combine soldiers, stack plywood across a blown out bridge instead of travelling around it, chuck a grenade into a room and light it on fire, or chuck a car at a Strider's leg and make it buckle and collapse. I'm not saying Valve should have created a macrolinear Deus Ex/Far Cry style game or a completely deformable Red Faction world. Merely a series of linear challenges that can be overcome in ways other than what was originally conceived by the level designer while still advancing to the next area and plot sequence.

Secondly, the multiplayer is quite mediocre. CS Source is every bit as good as Counterstrike and has less of a cheating problem. But, for that matter, Frag.Ops for UT2k4 looks almost as good, plays as well, and has even fewer cheaters than CS:S. HL2DM has the same problem, but lets player chuck billboards/toasters/doors/corpses/other objects at each other.

It's really all about taste. At least with CS:Source.

And when you say they've done nothing new, thats not true. You're even saying yourself the physics engine capabilities. Half of those things can be done. (Am I misunderstanding something here, perhaps?)
Of course, its linear, but is that what it has to be to be good for you? Overrated? To me, it was a brilliant game, and putting in a map and a compass for Gordon to explore vast terrains just wouldnt be as much of a HL game as the others.

The list of "great" games, half of them are very similar. Is that innovative or different?

I'd like you to compare HL2 to a game that makes it seem non-innovative.
Half Life 2 is doing something new. The possibilities are endless.

 

[None_So_Vile]

HL2 is an absolutely awesome game but the main gripe I have is that it's way too short. I've completed it on easy and normal but can't be bothered to do it all again on hard.

 

[Pitiless Wanderer]

i agree HL2 isnt nearly as good as the first, but it is still a solid game. nothing in it compares to the excitement of the surface tension levels in the original HL, though.