Half-Life (half-bad)

Posted by death on July 20, 2012, 9:25 p.m.

Am i seriously the only one who thinks Half-Life is an extremely over-rated game? I bought the game, thinking "gamers can't be this wrong, it's almost got perfect scores all around, it's the 2nd highest rated game on Steam!" and after playing through almost all of it in a short amount of time, i am incredibly disappointed by this Quake rip-off.

this game has no quality what so ever. it is incredibly buggy. I've had to restart whole levels due to glitches with doors and dialogue, I wasn't able to continue during some of these glitches. no choice but to restart a level? how does this shit get over looked?

The movement just isn't right here either. If it's anything i hate, it's First Person Platforming. You walk too fast to be jumping off of narrow/thin platforms and it always feels like your slipping on ice when you land. Timing and landing a jump is difficult as well. These sections feel so random, as if they've been thrown together for no real reason at all. It's a ton of shooting, than outta nowhere, it's jumping on pipes and ducking under electrical wires.

The combat is flawed as well. There isn't a lot of ammo but there are a ton of soldiers. Man that was random. at first it was a scary horror themed game where you're killing monster/aliens and than it's a shootemup with Tanks and shit.

I'm gonna pin this up as being outdated. Standards have changed. Half Life came out in 1998 and was made on the Quake engine. Valve was still young and they have defiantly improved over the years. Maybe people back in 1998 thought this game had great graphics or presentation, it was also back when FPS games were still blooming. Nowadays we've got way too many of them and so people get a little picky about their shooters.

Do keep in mind, i'm talking about Half Life only, not Half Life 2, or any of the episodic games or spin offs. Since i bought the whole collection (it was on sale so no big loss) I still have to play the other HL games. HOPEFULLY Half Life 2 is better... but i have been fooled before…

p.s. Bioshock sucks too. [/ranting]

Holy shit 10 days left! I'm ……………………… not sure if i can finish in time [-_-]

EDIT: also i feel i should say, i'm not completely bashing the game, i'm just stating that it's not a masterpiece at all. it's not even what i would consider great (imo) but it's also not the worst game ever. I can play it but i'm not enjoying it much.

Comments

link2x101 12 years, 4 months ago

*Inset comment about GoldSrc being a Quake engine mod here.* o.o

Eva unit-01 12 years, 4 months ago

Can't peg Half-Life as responsible for kick-starting -everything-, but it did do a ton.

death 12 years, 4 months ago

Quote:
It was the first videogame to have more than just shooting. It had pacing, it had puzzles. It was the first videogame to have realistic companions who would follow and assist you at your command.
really? where do you get your facts? the first game to have more than shooting? i hate to break it to ya but FPS games were not among the first games ever made.

First game to have companions?… really? I can list a handful of NES games in which you had "companions". Hell just about every console rpg had additional allies that followed your command. In HL all they do is run up to enemies and die in about 5 seconds. And i remember only 3 times did i get to meet any living security guards. The enemy AI is a joke too. they just run up and fire at you. They seem to have PERFECT sense as well, simply being within view of them they know where you are. they don't have a field of view, they know if your behind them even if a single pixel is sticking out from a corner.

Quote:
It was the first videogame to tell an actual story from entirely within the first-person perspective. The level of immersion was unprecedented. Not only is the experience like you're watching a movie, it's like you're in a movie.
HL wouldn't be the first game to take a cinematic approach, hell even before HL came out, there were games with more dialogue and actual cutscenes, sometimes even live action. Even Resident Evil had more cinematics than HL and RE came out in 1996.

Like i said, HL had an slow intro, with some dialogue but as soon as the aliens pop out of green flashes, it's pretty much all shooting and jumping from there. only one other time does a scientist stop to tell you something for the next 9 hours of gameplay.

Half Life could have been the first FPS with an introduction and semi-serious voice clips but other than that, i don't think it did shit new for gaming. People's obsession with this game has some how caused them to believe games didn't exist before 1998.

KaBob799 12 years, 4 months ago

@death

I think he meant first fps game. Also, cutscenes and live action go completely against "entirely within the first-person perspective"

death 12 years, 4 months ago

Quote:
@death

I think he meant first fps game. Also, cutscenes and live action go completely against "entirely within the first-person perspective"
[-_-] .. what difference does it make? oh so you get extra credits if you do something other games did but in a different perspective? woooow very impressive.

Quote:
The FPS games you mention are all shallow shoot em ups. If that's what your into, that's what you're into, but Half-Life offers something far more tasteful.
i don't care if a game is "tasteful" if a game is fun, than it's fun and worth having a fun time with. What's with this "noble gaming" attitude? reminds me of this art-game shit that's been going around…

Eva unit-01 12 years, 4 months ago

Just tossing this in there, but I thought, and still think, that the AI in HL2 was just horrible and almost non-existent. It was like, don't even think of sneaking up to an enemy: he knows you're there, he's just playing dumb, prepare to take a shower in bullets and get gangbanged by the homies.

Ugh.

KaBob799 12 years, 4 months ago

Quote:
oh so you get extra credits if you do something other games did but in a different perspective?
That describes pretty much every "original" game in the past 10+ years, so yes.

Charlie Carlo 12 years, 4 months ago

"Original" isn't a thing that exists.

Every idea ever conceived is the product of other ideas, inspiration from other sources, actual events, etc. The thought that anything exists by its own virtue is just stupid; you can't make something out of nothing.

I think a better term would be "new." Which would be ideas derived of the combination of other ideas in a way that has yet to be done, or in a way that isn't yet popularized.

Toast 12 years, 4 months ago

At the end of the day you're entitled to your opinion, but the arguments you brought forward aren't convincing. You really thought "lack of ammo" was a good criticism?

Anyway. You're entitled to your opinion, but your last paragraph is just plain wrong. It is not up to you to decide whether or not Half-Life is a masterpiece. Half-Life is a masterpiece, just like World of Warcraft is a masterpiece, even though I'd rather boil my own head than play that game.

Half-Life has been given almost unanimous praise from established game critics. It is often cited as one of the greatest games of all time. It's one of the bestselling PC games of all time. It has had an astounding influence on the games industry as a whole. It is a masterpiece, whether you like it or not.

F1ak3r 12 years, 4 months ago

Quote:
I'm gonna pin this up as being outdated. Standards have changed. Half Life came out in 1998 and was made on the Quake engine.
Basically this. Half-Life was revolutionary when it came out, but things are different now. You'll probably experience a similar thing with Half-Life 2. =P

Seinfeld is Unfunny, basically:
Quote: tvtropes.org
Half-Life, being the first modern, highly scripted first person shooter with adaptive AI, now seems somewhat typical after being endlessly copied, ripped off and modified by just about every first person shooter that came after it. (For a concrete example, see this forum thread).

Quote:
Valve was still young and they have defiantly improved over the years.
http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/