Player0
11-22-2004, 06:04 PM
I haven't quite completed the game yet, but I have played the first half of the game about 3 times over again now. This thread isn't for play help, spoilers, or photos. But the question I have is, youve all been playing it now, does it live up to the hype? Does it blow Doom3 out of the water? Is the sequal better than the original?
I know my answer to all of those questions, and its the same answer. Yes!
On the Half-Life2 box itself, they claim that it's the most anticipated PC game ever. I guess someone did the research, and it must have beat out Doom3 at least by some numbers. Anyway. That's a pretty large bet to live up too. The orginal was way ahead of it's time, and the basis for many games since. Heck, even the Opposing Forces expansion pack, very very under-rated if you ask me, was so extremely well done I considered it a sequal. Blue-Shift was a fun reminded, but generally worthless. But given the quality of Op-Forces, it seems to me that Valve wasn't just resting on its HL2 laurels and really cares about the franchise. It is all they have, I guess.
Source is a better engine than Doom3. Better physics, better particle system, support for amazing outdoor maps. Although Im sure the Doom3 engine will be liscenced and will be made to do amazing things (remember Wolfenstein on the Q3 engine?), I don't think it's quite as solid as Source. Source isn't perfect either. It has some culling problems, reflections dont seem to work right, and the lighting/shading doesnt seem to be that dynamic either. Whether these are performance shortcuts or engine limitations, Im not sure of. HL2 does something incredible that D3 or FarCry, etc can't do. It runs really really well on almost ALL hardware. When I play on a FX5200 or the 9800XT or anything in between, I can hardly tell. It's very well balanced at the moment, although Im sure that some new drivers may tip that favor one way or the other.
Half-Life2 suffers from tunnel syndrom so far. I havent completed the game so I cant say that for all levels. But, you pretty much know where to go, and theres only one way to get there, and it's very different from FarCry. AI is also lacking in HL2. The enemies are challening due to weapons, speed, or just surprise, not from any sort of intellegence.
The headcrabs are nasty in this game. While, I think this adds to the game by bringing back the "OMGITSTOUCHINGME!!" factor, it also makes the game furiously annoying since they're hard to kill, or even FIND sometimes. The poisoned ones are just cheap. And you shouldn't just 'die' from 2 headcrab bites in a hazard suit.
The game is clausterphobic and this is also a double edged sword. Certainly the first game was. The gravity gun is a lot less 'gimmicky' than I thought it would be, but it's really complicated to use in close-quarter situations. I'll also complain about the level-loads. I love how the game is continuous with no serious level breaks. BUT... I hate where the level loads occur. They sometimes happen in the worst spots. This is different from say the original or like Halo where the loads occur in that standard two door hallway you see over and over again. It's nice that those are no more, and its much less obvious. But still, when I jump an airboat down a 200m drop in to the river, I dont want it to pause right when i hit the water :P
With a game that surpasses so many others on so many levels, its not surprising that it fails to deliver on other levels. What we do have is a solid platform for a sequal. Valve shouldnt need to focus on Source for a while. In fact, it should release a second installment of the game using most of the same technology. The gameplay is key. The engine is fine for that. They probably will wait for another 6 years and come up with something better. Im just not sure they need to do that.
The lack of multiplayer is a dissappointment. CounterStrike is not my bag, and I loved the original multiplayer. Im sure some nice 3rd party development will come out of this. That is how CounterStrike startde in the first place.
My advice though is take the game slow. I get people telling me how they beat the game in a day. WHY?? I try to go as slow as possible. There are SOO many little areas to explore. Only by playing the game a few times through have I found certain little hints about the story line, newspaper clippings or photos, or little dialogs here and there that are SO easy to miss. Its meant to be fun, its not meant to be a competition for how fast you beat it. I personally, dont want it to be over that fast!! Make your $50-$80 last a while ;) The replay value is pretty good though. Youll always find the 'easier' way to kill the enemies with the traps or better ways of doing things, or those subtle little cool things you didnt see before. Cool.
Ill have more to say once it's beat. The lack of story is concerning. But there seems to be a very cool story line going on, even if its not apparent in this game.
I know my answer to all of those questions, and its the same answer. Yes!
On the Half-Life2 box itself, they claim that it's the most anticipated PC game ever. I guess someone did the research, and it must have beat out Doom3 at least by some numbers. Anyway. That's a pretty large bet to live up too. The orginal was way ahead of it's time, and the basis for many games since. Heck, even the Opposing Forces expansion pack, very very under-rated if you ask me, was so extremely well done I considered it a sequal. Blue-Shift was a fun reminded, but generally worthless. But given the quality of Op-Forces, it seems to me that Valve wasn't just resting on its HL2 laurels and really cares about the franchise. It is all they have, I guess.
Source is a better engine than Doom3. Better physics, better particle system, support for amazing outdoor maps. Although Im sure the Doom3 engine will be liscenced and will be made to do amazing things (remember Wolfenstein on the Q3 engine?), I don't think it's quite as solid as Source. Source isn't perfect either. It has some culling problems, reflections dont seem to work right, and the lighting/shading doesnt seem to be that dynamic either. Whether these are performance shortcuts or engine limitations, Im not sure of. HL2 does something incredible that D3 or FarCry, etc can't do. It runs really really well on almost ALL hardware. When I play on a FX5200 or the 9800XT or anything in between, I can hardly tell. It's very well balanced at the moment, although Im sure that some new drivers may tip that favor one way or the other.
Half-Life2 suffers from tunnel syndrom so far. I havent completed the game so I cant say that for all levels. But, you pretty much know where to go, and theres only one way to get there, and it's very different from FarCry. AI is also lacking in HL2. The enemies are challening due to weapons, speed, or just surprise, not from any sort of intellegence.
The headcrabs are nasty in this game. While, I think this adds to the game by bringing back the "OMGITSTOUCHINGME!!" factor, it also makes the game furiously annoying since they're hard to kill, or even FIND sometimes. The poisoned ones are just cheap. And you shouldn't just 'die' from 2 headcrab bites in a hazard suit.
The game is clausterphobic and this is also a double edged sword. Certainly the first game was. The gravity gun is a lot less 'gimmicky' than I thought it would be, but it's really complicated to use in close-quarter situations. I'll also complain about the level-loads. I love how the game is continuous with no serious level breaks. BUT... I hate where the level loads occur. They sometimes happen in the worst spots. This is different from say the original or like Halo where the loads occur in that standard two door hallway you see over and over again. It's nice that those are no more, and its much less obvious. But still, when I jump an airboat down a 200m drop in to the river, I dont want it to pause right when i hit the water :P
With a game that surpasses so many others on so many levels, its not surprising that it fails to deliver on other levels. What we do have is a solid platform for a sequal. Valve shouldnt need to focus on Source for a while. In fact, it should release a second installment of the game using most of the same technology. The gameplay is key. The engine is fine for that. They probably will wait for another 6 years and come up with something better. Im just not sure they need to do that.
The lack of multiplayer is a dissappointment. CounterStrike is not my bag, and I loved the original multiplayer. Im sure some nice 3rd party development will come out of this. That is how CounterStrike startde in the first place.
My advice though is take the game slow. I get people telling me how they beat the game in a day. WHY?? I try to go as slow as possible. There are SOO many little areas to explore. Only by playing the game a few times through have I found certain little hints about the story line, newspaper clippings or photos, or little dialogs here and there that are SO easy to miss. Its meant to be fun, its not meant to be a competition for how fast you beat it. I personally, dont want it to be over that fast!! Make your $50-$80 last a while ;) The replay value is pretty good though. Youll always find the 'easier' way to kill the enemies with the traps or better ways of doing things, or those subtle little cool things you didnt see before. Cool.
Ill have more to say once it's beat. The lack of story is concerning. But there seems to be a very cool story line going on, even if its not apparent in this game.