Is Half Life 2 perfect?

R

ratm9200

Newbie
Joined
Nov 1, 2004
Messages
105
Reaction score
0
To answer that quesion, no. Its not even close to perfect. There were probly hundreds of dissapointments i had about the game. But thats not the point. The point is, its not anywhere close to perfect but its alotcloser to anything else out there.

alos, something else on my mind. If you think the story sucked, thats an opinion. I think its great, and thats my opinion. i dont se why there are constant flame wars on this forum about opinions. But what does piss me off is when people say HL2 sucks because there is no story. Thats not an opinion, thats just one of the effects of having, a story line thats not smashing you in the face. Its more subtle. Now whether this method of storytelling is better or worse then cutsceans walking you through the story is debatable, weather or not there is a story is not.

p.s. sorry for my fairly pointless ramblings. My excuse? its late, im bored
 
I amongst others based opinions on the early levels, which I think is fair given as they are supposed to set the feel of the whole game (you would think). The story is fairly involved early on (I for one never said there was NO story - just that at that point of the game you do not want it rammed down your throat until you have become accostomed to the universe).. basically , the early levels felt to me, like a guided tour of the "right parts at the right times" with story literally thrown at you from the propoganda and scripted sequences. I felt that I wanted to explore and interact and it felt like it was on rails and taking me where IT wanted to go, honestly - that combined with the constant loading/loading times early on was a cause of my main dissapointment.

However, it improved immensley once I had sorted out the stuttering so that I could play long enough to clear the first 3 chapters. from 4 onwards the atmosphere, sense of immersion, interaction, and gfx all picked up and I thought it was wonderful. Unfortunately the early part has stopped it being "perfect" for me, even though I wanted it to be. I will say, I would definatley want to play it through again when I have finished (atm I am merely half way through Ravensholm and the game is like a different beast compared to early on). I know there is even better to come, and I also am aware there are dissapointments ahead from reading other threads. So, when it works well it works amazing well, no contest it IS the most involved and cool game of it's type - but it has those damn downsides that eat away at it. I was never one to just take things on face value, just because reviews gave it 10/10. I bought the hype before I could play it myself - because like most of us, I want to belive it, I want to look forward to a stunning game. Realistically the dissapointment was all early on for me, which is NOT a good time (if there ever is a good time) you want to completely love the game from first load not encounter hinderances and boring shuffling/rushed sequences. If they had started you off in a similar vien to the chapters after 3, but obviously with the story needed, you would have felt that awe from the later levels straight away and the whole games feel would have improved from day one. The later sections are so much better that I even don't care so much about the loading times in them. The early loading times were frustrating due to the fact that you were being "forced" to rush along a path without proper time to comprehend the environment or to think about what is going on, and especially for those that have no clue about HL in general it is all abit "WTF?" at first - which can turn into apathy... basically it seems like all cool references to the past, story - forced into loading - repeat for a good while which I DO NOT LIKE.

Thankfully it paid of in the end, a lesser title may have been tossed in the bin by now, glad I stuck to it, through it's faults, there are many memorable sections from chapter 4 (I think) onwards (and even though ch 4 was was overly long it was none-the less fun).
 
The game is nowhere near perfect imo, Its a very fun game but its not as good as i'd hoped it was going to be.

It was still a lot of fun, but i didnt find any of it revolutionary at all, in fact it was quite the opposite i thought, fairly generic and repetetive. I cant put my finger on exactly why, but this game didnt have the same magic as the first installment for me. Nothing seemed to flow naturally and evolve, it seemed almost painfully controlled and forced in parts. Particularly the city sections (the lter ones i mean with the strider battles) felt horribly controlled and a little lifeless, there werent any clear goals to be acheived (other than the section in the museum) so i ended up feeling as if i was just doing the same things over and over ie, kill strider, run through undeground tunnel, come up and kill another strider etc...

I also found some of the characters and coversations to be slightly annoying and a little cheesy at times. However the story is not one of my complaints with the game, i thought the story is told really well, and not over done.

These are what i conisder to be the faults with the game:

Way too short.
AI is very ordinary.
Too few memorable events.
Level design (from a gameplay standpoint).
Repetetive combat.
Not enough variety to the mission objectives.

I dont want to come across as saying its a bad game, because i dont think it is. I just think its not nearly as impressive as the reviews and initial hype made it out to be. None of what the game does is revolutionary, its more evolutionary.

So its still a very good game imo, just not as good as it could have/should have been. Kind of like a big budget sequel to a classic film, its better in a lot of ways (technically/visually etc..) but somehow the heart and soul just isnt quite there.
 
NB. said:
Way too short.
AI is very ordinary.
Too few memorable events.
Level design (from a gameplay standpoint).
Repetetive combat.
Not enough variety to the mission objectives.
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
Perfect? Of course not. Perfection does not exist.
But HL2 is the best game ever and comes pretty close to perfection.
I have played a few fps, and all of them, everyone has had at least one level I disliked/found boring/was too hard. But not HL2.
I think that says it all as far as my opinion counts.
 
NB. said:
These are what i conisder to be the faults with the game:

Way too short.
Too few memorable events.
Level design (from a gameplay standpoint).
Repetetive combat.
Not enough variety to the mission objectives.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but either you run-and-gun everything (which would mean that you are to blame for the blandness), or you're just making shit up to make us all mad.

I have put upwards of 17 hours into this game and am not through Nova Prospekt yet. No, I don't suck at this game. I'm taking my time and playing it like I feel it should be played.

There are countless memorable moments that I just can't wait to get back to and play again. The level design is superb, as is the variety in the missions. I am highly suspicious that all you did was run-and-gun your way through the game, because if you actually take your time to strategise and understand what you must perform to complete a certain task, then the variey in this game is excellent.

Thanks for adding another superfluous post the the pile.

AJ Rimmer said:
Perfect? Of course not. Perfection does not exist.
But HL2 is the best game ever and comes pretty close to perfection.
I have played a few fps, and all of them, everyone has had at least one level I disliked/found boring/was too hard. But not HL2.
I think that says it all as far as my opinion counts.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree.

This game has flaws. There have been times where I've said, "Damn. You know, I wish this were a little different." Has it detracted from the sheer magnificence of this game? Hell naw!

Instead of seeing all the positives and firsts for the genre, nay-sayers focus on the one thing that upset them. Who the hell cares? I've got 45 other exciting moments that make me forget about it.
 
ship said:
I'm sorry, but either you run-and-gun everything (which would mean that you are to blame for the blandness), or you're just making shit up to make us all mad.

I have put upwards of 17 hours into this game and am not through Nova Prospekt yet. No, I don't suck at this game. I'm taking my time and playing it like I feel it should be played.

There are countless memorable moments that I just can't wait to get back to and play again. The level design is superb, as is the variety in the missions. I am highly suspicious that all you did was run-and-gun your way through the game, because if you actually take your time to strategise and understand what you must perform to complete a certain task, then the variey in this game is excellent.

Thanks for adding another superfluous post the the pile.
Click to expand...

Well thanks for showing me that you cannot tolerate other peoples opinions.

But just out of interest what exactly do you mean by 'run and gun everything' From where i am the game is exactly that, a shooter. I didnt once see a single mission where you could acheive an objective without taking people out, in fact i didnt see a single mission that had multiple choices for how acheive an objective? So if your accusing me of shooting the enemies, then yes i'm afraid i'm guilty, but i wasnt aware of the deep rpg elements and politics that you seem to be talking about.

And as for the level designs i think they all look fantastic, but i just found them to be a little one dimensional and repetetive to play.

But anyway you obviously missed the fact that i said i think its a good game just nothting revolutionary, and certainly not as good as it could have been given that it was in developement for 6 years. But anyway, if you dont agree with my opinion fine, but dont accuse me of making shit up to make people like you angry.
 
Listen man, I apologize. I'm not trying to call you a moron or a dumbass or anything like that. No ill-will towards you. I promise. :)
I respect your opinion and the opinions of others. I definitely have taken it into account and will not act indifferently towards it. However, I do disagree with you and wanted to make a point in my favor. I got carried away. You know how many flamers there can be in here; it gets to you...

When I said run-and-gun, I meant jumping into the action, immediately confronting the combine, and just all out shooting at them until they die or you die. Mass ammunition consumption.

I'm having incredible amounts of fun thinking of different ways I can defeat my enemy. Using the physics engine and the manipulator, I can set up defense and cover for myself, and really outsmart the A.I. - well, hopefully everyone is smarter than the A.I. :P It's kind of weak.

But what I mean is, I keep thinking of new and interesting ways to get the job done. I'm sure if you watched 25 different people playing the game, you'd see 25 different ways of playing succesfully. That's what excites me about this game.
 
For the record - I'm one of the more vocal "dissapointed" but now seeing the good side, I have heard it said more than once "must be the way you play the game, you obviously are a meat head who just blasts through a game", I personally explore EVERY area i can even if it means going back through the LONG load points (to usually find ... not much actually) and I savour the atmosphere and take my time, usually pressing F5 every few minutes as the scenery looks great.

So, just so people know, most of us want to explore and take our time (far cry felt good for this ) but the game itself sometimes forces you to not hang around (because of all out attacks) or due to loading points.

I am defintaly in the middle ground of these debates now, I CAN see both sides and will flame no-one for opinions on either side. It really DOES have down sides and really IS over rated/over hyped - on the flipside it also has some of the best (if not the best/most awe inspiring moments in any game I've seen) and intense atmosphere (in places). It also is a mixed bag on the gfx front, "next gen" in areas, while lagging behind older tech in others. So it really is a great game, with flaws and some annoyances. Other games have coped better (slicker, smoother, more cohesive) but may not have the ambitions of HL2 and it's better moments. Which will always lead me back to why people have to use a blanket statement such as "Best game ever" (what? every genre on every system? really?), as I have said, Best is a bad word when there are many quality games out there, and putting down OTHER great games to further the cause of THIS great game is slack, and I suppose I did the reverse in re-action to that. (D3, FC being slated etc).
 
@ ship, yeah i know what you mean, and i do agree with that the physics is fantastic and makes for some fun possibilities.

What i thought you meant was that i ran through the game and somehow didnt do everything that there was to do. This was pretty much my biggest criticism of the game, it was just so linear and there was never an alternative way to beat a certain mission. Sure you could kill grunt A in a number of ways, but whatever way you chose to kill him you still had to go from point X to point Y and destroy Z afterwards, there were no alternatives in that respect.

I am the type of person who takes there time playing games usually and i like to see all the different things there are, but i just found that there was no incentive to do so in HL2 because you were effectively placed on a rail for most of the game. I particularly felt it in the city, which was just begging for buildings that you could explore and hide in, but you always knew that the city was just a mirage and there was never anything behind what you could see.

But anyway no offense taken, i just dont want to be seen as a troll because thats not my intention, i'm just a little disappointed with certain aspects of the game and thought i'd post my opinions here.
 
HL2 is very cool :) but not perfect (which game is?)

Over the years there have been many titles that I think have done more thanHL2, both in terms of innovation and enjoyment (no point naming them here - it would just result in pointless bickering)

I agree that the fighting is rather easy and repetitive. The experience was also rather lacking in plot details (which is different to story btw .......... which was fine imo)

HL2 shows us how well a convincing and believable gameworld can be realised. It has made the line between video games and movies a little more blurry. (HL2 is the first game i've played that is 'real enough')
 
Certainly not perfect, few problems however. Such as.

Ammo levels, 3 rockets :(
npc invicibility
level design sometimes hides the way out rather than hints at it using clever tricks
AI can get you stuck, I should have the option of not wanting the bugs to follow me. I should have the option of not wanting the resistance fighters following me.

Apart from that nothing really significant, it is the best game I've played. And I can only imagine what's in store if these little problems get ironed out in further valve games.
 
I don't even think it's the best of the big 3, let alone perfect.
 
Of course it isn't perfect.

But it is, in my opinion, the best game I have ever played. I think it's actually the first title I've had where I finished the game and said to myself "Damn, let's play through it all over again!".
 
I've got a simple answer to this one.

No game is ever perfect, developers dont ever get the required amount of development time or resources (from my own experience). All games have their bugs, especially pc titles where there aren't the TRCs from sony/microsoft.

However, IMHO its a damn good game story, gameplay, gfx, audio.
 
In all honesty i cant say i baught the game for hl2 its self mainly for its mods.. yeh i was hopeing it could match its previours but as i expected it didnt... and i dnt thing anything will... well anyway i only paid £35 for it for playing online otherwise i wouldnt have botherd, and with the new dod:s and other damn good lookin mods on the way i say it was well worth the money..
:)
 
Good for you Fleffua, you didn't overestimate what you were gonig to get.
 
ship said:
I am highly suspicious that all you did was run-and-gun your way through the game, because if you actually take your time to strategise and understand what you must perform to complete a certain task, then the variey in this game is excellent.
Click to expand...

If you are able to run and gun through the game, why would you need to form strategies and "take your time"? If I see an enemy, I shoot it. I don't spend an hour trying to figure out how I could kill him with a brick.

And most importantly: HL2 IS A FIRST PERSON SHOOTER!
 
The only perfect game is pong.

But the source engine will be continuously upgraded over steam, so HL2 can only get better.
 
Spartan said:
If you are able to run and gun through the game, why would you need to form strategies and "take your time"? If I see an enemy, I shoot it. I don't spend an hour trying to figure out how I could kill him with a brick.
Click to expand...
Games are made for ONE reason: to be fun. I found the physics fun, so I used them a lot. If you did not find running and gunning fun, why didn't you try to vary the action a bit?

You may retort, "I should not have to create my own fun - it should be integral to the game," or something of the kind. To that I say, if Valve forced you to use the physics in certain situations, where would the creativity be? The creativity comes in being able to choose a method to adhere to your own personal strategy, your own definition of fun.

The purpose of a game is not to win, if winning means that you are not having fun. The purpose is to enjoy yourself.
 
Chiefi said:
I wish I had a N64, I've never played that game. :o
Click to expand...
You have never lived. Buy a used N64 just so you can play it, for the sake of your soul.
 
Narcolepsy said:
You have never lived. Buy a used N64 just so you can play it, for the sake of your soul.
Click to expand...
I will... I will... :D
 
Dude, even the hottest chick has a few pimples on her ass.
 
Sparta said:
Zelda: Ocarina of Time was perfect.
Click to expand...

I whole-heartedly agree with you. In fact, you beat me to it.

This and Super Metroid are the closest I've ever seen to actual perfection. Probobly won't happen again for a long time, or until Legend of Zelda 2005 is released. :laugh:
 
Yeah, Ocarina of Time wuz da pwnz 4ll.

I'm going to have to shoot everyone who worked on that, people who can create a game that good don't deserve to live. :sniper:
 
Ocarina of Time - Water Temple = Perfect

i hated that level with a passion
 
No, but it's damn near perfect if it has kept my interest for a 4 hour continuous playing session. Only other game that could keep my interest (of complete, not-doing-anything-else playing) is Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door.

Right now, it comes in a close second right behind HL2. (I'm at 15 hours in Paper Mario)
 
It was as close to perfect as any game I have ever played.

HUH???//// BUT IDT DONESNT HAEV DUEL WIELDNG LIEK HALO2 OMG"!!11
 
I played Ocarine of Time on the GameCube... I didn't like the camera controls, it made gameplay a mess.
 
I don't think any game will ever be perfect, but I consider Half-Life 2 to be the game closest to the term. It kept me playing for 10+ hours straight the first day. No other game except for "The Settlers 2" and "C&C: Red Alert" has done that to me before.

The feeling of being a part of something big in the streets of City17 made all the difference IMO. It actually feels like a war. No other game has given me that feeling before.
 
Spartan said:
I played Ocarine of Time on the GameCube... I didn't like the camera controls, it made gameplay a mess.
Click to expand...
Yeah the camera can be pretty messed up at times, but dont let that stop you from playing the game. It's almost universally recognised as the greatest game ever made. Even statistically speaking, look at www.gamerankings.com or www.metacritic.com
 
Perfection is technically impossible.
Perfection means it has no faults in anyway. In order for true perfection to happen everything and everyone in the universe at that moment in time must think the game is absolutly 100% perfect. That there is no way this game could ever be bad. Impossible. There are some things that cannot judge in this world thus it cannot be perfect. It's like trying to get to absolute zero. It is impossible though we have gotten within a billionth of it. That is in true form.

In opinon form well.. Your mind must be mad up without a single doubt that the game is absolutly perfect in every way possible and there is no downfalls of it at all in any possible way and you have no second guessing in your mind or anything. Then in your opinon the game is perfect.

You want to know what is perfect?
Nothing.
Because what you say I will disagree with it thus no matter what even if everything but me agreed that it was perfect it aint perfect. ^_^.

Thus I just proved that im bored..
 
As far as video games go.....Ocarina of Time was perfect to me.

Perfection is subjective. Thus opinion, always.
 
You know what was a perfect game?

Ya DAMN right! The Secret of Monkey Island, mother****er!
 
Mario 64, Zelda OoT and Golden Eye/Perfect Dark are the closest i've seen to gaming perfection.

After all these years my 'uber' pc rig still gets owned by an old Nintendo console.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
D.r Gordon Freeman
No Half-Life 3 ? No More Half-Life ?
Replies
13
Views
7K
D.r Gordon Freeman
D.r Gordon Freeman
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
Back
Top