half life = half a game.

The orange box. Sure its the best deal under the sun, Or is it. I notice a lot of people playing orange box lately. I have to admit I've tried it. But in light of halo 3 bioshock gears of war hell even prey. orange box just cant hold my interest. To me it seems like a stew pot of old played out ideas with an even older feeling to the play mechanics. Am I being hard on half life. Or am I just sick of it. I mean I was playing the original half life on the pc way back in the day. To me half life only feels like half a game. I'm not saying it doesn't live up to everyone's expectations. But if half life 2 episode 2 was so great why would they pack it in with two other half life's and then two crap games " just to sell" I'm not saying its not a good deal apparently it is.. There's just something about the game that bores me to tears, Half life just feels rushed and rehashed to me. yay! lets all do the same things in half life we where basically doing ten years ago !!! wow! I Cant say I hate the game, But then I cant really say I like it. half life just has this weird flavor to it that just doesn't suit my tastes. and that's really odd to because I like area 51, " the first one anyway" I like prey and other obscure alien/mutant/ psychotic robot shoot em ups. But there's just something about half life that's so boring and out of touch with today's gamer,Id much rather play a decent shooter like bioshock or halo hell even serious sam or even doom. But half life just screams, " IM A POORLY MADE CLONE OF EVERY OTHER SHOOTER EVER MADE" Idk. I'm sure a lot of people like orange box and will defend it for its stellar deal of packing five okay games on to one disc.

But in my opinion beavis was right. you can try and try. But you just cant polish a turd.

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/4603/beavismm8.gif

Now before everyone decids to hang Sp for a negitive review on a game im sure everyone loves. This is all Imo. I just feel the formula,gameplay, story elements, basicly every aspect of half life is very dated.

I just feel basically every aspect of half life has been done to death. It all mixes very poorly to make an outdated peice of crap.

I've played worse games but orange box should be a budget title.

Thank you for Pete's sake, I'm not the only one. trust me, you'll see the orange box in the front of my Gamertag--I rented it from blockbuster and the only game you'll find me playing on it is Team Fortress 2.

I never thought the original Half-Life was good. At all. My friend always gets mad at me for this, still claiming Half-Life 2 was the greatest game ever made, and says I have no taste in games. To me, its Unreal with better graphics and the same gameplay.

...Meh. I've never really liked any game Valve made. Portal was fun, but not amazing. Team Fortress 2 is fun, but by far has many issues with equality in classes. I got half-life 2 a while after it was made, but I was less then amused. I did love the gravity gun though :)

To me the original Doom is still the greatest FPS ever made. But its my favorite game of all time, so thats kinda biased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shadowprophet

The orange box. Sure its the best deal under the sun, Or is it. I notice a lot of people playing orange box lately. I have to admit I've tried it. But in light of halo 3 bioshock gears of war hell even prey. orange box just cant hold my interest. To me it seems like a stew pot of old played out ideas with an even older feeling to the play mechanics. Am I being hard on half life. Or am I just sick of it. I mean I was playing the original half life on the pc way back in the day. To me half life only feels like half a game. I'm not saying it doesn't live up to everyone's expectations. But if half life 2 episode 2 was so great why would they pack it in with two other half life's and then two crap games " just to sell" I'm not saying its not a good deal apparently it is.. There's just something about the game that bores me to tears, Half life just feels rushed and rehashed to me. yay! lets all do the same things in half life we where basically doing ten years ago !!! wow! I Cant say I hate the game, But then I cant really say I like it. half life just has this weird flavor to it that just doesn't suit my tastes. and that's really odd to because I like area 51, " the first one anyway" I like prey and other obscure alien/mutant/ psychotic robot shoot em ups. But there's just something about half life that's so boring and out of touch with today's gamer,Id much rather play a decent shooter like bioshock or halo hell even serious sam or even doom. But half life just screams, " IM A POORLY MADE CLONE OF EVERY OTHER SHOOTER EVER MADE" Idk. I'm sure a lot of people like orange box and will defend it for its stellar deal of packing five okay games on to one disc.

But in my opinion beavis was right. you can try and try. But you just cant polish a turd.

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/4603/beavismm8.gif

Now before everyone decids to hang Sp for a negitive review on a game im sure everyone loves. This is all Imo. I just feel the formula,gameplay, story elements, basicly every aspect of half life is very dated.

Now before everyone decides to hang Sp for a negative review on a game I'm sure everyone loves. This is all Imo. I just feel basically every aspect of half life has been done to death. It all mixes very poorly to make an outdated peice of crap.

I've played worse games but orange box should be a budget title.

---

Did u mean to reuse that saying? lol and how dare u say bundeled with 2 crap games portal is a awesome game!

Shadez, did you bring your fanboy repelant? I fear you may need it before long... lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HeLL_RaiSeR101

Did u mean to reuse that saying? lol and how dare u say bundeled with 2 crap games portal is a awesome game!

---

I never played portal a lot, and no that was an edit snafu on my side. :P tis fixed now :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowblind

Thank you for Pete's sake, I'm not the only one. trust me, you'll see the orange box in the front of my Gamertag--I rented it from blockbuster and the only game you'll find me playing on it is Team Fortress 2.

I never thought the original Half-Life was good. At all. My friend always gets mad at me for this, still claiming Half-Life 2 was the greatest game ever made, and says I have no taste in games. To me, its Unreal with better graphics and the same gameplay.

...Meh. I've never really liked any game Valve made. Portal was fun, but not amazing. Team Fortress 2 is fun, but by far has many issues with equality in classes. I got half-life 2 a while after it was made, but I was less then amused. I did love the gravity gun though :)

---

Im glad that there is someone on my side about this bro. :p I suspected to meet much resistance to my orange box review :cool:

All in all its just not that great, the deal of five games for a new 360 owner is a great deal. But the games themselves just irk me *nods

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICE

Shadez, did you bring your fanboy repelant? I fear you may need it before long... lol

---

Got it covered bro,

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/9...tualboyqt0.jpg

Nine out of ten fanboys wont enter the same room as my secret weapon

:cool:

The original Half life was one of the biggest influences to other game makers to produce more 'cinematic' gaming, with real stories and characters.
Quake 1/2/3, Unreal etc didn't have a story/plot/characters really, you were a guy with a gun that kept spawning in different levels where you picked up more guns and shot everything that moved.

I agree HL2 was less ground breaking in that respect, at the time it came out it was all about doom3 vs HL2. I was in the Doom3 camp as a loyal Carmack fan but I was certainly shown up when doom3 was boring as **** but HL2 was great. It had some really cool uses of havok physics, nice gfx (perhaps not the doom3 wow factor but it wasnt just a corridor shooter) and great gameplay.

I certainly wouldn't call it a clone of every other shooter ever made, unless your comparing it to games that have come out after it (HL1) that have taken what it brought to the genre on board and expanded on it.
It was one step in the maturation of the FPS genre, HL2 may not be the latest n greatest thing any more but its still a great game IMO.

Portal rocks too :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

The original Half life was one of the biggest influences to other game makers to produce more 'cinematic' gaming, with real stories and characters.
Quake 1/2/3, Unreal etc didn't have a story/plot/characters really, you were a guy with a gun that kept spawning in different levels where you picked up more guns and shot everything that moved.

I agree HL2 was less ground breaking in that respect, at the time it came out it was all about doom3 vs HL2. I was in the Doom3 camp as a loyal Carmack fan but I was certainly shown up when doom3 was boring as **** but HL2 was great. It had some really cool uses of havok physics, nice gfx (perhaps not the doom3 wow factor but it wasnt just a corridor shooter) and great gameplay.

I certainly wouldn't call it a clone of every other shooter ever made, unless your comparing it to games that have come out after it (HL1) that have taken what it brought to the genre on board and expanded on it.
It was one step in the maturation of the FPS genre, HL2 may not be the latest n greatest thing any more but its still a great game IMO.

Portal rocks too :)

---

To be honest the original doom did have a story and story depth,"I think people forget just how popular doom was in its day" While turok n64 was one of the first modern shooters to bring cinematic flair to the genre The fact is In its day half life the original offered something because it was unique, But let us not forget, Every shooter ever. from now till the end of time will forever be a wolfenstein 3d clone. It was the first of its kind and will forever retain that honor. Now as for half life In its day It had something console shooters where unable to offer, for lack of power and storage space. I will give props to half life, But no more then I'd give to red neck rampage or duke nukem 3d. "tis a fair statment"

You have to be fair, half life 2 brought havok physics to the table. But havok physics are commonplace these days. most of today's shooters have a variation of the havok physics engine or a re imagined moded H-p engine. So yes I agree that havok physics are the bomb. what makes half life stand out amidst the other bombs when almost every other shooter commonplace today uses havok physics? half life has grown stale. they polish the graphics up and make it look as spiffy as possible its still no better a game then it was before the face lift. Sorry bro I just can not agree, Half life is still half garbage imo the series hasn't aged well.

Maybe im just bitter, The screenshots to episode 2 looked so great, But it just doesnt feel exciting or new when played. I really tried to give half life episode 2 a shot, It just failed in my eyes.



Further proof to advocate my claims of half life 2 episode 2s failure is as follows, its been admitted that area 51 black site was rushed and basically ended up being a moded version of half life 2 episode 2, this is common place news. why is it people weren't afraid to trash black site for its flaws but unable to come to grips with half lifes 2 ep 2s own shortcomings ?.. could it be rampant fanboyisim ?

Things that make you go hmmm. Well those things make me go hmmm. anyway:p

I feel completely the opposite to you, Shadowprophet, so maybe just certain FPS styles suit some people more than others.

I love Half Life 2 and found it compelling to play all the way through. Conversely, I don't like Halo 3 much, which you obviously rate. I enjoyed the first game right through to the end, and the second one I lost interest mid way through. Halo 3 just looks like more of the same to me and I have only got as far as the 4th level and now haven't touched it in weeks, and I may well not ever get any further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhizzBang

I feel completely the opposite to you, Shadowprophet, so maybe just certain FPS styles suit some people more than others.

I love Half Life 2 and found it compelling to play all the way through. Conversely, I don't like Halo 3 much, which you obviously rate. I enjoyed the first game right through to the end, and the second one I lost interest mid way through. Halo 3 just looks like more of the same to me and I have only got as far as the 4th level and now haven't touched it in weeks, and I may well not ever get any further.

---

I was never really a halo fan last gen. In fact I only came into the halo series at part 3. So I cant speak for part one or two. But I approached halo 3 as a skeptic and a hater. I would hear people proclaim halo to be the best shooter of all time. and It would actually anger me as a shooter fan. for those reasons I avoided halo 3 like it was the video game equivalent of Aids,then I had a friend that got me halo 3 for a birthday gift. He knew good and well I hated the series. I think he did it as a joke. Anyway I got bored one day and began to play it. Then it hit me. What makes halo such a good game isn't the story or the stars wars Esq. theme, the futuristic setting or even the mighty master chief.

Halo has the most dead accurate pen point play mechanics I've ever experienced. It blows older style shooters completely out of the water, Halo in every way. Is like an evolution in shooting play mechanics, and in honesty halo 3 may have been shoved aside for the new big guns in town like gears of war and bioshock. And in some ways they do triumph over halo 3, But there is still one factor to halo 3 that hasn't been outdone. Those rock solid play mechanics. They have yet to be beaten. I sometimes doubt they ever will be. *nods

You are playing all FPS you compare on a high end PC yeah?
FPS belong on a PC with a mouse n KB, playing them on a console with a joypad is just wrong.

Each to their own man, personally I never saw what people like so much about halo (any of them). It was a really average shooter, on a console, that didn't really bring anything new at all.
Even when it came to the PC I still didn't get all the hype.

Quake 1 (with +mlook, still remember playing online with the KB before someone told me to try the mouse with that cmnd) will probably always be my favourite FPS just because that was when I first really got into PC games when I was 13 or something. Q95 then Quakeworld, rocket jumps, users 'trying to put the pin back in' or 'becoming bored with life'. Good times.

More recently, i really liked prey, still play BF2 a bit.


Dont forget Hovertank 3d (ID) and other similar games of that time. Wolfenstein popularised the genre, but it was an evolution of an existing idea not the first ever 'FPS'.

I wouldn't call HL2 or any modern FPS a clone of wolfenstein, just the continuing evolution of the genre.
Some are cinematic and have great stories, others have RPG elements, others have puzzles, some have all of these things.

I dont know if you can compare the level of story behind the original Doom to that of HL or Prey or other modern games.
What is the guy you play in doom's name? In quake generations it was 'doomguy'. Name a character in the story other than the monsters you shoot. Name a theme to the plot other than 'demons from hell teleported here, shoot anything that moves'.

My 2c.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

You are playing all FPS you compare on a high end PC yeah?
FPS belong on a PC with a mouse n KB, playing them on a console with a joypad is just wrong.

Each to their own man, personally I never saw what people like so much about halo (any of them). It was a really average shooter, on a console, that didn't really bring anything new at all.
Even when it came to the PC I still didn't get all the hype.

Quake 1 (with +mlook, still remember playing online with the KB before someone told me to try the mouse with that cmnd) will probably always be my favourite FPS just because that was when I first really got into PC games when I was 13 or something. Q95 then Quakeworld, rocket jumps, users 'trying to put the pin back in' or 'becoming bored with life'. Good times.

More recently, i really liked prey, still play BF2 a bit.


Dont forget Hovertank 3d (ID) and other similar games of that time. Wolfenstein popularised the genre, but it was an evolution of an existing idea not the first ever 'FPS'.

I wouldn't call HL2 or any modern FPS a clone of wolfenstein, just the continuing evolution of the genre.

---

Like many people, My first video game experience was with a gamepad. I was never able to play even pc shooters with the mouse and keyboard, it just felt wrong for me to play a heavy action type game like a shooter on anything other then a controller, I was always using a pc gamepad controller even in the early days of shooting. I mean controlling movment with the right hand on the arrow keys and aiming shooting with the mouse thats completely backwards to a gamepad. I could never get used to it ;)

Rts games like Aoe or the original warcrafts, those felt natural on the old kayboard/mouse. But I only played one shooter on the kb/mouse combo that was duke 3d and only once. No way man, not for me :p

Hrms, so you find it easier to move around in windows quickly with an analogue stick rather than a mouse?

Personally I find if u set the sticks sensitivity high then I can move around as fast as a mouse, but then cant stop in time and getting the cursor to the icon quickly becomes difficult, If i set the sensitivity low then I can easily stop on the icon but moving around the screen is really slow.

Where as with a mouse, the cursor moves directly proportional to how I move my hand, I can flick it fast to get from one side of the screen to the other then easily slow down and get fine aim when close.

I'm sure that's why a mouse is the standard input device for a GUI.

My point being: what is the difference between moving a cursor across a screen and clicking an icon efficiently and doing a 180 degree turn, moving a crosshair to an enemy really fast, then slowing slightly to get a nice head shot?

No matter how much you practice on a joypad, putting in the same amount of time learning to use the mouse will always give better results. It's why console games almost always either have a lock-on method or some kind of aim assistance but PC games don't.


Its obviously a lot more comfortable to use a joypad when sitting back on a couch, which Is why I say FPS belong on a PC, not a PC or console with a mouse/KB.
:)

I have some firm views on this topic, despite the complete uselessness of holding them. Call it my religion :P

EDIT:
I grew up with a BBC model B so it was all KB or a homemade digital joystick me and my dad made. Then a 2600, Master system, megadrive and finally a PC. Mouse look wasn't even default in quake 1 (moving the mouse made you move not look I think). It's just I got sick of getting owned by ppl who were no better than me just because they could both turn faster and aim more accurately.

Your obviously completely entitled to like what you like, but once you get me ranting about something I believe in I wont stop till I'm done. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

Hrms, so you find it easier to move around in windows quickly with an analogue stick rather than a mouse?

Personally I find if u set the sticks sensitivity high then I can move around as fast as a mouse, but then cant stop in time and getting the cursor to the icon quickly becomes difficult, If i set the sensitivity low then I can easily stop on the icon but moving around the screen is really slow.

Where as with a mouse, the cursor moves directly proportional to how I move my hand, I can flick it fast to get from one side of the screen to the other then easily slow down and get fine aim when close.

I'm sure that's why a mouse is the standard input device for a GUI.

My point being: what is the difference between moving a cursor across a screen and clicking an icon efficiently and doing a 180 degree turn, moving a crosshair to an enemy really fast, then slowing slightly to get a nice head shot?

No matter how much you practice on a joypad, putting in the same amount of time learning to use the mouse will always give better results. It's why console games almost always either have a lock-on method or some kind of aim assistance but PC games don't.


Its obviously a lot more comfortable to use a joypad when sitting back on a couch, which Is why I say FPS belong on a PC, not a PC or console with a mouse/KB.
:)

I have some firm views on this topic, despite the complete uselessness of holding them. Call it my religion :P

---

You make a good point but not an entirely valid one about the accuracy of mouse v.s analog stick. imagine moving your whole arm in motion compared to just moving a thumb. I mean. there are two sides to every story. And yeah. I feel for games at least analog sticks while maybe not as dead on at aiming as a mouse or as quick I will give you that point. but a game pad lends to a feel more familiar to the gamer, is less taxing on the wrist and arm and soulder for that matter. imagine playing a shooter for hours on a mouse. Then imagine it for hours on a controller which is less likely to to cause carpal tunnel.
I can see your point that both have their advantages and disadvantages. but allow a controller player to play a keyboard/ mouse player in any shooter. nine times out of ten. the controller guy is doing the owning. *nods

I've played plenty of FPS for hours straight, the only thing that gets sore is my left little finger from using shift and ctrl. The mouse/Kb are supported and your hands rest on them.

A Mouse player vs a KB player, both on PC, both with no aim assistance, the same hit boxes etc?
If each player has used their respective control for the same amount of time and are roughly equally good at the game, the mouse player will own. Just as the person using a joypad in windows would be slower to do the same set of say 10-20 actions manipulating icons and drop down menus.

I cannot see how a joypad player can win 9 out of 10 unless the game gives mouse users a handicap to make up for the superior look/aim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

I've played plenty of FPS for hours straight, the only thing that gets sore is my left little finger from using shift and ctrl. The mouse/Kb are supported and your hands rest on them.

A Mouse player vs a KB player, both on PC, both with no aim assistance, the same hit boxes etc?
If each player has used their respective control for the same amount of time and are roughly equally good at the game, the mouse player will own. Just as the person using a joypad in windows would be slower to do the same set of say 10-20 actions manipulating icons and drop down menus.

I cannot see how a joypad player can win 9 out of 10 unless the game gives mouse users a handicap to make up for the superior look/aim.

---

It's been my experience that games are simply more accurately and smoothly controlled on a gamepad then a mouse and keyboard combo. And from my observations it seems to be that way for most console gamers that migrate to pc games. I still back my point about gamepad v.s keyboard/mouse though. and id be willing to proove it on any pc game you choose. still ultimately the resulting matches would proove little win or lose for either of us. as a lot of the deciding factor for said game would come down to personal skill. I would bet through. Any console gamer worth his salt, would simply preform better in any pc shooter given a game pad. tis all im saying :cool: *nods

More accurately and smoothly? A FPS with a joypad is just like I way saying with an icon and a mouse pointer controlled by an analogue stick. You stop short, go too far etc and end up spraying bullets somewhere at or near the enemy, how is that more smooth than the fluid action of using a mouse to move to a point perfectly?
In windows neither the icon nor your field of view is moving and it doesnt matter where you click on the icon, so in a game its even more important.

Modern games can have advanced hit detection where you can shoot their hand to drop a gun etc, fine aim counts.
CS with a mouse/kb vs a joypad, the joypad player is dead.


A console player would perform better with it because that's what he's used to, the pc gamer would perform better on a PC for the same reason.

My point is that with a completely equal playing field (everything in game and to do with player skill the same and just how you move the crosshair differing), the method that's better at moving to a point and clicking will win.

All the auto-aiming/simplified hit box stuff is there in console FPSs because you cannot aim as accurately and quickly (and making a game that wants you to do so will be really irritating), so with 2 people of equal skill and equally acquainted with their controls device, how could the one that has the ability to turn quicker and aim more accurately not win?

Your a good bloke shadow, but I dont think we will ever agree on this. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

More accurately and smoothly? A FPS with a joypad is just like I way saying with an icon and a mouse pointer controlled by an analogue stick. You stop short, go too far etc and end up spraying bullets somewhere at or near the enemy, how is that more smooth than the fluid action of using a mouse to move to a point perfectly?
In windows neither the icon nor your field of view is moving and it doesnt matter where you click on the icon, so in a game its even more important.

Modern games can have advanced hit detection where you can shoot their hand to drop a gun etc, fine aim counts.
CS with a mouse/kb vs a joypad, the joypad player is dead.


A console player would perform better with it because that's what he's used to, the pc gamer would perform better on a PC for the same reason.

My point is that with a completely equal playing field (everything in game and to do with player skill the same and just how you move the crosshair differing), the method that's better at moving to a point and clicking will win.

All the auto-aiming/simplified hit box stuff is there in console FPSs because you cannot aim as accurately and quickly (and making a game that wants you to do so will be really irritating), so with 2 people of equal skill and equally acquainted with their controls device, how could the one that has the ability to turn quicker and aim more accurately not win?

Your a good bloke shadow, but I dont think we will ever agree on this. :)

---

lol Yeah I love a debate. ANd while your on to something with the hit boxes. I recall something of a stir that was made about the console version of doom 3 and those hit boxes. It's never dawned upon me that it had to do with the controll scheme, as at the time I thought it had to do with system limitations.

I wasnt awear that all console shooting games used those hit box methods. You may be right. which could also lend to my beliefe that shooters are just plain eaiser on consoles :rolleyes: still. I just like the feel of a controller better then a mouse and kb. To me. It always seemed like I was still at work working even while playing a game on the pc.

A little known secret about me. I've worked with pc's for over a decade and to be honest the machines have became a harsh feeling reminder of work. and I dont look to them for play. its kind of a personal preference for me. Still you have made some good points about the accuracy of the mouse, you've also impressed me that you stuck through the entire debate without giving up., as so many people tend to do,, So I will humbly give you this one. As a token of appreciation.
I submit and give you the win :thumbup:



I do so love a great debate :cool:

Shadow 1,999,999: Bah 1.

I'll take my small victory while I can :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

Shadow 1,999,999: Bah 1.

I'll take my small victory while I can :)

---

*nods. I wonder if console shooters would be extra easy with a mouse :confused:

I'd love to go online with halo 3 and just own :p

I have a mouse/KB adaptor for my XBOX, the problem is the games are only coded to receive say 3 or so variations of each axis of an analogue (no joysticks these days are analogue, just many digital steps. Most games only use a cpl).

It adapts it (I guess) by translating different 'ranges' of mouse speed into one of the speed 'steps' its expecting from the joypad.

So the speed of movement of the on screen crosshair isn't really directly proportional to your hand movements, which makes it feel weird/not right.
Plus you add the hassle of a mouse/kb while trying to sit down (rather than sit up at a PC) and its not worth it.

I don't know about 360/PS3 (wasn't one of them supposed to have native mouse support for all games?), if they allow people using either to play each other without any handicapping there could be issues.

I remember reading something about it, and some comments about how they would go about balancing it for everyone so its fun for all.
When everyone is using one or the other there's no problems, when you mix them I don't know how they deal with it.

Joypads are certainly better for driving games, and most 3rd person games that dont require fine aiming or have auto aim (scarface is a great example of doing auto-aiming well, though it works much better for singleplayer than multiplayer as it takes the skill out of aiming) work really well too.
I've played farcry/black and some others on xbox and I can get used to it well enough to play them on higher difficulty, but FPS will always be a PC genre for me :)

Mouse/KB combo ftw. I gotta agree with bah on this one, its a lot easier playing with that rather than a controller (then again i grew up with a PC and playing games on it)

But as for the Orange Box, the 360 version isn't that great, you can only play up to 16 players on TF2 and none of the games get updates. TF2 has gotten many updates since its been released to help with class balancing and map balancing (ill show an example from cp_dustbowl later). But one of the most important parts is the 3rd party mod, a big one being FakeFactory's Cinematic Mod that link isn't to the newest one but I have to go right now so i just lined the first one I found

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you Shadow!

I know HL2 seems dated, but then it is, it's 3 years old. It has 2 semi-sequels, each clocking at about 4 hours, so they aren't substantial enough for full releases. Portal and TF2 rock my socks off, very fun and original.

If HL2 isn't your cup of tea then you shouldn't buy it, but if you enjoy the game then it's a must.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bah

The original Half life was one of the biggest influences to other game makers to produce more 'cinematic' gaming, with real stories and characters.
Quake 1/2/3, Unreal etc didn't have a story/plot/characters really, you were a guy with a gun that kept spawning in different levels where you picked up more guns and shot everything that moved.

I agree HL2 was less ground breaking in that respect, at the time it came out it was all about doom3 vs HL2. I was in the Doom3 camp as a loyal Carmack fan but I was certainly shown up when doom3 was boring as **** but HL2 was great. It had some really cool uses of havok physics, nice gfx (perhaps not the doom3 wow factor but it wasnt just a corridor shooter) and great gameplay.

I certainly wouldn't call it a clone of every other shooter ever made, unless your comparing it to games that have come out after it (HL1) that have taken what it brought to the genre on board and expanded on it.
It was one step in the maturation of the FPS genre, HL2 may not be the latest n greatest thing any more but its still a great game IMO.

Portal rocks too :)

---

Half Life's "cinematics" may have been innovative, but they weren't anything special. In fact, because you could move around during them, it was extremely easy not to hear what you were supposed to do next. Other then that, it was Quake.

That was my problem with half-Life 2 as well. It brought amazing physics to game. but other then that, it was Doom 3 minus what made Doom 3 awesome, the atmosphere.

I'm annoyed with half-Life also because it made other people not see the game that REALLY was innovative at the time, System Shock 2. It was Half-Life and more.

Oh, uh, Half-life 2 is possibly the one of the most linear corridor shooter I've ever played. Halo 2 beat half-Life 2 in every way, and reviews and players show and know it.

I looove portal but half life was a little dull for my tastes.

Ok well apparently that link I said earlier was quite out of date, if anyone is interested though here is Cinematic Mod 6 Along with a comparison screenshot:

Spoiler!

http://screenshots.filesnetwork.com/...s2/85125_2.jpg

This isn't just a graphical upgrade by the way, it has different models for Alyx and different musical scores to fit the mood of the game better

Hrm... technically it could be a half a game though because the story still hasn't ended XD though that'd be more than halves

This thread is a great example of why we have such a great community at dcemu.
People can come in share their opinions about a subject and that person isn't met with ridicule and disrespect, rather they are met with intellectual debate and tolerance.

I believe dcemu has one of the most respectful well rounded communities in all the world wide web. I challenge any site to show up this community for respect tolerance and acceptance.

I don't believe Dcemu can be outdone. :cool:

It might be by the The Ubuntu Forums it probably has the best and most helpful community I've ever seen (not saying DCEmu isn't helpful, though)

personally i though the game wasent the bad but not great

it was entertaining

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shadowprophet

This thread is a great example of why we have such a great community at dcemu.
People can come in share their opinions about a subject and that person isn't met with ridicule and disrespect, rather they are met with intellectual debate and tolerance.

I believe dcemu has one of the most respectful well rounded communities in all the world wide web. I challenge any site to show up this community for respect tolerance and acceptance.

I don't believe Dcemu can be outdone. :cool:

---

Sometimes it is, like this thread. Sometimes there are massive arguments, disrespectful users and drawn out battles with mods.

Wow, I didn't know there was such as dislike for the Half-Life series. I personally find the game very innovative and I love playing it. But I guess thats one of the great things of the gaming world is that there are so many different games out there that everyone's tastes can be satisfied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gdf

Sometimes it is, like this thread. Sometimes there are massive arguments, disrespectful users and drawn out battles with mods.

---

I don't really remember any of those except by spammers or users who get too full of themselves. Those kinds of users don't usually stay on the forums too long ;)

Maybe the reason it's not all "wow, I can do really good graphics and I pwn" is the fact that "Half Life: Episode 2" isn't MEANT to be an entirely new game. It's just meant to be an extension to the story, rather than "BLAM, I'M A NEW GENERATION".

Comparing completely new games to extensions of oldish ones is like comparing apples to oranges.

Also, the other games in the Orange Box are good IMO - Portal was a blast, and I still play TF2 all the time :)

As for the Mouse and Keyboard vs Controller, I prefer a mouse and keyboard - I just find it gives me more accuracy. Moving your entire arm does have advantages.

Cloudy

Companies release compilations of Megadrive games etc onto modern consoles and charge a pretty high price for really old content, I don't see anything wrong with releasing a compilation HL2 and its addons for consoles that hadn't seen the game yet.
It's not the latest and greatest game engine, but a lot of people really enjoyed the game/s.


Ive heard this a cpl times now: people move their whole arm with the mouse?
My palm rests on the desk and hardly ever moves, the rest of the arm is as still as when using a joypad.

I would have to say Half-Life (Blue Shift and Opposing force included) and Half-Life 2 were decent enough for a once or twice through.

The mods are what interest me more than the original games (aside from CS and CS Source, possibly the blandest games of the FPS genre).

Halo.... The Halo series of games irk me. Halo 1 had a decent story and pretty good mechanics that overshot my expectations for a console FPS. Halo 2, not so much. It felt like Bungee/MS sat down and wrote the engine, then forgot to make a game. Halo 2 sucked in campaign, even more so online blew due to the mass amounts of cheating (that I experienced) and glitching (due to the buggy engine used), and no one made an effort to stop them or release a decent update to correct it, they just moved on to the next game (with huge fat wallets now). Now on to Halo 3. Overhype killed this for me. Got the game, popped it in and was greeted with Halo 2: High Res Pack: Redo Oops Edition. It felt like nothing changed, except for a few "out door" maps and cleverly reused textures and models from 2. The story still blew, but just not as bad. It still seems that Bungee/MS was pushing this game for online play only, just writing a half assed story for campaign mode and calling a "revolutionary single player/co-op experience".

I would have been happier to see Marathon IV....

Don't get me started on Crysis. That's another turd covered in baby powder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_eternal_dark

Halo.... The Halo series of games irk me. Halo 1 had a decent story and pretty good mechanics that overshot my expectations for a console FPS. Halo 2, not so much. It felt like Bungee/MS sat down and wrote the engine, then forgot to make a game. Halo 2 sucked in campaign, even more so online blew due to the mass amounts of cheating (that I experienced) and glitching (due to the buggy engine used), and no one made an effort to stop them or release a decent update to correct it, they just moved on to the next game (with huge fat wallets now). Now on to Halo 3. Overhype killed this for me. Got the game, popped it in and was greeted with Halo 2: High Res Pack: Redo Oops Edition. It felt like nothing changed, except for a few "out door" maps and cleverly reused textures and models from 2. The story still blew, but just not as bad. It still seems that Bungee/MS was pushing this game for online play only, just writing a half assed story for campaign mode and calling a "revolutionary single player/co-op experience".

---

I agree and this is sort of what I was saying on page one of this thread.

A lot of people talk about the story in Halo and say they like it or dislike it but I couldn't follow it all. The main problems for me were that there were no subtitles, and often when people were speaking they were talking through radio microphones while explosion and bullet sounds were also happening. I often found my self thinking "I have no idea what that was all about" and so would pause the game to find out what my objective was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhizzBang

I agree and this is sort of what I was saying on page one of this thread.

A lot of people talk about the story in Halo and say they like it or dislike it but I couldn't follow it all. The main problems for me were that there were no subtitles, and often when people were speaking they were talking through radio microphones while explosion and bullet sounds were also happening. I often found my self thinking "I have no idea what that was all about" and so would pause the game to find out what my objective was.

---

Halo 1 was a game that was so amazingly well rounded, had so much new ideas and innovation at the time, had an amazing multiplayer mode, that it was the greatest game ever at the time. But since Halo 1 so many many many FPS and 3PS have taken ideas from it that is may seem average now. but it was amazingly innovative at the time.

Halo 2...I never did like it. It was never really even matched in multiplayer.

Shadow did you play Team Fortress 2? It's supposed to be the best one in the pack.

I got The Orange Box yesterday, for Christmas, and haven't opened it. I will, later. I just have too much presents to play Xbox now. :p

Hopefully I'll get very excited. And I know I will! I haven't ever played any Half-Life game before. This will be my first time. 5 new games for me. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarthPaul

Shadow did you play Team Fortress 2? It's supposed to be the best one in the pack.

I got The Orange Box yesterday, for Christmas, and haven't opened it. I will, later. I just have too much presents to play Xbox now. :p

Hopefully I'll get very excited. And I know I will! I haven't ever played any Half-Life game before. This will be my first time. 5 new games for me. :D

---

I look forward to DESTROYING YOU ON TEAM FORTRESS 2! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!

*cough*, um, yeah....lol :D

TF2 is the ONLY game I ever play on the box of less then red. Half-life 2.....ugh. Portals pretty fun though.

Well I have to be fair. even to a fault. If I wasn't fair about my hl2 review then some may take it too literally and not realize my review was a quickie that shouldn't be taken to heart by anyone.

In my review I dubbed hl2 ep 2 as garbage. "Which is still my opinion". But for the sake of orange box. And truth, I only played hl2 ep 2. Figiring that was the beefiest part of orange box and the most anticipated,and if I was let down by it. what hope would the rest of the content have against hl2 ep 2. So to be fair. and brutally so. Even at the cost of shattering this review entirely. I never played the other titles any. After hl2 ep 2. I just kind of packed the orange box up. threw it into my collection and never touched it gain. "Like so many other titles I've done in the past" *nods