Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Game of the Decade] RESULTS IN OP

12930313234

Posts

  • bsjezzbsjezz Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    i don't believe in opinions. i believe in theory, though, and in my current understanding of interactive narrative theory half life 2 did everything wrong

    edit: note that there can be other theories

    sig_zps00ca6d07.jpg
  • augustaugust where you come from is gone Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Yes, it's very clear how enamored you are with theory.

    Spoiler:
  • Speed RacerSpeed Racer I'm Speed Racer and I drive real fast. I drive real fast, I'm gonna last.Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Yay for bsjezz arguing the points I decided it would be too frustrating to argue myself.

    speedsig2_zps388d2098.jpg
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    bsjezz wrote: »
    bsjezz wrote: »
    but everything revolves around him

    the other characters talk at this vacant space

    they stare at it, expecting a response. (which you do eventually, if only by being railroaded by the environment)

    it was wholly uncanny and done out of some stubborn, misguided belief about 'immersion'. again, that silent protagonist could work well if the world was open enough to create your own scenarios, to role-play a bit, but everything else was so scripted that it makes no sense to use it at all. it was the wrong tool for the kind of experience they were going for and it ruined the game.

    The protagonist being silent ruined the game? Huh?

    And half-life has never been about creating your own story. There are sandbox games and then there are narrative driven games. Railroading is not always bad.

    as i said, it's not his being silent and more his complete lack of characterization. he is nothing, he represents nothing, he has no values or ambition or perspective (other than the stricly literal one). he is floating eyes and it feels like that

    and i know it's not about creating your own story - that's why the silent protagonist is the wrong choice (it's a set world, a narrative world, not a vastly open one). and yes, good storytelling is all about the railroading. there needs to be an author to set the context, to set the events, to set the conclusion and to try to pass on what it all means.

    the author also needs to set the protagonist, who is the yardstick to which the external events are measured. he is the foil for the other characters, the centre-post for the story's great change, the first point of translation between the story's world and the audience.

    but really half life 2 has no protagonist. and it suffers

    edit: i've had this exact discussion at least twice before and i don't really care to have it again. all i wanted to talk about was the difference between story and plot, damnit

    Not true, naturally all this is correct with movies or literature, you need that anchor, but being an interactive medium, not all this is required.

    We have what we need from the protagonist. He is Gordon Freeman, a scientist, and person adapt at combat. He is connected to the various characters because of the previous game, and the exploits of the previous game frame him in this second one (messianic figure, savior, etc.) . You as the player are left to fill everything else out through the length of the game. It also helps that Gordon himself is a pawn both mechanically and narratively.

    I have the partner book 'Raising the Bar' at home, and Gabe Newell actually goes into some length about this in there. May have to bring that into this when I get home, but this was the jist of his idea. They remove the layers of the protagonist so the player becomes it. They provide enough anchor so there can be narrative surrounding the protagonist, but leave the rest out for immersive value.

    Spoiler:
  • bsjezzbsjezz Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Not true, naturally all this is correct with movies or literature, you need that anchor, but being an interactive medium, not all this is required.

    you're using the term 'interactive' pretty loosely there. in an experience so scripted as that of half life 2's, it is indeed just as correct as it is with movies and literature

    again, if we were talking some giant open world where your actions as a player had consequence over the experience that played out, i might agree

    sig_zps00ca6d07.jpg
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    bsjezz wrote: »
    Not true, naturally all this is correct with movies or literature, you need that anchor, but being an interactive medium, not all this is required.

    you're using the term 'interactive' pretty loosely there. in an experience so scripted as that of half life 2's, it's just as correct as it is with movies and literature

    again, if we were talking some giant open world where your actions as a player had consequence over the experience that played out, i might agree

    There doesn't need to be an open game world, just the perception of one.

    Spoiler:
  • bsjezzbsjezz Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    bsjezz wrote: »
    Not true, naturally all this is correct with movies or literature, you need that anchor, but being an interactive medium, not all this is required.

    you're using the term 'interactive' pretty loosely there. in an experience so scripted as that of half life 2's, it's just as correct as it is with movies and literature

    again, if we were talking some giant open world where your actions as a player had consequence over the experience that played out, i might agree

    There doesn't need to be an open game world, just the perception of one.

    you'd have to be half-blind and missing a 'W' key to ever get the idea half-life 2 has an open world

    sig_zps00ca6d07.jpg
  • LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Yay for bsjezz arguing the points I decided it would be too frustrating to argue myself.

    Hi5. Bsjezz, for the record I think the points you're dropping are correct.

  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    bsjezz wrote: »
    bsjezz wrote: »
    Not true, naturally all this is correct with movies or literature, you need that anchor, but being an interactive medium, not all this is required.

    you're using the term 'interactive' pretty loosely there. in an experience so scripted as that of half life 2's, it's just as correct as it is with movies and literature

    again, if we were talking some giant open world where your actions as a player had consequence over the experience that played out, i might agree

    There doesn't need to be an open game world, just the perception of one.

    you'd have to be half-blind and missing a 'W' key to ever get the idea half-life 2 has an open world

    That's basic level stuff. The idea is that you and the story are all set within a wider world. When you first step out from the train, and then the train station at the beginning of the game, right up to the assault on the Citadel, everything there is to give the perception of being in a larger world. These individual areas are boxed and separated, but the idea is there. That's what all narrative FPS's attempt to do. Half-Life 2 is generally regarded as doing this successfully

    Basic game design 101 ITT

    Spoiler:
  • Lithium SpadeLithium Spade Registered User
    edited January 2010
    In the end theory is just a posh way of saying opinion.

    And in this case both theories have their merits.

    However i've extensively read Raising The Bar, and whilst i remember the section you're talking about, I remember reading it and thinking that it didn't in any way help. No amount of explanation why i SHOULD feel attached could MAKE me feel that.

    It's especially pronounced in Episode 2, there's a bit where that other scientist guy is shouting at you over the intercom that he needs to know if you're alive (it's near the end of the game) and of course, you don't respond. It feels very robotic and pointless.

    LithiumSpade.png
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    In the end theory is just a posh way of saying opinion.

    And in this case both theories have their merits.

    However i've extensively read Raising The Bar, and whilst i remember the section you're talking about, I remember reading it and thinking that it didn't in any way help. No amount of explanation why i SHOULD feel attached could MAKE me feel that.

    It's especially pronounced in Episode 2, there's a bit where that other scientist guy is shouting at you over the intercom that he needs to know if you're alive (it's near the end of the game) and of course, you don't respond. It feels very robotic and pointless.

    Well yeah, I think there are many instances where the developer team actively poke fun at Gordon's muteness. Alyx comments on it a few times, people say things like 'a man of few words eh?', and the scene you mentioned. It's just some meta-humor.

    Spoiler:
  • bsjezzbsjezz Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    That's basic level stuff. The idea is that you and the story are all set within a wider world. When you first step out from the train, and then the train station at the beginning of the game, right up to the assault on the Citadel, everything there is to give the perception of being in a larger world. These individual areas are boxed and separated, but the idea is there. That's what all narrative FPS's attempt to do. Half-Life 2 is generally regarded as doing this successfully

    Basic game design 101 ITT

    we've come too far as gamers to not instantly need to understand not the limits of the world as a place, but the limits of our ability as gamers. as soon as i set foot in a game i will seek to know whether it's one where i am either the creator of the experience, the storyteller (see the sims, fallout 3) or one in which i'm going to be told a story (uncharted 2, half-life 2). no matter what valve wants to do with 'immersion' they've still created a game where they have to accept ultimate authorial control, and any player immersion is only ever going to be in the shadow of their own scripting

    this is why i think newell's arguments are flawed - and why the game was so flat and uninteresting to me and a lot of other players. they put immersion before their responsibility as storytellers

    sig_zps00ca6d07.jpg
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    bsjezz wrote: »
    That's basic level stuff. The idea is that you and the story are all set within a wider world. When you first step out from the train, and then the train station at the beginning of the game, right up to the assault on the Citadel, everything there is to give the perception of being in a larger world. These individual areas are boxed and separated, but the idea is there. That's what all narrative FPS's attempt to do. Half-Life 2 is generally regarded as doing this successfully

    Basic game design 101 ITT

    we've come too far as gamers to not instantly need to understand not the limits of the world as a place, but the limits of our ability as gamers. as soon as i set foot in a game i will seek to know whether it's one where i am either the creator of the experience, the storyteller (see the sims, fallout 3) or one in which i'm going to be told a story (uncharted 2, half-life 2). no matter what valve wants to do with 'immersion' they've still created a game where they have to accept ultimate authorial control, and any player immersion is only ever going to be in the shadow of their own scripting

    this is why i think newell's arguments are flawed - and why the game was so flat and uninteresting to me and a lot of other players

    Ok, but you have to look at it in the scope of a narrative game. No, Half-Life is not a sandbox game, but that is not a bad thing. Gabe Newell is speaking within the confines of a linear, narrative experience, this is presumed.

    I can understand why people don't like Half-Life and might prefer something like Grand Theft Auto, they're obviously providing two different experiences. But don't knock Half-Life for the experience it is delivering just because it is different and is made with a different intention in mind.

    Spoiler:
  • bsjezzbsjezz Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Ok, but you have to look at it in the scope of a narrative game. No, Half-Life is not a sandbox game, but that is not a bad thing. Gabe Newell is speaking within the confines of a linear, narrative experience, this is presumed.

    I can understand why people don't like Half-Life and might prefer something like Grand Theft Auto, they're obviously providing two different experiences. But don't knock Half-Life for the experience it is delivering just because it is different and is made with a different intention in mind.

    no no no, don't misunderstand me, i love narrative games. uncharted: drakes fortune was my game of the decade, and that was scripted beyond compare. but the key difference is that it had a central character with emotions, a distinct voice, flaws; a central character who developed as the plot did. it was also very much immersive, as much as a narrative game can be, because the excellently presented traditional cinematic context gave the gameplay sections real weight and importance

    sig_zps00ca6d07.jpg
  • SlayerVinSlayerVin Registered User
    edited January 2010
    I have very little success attaching myself to protagonists in video games. Most of them are such horrid caricatures of real human beings that I'd much more prefer that they just shut the fuck up. Gordon on the other hand is an MIT grad (I'm a science geek, graduated from a similar school in Massachusetts), generally a regular, uninteresting person, but when he gets the HEV suit, and progresses through the stories of Half Life 1 and 2, he becomes something interesting. Just because you never hear him talk doesn't mean he's not there. Use your imagination. I did.

    I guess my argument boils down to how I was able to become engrossed in the story, because of minor similarities between myself and the protagonist's back story. If your life was dissimilar to mine (pretty likely), you probably wouldn't get as much out of it as I did.

    BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS!
  • Lithium SpadeLithium Spade Registered User
    edited January 2010
    bsjezz wrote: »
    That's basic level stuff. The idea is that you and the story are all set within a wider world. When you first step out from the train, and then the train station at the beginning of the game, right up to the assault on the Citadel, everything there is to give the perception of being in a larger world. These individual areas are boxed and separated, but the idea is there. That's what all narrative FPS's attempt to do. Half-Life 2 is generally regarded as doing this successfully

    Basic game design 101 ITT

    we've come too far as gamers to not instantly need to understand not the limits of the world as a place, but the limits of our ability as gamers. as soon as i set foot in a game i will seek to know whether it's one where i am either the creator of the experience, the storyteller (see the sims, fallout 3) or one in which i'm going to be told a story (uncharted 2, half-life 2). no matter what valve wants to do with 'immersion' they've still created a game where they have to accept ultimate authorial control, and any player immersion is only ever going to be in the shadow of their own scripting

    this is why i think newell's arguments are flawed - and why the game was so flat and uninteresting to me and a lot of other players

    Ok, but you have to look at it in the scope of a narrative game. No, Half-Life is not a sandbox game, but that is not a bad thing. Gabe Newell is speaking within the confines of a linear, narrative experience, this is presumed.

    I can understand why people don't like Half-Life and might prefer something like Grand Theft Auto, they're obviously providing two different experiences. But don't knock Half-Life for the experience it is delivering just because it is different and is made with a different intention in mind.

    I think the problem people have is that they feel that the intention hasn't translated into an idea that works for them. If i think of my favourite linear first and third person shooters, I always felt i was playing as someone within the narrative who actively changed things. Half Life 2 always felt like things simply happened to me and all i was doing was not dying. Like it could be any person, that this person has no motivation to do this as he has no connection to the characters.

    If that was their intention, then maybe they were making a game that I could never like. Even in Zelda you get Yes/No choices from time to time.

    LithiumSpade.png
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    SlayerVin is right, he is an MIT scientist in the presence of a woman most of the game, he probably isn't going to speak a lot in fear of stuttering or something

    Spoiler:
  • StormwatcherStormwatcher Uee Citizen Record #2051 Über Star CitizenRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    and was definitely inspired and built upon generations of PC games
    If by that, you mean, Gears of War.

    No, I don't, because that would be pretty fucking stupid.

    I mean, the only thing you took from ME was the cover system? Which wasn't even very important to begin with?
    by a developer with a strong and bountiful history of PC gaming.

    And by this, that it was released by a developer that released a PC classic in 1998 and another in 2000.

    Well, there are a couple more than 2... And almost all of those games below were released at one time or another.
    biowaregames.jpg

    They were also involved in IWD and PST.

    Steam: Stormwatcher | XBL: Stormwatcher 21 | PSN: Stormwatcher33 | Gamecenter: Stormwatcher33 | 3DS: 0130-2805-2850
    steam_sig.png
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I was pretty disappointed that Warcraft 3 made it on that list.

    In my opinion, the only reason it should make it on there is the custom maps like DotA (fuck, DotA is so popular it has its own game now). The gameplay of Warcraft 3 was boring as fuck. Woohoo, four races, perfectly balanced? Oh right, thats because every race is 95% the same.

    Tube-san wrote:
    I apologise for my rudeness desu.
  • Lithium SpadeLithium Spade Registered User
    edited January 2010
    and was definitely inspired and built upon generations of PC games
    If by that, you mean, Gears of War.

    No, I don't, because that would be pretty fucking stupid.
    by a developer with a strong and bountiful history of PC gaming.

    And by this, that it was released by a developer that released a PC classic in 1998 and another in 2000.

    Wow, you really suck at math:
    biowaregames.jpg

    They were also involved in IWD and PST.[/QUOTE]

    Okay, I realise that this doesn't disprove your point, but you really can't use MDK 1 or 2 (Not made by Bioware), or Star Wars The Old Republic (Not out when Mass Effect came out), or Sonic (Not PC), or Dragon Age (Also not out).

    EDIT: Okay, you can have MDK 2. Not really a PC classic tho, i'd argue. I mean it was good, but not Neverwinter Nights good.

    LithiumSpade.png
  • StollsStolls Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I wonder how different the list would look if we had to exclude games with cliffhanger endings and/or non-endings.

    That aside, Half-Life 2's story has been built up so much that any possible explanation of who or what the G-Man is will undoubtedly be disappointing. I say this as someone who was for the most part impressed by Valve's scene direction and dialogue. I do think there's a lot to like about the characters and the action, and facial animation had come a long way at the time. But I'd put money down that the big reveal about the G-Man will either be lame, confusing, or nonexistent.

    Unless he's killed by Adrian Shephard all of a sudden. I would fucking cheer.

  • StigmaStigma Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Adrian Shepherd should totally re-appear in a badass way.

    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Holy Shiek, the only one of my votes that got into the top ten was Portal, and that one wasn't in my top 5. Incredible.

    I didn't care for RE4, BTW.

    Pokemon X | Buy Pokemon X (US Version) for Nintendo 3DS (3DS)>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • StigmaStigma Registered User
    edited January 2010
    I love Portal and everything, but I think it's rated a little too highly.

    After all, it's really just a short puzzle/adventure Half-Life addon. I wouldn't say it has much in the way of replayability. Though yes, it started the whole cake thing.

    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • SlayerVinSlayerVin Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Stolls wrote: »
    I wonder how different the list would look if we had to exclude games with cliffhanger endings and/or non-endings.

    That aside, Half-Life 2's story has been built up so much that any possible explanation of who or what the G-Man is will undoubtedly be disappointing. I say this as someone who was for the most part impressed by Valve's scene direction and dialogue. I do think there's a lot to like about the characters and the action, and facial animation had come a long way at the time. But I'd put money down that the big reveal about the G-Man will either be lame, confusing, or nonexistent.

    Unless he's killed by Adrian Shephard all of a sudden. I would fucking cheer.

    I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Gordon was G-Man. After all
    Spoiler:

    BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS!
  • StigmaStigma Registered User
    edited January 2010
    SlayerVin wrote: »
    Stolls wrote: »
    I wonder how different the list would look if we had to exclude games with cliffhanger endings and/or non-endings.

    That aside, Half-Life 2's story has been built up so much that any possible explanation of who or what the G-Man is will undoubtedly be disappointing. I say this as someone who was for the most part impressed by Valve's scene direction and dialogue. I do think there's a lot to like about the characters and the action, and facial animation had come a long way at the time. But I'd put money down that the big reveal about the G-Man will either be lame, confusing, or nonexistent.

    Unless he's killed by Adrian Shephard all of a sudden. I would fucking cheer.

    I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Gordon was G-Man. After all
    Spoiler:

    Holy shit I think you're right!

    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • StollsStolls Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Portal has ruined the ability to use the word cake. We need to take it back, that was a perfectly good word.

    That aside, it was a fun and very well designed puzzle game, but I beat it once and haven't been back since.

  • StigmaStigma Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Exactly, and I'm sure most people treat it the same way. While a totally pleasant experience and quite a nice thing to get for 'free' in a collection. I wouldn't put it in the top ten games of the decade when standing on it's own.
    The GTA series alone would push it down quite a bit in my opinion. Sadly I didn't vote so my opinion doesn't matter.

    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Stolls wrote: »
    Portal has ruined the ability to use the word cake. We need to take it back, that was a perfectly good word.

    That's a lie.

    Pokemon X | Buy Pokemon X (US Version) for Nintendo 3DS (3DS)>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • StigmaStigma Registered User
    edited January 2010
    RockinX wrote: »
    Stolls wrote: »
    Portal has ruined the ability to use the word cake. We need to take it back, that was a perfectly good word.

    That's a lie.

    What's a lie?

    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • StollsStolls Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Stigma wrote: »
    RockinX wrote: »
    Stolls wrote: »
    Portal has ruined the ability to use the word cake. We need to take it back, that was a perfectly good word.

    That's a lie.

    What's a lie?

    I'll tell you what's not a lie.

    Robot Hell.

  • SlayerVinSlayerVin Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Stigma wrote: »
    SlayerVin wrote: »
    Stolls wrote: »
    I wonder how different the list would look if we had to exclude games with cliffhanger endings and/or non-endings.

    That aside, Half-Life 2's story has been built up so much that any possible explanation of who or what the G-Man is will undoubtedly be disappointing. I say this as someone who was for the most part impressed by Valve's scene direction and dialogue. I do think there's a lot to like about the characters and the action, and facial animation had come a long way at the time. But I'd put money down that the big reveal about the G-Man will either be lame, confusing, or nonexistent.

    Unless he's killed by Adrian Shephard all of a sudden. I would fucking cheer.

    I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Gordon was G-Man. After all
    Spoiler:

    Holy shit I think you're right!

    I figure either it's that, or Gordon is G-Man's employer.

    BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS!
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Well, there are a couple more than 2... And almost all of those games below were released at one time or another.
    biowaregames.jpg[IMG]

    MDK and Sonic are PC classics, eh?

    And you realise that Mass Effect is about as much a "PC game" as Halo, Gears, or FF7. Those are all perfectly fine games, but people would laugh if you called them PC classics.
    They were also involved in IWD and PST.

    They programmed the engine they ran on, yes.

    What Bioware does have a long tradition of is porting consolized RPGs to the PC.
    Spoiler:

    1208768734831.jpg
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Portal was a good chunk of fun and very innovative, but there's no way it belonged on a top 25 list let alone top 10.

    Tube-san wrote:
    I apologise for my rudeness desu.
  • Alfred J. KwakAlfred J. Kwak Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Stigma wrote: »
    SlayerVin wrote: »

    I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Gordon was G-Man. After all
    Spoiler:

    Holy shit I think you're right!

    futurama_fry_looking_squint.jpg

    How original, Valve.

  • Two Headed BoyTwo Headed Boy Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Portal was a good chunk of fun and very innovative, but there's no way it belonged on a top 25 list let alone top 10.

    Ah, geez. You may be torn apart for such a statement, maybe even banned.

    4hNKbHH.png
    Twitter 3DS: 0860 - 3257 - 2516
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Portal was a good chunk of fun and very innovative, but there's no way it belonged on a top 25 list let alone top 10.

    Yet, it made it to the top three!

    Pokemon X | Buy Pokemon X (US Version) for Nintendo 3DS (3DS)>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • StigmaStigma Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Stolls wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    RockinX wrote: »
    Stolls wrote: »
    Portal has ruined the ability to use the word cake. We need to take it back, that was a perfectly good word.

    That's a lie.

    What's a lie?

    The cake is a lie.

    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Portal was a good chunk of fun and very innovative, but there's no way it belonged on a top 25 list let alone top 10.

    Ah, geez. You may be torn apart for such a statement, maybe even banned.

    It always struck me as more of an extra-long tech demo, rather than just a short game. If it had been a mod for Half Life 2 it would have been amazing, but from a company its just very good.

    I'm not disputing the quality of it, nor the entertainment value. I had a great time playing it.

    But does it REALLY belong above Team Fortress 2? Or above Deus Ex, Counterstrike, or Halo?

    Tube-san wrote:
    I apologise for my rudeness desu.
  • Lithium SpadeLithium Spade Registered User
    edited January 2010
    SlayerVin wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    SlayerVin wrote: »
    Stolls wrote: »
    I wonder how different the list would look if we had to exclude games with cliffhanger endings and/or non-endings.

    That aside, Half-Life 2's story has been built up so much that any possible explanation of who or what the G-Man is will undoubtedly be disappointing. I say this as someone who was for the most part impressed by Valve's scene direction and dialogue. I do think there's a lot to like about the characters and the action, and facial animation had come a long way at the time. But I'd put money down that the big reveal about the G-Man will either be lame, confusing, or nonexistent.

    Unless he's killed by Adrian Shephard all of a sudden. I would fucking cheer.

    I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Gordon was G-Man. After all
    Spoiler:

    Holy shit I think you're right!

    I figure either it's that, or Gordon is G-Man's employer.

    Personally, I think Barney is the G-Man. For one, they have the same voice actor. Two, that quote when he hands you the crowbar: "You left this back at Black Mesa!" No, you didn't. You left it in the Xen borderworld! So basically there's my conclusive argument :P

    LithiumSpade.png
Sign In or Register to comment.