The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
I found pointing a gun at something and shooting was a lot easier then looking for crap on the ground, picking it up and hurling it only to have to look for more crap on the ground personally.
Really, I noticed crap on the ground all the time. Especially the bright red barrels with flame symbols on them.. or generally anything else that was lying around.
Yeah, again, shooting at them makes them explode. It's not like you ever need to shoot or hurl barrels anyways. At least I didn't, to finish the game that is.
Making them explode is pointless if there's noone around them. Much faster to toss it towards your enemies than try to lure them close.
Also, you didn't need to use it to finish the game? What on earth kind of complaint is that? You don't need to use the crossbow to finish the game either; or any of a number of weapons or situations. Hell, you could probably get away with not fighting 80% of the enemies in the game if you were dedicated enough. I really don't see the point of that complaint.
Half-Life 2 is at its best in the urban environments, I think. The opening chapters up to Ravenholm were great, and Anticitizen One onward was a blast. The chapters between those, though... it's all one giant low to me. It feels like Oregon Trail with guns (with a few scripted events to keep things alive). I much prefer the frenetic action-movie sequences to that style of play.
Speaking of the end of the game...
Am I the only one who felt just a twinge of disconnect from what Gordon's expected attitude in the Citadel chapters? I found myself agreeing with Doctor Breen. From the very start, I had no choice in my own actions; I was fighting for survival against an enemy that never attempted to negotiate. When Breen asks you "What have you created?" you couldn't contradict him even if you had the capability. You're nothing but a hired gun, as Breen himself points out. And while I disagree with his methods and their results (it's hard to love a washed-out, zombie-infested dystopian cityscape with no sex), I can't help but feel a little sympathetic for him. Based on what I know of the Seven-Minute War, Breen's solution is about the best you could ask for. Not to mention that he doesn't exactly seem to like the Combine himself (he calls them by that name, despite using the "Our Benefactors" euphemism publicly). I wish I could have spoken in that last scene; it could have come out so differently...
Kupi on
My favorite musical instrument is the air-raid siren.
I found pointing a gun at something and shooting was a lot easier then looking for crap on the ground, picking it up and hurling it only to have to look for more crap on the ground personally.
Really, I noticed crap on the ground all the time. Especially the bright red barrels with flame symbols on them.. or generally anything else that was lying around.
Yeah, again, shooting at them makes them explode. It's not like you ever need to shoot or hurl barrels anyways. At least I didn't, to finish the game that is.
Making them explode is pointless if there's noone around them. Much faster to toss it towards your enemies than try to lure them close.
Also, you didn't need to use it to finish the game? What on earth kind of complaint is that? You don't need to use the crossbow to finish the game either; or any of a number of weapons or situations. Hell, you could probably get away with not fighting 80% if you were dedicated enough. I really don't see the point of that complaint.
It's rather simple really. The firearms you are provided with, along with the ample munitions that come with it make the whole functionality of the gravity gun pointless.
Edit: Actually you can make use of the grenades. Whoever designed the physics for the grenades initially needs a fucking beating. The dammed things have the weight of an empty coke can. That is, if you don't blow your fucking face off in the process and have some sort of clockwork mind to be able to judge timer vs distance vs dropping it and picking it up.
I found pointing a gun at something and shooting was a lot easier then looking for crap on the ground, picking it up and hurling it only to have to look for more crap on the ground personally.
Really, I noticed crap on the ground all the time. Especially the bright red barrels with flame symbols on them.. or generally anything else that was lying around.
Yeah, again, shooting at them makes them explode. It's not like you ever need to shoot or hurl barrels anyways. At least I didn't, to finish the game that is.
Making them explode is pointless if there's noone around them. Much faster to toss it towards your enemies than try to lure them close.
Also, you didn't need to use it to finish the game? What on earth kind of complaint is that? You don't need to use the crossbow to finish the game either; or any of a number of weapons or situations. Hell, you could probably get away with not fighting 80% if you were dedicated enough. I really don't see the point of that complaint.
It's rather simple really. The firearms you are provided with, along with the ample munitions that come with it make the whole functionality of the gravity gun pointless.
Except, as I originally pointed out, the Gravity Gun is one of the most powerful weapons in the game (The ones that are more poweful have extremly limited ammo) and one of the more useful. It often results in an instant kill (which, on the hardest difficulty, the shotgun can even reliably do), and if can be used to take out multiple enemies in one hit.
Just because you chose not to use it doesn't mean it isn't a useful weapon.
Half-Life 2 is at its best in the urban environments, I think. The opening chapters up to Ravenholm were great, and Anticitizen One onward was a blast. The chapters between those, though... it's all one giant low to me. It feels like Oregon Trail with guns (with a few scripted events to keep things alive). I much prefer the frenetic action-movie sequences to that style of play.
Speaking of the end of the game...
Am I the only one who felt just a twinge of disconnect from what Gordon's expected attitude in the Citadel chapters? I found myself agreeing with Doctor Breen. From the very start, I had no choice in my own actions; I was fighting for survival against an enemy that never attempted to negotiate. When Breen asks you "What have you created?" you couldn't contradict him even if you had the capability. You're nothing but a hired gun, as Breen himself points out. And while I disagree with his methods and their results (it's hard to love a washed-out, zombie-infested dystopian cityscape with no sex), I can't help but feel a little sympathetic for him. Based on what I know of the Seven-Minute War, Breen's solution is about the best you could ask for. Not to mention that he doesn't exactly seem to like the Combine himself (he calls them by that name, despite using the "Our Benefactors" euphemism publicly). I wish I could have spoken in that last scene; it could have come out so differently...
I agree completely, one of the cool things about Half Life 2 was that it left lots of hints that perhaps what you're doing isn't the right thing to do, particularly with the "did you know your contract was up to the highest bidder?" line. They seemed to have dropped that for a simple "good versus bad" conflict in the expansions, though. I just don't see how Episode 3 can be a satisfying end to things, but I'd love to be surprised.
Ravenholm is probably the most anxiety inducing level I've played in a game. I wanted to get the fuck out of that place.
shiver
Am I the only one that just found it... boring? And totally unnecessary? Everyone always raves about Ravenholm, but I thought it was the worst part of the game (aside from the hoverboat section... Ugh).
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited January 2008
I haven't finished HL2 yet b/c I'm a huge vagina and get too scared to keep playing. I got the Orange Box though, and am valiantly giving it another shot.
The first time through Ravenholm was stress inducing. Played it on a friend's computer, and we were jumping like ninnies. Second time through I wondered what the hell I was so scared about the first time through.
Well, Ravenholm made sense, with the combine shelling everywhere with headcrabs I wish I could have bypassed the place....is there a way to get through without shooting?
But if the combine recovered headcrabs from Xen, I wonder if someone could make a mod where you are the combine soldier recovering the headcrab queen from xen for the glory of the combine?
RoyceSraphim on
0
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
Ravenholm is probably the most anxiety inducing level I've played in a game. I wanted to get the fuck out of that place.
shiver
Am I the only one that just found it... boring? And totally unnecessary? Everyone always raves about Ravenholm, but I thought it was the worst part of the game (aside from the hoverboat section... Ugh).
Man, I loved ravenholm and the speed boat section. When you get the music playing and you're dodging the helicopter-bomb thingies, you feel like you're in the middle of a James Bond movie.
Olivawgood name, isn't it?the foot of mt fujiRegistered Userregular
edited January 2008
The only really scary part of Ravenholm for me was the fast zombies, mostly because I hate all fast zombies
As for Half Life 2, I thought it was great, but it doesn't have much replay value for me, so it's not one of my favorite games. But Episode 1 and 2 really impressed me with the improvements in the engine and the game design. Episode 2 in fact has two of my favorite moments in a video game ever. The only downside to this is that I have to wait another year and half for Episode 3. That's gonna be tough
Oh, and I don't think I've ever played a game and thought "This gun would be a lot more enjoyable if I had to fight with it recoiling upwards.."
EDIT: Also, aren't Story and Plot the same damn thing? According to Dictionary.com
Plot: The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama.
Story: The plot of a narrative or dramatic work.
not according to five years of studying creative writing at uni, but perhaps the online dictionary knows better
at the very least, a good story is not the same as a good plot
I'd say your statements would make more sense if we were talking about books, but we are talking about games.
with the gamer playing the protagonist things change.
i think the gamer can still 'play the protagonist' (ie take control of the action) without the author shedding responsibility for all decisions and other story elements
again, see drake's fortune as an example - the plot becomes more satisfying because a defined character is interacting with it, giving it context and meaning - creating genuine story
don't get me wrong, games don't always have to have a fantastic story to be good, but i think hl2 doesn't have much else and in that sense the whole package is lacking
this must sound like a pretentious wank, but anyway. i really think gamers should be asking more from the narratives they get fed these days, because more often than not the developers cop out and substitute plot and 'choice' for real stories.
I loved HL1, it was my first shooter, but I'm only just now playing HL2 with the Orange Box (lame computer issues and whatnot). I'm not very far yet, but so far I'm actually finding myself bored. I don't know, it might be nostalgia, but HL1 seemed so much more atmospheric and exciting. But I will persevere!
One that is annoying me is not that Gordon is silent, but the structure of the conversations. In HL1 it worked because you didn't have time for talking, you were always either late or rushing off to kill aliens, and the conversations were more structured so that everyone was talking at you, and it was more believable that you had no response.
But HL2 has this weird, almost jovial atmosphere atmosphere in the beginning with everyone conversing with you and not being bothered by your stubborn silence. Everyone is happy to see you and there's the teleporter and it's great, but Gordon is just standing there, cold and unresponsive, killing all their fun. And that moment in the elevator with Alyx when there's that long pause (didn't she ask Gordon a question?) and then she says "A man of few words, huh?" made me want to slap the writers. Stoicism is one thing, but anyone would make some sort of minimal response in that pause. Except for Gordon Freeman, the hollow shell.
Oh, and I don't think I've ever played a game and thought "This gun would be a lot more enjoyable if I had to fight with it recoiling upwards.."
EDIT: Also, aren't Story and Plot the same damn thing? According to Dictionary.com
Plot: The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama.
Story: The plot of a narrative or dramatic work.
not according to five years of studying creative writing at uni, but perhaps the online dictionary knows better
at the very least, a good story is not the same as a good plot
I'd say your statements would make more sense if we were talking about books, but we are talking about games.
with the gamer playing the protagonist things change.
Even talking about games, story and plot are different.
Broken down as simply as possible - the story encompasses the information we see and what we don't see. The information we seek. This includes backstory, implied actions, etc.
Plot is the vehicle for story. It's the events as we visit them. It's what we explicitly see.
An example taken in gaming: Super Mario bros 1
the story would be bowser has kidnapped the princess, and mario goes through various levels looking for her until he finds her.
The plot would be "Mario begins by running right, then jumping on a goomba. then he hits the first block. then the second. then the third. then he runs to the right and jumps over the tube. then... etc etc"
The reason there's a distinction? Is because the plot and story can be told in reverse order through flashbacks and the occasional flash forward. Take, for example, pulp fiction. Sitting down and writing the story looks completely different from the plot because the plot tells the story out of order.
Oh, and I don't think I've ever played a game and thought "This gun would be a lot more enjoyable if I had to fight with it recoiling upwards.."
EDIT: Also, aren't Story and Plot the same damn thing? According to Dictionary.com
Plot: The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama.
Story: The plot of a narrative or dramatic work.
not according to five years of studying creative writing at uni, but perhaps the online dictionary knows better
at the very least, a good story is not the same as a good plot
I'd say your statements would make more sense if we were talking about books, but we are talking about games.
with the gamer playing the protagonist things change.
i think the gamer can still 'play the protagonist' (ie take control of the action) without the author shedding responsibility for all decisions and other story elements
again, see drake's fortune as an example - the plot becomes more satisfying because a defined character is interacting with it, giving it context and meaning - creating genuine story
don't get me wrong, games don't always have to have a fantastic story to be good, but i think hl2 doesn't have much else and in that sense the whole package is lacking
this must sound like a pretentious wank, but anyway. i really think gamers should be asking more from the narratives they get fed these days, because more often than not the developers cop out and substitute plot and 'choice' for real stories.
You know, I never thought about this, but I just figured out that this is why everyone says HL2 has a great story. I'm a film major, and I think of story as being seperate from plot. But I guess most people don't... HL2 has a good plot, but damn it has a terrible story.
Suddenly people's opinion on HL2 make a lot more sense to me. I still think it's over rated, though, but I won't get into that and shit up their thread.
TheSonicRetard on
0
Olivawgood name, isn't it?the foot of mt fujiRegistered Userregular
I loved HL1, it was my first shooter, but I'm only just now playing HL2 with the Orange Box (lame computer issues and whatnot). I'm not very far yet, but so far I'm actually finding myself bored. I don't know, it might be nostalgia, but HL1 seemed so much more atmospheric and exciting. But I will persevere!
One that is annoying me is not that Gordon is silent, but the structure of the conversations. In HL1 it worked because you didn't have time for talking, you were always either late or rushing off to kill aliens, and the conversations were more structured so that everyone was talking at you, and it was more believable that you had no response.
But HL2 has this weird, almost jovial atmosphere atmosphere in the beginning with everyone conversing with you and not being bothered by your stubborn silence. Everyone is happy to see you and there's the teleporter and it's great, but Gordon is just standing there, cold and unresponsive, killing all their fun. And that moment in the elevator with Alyx when there's that long pause (didn't she ask Gordon a question?) and then she says "A man of few words, huh?" made me want to slap the writers. Stoicism is one thing, but anyone would make some sort of minimal response in that pause. Except for Gordon Freeman, the hollow shell.
I think the reason Gordon doesn't talk, and in fact doesn't even have a model, is because he isn't supposed to be a character. You are supposed to be Gordon Freeman, so you are supposed to respond to the characters. I think it's a rather interesting design philosophy, in that it pretty much requires the player to use their imagination to "fill in the blanks" in the dialogue, but I can see how it would drive some people up the wall.
Oh, and I don't think I've ever played a game and thought "This gun would be a lot more enjoyable if I had to fight with it recoiling upwards.."
EDIT: Also, aren't Story and Plot the same damn thing? According to Dictionary.com
Plot: The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama.
Story: The plot of a narrative or dramatic work.
not according to five years of studying creative writing at uni, but perhaps the online dictionary knows better
at the very least, a good story is not the same as a good plot
I'd say your statements would make more sense if we were talking about books, but we are talking about games.
with the gamer playing the protagonist things change.
i think the gamer can still 'play the protagonist' (ie take control of the action) without the author shedding responsibility for all decisions and other story elements
again, see drake's fortune as an example - the plot becomes more satisfying because a defined character is interacting with it, giving it context and meaning - creating genuine story
don't get me wrong, games don't always have to have a fantastic story to be good, but i think hl2 doesn't have much else and in that sense the whole package is lacking
this must sound like a pretentious wank, but anyway. i really think gamers should be asking more from the narratives they get fed these days, because more often than not the developers cop out and substitute plot and 'choice' for real stories.
nah, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and I'd never stand against someone who wants more from our shared hobby... I admittedly tend to prefer games with less story, weird though that may be, so it's tough for me and you to have a debate that's going to make any sense .
I do see your point more now (thanks to both you and TSR), though, so that's good.
edit - I've taken my share of creative writing classes and film classes actually, while bouncing around majors (not that I'm gonna be as schooled as someone who stuck with those particular majors) but I guess what you were saying just didn't register about story vs. plot. thanks for pointing it out, obviously makes a lot of sense now that I know what you mean.
I think HL2's biggest problem was that the enemies weren't put in proper environment. Like Batman, the AI is more awesome when it has time to prepare. However, all their supporting fire, flanking, taking cover to reload, and hunting you down based on sound is lost when met with an MIT graduate in an HEV suit sprinting forward to unload both shotgun barrels into their face.
The most hilarious moment of AI was near the end of the game,
when you lose all your weapons
for shits and giggles, I decided to toss a grenade so that it would detonate as that was happening.
This attracted the attention of the Combine who were scripted to run in about ten seconds later.
I thought halflife 2 was a pretty good game. It wasn't nearly as interesting as HL 1 was at the time of its release, but it had pretty damn good graphics, good locations, and decent firefights.
I only felt the need to play through it once, I played the first game to death.
For all of the talk about storytelling in HL2 and whatnot, the first game had more interesting situations and a more interesting premise.
Also, I don't really care for any of the NPCs the game insists I should care about.
I felt HL2 vanilla was really inconsistent. It had amazing moments, like in Follow Freeman and Nova Prospekt, but then much of it (the vehicle sections) were really lame. But I really, really liked the episodes (episode one moreso than two) more. I just thought the combat arenas and locations were done much better and they kept a consistent pace.
Gordon Freeman never speaking is pretty much one of the best game design decisions that's ever been made, and I'm glad Valve are sticking with it.
I personally like that the entire series takes place in first person, with the view never ever leaving the character. In fact, the only part of the series I outright dislike is their decision to sum up the events of HL2 and Episode 1 at the beginning of Episode 2.
I look at Half Life 1 and 2 the same way I look at Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. Both are absolutely fantastic games, but aside from a few story elements and the outstanding quality of game design, they are unrelated. I really enjoy the departure from the first game, anyway, because it still allows me to replay it and fully enjoy it without feeling that the gameplay has been surpassed by it's sequel.
SilentCoconut on
0
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
Gordon Freeman never speaking is pretty much one of the best game design decisions that's ever been made, and I'm glad Valve are sticking with it.
I personally like that the entire series takes place in first person, with the view never ever leaving the character. In fact, the only part of the series I outright dislike is their decision to sum up the events of HL2 and Episode 1 at the beginning of Episode 2.
I look at Half Life 1 and 2 the same way I look at Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. Both are absolutely fantastic games, but aside from a few story elements and the outstanding quality of game design, they are unrelated. I really enjoy the departure from the first game, anyway, because it still allows me to replay it and fully enjoy it without feeling that the gameplay has been surpassed by it's sequel.
That was very, very weird. Especially since they did it with video.
I at least expected to be tossed through some kind of time-portal flashback plot device so I'd be running around or maybe even watching myself go through all those little flashes.
The only pure design element that bothers me is the fact that Gordon's hands don't appear on the controls for the vehicles. From a gameplay perspective, it's cool that you can look around in any direction, and I enjoy the actual vehicle modeling. It has just always been a little weird to me that the wheel in the car and the handles of the boat just sort of magically turn as I turn them.
For me that's the only thing that really breaks the immersion.
brynstar on
Xbox Live: Xander51
PSN ID : Xander51 Steam ID : Xander51
I think the reason Gordon doesn't talk, and in fact doesn't even have a model, is because he isn't supposed to be a character. You are supposed to be Gordon Freeman, so you are supposed to respond to the characters. I think it's a rather interesting design philosophy, in that it pretty much requires the player to use their imagination to "fill in the blanks" in the dialogue, but I can see how it would drive some people up the wall.
Gordon Freeman never speaking is pretty much one of the best game design decisions that's ever been made, and I'm glad Valve are sticking with it.
I think the decision was a good one to carry over from HL, I just (so far) disagree with the implementation. The always first person is very good.
I see your point about the silent moments. I guess someone else could see it as not completely bizarre. I hear that Episode 1 is about your interactions with Alyx, which sounds like it's going to annoy me even worse.
The gameplay just has been inconsistent so far. Sometimes I'm running around going "This is awesome!" and then sometimes I just don't care about the enemies I'm shooting. So far, I'm not exactly sure what makes the difference between those two.
EDIT: I would agree though that giving Gordon some gestures he can make to the world might be a decent idea though so you can at least acknowledge characters in an interactive way (plus I think squad direction would make more sense if you got an animation of making a "go over there" gesture).
That would help a lot, because right now I can only imagine Gordon standing there blankly and ignoring everyone while everyone else around him is talking to him and pretending that he's not acting like a jerk.
I just played through this for the first time in the orange box on the 360. My feelings about it are a little mixed, I enjoyed HL2 more than either of the episodes. I felt the vehicle sections were awful. Having the vehicle direction and speed all controlled by the right hand seems flawed, and the advantage(?) of being able to look everywhere, when you can only travel in a certain direction, leads to confusing problems when under stress. Also I got pig sick of seeing the map whilst having no idea where I was on it or even where I was supposed to be going.
The weapons are ok, but I spent a lot of the game wishing I had a grenade launcher, that the Gravity Gun would actually work like a proper gravity gun ALL OF THE TIME, (and be able to effect opponents with localised gravity), and not just when the combine zap it for you. I felt the rocket launcher was a little feeble, seeing as everything you shoot with it needs shooting more times than the amount of rockets you can carry, meaning every single rocket battle requires you to piss about endlessly.
As to the physics puzzle parts of the game, they were just incredibly dull, and seriously went on for too long. I had built up some serious hate for antlions by the time they became my willing cannon fodder.
I'm glad I played it through, and I will be holding on to the orange box, (although more for portal and tf2) and I will probably get hold of ep3 when it arrives, it just left me a bit meh to be honest.
Half-Life 2 was....well, the Gravity Gun was fun. I guess that's really all I can say. All the other weapons have been done to death in other games, the story was the weakest fucking thing in the world, and the vehicle sections dragged on forever.
Well it gets damned annoying that everyone praises HL2's story and villain when most of the time when playing it, you have no fucking clue why you're doing what you're doing. It's just point A to point B killing enemies along the way. I don't buy that crap about "immersive story" either, because Bioshock had no cutscenes and I never had a single doubt in my mind why I was completing my current objectives.
Well it gets damned annoying that everyone praises HL2's story and villain when most of the time when playing it, you have no fucking clue why you're doing what you're doing. It's just point A to point B killing enemies along the way. I don't buy that crap about "immersive story" either, because Bioshock had no cutscenes and I never had a single doubt in my mind why I was completing my current objectives.
I don't praise its story, its story is pretty damn bad. For a video game, though? Its way above average.
The villain is pretty cool though, and the atmosphere is top notch.
Posts
Making them explode is pointless if there's noone around them. Much faster to toss it towards your enemies than try to lure them close.
Also, you didn't need to use it to finish the game? What on earth kind of complaint is that? You don't need to use the crossbow to finish the game either; or any of a number of weapons or situations. Hell, you could probably get away with not fighting 80% of the enemies in the game if you were dedicated enough. I really don't see the point of that complaint.
Speaking of the end of the game...
I'm "kupiyupaekio" on Discord.
It's rather simple really. The firearms you are provided with, along with the ample munitions that come with it make the whole functionality of the gravity gun pointless.
Edit: Actually you can make use of the grenades. Whoever designed the physics for the grenades initially needs a fucking beating. The dammed things have the weight of an empty coke can. That is, if you don't blow your fucking face off in the process and have some sort of clockwork mind to be able to judge timer vs distance vs dropping it and picking it up.
Except, as I originally pointed out, the Gravity Gun is one of the most powerful weapons in the game (The ones that are more poweful have extremly limited ammo) and one of the more useful. It often results in an instant kill (which, on the hardest difficulty, the shotgun can even reliably do), and if can be used to take out multiple enemies in one hit.
Just because you chose not to use it doesn't mean it isn't a useful weapon.
shiver
Am I the only one that just found it... boring? And totally unnecessary? Everyone always raves about Ravenholm, but I thought it was the worst part of the game (aside from the hoverboat section... Ugh).
But if the combine recovered headcrabs from Xen, I wonder if someone could make a mod where you are the combine soldier recovering the headcrab queen from xen for the glory of the combine?
Man, I loved ravenholm and the speed boat section. When you get the music playing and you're dodging the helicopter-bomb thingies, you feel like you're in the middle of a James Bond movie.
As for Half Life 2, I thought it was great, but it doesn't have much replay value for me, so it's not one of my favorite games. But Episode 1 and 2 really impressed me with the improvements in the engine and the game design. Episode 2 in fact has two of my favorite moments in a video game ever. The only downside to this is that I have to wait another year and half for Episode 3. That's gonna be tough
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
i think the gamer can still 'play the protagonist' (ie take control of the action) without the author shedding responsibility for all decisions and other story elements
again, see drake's fortune as an example - the plot becomes more satisfying because a defined character is interacting with it, giving it context and meaning - creating genuine story
don't get me wrong, games don't always have to have a fantastic story to be good, but i think hl2 doesn't have much else and in that sense the whole package is lacking
this must sound like a pretentious wank, but anyway. i really think gamers should be asking more from the narratives they get fed these days, because more often than not the developers cop out and substitute plot and 'choice' for real stories.
One that is annoying me is not that Gordon is silent, but the structure of the conversations. In HL1 it worked because you didn't have time for talking, you were always either late or rushing off to kill aliens, and the conversations were more structured so that everyone was talking at you, and it was more believable that you had no response.
But HL2 has this weird, almost jovial atmosphere atmosphere in the beginning with everyone conversing with you and not being bothered by your stubborn silence. Everyone is happy to see you and there's the teleporter and it's great, but Gordon is just standing there, cold and unresponsive, killing all their fun. And that moment in the elevator with Alyx when there's that long pause (didn't she ask Gordon a question?) and then she says "A man of few words, huh?" made me want to slap the writers. Stoicism is one thing, but anyone would make some sort of minimal response in that pause. Except for Gordon Freeman, the hollow shell.
Even talking about games, story and plot are different.
Broken down as simply as possible - the story encompasses the information we see and what we don't see. The information we seek. This includes backstory, implied actions, etc.
Plot is the vehicle for story. It's the events as we visit them. It's what we explicitly see.
An example taken in gaming: Super Mario bros 1
the story would be bowser has kidnapped the princess, and mario goes through various levels looking for her until he finds her.
The plot would be "Mario begins by running right, then jumping on a goomba. then he hits the first block. then the second. then the third. then he runs to the right and jumps over the tube. then... etc etc"
The reason there's a distinction? Is because the plot and story can be told in reverse order through flashbacks and the occasional flash forward. Take, for example, pulp fiction. Sitting down and writing the story looks completely different from the plot because the plot tells the story out of order.
My reaction: (ep2 spoilers, don't click if you haven't beat it)
I was so scared.
You know, I never thought about this, but I just figured out that this is why everyone says HL2 has a great story. I'm a film major, and I think of story as being seperate from plot. But I guess most people don't... HL2 has a good plot, but damn it has a terrible story.
Suddenly people's opinion on HL2 make a lot more sense to me. I still think it's over rated, though, but I won't get into that and shit up their thread.
I think the reason Gordon doesn't talk, and in fact doesn't even have a model, is because he isn't supposed to be a character. You are supposed to be Gordon Freeman, so you are supposed to respond to the characters. I think it's a rather interesting design philosophy, in that it pretty much requires the player to use their imagination to "fill in the blanks" in the dialogue, but I can see how it would drive some people up the wall.
As for the gameplay, well, I like it
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
nah, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and I'd never stand against someone who wants more from our shared hobby... I admittedly tend to prefer games with less story, weird though that may be, so it's tough for me and you to have a debate that's going to make any sense
I do see your point more now (thanks to both you and TSR), though, so that's good.
edit - I've taken my share of creative writing classes and film classes actually, while bouncing around majors (not that I'm gonna be as schooled as someone who stuck with those particular majors) but I guess what you were saying just didn't register about story vs. plot. thanks for pointing it out, obviously makes a lot of sense now that I know what you mean.
The most hilarious moment of AI was near the end of the game,
for shits and giggles, I decided to toss a grenade so that it would detonate as that was happening.
This attracted the attention of the Combine who were scripted to run in about ten seconds later.
I got reamed.
I only felt the need to play through it once, I played the first game to death.
For all of the talk about storytelling in HL2 and whatnot, the first game had more interesting situations and a more interesting premise.
Also, I don't really care for any of the NPCs the game insists I should care about.
I personally like that the entire series takes place in first person, with the view never ever leaving the character. In fact, the only part of the series I outright dislike is their decision to sum up the events of HL2 and Episode 1 at the beginning of Episode 2.
I look at Half Life 1 and 2 the same way I look at Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. Both are absolutely fantastic games, but aside from a few story elements and the outstanding quality of game design, they are unrelated. I really enjoy the departure from the first game, anyway, because it still allows me to replay it and fully enjoy it without feeling that the gameplay has been surpassed by it's sequel.
That was very, very weird. Especially since they did it with video.
I at least expected to be tossed through some kind of time-portal flashback plot device so I'd be running around or maybe even watching myself go through all those little flashes.
For me that's the only thing that really breaks the immersion.
PSN ID : Xander51 Steam ID : Xander51
I see your point about the silent moments. I guess someone else could see it as not completely bizarre. I hear that Episode 1 is about your interactions with Alyx, which sounds like it's going to annoy me even worse.
The gameplay just has been inconsistent so far. Sometimes I'm running around going "This is awesome!" and then sometimes I just don't care about the enemies I'm shooting. So far, I'm not exactly sure what makes the difference between those two. That would help a lot, because right now I can only imagine Gordon standing there blankly and ignoring everyone while everyone else around him is talking to him and pretending that he's not acting like a jerk.
http://www.gamespot.com/halflife2/review.html
The weapons are ok, but I spent a lot of the game wishing I had a grenade launcher, that the Gravity Gun would actually work like a proper gravity gun ALL OF THE TIME, (and be able to effect opponents with localised gravity), and not just when the combine zap it for you. I felt the rocket launcher was a little feeble, seeing as everything you shoot with it needs shooting more times than the amount of rockets you can carry, meaning every single rocket battle requires you to piss about endlessly.
As to the physics puzzle parts of the game, they were just incredibly dull, and seriously went on for too long. I had built up some serious hate for antlions by the time they became my willing cannon fodder.
I'm glad I played it through, and I will be holding on to the orange box, (although more for portal and tf2) and I will probably get hold of ep3 when it arrives, it just left me a bit meh to be honest.
By FPS standards? Not even close.
By video game standards.
Uh, even further from the bottom.
I don't praise its story, its story is pretty damn bad. For a video game, though? Its way above average.
The villain is pretty cool though, and the atmosphere is top notch.