STEvil
11-19-2004, 12:15 PM
I got bored so I started typing away.. this is what came out.
-----
A word of warning to those with impressionable minds and who believe they may be weak of character: This review/editorial may or does contain strong langauge (you guys wont see it, forum word filters! /edit), although on a forum with filters you wont see them.
- Preface, in the box, and system for those who care. Not necessarily in that order.
This is a Review of the Retail Collectors Edition of Half-Life 2.
What comes in the box:
Half-Life 1 and 2 + CS:Source on DVD
Tiny booklet with some info.
T-Shirt.
What didnt come in the box:
Hat (I like hats)
Posters (my walls are a bit bare..)
Full strategy guide or "Raising The Bar" (yeah, I paid for it, now gimme).
DoD: Source (hey, its just hit beta now, I can wait)
That angred me, seeing as I remember the package I pre-paid for had that listed... not to mention you must have the DVD in to play the game. Two annoyances right off the bat and I hadn't even played it yet!
Review system basics:
Mobile Athlon-XP 2500+ @ 2.3ghz
2x512 Buffalo PC3200 (CH-5) @ 200mhz 2-3-2-11
Asus A7N8X-DLX 2.0 1007 uber bios
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro @ 410/350
20gb Maxtor HDD, 120gb Quantum HDD
- Preface
Half-Life 2. Where do I begin? Do I begin with where it all started, approximately 6 years ago when I visted a friends house and played Half-Life 1 on a LAN with him, constantly getting "owned" with the Guass rifle on crossfire? The snark battles were pretty fun there, too.. especially after changing a few options through the console (thanks to the sven coop team for the ability to change these). Just had to be carefull not to throw too many, it would crash the game ;)
No, thats how I got addicted to LAN gaming.. Half-Life had a pretty decent story, in fact i'd say its as good or better than most any other game i've played to date, but that still isnt what made Half-Life the game it is today. It does set the tone for this review, however.
Maybe i'd better call it an editorial, not that there is a ton of difference between the two.
By now you've all likely read the other reviews where the game gets 9/10 or 98% and the reviewer touches on what the game is about or how the game operates, but of course doesnt really rate the game all that well. I dont believe Half-Life 2 deserves more than 7/10.
So, without any further digression, its time to get into the meat of this anorexic zombie killer. Note that this comment is sarcasm, by the way ;)
- Single Player
You play as a scientist, Gordon Freeman to be exact. Since Half-Life 1 :banana::banana::banana::banana: has apparently hit the fan in some way or another (of which we are not told unles you pay attention to your surroundings through the game) and the world is under control of an oppressive regime known as the Combine. Being that they basically harvest worlds, the name fits.. Of course you need to escape them, then avoid them, and do a couple neat things along the way. Its a pretty cut and dried plot line with how Valve has presented it. They all have this syndrome of cut and dried plot lines. Half-Life 2 adds a few tricks here and there, which in the last three or so chapters make the game pretty good in all actuality. That doesnt mean i'm gonna go easy on it, though. No, i'm not going to go easy on the game at all. The story itself is pretty nice all actuality, but unless you look around you dont get to know very much about it.
Breaking the game down into transitions, it seems that there are two major ones. Beginning to Nova Prospect and Nova Prospect to The Citidel. The first takes about 5 or 6 hours to do and is extremely linear. The boat ride was ok but it was filler. The buggy was less fun, and again filler.. Theres a lot of filler to this game. Once you get into Nova Prospect and past to the Citidel the gameplay is better, above par I would say, but definately not deserving of a 9/10. All the filler and minefield of missing plot lines (unless you are looking at newspapers clipped to boards and such.. why are there newspapers if the word has been oppressed?) really leave one staggering about trying to keep going.
- Graphics
They're pretty darn nice, as illustrated here: http://xs3.xs.to/pics/04472/rocks.jpg
Sure, its not a real screenshot from the game, but you get the idea. They are done "correctly" whereas most other games are much less than satisfactory. The graphics are almost real enough that the normal person isnt going to care and will go "oh wow!". Stopping there would make for a short section on this, though, wouldnt it? I say they are satisfactory.. but for a game that is supposed to be all that and a bowl of cornflakes.. well, someone has pissed in my cornflakes and that someone is Valve. I commend them for their efforts, I really do. They are a step above Doom 3 (game looks like a damn cartoon) which is supposedly the most graphically advanced gaming engine there is, they surpass FarCry as long as you dont have trees or grass around but they still lack realism to the extent that I would like. A cut above the rest for sure, but surely not deserving of a 9/10. The Citedel to me is the most impressive level in the entire game, though RavenHolm comes in a close second. I liked this the best out of all the Half-Life 2 levels, it brings back feelings from the original the best and the atmosphere is great. Whoever built this should be given a promotion... Easily the best level in an FPS i've seen, actually... I love it. Wish the entire game were like this.. now I feel spoiled.
- Ambience
Related to both graphics and sounds, I would say Valve did a very nice job here actually. The game does pull you in, but the story kicks you right back out again... up until about three quarters of the way through, anways. RavenHolm and The Citidel are both excelently done in the ambience department. An 8/10 could maybe be garnered here.
- Sound
This, I believe, is where Valve succeeded the best when reviewing this game from the standpoint of it being a game. The sounds are incredible. Even I have to agree here. If Valve deserved a 9/10 anywhere in the game, this is where its going to be.
- Physics
The engine does this great. Unfortunately whoever coded the buggy and the fan boat needs to go outside and apply for a drivers license. If you played the leaked version at all the same could be said for the jetski thing.. but it never made it into the final version, so I guess it doesnt count here. Ever played a game called "Flatout"? How about Insane, Screamer 4x4, or any one of several other racing games that have vastly superior driving physics. Even Unreal Tournament 2003 and 2004 have better driving physics than Half-Life 2. Yeah, i'm sure the engine can be changed to be better (good example being Half-Life Rally for Half-Life 1) but for a game that tries to be so realistic, it fails miserably here... for the boat and buggy, anyway.
- Gameplay
What gameplay? You run along a pretty set path (that gravity gun lets you get to a few interesting places if you dont mind playing around stacking barrels and such) and shoot whatever is in your way. Its just like Half-Life 1 gameplay wise, other than much more outdoors based. Some of the tunnels, buildings, the cliffside area, and the Citidel are very reminicent of Half-Life 1, thats for sure. Yeah, i'm being harsh on Valve here, but gameplay is what makes single player games. Screwing that up puts you in the same boat as John Romero and his game Daikatana (thanks "Bradvandam" and "eNforcer" for reminding me of his name and the games name). Maybe it just has to do with how large the game was.. In Ravenholm and The Citidel gameplay was better than most of the rest of the game, if a bit lacking in the story department, but good. Have I mentioned that I dislike the cut and dried single player gameplay that most games seem to have?
- Game?
So far Half-Life 2 has left me wondering if it really is a game so much as it is a tech demo to show off the engine. Sure, the game is ok to play through once or twice just like Half-Life 1 was (how many times can you play through single player knowing the exact same outcome comes from your actions and reactions? Even when they are "unscripted" you still have a storyline which binds it all up pretty well). If its a tech demo, they've done a pretty good job. Its better than Farcry, better than Doom 3, better than any of the Unreal series, and the gravity gun by itself I must admit is a very well designed addition to the game. It sure brings about a lot of possibilities for mod makers and sets an initiative for other games to follow.
- Multiplayer
There is none. Sure, Counter-Strike Source shipped with it (well, before it actually), but as has been said on HardGaming.com and HardOCP.com it seems to be nothing more than a beta test and Valve is doing almost nothing to curb cheaters. Personally this sickens me as the mods are what made Half-Life what it is today. Without mods Half-Life would have gone nowhere. With that said, Counter-Strike Source hasnt been fun to play since about Beta 5 in the Half-Life 1 days. I dont think its just me, either. Many people have taken up the call of "CS sucks" but due to the large user base of people who only picked it up after it was irrepairably damaged the call is almost unheard. Day of Defeat source, having just entered beta testing not a week prior to the writing of this is a ways off until release and might be the only savng grace of Half-Life 2 unless some other mods hit the streets quick. Good thing Day of Defeat came out when it did.
I have always been a fan of Day of Defeat, and may have said some things to the DoD team when there were changes from 1.3b to 3.1 (the version numbers jumping around were annoying on their own) that were strongly worded, but it has worked out since then. The game is still fun, and I hope they dont screw up DoD Source. Cheaters, team killers (TK's, also known as "player killers" and "greifers" in other gameplay types) and "fan boys" are ravaging the multiplayer scene today.
Multiplayer to me is what makes the game, since single player is so cut and dried 90% of the time. Get in with a community of people and its great. Thats what clans, guilds, and the like are all formed from. Maybe Valve doesnt realize it, but they are shooting themselves in the foot by not curbing these players who seem to think its ok for them to ruin our gaming experience. Blizzard is another high profile company that seems to have little reguard at all for the problems that have been creeping up in the multiplayer community... at least Valve tried with VAC and STEAM at the start, however flawed it seems to have been.
- Final words.
Of course i'm being harsh on the game, but thats because most other reviewers tend to go easy on games and score them in the 70-80+ range.. why they do this when a game does not deserve it is beyond me. The game failed on a few points, has excelled in others, and the source engine is definately an awesome peice of coding, The Citidel being a great example, but I dont believe it really seems to be a game. It seems more like a demo to show off the engine, and as "f3lik]x[" said to me on MSN, it reeks of "2" (not, not 2 Griffin, but he's pretty damn funny at least). Its obvious many hours and sleepless nights were put into this, but the complete lack of multiplayer support and how stretched out the game is at the start with a bad plot to those who arent going to view the scenery really makes me quite annoyed (sight seeing in an FPS? That gets you killed!).
In the end I do rather like the game, even for all its shortcommings. It surpasses most of whats out there but I believe other reviewers are being far too generous.
Pros - Decent if you stick it out until the end, better if you pay attention to your surroundings; Exceptional engine... the game barely shows off its capabilities
Cons - No multiplayer; horrible plot holes; gameplay is way to drawn out for first 3/4 of the game; some of the zombies look like they are on a diet (/sarcasm); Uses "STEAM" (wish it would subliminate.. horrible program); didnt come with all advertised contents.
Final verdict: 6.5/11.
Read this and and have a problem with it? I will refer you to what Donna Barr said about the Desert Peach: Anyone who takes this seriously deserves to. Thanks for Watts Martin for pointing me to that invaluable quote.
-----
A word of warning to those with impressionable minds and who believe they may be weak of character: This review/editorial may or does contain strong langauge (you guys wont see it, forum word filters! /edit), although on a forum with filters you wont see them.
- Preface, in the box, and system for those who care. Not necessarily in that order.
This is a Review of the Retail Collectors Edition of Half-Life 2.
What comes in the box:
Half-Life 1 and 2 + CS:Source on DVD
Tiny booklet with some info.
T-Shirt.
What didnt come in the box:
Hat (I like hats)
Posters (my walls are a bit bare..)
Full strategy guide or "Raising The Bar" (yeah, I paid for it, now gimme).
DoD: Source (hey, its just hit beta now, I can wait)
That angred me, seeing as I remember the package I pre-paid for had that listed... not to mention you must have the DVD in to play the game. Two annoyances right off the bat and I hadn't even played it yet!
Review system basics:
Mobile Athlon-XP 2500+ @ 2.3ghz
2x512 Buffalo PC3200 (CH-5) @ 200mhz 2-3-2-11
Asus A7N8X-DLX 2.0 1007 uber bios
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro @ 410/350
20gb Maxtor HDD, 120gb Quantum HDD
- Preface
Half-Life 2. Where do I begin? Do I begin with where it all started, approximately 6 years ago when I visted a friends house and played Half-Life 1 on a LAN with him, constantly getting "owned" with the Guass rifle on crossfire? The snark battles were pretty fun there, too.. especially after changing a few options through the console (thanks to the sven coop team for the ability to change these). Just had to be carefull not to throw too many, it would crash the game ;)
No, thats how I got addicted to LAN gaming.. Half-Life had a pretty decent story, in fact i'd say its as good or better than most any other game i've played to date, but that still isnt what made Half-Life the game it is today. It does set the tone for this review, however.
Maybe i'd better call it an editorial, not that there is a ton of difference between the two.
By now you've all likely read the other reviews where the game gets 9/10 or 98% and the reviewer touches on what the game is about or how the game operates, but of course doesnt really rate the game all that well. I dont believe Half-Life 2 deserves more than 7/10.
So, without any further digression, its time to get into the meat of this anorexic zombie killer. Note that this comment is sarcasm, by the way ;)
- Single Player
You play as a scientist, Gordon Freeman to be exact. Since Half-Life 1 :banana::banana::banana::banana: has apparently hit the fan in some way or another (of which we are not told unles you pay attention to your surroundings through the game) and the world is under control of an oppressive regime known as the Combine. Being that they basically harvest worlds, the name fits.. Of course you need to escape them, then avoid them, and do a couple neat things along the way. Its a pretty cut and dried plot line with how Valve has presented it. They all have this syndrome of cut and dried plot lines. Half-Life 2 adds a few tricks here and there, which in the last three or so chapters make the game pretty good in all actuality. That doesnt mean i'm gonna go easy on it, though. No, i'm not going to go easy on the game at all. The story itself is pretty nice all actuality, but unless you look around you dont get to know very much about it.
Breaking the game down into transitions, it seems that there are two major ones. Beginning to Nova Prospect and Nova Prospect to The Citidel. The first takes about 5 or 6 hours to do and is extremely linear. The boat ride was ok but it was filler. The buggy was less fun, and again filler.. Theres a lot of filler to this game. Once you get into Nova Prospect and past to the Citidel the gameplay is better, above par I would say, but definately not deserving of a 9/10. All the filler and minefield of missing plot lines (unless you are looking at newspapers clipped to boards and such.. why are there newspapers if the word has been oppressed?) really leave one staggering about trying to keep going.
- Graphics
They're pretty darn nice, as illustrated here: http://xs3.xs.to/pics/04472/rocks.jpg
Sure, its not a real screenshot from the game, but you get the idea. They are done "correctly" whereas most other games are much less than satisfactory. The graphics are almost real enough that the normal person isnt going to care and will go "oh wow!". Stopping there would make for a short section on this, though, wouldnt it? I say they are satisfactory.. but for a game that is supposed to be all that and a bowl of cornflakes.. well, someone has pissed in my cornflakes and that someone is Valve. I commend them for their efforts, I really do. They are a step above Doom 3 (game looks like a damn cartoon) which is supposedly the most graphically advanced gaming engine there is, they surpass FarCry as long as you dont have trees or grass around but they still lack realism to the extent that I would like. A cut above the rest for sure, but surely not deserving of a 9/10. The Citedel to me is the most impressive level in the entire game, though RavenHolm comes in a close second. I liked this the best out of all the Half-Life 2 levels, it brings back feelings from the original the best and the atmosphere is great. Whoever built this should be given a promotion... Easily the best level in an FPS i've seen, actually... I love it. Wish the entire game were like this.. now I feel spoiled.
- Ambience
Related to both graphics and sounds, I would say Valve did a very nice job here actually. The game does pull you in, but the story kicks you right back out again... up until about three quarters of the way through, anways. RavenHolm and The Citidel are both excelently done in the ambience department. An 8/10 could maybe be garnered here.
- Sound
This, I believe, is where Valve succeeded the best when reviewing this game from the standpoint of it being a game. The sounds are incredible. Even I have to agree here. If Valve deserved a 9/10 anywhere in the game, this is where its going to be.
- Physics
The engine does this great. Unfortunately whoever coded the buggy and the fan boat needs to go outside and apply for a drivers license. If you played the leaked version at all the same could be said for the jetski thing.. but it never made it into the final version, so I guess it doesnt count here. Ever played a game called "Flatout"? How about Insane, Screamer 4x4, or any one of several other racing games that have vastly superior driving physics. Even Unreal Tournament 2003 and 2004 have better driving physics than Half-Life 2. Yeah, i'm sure the engine can be changed to be better (good example being Half-Life Rally for Half-Life 1) but for a game that tries to be so realistic, it fails miserably here... for the boat and buggy, anyway.
- Gameplay
What gameplay? You run along a pretty set path (that gravity gun lets you get to a few interesting places if you dont mind playing around stacking barrels and such) and shoot whatever is in your way. Its just like Half-Life 1 gameplay wise, other than much more outdoors based. Some of the tunnels, buildings, the cliffside area, and the Citidel are very reminicent of Half-Life 1, thats for sure. Yeah, i'm being harsh on Valve here, but gameplay is what makes single player games. Screwing that up puts you in the same boat as John Romero and his game Daikatana (thanks "Bradvandam" and "eNforcer" for reminding me of his name and the games name). Maybe it just has to do with how large the game was.. In Ravenholm and The Citidel gameplay was better than most of the rest of the game, if a bit lacking in the story department, but good. Have I mentioned that I dislike the cut and dried single player gameplay that most games seem to have?
- Game?
So far Half-Life 2 has left me wondering if it really is a game so much as it is a tech demo to show off the engine. Sure, the game is ok to play through once or twice just like Half-Life 1 was (how many times can you play through single player knowing the exact same outcome comes from your actions and reactions? Even when they are "unscripted" you still have a storyline which binds it all up pretty well). If its a tech demo, they've done a pretty good job. Its better than Farcry, better than Doom 3, better than any of the Unreal series, and the gravity gun by itself I must admit is a very well designed addition to the game. It sure brings about a lot of possibilities for mod makers and sets an initiative for other games to follow.
- Multiplayer
There is none. Sure, Counter-Strike Source shipped with it (well, before it actually), but as has been said on HardGaming.com and HardOCP.com it seems to be nothing more than a beta test and Valve is doing almost nothing to curb cheaters. Personally this sickens me as the mods are what made Half-Life what it is today. Without mods Half-Life would have gone nowhere. With that said, Counter-Strike Source hasnt been fun to play since about Beta 5 in the Half-Life 1 days. I dont think its just me, either. Many people have taken up the call of "CS sucks" but due to the large user base of people who only picked it up after it was irrepairably damaged the call is almost unheard. Day of Defeat source, having just entered beta testing not a week prior to the writing of this is a ways off until release and might be the only savng grace of Half-Life 2 unless some other mods hit the streets quick. Good thing Day of Defeat came out when it did.
I have always been a fan of Day of Defeat, and may have said some things to the DoD team when there were changes from 1.3b to 3.1 (the version numbers jumping around were annoying on their own) that were strongly worded, but it has worked out since then. The game is still fun, and I hope they dont screw up DoD Source. Cheaters, team killers (TK's, also known as "player killers" and "greifers" in other gameplay types) and "fan boys" are ravaging the multiplayer scene today.
Multiplayer to me is what makes the game, since single player is so cut and dried 90% of the time. Get in with a community of people and its great. Thats what clans, guilds, and the like are all formed from. Maybe Valve doesnt realize it, but they are shooting themselves in the foot by not curbing these players who seem to think its ok for them to ruin our gaming experience. Blizzard is another high profile company that seems to have little reguard at all for the problems that have been creeping up in the multiplayer community... at least Valve tried with VAC and STEAM at the start, however flawed it seems to have been.
- Final words.
Of course i'm being harsh on the game, but thats because most other reviewers tend to go easy on games and score them in the 70-80+ range.. why they do this when a game does not deserve it is beyond me. The game failed on a few points, has excelled in others, and the source engine is definately an awesome peice of coding, The Citidel being a great example, but I dont believe it really seems to be a game. It seems more like a demo to show off the engine, and as "f3lik]x[" said to me on MSN, it reeks of "2" (not, not 2 Griffin, but he's pretty damn funny at least). Its obvious many hours and sleepless nights were put into this, but the complete lack of multiplayer support and how stretched out the game is at the start with a bad plot to those who arent going to view the scenery really makes me quite annoyed (sight seeing in an FPS? That gets you killed!).
In the end I do rather like the game, even for all its shortcommings. It surpasses most of whats out there but I believe other reviewers are being far too generous.
Pros - Decent if you stick it out until the end, better if you pay attention to your surroundings; Exceptional engine... the game barely shows off its capabilities
Cons - No multiplayer; horrible plot holes; gameplay is way to drawn out for first 3/4 of the game; some of the zombies look like they are on a diet (/sarcasm); Uses "STEAM" (wish it would subliminate.. horrible program); didnt come with all advertised contents.
Final verdict: 6.5/11.
Read this and and have a problem with it? I will refer you to what Donna Barr said about the Desert Peach: Anyone who takes this seriously deserves to. Thanks for Watts Martin for pointing me to that invaluable quote.