HL2 Players only -- What could have made it better?

[Fullforce]

Far Cry was brilliant, but shot itself in the foot with the addition of the shit mutants. HL2 on the other hand is just brilliant all the way. It keeps you on your toes, keeps you going to find out the story, keeps you involved with the physics.

And it has great graphics, too. HL2 (well, source engine) is the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to mods, too.

[$kelet0r]

Originally Posted by Brood

Such a long development period for a piss poor looking game. Far Cry had it beat from the start as far as technology goes.

Far Cry is pretty but HL2 is still the benchmark until UE3 games start arriving. Buy a better system.

-Grav gun, I mean WTF, where does it get its energy from
-RPG with LAZER guided munition?

You've got to be kidding me? Between them, the are the most awesome weapons ever commited to a computer monitor. Some of you guys I swear take the realism stuff WAY too far. It's make-believe and awesome at that

[00SoldierofFortune00]

Originally Posted by $kelet0r

It's a science fiction fantasy - reality has no place in it tbh.
The one thing that would have made the game untouchable would have been the AI - the ingame hostile AI while adequete was not mind-blowing

The AI in Half-Life 1 was mind-blowing. It is still better then most AI today and is only second to Far-Cry's.

Far Cry is pretty but HL2 is still the benchmark until UE3 games start arriving. Buy a better system.

BS. Both Far Cry and Half-Life 2 are good techinologically, but if you were to pick which one is better overall, it would be Far Cry. It has far superior folage(best in any game), better AI, better and more open ended gameplay, best water in a game yet, and the walls aren't as flat as HL2's. It's environment is also more detailed including the weapons. HL2 does beat it in terms of physics, player models(best in any game), and story/depth though.


What made Far Cry so great was that the environment was realistic and pretty much open ended. HL2 was never open ended. Both are some of the best games of all time though.

But when it comes to replayability, it really matters to the person. I have played HL2 through 3-4 times, while only 2 for Far Cry.

[dragon10390]

@fullforce: You raise a valid point, the guns are based on real life weapons, and the MP7 and the SMG are almost identical, seeing as the MP7 has a collapsible fore-grip, which is up in the pic you posted, with it down, the only difference is the positioning of the trigger and grip

Also, the crow-bar is an accurate replication of the real life tool.

[SethLive!]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Fullforce

Far Cry was brilliant, but shot itself in the foot with the addition of the shit mutants. HL2 on the other hand is just brilliant all the way. It keeps you on your toes, keeps you going to find out the story, keeps you involved with the physics.

And it has great graphics, too. HL2 (well, source engine) is the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to mods, too.

qft

[Expendable Grunt]

I didn't know about the MP 7 and I do appologize about that error.

I'd rather we not discuss Far Cry here, I didn't like it much. Environment was ok but the AI was next to retarded (just rushed me for the most part), and the MP5 (a 9mm weapon) fired the same ammo as the P90 (a 5.7mm weapon).


Anyways the story line of HL2 is a bridger, Freeman himself has no clue wtf is going on at all. It's in Eastern Eruope because GMan wants him there, it happens to be where the head of the Earth occupation (Breen) has his city. Had the city been chosen to be in New York, it game would have been there, had it been in Hollywood, MD, (my neighborhood) it would be there instead. The game takes place in Chechnya. While they do not tell you, in Episode 1 you see a building with Cyrillic on it. It is not a Russian word, but a dialect of a Russian word that is only heard in Chechnya.



That aside (and alot of what you all are saying is valid), anyone agree that the weapons in the resistance and stuff where a bit too "standard issue"?

I do understand it's a sci fi but I do like to add some realism to the game, and the cone of fire for the weapons was horrid :-/

[JohnnyPissoff]

Well like I said earlier I played Far Cry and HL2 at the same time alternating between them, and know what?...It felt like I was playing Far Cry for the shear pleasure and HL2 much like it was a stressful job, not that I didn't enjoy it.

A word about HL/HL2's plot; it's never been fully revealed as it's still evolving.

[DrMcCleod]

Couple of things that could have been improved:

Multiple paths. It is a great Linear shooter in the HL1 mould, but a few branches might have been nice.


Hmmm. Nope, that's it. The rest is pretty much perfect.

Oh, and I loved the ending, thought it was great.

[[R-DEV]Dunehunter]

One of the things I loved the most was the upgraded grav gun. I had gotten used to throwing small stuff around, but then..."OMG, I just totally crushed that guy by throwing a freaking control panel at him! And OMG, now I totally played bowling with those three guys! Bow before my feet, puny mortals! I am your new god!"

[Brood]

Originally Posted by $kelet0r

Far Cry is pretty but HL2 is still the benchmark until UE3 games start arriving. Buy a better system.

Dual 8800's not good enough? I get my gear at cost price, sometimes able to write off as a business expense thanks to my field.

Source, the little engine can't even handle a large outdoor space. Shit, Unreal 2004 has more on source :\. Developers know this and it is why Unreal Engine 2 and 2.5 are still more popular than Source. I'm not saying that graphics mean everything, Technology however allows developers to get players a lot more involved in the game world and story than was possible a few years back. The level of interaction, phasing out of scripted events and general eye candy all aid the gameplay and story telling aspects of a game. Those who proclaim "graphics > gameplay" really don't have a clue what they're on about.

Yeah Far Cry had a lame story, but so did Half Life 2, you call that a story? Shit, go play yourselves some Metal Gear Solid (2 was lame though, 1 and 3 are good), that's a story and a half. Truth is, I haven't seen a decent storyline in a blockbuster game in a long while, it's almost like people don't care anymore. Thankfully I've noticed articles popping up over the net that address this and it seems that the next generation of games are going to be a lot more involving.

Alright, but where does this leave Half Life 2? Well, it really had quite a lame storyline, the world was fantastic, but the game that took place within this world was rather uninspiring. Why not create an epic? Shit, with a development time like that they should have been able to pop out a classic. Instead of a creating an epic and involving storyline, they created a pointless "runandgun" with a storyline thrown in just for the convenience of knowing why your jumping from one environment to the next.

Sandbox is the future, the non-linearity can scare people off, but not if it is done right. It is possible to have a well constructed linear story in a non-linear environment. The Jak series on PS2 is a great example, Jak 2 and 3 were great games, it really seems that console game developers have story telling and gameplay down to a fine art... Well studios like SquareEnix, Konami and Insomniac anyway. Back to HL2, I just felt like I was fighting scripting, every time I played the game it was the same, this isn't fun at all. The same enemy would come from the same door, the same zombie would burst through the same door. Big woop, after 7+ years of development, Valve gave us a generic, linear shooter.

Big disappointment...