Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Is HL2 innovative? DISCUSS

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Too many Edge-masters trying to out edge each other. Tip to newfags and those desperate for Kodex Kool Kredits: just because a game is popular doesn't automatically make it shit. HL2 was not a bad game. Of course it's nowhere near the 99/100 GOTCENTURY people make it out to be. It popularized the concept of the pseudo open-world shooter. While the game was mostly linear they added a lot of design, set pieces, etc. that made things more visually pleasing than a bunch of twisting corridors. You can say Duke 3D did this but the technology was limited.
 

A horse of course

Guest
Too many Edge-masters trying to out edge each other. Tip to newfags and those desperate for Kodex Kool Kredits: just because a game is popular doesn't automatically make it shit. HL2 was not a bad game. Of course it's nowhere near the 99/100 GOTCENTURY people make it out to be. It popularized the concept of the pseudo open-world shooter. While the game was mostly linear they added a lot of design, set pieces, etc. that made things more visually pleasing than a bunch of twisting corridors. You can say Duke 3D did this but the technology was limited.

Halo is more open than Half Life 2. Neither of them are "pseudo open-world". Bioshock is closer to that description.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jaesun

Fabulous Ex-Moderator
Patron
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
37,241
Location
Seattle, WA USA
MCA
IIRC the *innovation* of Half-Life was it was the first FPS that added scripted-scenes. Which unfortunately, the entire industry adopted and it all turned to shit and was over-used.

I cannot think of one single thing that Half-Life2 did that was actually innovative.
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Guest
IIRC the *innovation* of Half-Life was it was the first FPS that added scripted-scenes. Which unfortunately, the entire industry adopted and it all turned to shit and was over-used.
Cybermage did that in 1996 and featured better level design than this, but it was ignored cuz "hardcore difficulty" and "huuuuge system requirements".
 

Love

Cipher
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
371
IIRC the *innovation* of Half-Life was it was the first FPS that added scripted-scenes. Which unfortunately, the entire industry adopted and it all turned to shit and was over-used.

I cannot think of one single thing that Half-Life2 did that was actually innovative.

So you think Valve didn't unlock the achievement of innovation? You know, the achievement... get it?
 

Jaesun

Fabulous Ex-Moderator
Patron
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
37,241
Location
Seattle, WA USA
MCA
IIRC the *innovation* of Half-Life was it was the first FPS that added scripted-scenes. Which unfortunately, the entire industry adopted and it all turned to shit and was over-used.
Cybermage did that in 1996 and featured better level design than this, but it was ignored cuz "hardcore difficulty" and "huuuuge system requirements".

OK cool. My limited exposure to very early FPS, is that Half-Life was the *first* FPS to use scripted-scenes. Though if Origin did it first in 1996, that doesn't surprise me. They had so much fucking talent working for them....
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Guest
IIRC the *innovation* of Half-Life was it was the first FPS that added scripted-scenes. Which unfortunately, the entire industry adopted and it all turned to shit and was over-used.
Cybermage did that in 1996 and featured better level design than this, but it was ignored cuz "hardcore difficulty" and "huuuuge system requirements".

OK cool. My limited exposure to very early FPS, is that Half-Life was the *first* FPS to use scripted-scenes. Though if Origin did it first in 1996, that doesn't surprise me. They had so much fucking talent working for them....
If you're a fan of D.W. Bradley, you're in for a treat.
And the controls, boy, prepare to play it using your keyboard.

I wonder if DosBox allows to remap the keys outside of the game, because some unremappable keys turn the game into a ragequit fest. :negative:
 

A horse of course

Guest
IIRC the *innovation* of Half-Life was it was the first FPS that added scripted-scenes. Which unfortunately, the entire industry adopted and it all turned to shit and was over-used.

I cannot think of one single thing that Half-Life2 did that was actually innovative.

It's difficult to define the following as a specific "innovation" but the level of motion capture and facial animation quality in HL2 outstripped anything seen at that time, iirc. Big-budget PS2 games from Japan had been pioneering that sort of technology but they were still falling short of Valve's benchmark for years to come.
 

Elim

Augur
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
330
Project: Eternity
Riddick>HL2.

HL2 did not blow me away when it was released. Riddick on the other hand...
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Guest
Riddick>HL2.

HL2 did not blow me away when it was released. Riddick on the other hand...
The best thing was that it looked on par with Doom 3, but performance kicked Doom 3 in the balls with about the same set of features, somewhat faster gameplay and about the same graphics.
 
Joined
Sep 7, 2013
Messages
6,165
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Serpent in the Staglands Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
It's somewhat similar to the relationship between Fallout and Fallout 2. Half-Life 2 refined some of the concepts from the original while clipping others.

Bit of an inversion on one point though, which was level design. Half Life 2 sacrificed some of Half-Life's detailed level design for increased openness, which is arguably the opposite of what occurred in the transition between Fallout and Fallout 2. Fallout 2 had more detailed environments at the expense of the original's open-endedness.
 

the_shadow

Arcane
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
1,179
Too many Edge-masters trying to out edge each other. Tip to newfags and those desperate for Kodex Kool Kredits: just because a game is popular doesn't automatically make it shit. HL2 was not a bad game. Of course it's nowhere near the 99/100 GOTCENTURY people make it out to be. It popularized the concept of the pseudo open-world shooter. While the game was mostly linear they added a lot of design, set pieces, etc. that made things more visually pleasing than a bunch of twisting corridors. You can say Duke 3D did this but the technology was limited.

As a member who mostly lurks, I do agree that posters on the Codex do tend to be counter-culture and contrarian when it comes to major release by big gaming companies, and more understanding of indies and less known developers. I also think that the hype generated before the release of a sequel can lead to a backlash when it doesn't live up to said hype, although it may be a decent game 'for what it is'.

To answer the OP objectively, I'd have to say that no, there isn't anything innovative about Half-Life 2. Scripted events weren't a new thing in 2004, and the facial expressions of NPCs was done better in Vampire - The Masquerade: Bloodlines. Vehicles had made an appearance in Unreal Tournament 2004. The map design was subpar, and gunplay was a step backwards. Indeed, the stellar AI is the one thing that stood out for me in Half Life 1, and I still can't believe how popamole HL 2 is.

However, even if any of the above was innovative, they weren't implemented well. For example, Half Life 2 had vehicles, and said vehicle was used in a boring canal ride. Facial expressions were present, but they didn't add anything to the gameplay or story. Given that characterisation was crucial in Vampire: Bloodlines, facial expressions meant something. But in a cookie cutter FPS? Give me a break.

The problem is that Half Life 2 didn't do anything in a compelling way. It's a mediocre game with mediocre gameplay.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
5,110
Yeah, I agree with a bunch of you. Half-Life 2 was a good game, but not particularly innovative, especially compared to the first one. You can argue that the first Half-Life was very bad for the genre in the long run, with its linear approach and heavy use of scripting as opposed to actual AI, but at the time, the way it integrated storytelling into the game via in-game cut-scenes and the way the marines were scripted to act in a human-like manner, and just the overall design of that massive Black Mesa facility was like nothing else out there. Half-Life 2, on the other hand, other than the gimmicky-feeling over-reliance on physics, didn't do anything that was mind-blowing, it was just a solid and fun to play shooter. I was more impressed with games like Far Cry and F.E.A.R. around that time.
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Too many Edge-masters trying to out edge each other. Tip to newfags and those desperate for Kodex Kool Kredits: just because a game is popular doesn't automatically make it shit. HL2 was not a bad game. Of course it's nowhere near the 99/100 GOTCENTURY people make it out to be. It popularized the concept of the pseudo open-world shooter. While the game was mostly linear they added a lot of design, set pieces, etc. that made things more visually pleasing than a bunch of twisting corridors. You can say Duke 3D did this but the technology was limited.

Halo is more open Half Life 2. Neither of them are "pseudo open-world". Bioshock is closer to that description.
I wouldn't know about Halo since I don't play filthy console exclusive games like you.
 

A horse of course

Guest
Too many Edge-masters trying to out edge each other. Tip to newfags and those desperate for Kodex Kool Kredits: just because a game is popular doesn't automatically make it shit. HL2 was not a bad game. Of course it's nowhere near the 99/100 GOTCENTURY people make it out to be. It popularized the concept of the pseudo open-world shooter. While the game was mostly linear they added a lot of design, set pieces, etc. that made things more visually pleasing than a bunch of twisting corridors. You can say Duke 3D did this but the technology was limited.

Halo is more open Half Life 2. Neither of them are "pseudo open-world". Bioshock is closer to that description.
I wouldn't know about Halo since I don't play filthy console exclusive games like you.

Nobody asked you, fatty.
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Guest
I cannot think of one single thing that Half-Life2 did that was actually innovative.

First FPS to have your waifu follow you around?
Beaten by Daikatana.

The keyword here is "follow", not "path into walls, get stuck in doors, and kill yourself on traps".
I beat it a few years ago and these issues rarely occured. Maybe it was like this in the initial version, but I guess everyone plays different Daikatanas.
Actually, now when you mention it, I remember that I played another version where these issues were pretty frequent.
 

Akratus

Self-loathing fascist drunken misogynist asshole
Patron
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
0
Location
The Netherlands
Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Valve was doing super innovative shit for 2004. If you look at this:



and understand at least a little what this was like back then, and can still say the game wasn't innovative, well, I can only lol.

But there is something to be said for the gameplay, all their newfangled programming didn't have a severe impact on the gameplay. It was still the same type of shooter that HL1 was. Of course, things like the physics puzzles wouldn't have been possible otherwise, and neither would killing enemies with those physics. But there isn't much more that was impacted gameplay wise.

But presentation-wise there was the most innovation. The facial animations are still unrivaled by most of the industry nowadays. Although the tech has been surpassed with LA Noire for example, Alyx was still a breakthrough for her time.
 

tuluse

Arcane
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
11,400
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Well obviously, HL2 was amazing graphically. I don't think most people equate that to innovation.
 

pippin

Guest
I cannot think of one single thing that Half-Life2 did that was actually innovative.

First FPS to have your waifu follow you around?

IIRC Alix can't die. There was this moment where you're supposed to plow through Combine troops with Barney, a true bro, and I just kept going on thinking he would have god mode turned on. He didn't. I got a game over screen because Barney died. Fuck you, Gaben.
 

Akratus

Self-loathing fascist drunken misogynist asshole
Patron
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
0
Location
The Netherlands
Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Actually, Alyx CAN die. She just has very high hp and I think regeneration. At least, I remember shotgunning her to death at one point in Episode 1.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom