Half Life 2 is the 'best game of all time' according to Metacritic

Upon further reflection I feel that we should stop raiding and become isolationist.

 

HL2 wasn't even the best shooter (hello Far Cry) or game (hello Rome:Total War) of 2004 and was nowhere near as ground-breaking as the original, merely adding some admitedly nice facial animation work and physics to what is basically a corridor shooter.

It's not terrible but I can think of literally dozens of games I'd rather play than HL2.

 

aww yiss now this thread be going places

 

No bro, no. They're spies. In the first video they're talking about Halo, and in the second video they list Arma 2 as one of the most frustrating games because they're console gamers. I WILL NOT FALL FOR THEIR TRICKERY. M:

 

Even though I enjoyed HL2 this is a pretty good guide.

 

As has already been mention the gun play is extremely weak (mostly due to the Source engine). How can you have a good FPS with weak gun play? Never mind the overly long vehicle sequences and the tedious physics puzzles. HL2 isn't really an FPS, it's basically a semi-interactive movie. Yes, it has a lot of nice set pieces and is pretty to look at (for the time it was made) but game-play wise it's mediocre at best.

 

Yeah, the 1984 stuff from HL2 was good up until 5 minutes in when your enemies proved to be laughably inept and easily outsmarted, while you have an infinite supply of allies who can't die unless they are nameless NPC support. The oppression part doesn't work unless you are actually feel oppressed, as opposed to galloping around in hovercraft with laz0rs and using the gravity gun to shoot them with toilets for the lulz.

 

Hahahaha, holly shit, that is so true.
Half-Life 2 launch made me lose all trust in gaming press.

 

Don't think the Source engine had anything to do with it, just the game design.

 

Seriously????

 

Okay, looks like RPG Codex' pointless rage needs to be curbed. This is basic math.

Suppose you have a game that receives 10/10 in two reviews and 1/10 in one review. With equal weights to each review, that is a 7/10 average score.

And then suppose you have a game that receives 7/10, 8/10, and 9/10 in three reviews. That is an average score of 8/10.

What you guys are doing is raging that the higher average implies everyone else thinks the said game is the best ever. Yet, that is clearly not what the actual scores imply.

There are games that really divide their players, such as Might and Magic VI, where the intensity of liking and the intensity of disliking is strong. Then there are games that don't have a strong divide, and have the same moderate intensity of liking the game - such as Legend of Grimrock, which everyone thought was good or okay. OF COURSE, the weighted average score taken by polling every Codexer could show a higher average score for LoG. Does this mean that most Codexers think LoG is better than MM6? Of course not.

 

Haha thinly veiled bikini game ads. Could atleast have given them a bigger budget so that they could afford bags over their heads.

 

Yeah, for me HL2 is the "most overrated game of all time".
And it's a pop-a-mole game in the traditional sense. You are always the hunted, and enemies pop of everywhere. After a while you can predict where the moles enemies will pop up, and be ready to pop them.
And I was deeply disappointed by the use of the physics engine, which didn't allow for clever play, but instead was used for stupid puzzles that would be more appropriate in an Adventure game.

 

Sorry, but no.
HL2 might be overrated (as much as I enjoyed it it is overrated), but this* honor belongs to oblivion and oblivion alone.

Decent presented as the best ever by the majority is far less than abysmal turd presented as the best ever by the overwhelming majority.

Again, no. It lacks explicit cover mechanics, and if we count implicit cover mechanics, then it still is much less of a popamole than, say, Quake 2.

*) other.

 

I said "in the traditional sense". Moles/enemies pop up, and the player pops them.
And I don't remember any covert mechanics in Quake 2, nor do I remember all enemies popping up from ambushes.
Granted I didn't play the whole HL2, so maybe it improved later.

 

Half Life 2 was quite a disappointment after Half Life 1. But it wasn't that bad. Somehow they lost that cool sci-fi atmosphere of the original...

I think Half Life 1 is one of my favorite shooters evah!

 

Pretty much this. They replaced it with eastern european dystopia/wasteland, but it's not quite the same, especially after rather alien HL1. Plus enemy and weapon wariety sucked.

 

On the other hand no fucking Xen visits.

 

Well, for me HL2 is the most overrated game ever. I knew Oblivion was broken and needed heavy modding to be playable, but HL2 was universally heralded as the the best game evah, and nobody said anything about the flaws mentioned in this thread.
But of course it's weird that vanilla/console Oblivion should get such high ratings considering the critical level scaling design flaw. But I guess casuals just don't care, as long as the graphics look pretty and they can bash some goblins?

Expectations has a lot to say. I had high expactations to HL2 but ended up hating it. I had very low expectations to Invisible War and Unreal 2, but ended up liking them and completing them.

 

I had a shitton of fun with Left 4 Dead 1/2, and very little fun with Half-Life 2.

 

I can agree with this generally, but fuck if I can think of a more satisfying revolver to use in any game. The crossbow was cool too.

 

Xen > the last level in HL2. Period. R00fles!

 

I can't even remember there was a revolver in HL2... On the other hand about revolver in HL1 I can say exactly the same you said for HL2's revolver.