samsprinkle:
Gordan is supposed to be interesting because he is YOU! The whole entire point of a silent protagonist is so that YOU can fill in the dialogue with whatever you would like...Sure, maybe it's just the dev's being lazy...but it also makes me damn excited that I don't have to listen to some annoying ass protag whining about his mommy...

It's always fun to fill in dialogue. Look at Freeman's Mind http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J80KD4BG7M

UNKNOWNINCOGNITO:

(To all HALF LIFERS,,, it is overated and does not count as a shooter only a tech demo in)

Doesn't count as a shooter? I don't know what else to say... that's stupid. I wanted to be nice about it, but I just couldn't.

FIRSTLY: Do you know how the gravity gun works? No. So you cant complain about what situations you can use it in. Somehow, the science of the gravity gun doesnt get along with windows. The storey, what game has a better one? Sure it may have a few loose ends and its not perfect, but by video game standards, its phenominal. The guns? More creative than most games, the guns arent halo awesome, but the guns are awesome. I will say the SMG just plain sucks, the sound is annoying and its kinda ugly. The vehicle sections are SWEET! I wish you did say something about them because I want to know what you wouldve complained about. Also, whats bad about it being linear? Id go nuts if every game was non-linear. And I hate Gordon Freeman. He doesnt talk. Id like emotional value to my charecters, you know, some appeal.

Just something that came up in my head and I must say is one time at a hockey game I saw a banner that said "Be a fan, not a fanatic." Fan is short for fanatic.

Well... I disagree. I mean, that's a matter of personal taste. I like Half Life 1, and the origional Empire Earth,but that's not really relevant to a wider audience.

Linearity, in a FPS? Those bastards!

Yes Aliens, the Matrix 2, etc, are watchable without seeing the first, but even with those, the 2 in front sort of means you should watch the original. There isn't any problem with the story and characters. Well characters maybe, but I don't know anybody who gives you their life story everytime you see them. It's been made very well in mind for people who haven't played the first and the expansions. You're supposed to be a little clueless, you have to put the things together .

i don't get it why are you comparing an 2004 game with today's standards and i always enjoyed the driving sections

Fraught:

Asehujiko:
HL2 came out in 2004. Don't judge it by 2008 standards.

Why not?
The only huge difference in games between now and then is graphics.
Except for physics, but I include that under the "appearance" category.

Because these days an open world is pretty much mandatory and you get downrated immensely for not having one, see the op for an example of that. Back in 2004, emphasis was placed on coherent storytelling and asking for an open world would only result in you getting redirected to the GTA series and rpgs.

Death Magnetic:
The only things I like in half life 2 is grav gun when it can pick up enemies, G-man and Dog. The rest of the game's shit as well as the sequels which missions are all too similiar. I didn't like portal, gimmicky, boring, glados was annoying and who gives a fuck about cake. Team fortress 2 was mildly amusing but not entertaining to play.

I just didn't like a thing on the orange box and I'm glad that I'm not alone since so many gamers claim it as the messiah. It's not. It's slightly better than the average game, however, the average game is shit now a days anyway.

-Ricky

Then I hope to God your ideal game comes out in which there is no story, no subtlety, no humor, and no character development, and all there is simply a massive world and a million ways to kill people. Christ, man, maybe you should read a book or something.

In response to the thread creator: Some of your arguments are valid points, but they're arguments you could make about any FPS. True, it's linear. So is the Halo series. So is the Doom series. I haven't had much experience playing Call of Duty, but I'd bet it's the same way. The AI isn't the greatest, but we still haven't developed AI that will always respond like a highly trained human soldier. Also, notice that you're fighting creatures like zombies and giant insects, neither of which would be expected to have extra-sharp senses and lightning-fast reflexes.
Admittedly several of the weapons are standard FPS weapons, but it's not exactly unusual to have the basic 9mm/SMG/Shotgun/Grenade combo in any shooter. And have you forgotten the pulse rifle can launch an orb of energy that buzzes around the room like an angry insect, ricocheting off walls and vaporizing everything it touches? Or how about the crossbow that fires superheated rebars that nail enemies to the wall. I'd hardly call those boring weapons.
You said the story didn't make any sense? Guess what--that's the point. I don't know if you realized this as the game's intro suggested, but Gordon's been in suspended animation for TWENTY YEARS. The G-man drops him onto a train all of a sudden, and he doesn't have the slightest clue where the hell he is and what's going on. The Combine are supposed to be a mystery, but the details of their invasion of Earth are explained if you pay close attention. And no, the characters are not particularly well-developed, but because the game's strict immersiveness doesn't allow for any time skipping, the entire game takes place over a period of about three days, which doesn't allow much time for the characters to have any great emotional revelations or any such thing. However, during this time, the characters manage to act surprisingly human, displaying emotion and reacting like people would. The fact that Freeman is silent, despite the awkwardness of being talked to and not responding, really allows you to pay attention to the other characters and establish a connection with them, right down to the end of Episode 2, which many, including myself, have been rather moved by.
Whoops, this ended up being longer than I intended. Basically, what I mean to say is that I respect your opinion, but you're not appreciating the game for what it is, but rather what you want it to be.

Yokai:

Death Magnetic:
The only things I like in half life 2 is grav gun when it can pick up enemies, G-man and Dog. The rest of the game's shit as well as the sequels which missions are all too similiar. I didn't like portal, gimmicky, boring, glados was annoying and who gives a fuck about cake. Team fortress 2 was mildly amusing but not entertaining to play.

I just didn't like a thing on the orange box and I'm glad that I'm not alone since so many gamers claim it as the messiah. It's not. It's slightly better than the average game, however, the average game is shit now a days anyway.

-Ricky

Then I hope to God your ideal game comes out in which there is no story, no subtlety, no humour, and no character development, and all there is simply a massive world and a million ways to kill people. Christ, man, maybe you should read a book or something.

Alas my favourite moment in gaming is when I'm on COD4 online which is exactly how you described so kudos to your perception of me. I like to think I'm logical and humourous myself though. But in all honesty the orange box isn't my cup of a tea when it comes to humour, Jimmy Carr and Frankie Boyle are.

-Ricky

i have mostly enjoyed half life 2 and episodes because of the storyline.

One of the best FPS for people with crappy PC´s... like me :)

Try out Minerva:Metastasis; Its level progression is less linear then HL2 ones.

I can understand you. Sometimes the game feels like a "let's see what we can do with the technology"-demo. I recommend that you try out the episode 1 and 2. They are better.

I love the whole "feel" of the world in it, it takes a lot of time and detail to build up a good picture of City 17. I personally love the vehicle sections because, like the ocean-trawling in Wind Waker that everyone but me hates, it makes the world feel *real*. It feels like you're actually going on a journey rather than taking 2 minutes to get somewhere and characters acting as though you've come a long way. The combat is nothing spectacular, granted. I never noticed any problems with the AI. I guess the reason I like it so much is because I just love games that provide a really cool and believable setting. This, Wind Waker, Shenmue (yeah, yeah, I know), Skies of Arcadia and Metroid Prime are three of my favourite games, precisely because of the setting and the worlds they create. In fact, when HL2 gets really combat-heavy at the expense (in my opinion) of the setting, I lose interest. Having beaten the game 2 or 3 times I stop playing it after I get to Nova Prospekt.

But up to that point I think it's one of the greatest gaming experiences ever. Different strokes for different folks.

The Half Life series has a more unique version of story telling. Playing through the game blindly and not looking around and you'll get little. Half Life stuff rewards more for thinking about it, and discovering it.

You play Half Life like you really are Gordon Freeman, you aren't told what is happening because of that.

I actually genuinely like many of the Half Life characters, the events of Episode 2 were nasty, honestly. For me at least, whilst sections of Half Life are not fantastic (correctly calling vehicles segments, though the EP2 car bit was actually good... you could drift that V8 beasty), the majority is the best FPS i have played mostly due to the nature of it being one of the only ones i have completed in recent years. I like the characters, and i'm aware of a greater story going on, one i'm not 100% what is going on.

Which actually, is what it must be like for the people in the Half Life universe. Even Gordon doesn't know G-Mans motives. We don't know what the Combine are really up to.

I like it for that, it's not obvious but the story certainly is there.

Play it mindlessly, you'll get nothing

corroded:

You play Half Life like you really are Gordon Freeman, you aren't told what is happening because of that.

Yup, kinda like that. All the people you meet expect that you know the things that happened that led to the world to be like it is. It's like 9/11. No one would say something along the lines of "Remember when Terrorists captured planes and crashed them into the Towers of the World Trade Center? That sure changed America quite a bit!"

Actually, it was planned originally that over the course of the game, Alyx and one of the scientists (Kleiner or Eli) show Gordon a kind-of-dia show and explained the events after HL1, but it was canned because Valve thought it would hurt the pacing too much. So the Information is very gradually revealed (even if you can find most Info on the pinboards in Kleiners Lab and on Black Mesa East)

Yeah, stuff like the 7 hour war and the portal storms. That said, Freeman is in stasis for quite a while and maybe wouldn't know too much. But when it comes down to it, there doesn't really seem to be the time to sit him down and run through the events of the last 10 years.

http://members.shaw.ca/halflifestory/timeline.htm

Is a nice resource for the major events, though.

Well I think Half-life 2 is fantastic. It's just a really fun game, and episodes 1 and 2 are even better in terms of enjoyment.

I'm not going to debate all the points, but I am going to say that I am in favour of linear games. I love linear games - I'm not afraid to say it. Some of the best games I ever played were linear - and you know why? Because it streamlines them. Choice is never a bad thing, but when a game goes for breadth and not depth, it often shoots itself in the foot.

Don't get me wrong, I loved Fallout 3, but the characters could've been so much more developed if the world hadn't been so big. And as cool as that game was, the main quest and endings, quite frankly, sucked. Linearity certainly has its benefits!

Maybe Half-Life 2 just isn't your cup of tea. That's cool, everyone has their own taste.But personally I found it highly enjoyable and finished it multiple times.

Ah I'm with the OP on this, the game is very much over-hyped and it's difficult to see why.

First playing it on a PC I found it a bit difficult to get into, the controls seemed too loose in my opinion, so I borrowed the Orange Box from a friend on the 360 and it felt a lot better with the 360 pad but still, it seemed a bit loose and even empty at times.

What is so good about Gordon Freeman? the glasses-wearing geek mute that saves the day on more than one occasion? well I'm guessing it's the fact that he's hard as nails, or seems to be, he's a bit like the Masterchief but nevertalks.

Anyway it is a good game to play but it seems more like hype has gotten to reviewers and players of the game, which is why it gets 'best game ever' labels and such.

Now, I played the first game and thought it was...alright (I've seen much better games, namely Red Faction) everything that was good about that game had a huge annoyance get in the way of it which in turn dragged it back down to normality.

The same can be said of Half Life 2 although it's dragged down to just below average in my opinion since the fans of the game keep making unjustified claims of it's greatness (which means one of two things, either I have suffered a grievious head injury and woken up in a paralell universe or there are some people who just can't admit that maybe they were being a bit too optimistic).

Firstly, the confusion over the story. It is confusing, very little is explained and while some people can justify this with the whole 'you're suposed to be a little bit unsure' explaination I personally don't buy this. Refusing to explain anything just leaves the player confused and disoriented in most cases, why am I fighting these bad guys? why do I care what Alyx thinks? why the hell am I throwing myself into harm's way to rescue a Morgan Freeman look-a-like?
Without any motivation or justifacation for my continued efforts it's almost impossible to connect with what is happening or the characters which in turn just makes the dialogue sequences boring and pretentious.
The only genre in which telling the player little or nothing about the situation is acceptable is horror since this adds to that 'fear of the unkown' and the anxiety surrounding the threat or danger (we can safely say that Half Life is not a survival horror).

Quite a lot of fuss has been made over the gravity gun, fair enough, back in the day it was a unique idea but I would hardly say that gives it lasting appeal or automatic greatness (the Virtualboy was unique and original back in the day and look how that turned out), throughout the game it is used more or less as a utility item for solving physics puzzles.

While I'm the topic of physics I'll take a moment to point out the needless and not overtly important fact that the grav gun isn't scientifically accurate and wouldn't really be that useful, the object being lifted by the gg still has weight/mass and the strain of that would have to be taken somewhere (an airplane in midair is still heavy) so not only would the device not aid with heavy lifting at all but firing the object with great force (like you do in the game) would send you flying in the opposite direction at the same speed as the object you fired (every action has an equal and opposite reaction) potentially killing you if you collide with a solid object.

That's the science bit over, in Episode 1 and 2 (to a certain extent) they tried to force the player to become adept with the grav gun by making it your only weapon for quite a long time when I personally would have prefered to just shoot the zombie hordes rather than running around looking for suitably solid objects to hurl at them.

Even with all of these critisisms that can be made I can acknowledge that Half Life isn't bad, it's just not as good as everyone keeps making it out to be.
(I apologise for turning this into a small essay, I've been writing them all week and it's begining to affect me slightly)

Yokai:

In response to the thread creator: Some of your arguments are valid points, but they're arguments you could make about any FPS. True, it's linear. So is the Halo series. So is the Doom series. I haven't had much experience playing Call of Duty, but I'd bet it's the same way. The AI isn't the greatest, but we still haven't developed AI that will always respond like a highly trained human soldier. Also, notice that you're fighting creatures like zombies and giant insects, neither of which would be expected to have extra-sharp senses and lightning-fast reflexes.
Admittedly several of the weapons are standard FPS weapons, but it's not exactly unusual to have the basic 9mm/SMG/Shotgun/Grenade combo in any shooter. And have you forgotten the pulse rifle can launch an orb of energy that buzzes around the room like an angry insect, ricocheting off walls and vaporizing everything it touches? Or how about the crossbow that fires superheated rebars that nail enemies to the wall. I'd hardly call those boring weapons.
You said the story didn't make any sense? Guess what--that's the point. I don't know if you realized this as the game's intro suggested, but Gordon's been in suspended animation for TWENTY YEARS. The G-man drops him onto a train all of a sudden, and he doesn't have the slightest clue where the hell he is and what's going on. The Combine are supposed to be a mystery, but the details of their invasion of Earth are explained if you pay close attention. And no, the characters are not particularly well-developed, but because the game's strict immersiveness doesn't allow for any time skipping, the entire game takes place over a period of about three days, which doesn't allow much time for the characters to have any great emotional revelations or any such thing. However, during this time, the characters manage to act surprisingly human, displaying emotion and reacting like people would. The fact that Freeman is silent, despite the awkwardness of being talked to and not responding, really allows you to pay attention to the other characters and establish a connection with them, right down to the end of Episode 2, which many, including myself, have been rather moved by.
Whoops, this ended up being longer than I intended. Basically, what I mean to say is that I respect your opinion, but you're not appreciating the game for what it is, but rather what you want it to be.

This man's points are spot on - the levels are no less linear than many made subsequently, the AI is considerably above-par compared to many current games, with AI that can make decisions on where to run to, where cover is, the shortest route to the player (compared to CoD, where every enemy spawns in the same place, runs to the same place, dies, respawns in the same place, runs to the ... zzzz..., Halo, where the only difference between replays is the rank of the elites you might face in each aquad etc etc.), and also features seamlessly integrated flying enemies and jumping enemies, has several three way battles throughout its full length (Episodes included). Soooo, yeah, the AI really sucks, doesn't it? And look, I didn't even need to exaggerate to make my point!

Yeah, ok, boring guns. I agree to some extent with this point, though to me it was because they all sounded so weedy, and because Gordon's not the best at controlling recoil the average engagement range when using the smg was about what you'd be using the shotgun for. Which wasn't a great bit of weapon design, imo. I quite liked the pulse rifle, but it didn't carry enough spare ammo to make it useable as a primary weapon.
No, this game was practically built around the shotgun and crossbow for me, just cause they were both so damn awesome. Pretty sure the HL2 shotgun was the first one that would blast your enemies back across the room, flailing and rebounding off walls like the poor foolish mortals they were. Oh, wait, Painkiller got there first, and had a stake gun that was remarkably like the Crossbow, but could shoot grenades. Oh well, it might not have been original but HL2 still had some great guns.

Now, level design... I have yet to see a fps put as much attention to detail in their design as the valve team - not even the expansive arenas of Crysis, because they loose their way by trying to make it look like a natural environment, thus loosing out on opportunities to do all those nice little tricks that good level designers put in - subtle attention guiding features, like local lighting, use of colour, framed views, windows that hint at your next destination to build anticipation, platforming sections across precarious drops to solve puzzles and all that jazz. Just so much more interesting than, say, a series of rooms containing badguys to shoot, a la the Rainbow series, or certain sections of Halo.
If you listen to the developer commentary, you gain a nice insight into the thoughts and designs of the team, noticing things that had seemed natural and fitted seamlessly but were actually carefully thought out and designed to enhance the experience of the game.
That said, much of the early sewer section sucked. Oh well, can't win them all.

The story is great, in depth and interesting - you just have to get into it, to want to listen to the various announcements and snippets of dialogue to piece together little bits of the big picture. It's all a big jigsaw, nothing's spelt out for you in a mission briefing or some such crap, and if you can't be bothered to use your brain to work out what's going on then you probably dont deserve to know. Knowledge of the first game is unnecessary, you should be able to work out that you're some sort of legend to these people pretty quickly, and the feeling of confusion you might get is intentional. Even having played HL1 this world and many of its denizens is new to you, but with that knowledge you understand that this could have been, in some way, your fault, and the presence of the G-man lets you know that soon the shit will hit the fan and things are going to get messy fast.

You do realise that one of the two vehicles you drive was an AIR BOAT, and that as such was liable to differ in handling from the average family saloon? Perhaps the idea of drifting your hovercraft through the long, sweeping, radioactive-waste-filled sewers whilst being molested by a helicopter gunship doesn't appeal to you? I personally loved it. The other vehicle was built from scratch by a couple of guys, some scrap metal and a blow torch. Not that surprising they couldn't find some offroad tyres for your comfort. Yeah, so the handling wasn't pretty or comfortable, but hey, it fitted beautifully into the world of the rebels.

The characters were also done far better than many games that I have seen since, seriously above par. Compare Alyx's emotional depth to characters in Crysis, Halo (well, Cortana was pretty well written), Rainbow games, CoD, etc etc. I understand Gears II is supposed to have some emotional depth, but this is coming 4 years later, and is the only fps I know of that can even begin to potentially compare.

Finally, if you found HL2 boring or too linear, try playing through it in one sitting, and experience it as a movie. I did that once, and it was one hell of a cinematic experience, with each set piece fitting in almost perfectly to keep the pacing right and the action dynamic. From slipping through zombie infested sewers, to dualing helicopters over radioactive wastelands, to clambering across the underside of a rickety rail bridge exchanging rockets with a bio-organic gunship, to battling alongside the rebels against the Combine invaders or the insectoid Antlions, and taking the fight to the Combine in a bid to break their hold on your planet. It's just all so cinematic, providing you dont close your mind, and open up to take in the view as you climb out of the sewers, relish in saving mankind, and just allow yourself to enjoy the game. It's easy to decide not to like a game before you play it, but I make a point of approaching every game with an open mind (even abysmal ones like Frontlines). You should do so too, especially one that is held in such high regard.

Half Life 2 is probably the best game I've ever played. EVER. It's an example of how any great game should be made. It got awards from almost every publication ever, and is known for raising the bar in the half life series, valve's games, and also for gaming in general. Want more proof that this game is the best I've played ever? Name one game that I have gone back to and beat a total of 7 times and it never got old. Yeah. I thought so.

ZeroMachine, I agree with everything you said except

Quote: "and Barney... well, he's just awesome"

I never liked barney.. didn't like him one bit from the first moment when gordon and him encountered. What do you all think of this character?

Wicky_42:

Yokai:

In response to the thread creator: Some of your arguments are valid points, but they're arguments you could make about any FPS. True, it's linear. So is the Halo series. So is the Doom series. I haven't had much experience playing Call of Duty, but I'd bet it's the same way. The AI isn't the greatest, but we still haven't developed AI that will always respond like a highly trained human soldier. Also, notice that you're fighting creatures like zombies and giant insects, neither of which would be expected to have extra-sharp senses and lightning-fast reflexes.
Admittedly several of the weapons are standard FPS weapons, but it's not exactly unusual to have the basic 9mm/SMG/Shotgun/Grenade combo in any shooter. And have you forgotten the pulse rifle can launch an orb of energy that buzzes around the room like an angry insect, ricocheting off walls and vaporizing everything it touches? Or how about the crossbow that fires superheated rebars that nail enemies to the wall. I'd hardly call those boring weapons.
You said the story didn't make any sense? Guess what--that's the point. I don't know if you realized this as the game's intro suggested, but Gordon's been in suspended animation for TWENTY YEARS. The G-man drops him onto a train all of a sudden, and he doesn't have the slightest clue where the hell he is and what's going on. The Combine are supposed to be a mystery, but the details of their invasion of Earth are explained if you pay close attention. And no, the characters are not particularly well-developed, but because the game's strict immersiveness doesn't allow for any time skipping, the entire game takes place over a period of about three days, which doesn't allow much time for the characters to have any great emotional revelations or any such thing. However, during this time, the characters manage to act surprisingly human, displaying emotion and reacting like people would. The fact that Freeman is silent, despite the awkwardness of being talked to and not responding, really allows you to pay attention to the other characters and establish a connection with them, right down to the end of Episode 2, which many, including myself, have been rather moved by.
Whoops, this ended up being longer than I intended. Basically, what I mean to say is that I respect your opinion, but you're not appreciating the game for what it is, but rather what you want it to be.

This man's points are spot on - the levels are no less linear than many made subsequently, the AI is considerably above-par compared to many current games, with AI that can make decisions on where to run to, where cover is, the shortest route to the player (compared to CoD, where every enemy spawns in the same place, runs to the same place, dies, respawns in the same place, runs to the ... zzzz..., Halo, where the only difference between replays is the rank of the elites you might face in each aquad etc etc.), and also features seamlessly integrated flying enemies and jumping enemies, has several three way battles throughout its full length (Episodes included). Soooo, yeah, the AI really sucks, doesn't it? And look, I didn't even need to exaggerate to make my point!

Yeah, ok, boring guns. I agree to some extent with this point, though to me it was because they all sounded so weedy, and because Gordon's not the best at controlling recoil the average engagement range when using the smg was about what you'd be using the shotgun for. Which wasn't a great bit of weapon design, imo. I quite liked the pulse rifle, but it didn't carry enough spare ammo to make it useable as a primary weapon.
No, this game was practically built around the shotgun and crossbow for me, just cause they were both so damn awesome. Pretty sure the HL2 shotgun was the first one that would blast your enemies back across the room, flailing and rebounding off walls like the poor foolish mortals they were. Oh, wait, Painkiller got there first, and had a stake gun that was remarkably like the Crossbow, but could shoot grenades. Oh well, it might not have been original but HL2 still had some great guns.

Now, level design... I have yet to see a fps put as much attention to detail in their design as the valve team - not even the expansive arenas of Crysis, because they loose their way by trying to make it look like a natural environment, thus loosing out on opportunities to do all those nice little tricks that good level designers put in - subtle attention guiding features, like local lighting, use of colour, framed views, windows that hint at your next destination to build anticipation, platforming sections across precarious drops to solve puzzles and all that jazz. Just so much more interesting than, say, a series of rooms containing badguys to shoot, a la the Rainbow series, or certain sections of Halo.
If you listen to the developer commentary, you gain a nice insight into the thoughts and designs of the team, noticing things that had seemed natural and fitted seamlessly but were actually carefully thought out and designed to enhance the experience of the game.
That said, much of the early sewer section sucked. Oh well, can't win them all.

The story is great, in depth and interesting - you just have to get into it, to want to listen to the various announcements and snippets of dialogue to piece together little bits of the big picture. It's all a big jigsaw, nothing's spelt out for you in a mission briefing or some such crap, and if you can't be bothered to use your brain to work out what's going on then you probably dont deserve to know. Knowledge of the first game is unnecessary, you should be able to work out that you're some sort of legend to these people pretty quickly, and the feeling of confusion you might get is intentional. Even having played HL1 this world and many of its denizens is new to you, but with that knowledge you understand that this could have been, in some way, your fault, and the presence of the G-man lets you know that soon the shit will hit the fan and things are going to get messy fast.

You do realise that one of the two vehicles you drive was an AIR BOAT, and that as such was liable to differ in handling from the average family saloon? Perhaps the idea of drifting your hovercraft through the long, sweeping, radioactive-waste-filled sewers whilst being molested by a helicopter gunship doesn't appeal to you? I personally loved it. The other vehicle was built from scratch by a couple of guys, some scrap metal and a blow torch. Not that surprising they couldn't find some offroad tyres for your comfort. Yeah, so the handling wasn't pretty or comfortable, but hey, it fitted beautifully into the world of the rebels.

The characters were also done far better than many games that I have seen since, seriously above par. Compare Alyx's emotional depth to characters in Crysis, Halo (well, Cortana was pretty well written), Rainbow games, CoD, etc etc. I understand Gears II is supposed to have some emotional depth, but this is coming 4 years later, and is the only fps I know of that can even begin to potentially compare.

Finally, if you found HL2 boring or too linear, try playing through it in one sitting, and experience it as a movie. I did that once, and it was one hell of a cinematic experience, with each set piece fitting in almost perfectly to keep the pacing right and the action dynamic. From slipping through zombie infested sewers, to dualing helicopters over radioactive wastelands, to clambering across the underside of a rickety rail bridge exchanging rockets with a bio-organic gunship, to battling alongside the rebels against the Combine invaders or the insectoid Antlions, and taking the fight to the Combine in a bid to break their hold on your planet. It's just all so cinematic, providing you dont close your mind, and open up to take in the view as you climb out of the sewers, relish in saving mankind, and just allow yourself to enjoy the game. It's easy to decide not to like a game before you play it, but I make a point of approaching every game with an open mind (even abysmal ones like Frontlines). You should do so too, especially one that is held in such high regard.

You took what I wrote and expanded upon it, adding in everything I left out. I fully agree with you. Nice job.

Yokai:

You took what I wrote and expanded upon it, adding in everything I left out. I fully agree with you. Nice job.

Holy crap that has to be the longest post I've ever made... didn't realise what an essay it was :)

still managed to miss one salient point: 'HL2 is a tech demo'... yeah, sure, in the same way that Farcry, Crysis and Painkiller are techdemoes. Wow, it features a weapon designed to showcase the game's advanced physics engine, turning mass into a weapon. Farcry feature a rendering engine that is able to look beautiful on systems what, 6 years later - it was seriously a piece of godly coding, and yet you wouldn't accuse that of being a rendering engine demo. What about Painkiller? Was that a Havoc 2 physics engine demo, or a no-holds barred frag fest? And Crysis - the same as Farcry, merely a fancy, pretty game engine to appeal only to those with a pimped out gaming rig? The answer to all these is, in my opinion, no.

What was a tech demo was HL2: Lost Coast, an abandoned HL2 level that was the first to demonstrate the HL2 engine revamped with dynamic lighting and new rendering abilities. It was essentially made purely to showcase their new technology, was very short and featured basic HL gameplay, with a single simple grenade puzzle to solve. Not a multi-chaptered masterpiece resulting from several years worth of hard work.

I really loved Halflife 1, but I have to say I agree with all the points in the OP. The level design is bland, the AI sucks, and the vehicle sections are just a waste of time. I really like to know what story everyone says is so great. All I remember from the game is waking up on the train, and then you find yourself in a large city area where "big brother" is messing things up. It doesn't get much deeper than that. In HL1, you had yourself just walking in on another day, experiment goes wrong, and suddenly your lab is merged with another dimension. To make things worse, its considered a security breach, so the government tries to kill you along with the aliens. Things continue to get worse from there as you find stuff out about the lambda team or whatever it was (been a long time since I played it). THAT was a story.

I don't hate HL2, but everyone says its the best game and I just can't agree. At the time, Doom 3 came out, and HL2 just seemed like a much better game at the time. I'll give it credit for that. But going back and playing both, Doom 3 actually had a good plot while HL2 just had good solid gameplay.

I'm also waiting for HL2:Ep3 to come out before touching episode 1. I'm hoping I'll see some of this "great story" in the sequels.

Signa:
I really loved Halflife 1, but I have to say I agree with all the points in the OP. The level design is bland, the AI sucks, and the vehicle sections are just a waste of time. I really like to know what story everyone says is so great. All I remember from the game is waking up on the train, and then you find yourself in a large city area where "big brother" is messing things up. It doesn't get much deeper than that. In HL1, you had yourself just walking in on another day, experiment goes wrong, and suddenly your lab is merged with another dimension. To make things worse, its considered a security breach, so the government tries to kill you along with the aliens. Things continue to get worse from there as you find stuff out about the lambda team or whatever it was (been a long time since I played it). THAT was a story.

I don't hate HL2, but everyone says its the best game and I just can't agree. At the time, Doom 3 came out, and HL2 just seemed like a much better game at the time. I'll give it credit for that. But going back and playing both, Doom 3 actually had a good plot while HL2 just had good solid gameplay.

I'm also waiting for HL2:Ep3 to come out before touching episode 1. I'm hoping I'll see some of this "great story" in the sequels.

... and here's someone who obviously hasn't read my post - or anyone's post arguing against his opinion for that matter. Particularly regarding the plot...

I agree with the topic creator / original poster.

Half Life 2 is long, completely linear, boring, tedious, and as a result, often just fatiguing to play. You have no options and there are no real puzzles (nothing that requires actual thought, anyway). Finally, there's no background. There are no notes to pick up, no audio logs, no books... everything that you experience is "here and now". True, it keeps you both in the moment and somewhat alienated, but being alienated... it also makes you wonder why you should give a damn about anybody or anything... which may result in you just plowing through the game instead of taking the time to interact with the scripted robots... I mean "characters".

And can we drop the "he's just a scientist, not a soldier" excuse for Gordon not being able to use whatever gun effectively? Anyone can use sights. It's not rocket science. It's just a bad excuse for underdeveloped gameplay. It's a first person shooter, people... not a "scientist accidentally thrown into combat" simulator... and it's not like Gordon's never used a gun before.

I am sitting here puzzled as to see how Lord Of The Rings fits into this at all? The only thing that come's to mind is that is has sequels? Every man and his dog have read/played/watched etc. some kind of sequel, what makes this such an important fact... And also, while I agree with some parts of your reviewish, rant type thing, the game more then make's up for it. Halflife for the win.

Codgo:
I find is that the majority of people who bitch about Half-Life and Half-life 2 didn't play them when they originally came out in 1998 and 2004.

Actually, I played HL1 in 2001 and enjoyed the hell out of it. I played HL2 when it came out and lost interest after I made it through the antlion section.

Wicky_42:

... and here's someone who obviously hasn't read my post - or anyone's post arguing against his opinion for that matter. Particularly regarding the plot...

Sorry, I didn't read your post, I was just responding to the original post. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that I had a lot more fun playing HL1 than HL2. There were some great technical achievements in HL2, I will not argue that, but none of them made the game better for me.

Regarding the plot, because I havn't played episode 1 and on, I try not to read what other people are saying about it because as it is now, I already know some characters die when I wish I didn't know that yet. When the orange box came out, I started up HL2 again, so I could work my way though it and then ep1 and 2. Once again, I got bored and stalled out half way through the game. There just isn't much substance in the game for me to grab onto. All the plot for the first 4+ hours is running and running aimlessly across the countryside. I just don't enjoy that. By that point in HL1, I was searching for a way to help out my fellow scientists and dodging bullets from the people that I was told were going to rescue me.

Can I ask, where you playing on a PC or a 360?
On the PC I found the controls to work fine, not too bad for a shooter. I guess I wasn't expecting anything like Gran Turismo handling. For story, yes it is one of those games where you have to play the first to understand what is going on. Even then the story is a bit messy. I know what part with the glass you are talking about and I agree, the gun should have been able to do more.
Also the LOTR can be considered a sequel to The Hobbit. I thought that came before?