The Valve and Steam Platform Discussion Thread

[zerotol]

Stop the trolling ffs, the story in HL (entire series) is non-existent and only a dumbfuck would even argue that HL2 is the better game.

It has NOTHING on HL and then i am not even discussing the brilliant spinoffs HL made possible.

 

[Morgoth]

Stop the trolling ffs, the story in HL (entire series) is non-existent and only a dumbfuck would even argue that HL2 is the better game.

It has NOTHING on HL and then i am not even discussing the brilliant spinoffs HL made possible.

Didn't I tell you you should just crawl into a hole and fucking perish there?

Fucking newfags, can't even follow orders from the elders anymore.

PS: Or was it someone else? I apologize in advance if it wasn't you.

PPS: Fucking oldfag dementia.

 

[Chuck Norris]

I agree that Half life is overrated ( and Valve games in general ), It's not the best game ever made as some people say. You can dislike it if you want. That's your opinion. But trying to make it look like an ordinary shooter you see every year is ridiculous.
Between pure shooters ( not FPS/RPG hybrids like System Shock ) Half-life is one of the best in 90s. Definitely among the top 10.
The same thing can be said about HL2 too. Powerful Physics mixed with unique and ground breaking level design ( by 2004 standards ) and above average production values made the game a very respectable shooter.
But the problem is dissing highly praised main-stream games, movies , books , etc makes you look cool and Codex is all about being cool.

 

[attackfighter]

hey guys I have an idea: lets debate whether or not a video game is fun

 

[Andyman Messiah]

There's nothing to debate. Half-Life is a shit game. End of the line.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

HL fans really cannot into the difference between story and presentation. A valid criticism of HL2 is that even though it has great presentation, and is a very immersive game, it simply doesn't do anything worthwhile with it. All that clever worldbuilding isn't used for much at all. It would be great if HL2 was more open, that would actually make use of these strengths, similar to how Stalker does. But no, it's just a painfully linear narrative where most of what happens is Gordon getting from point A to point B through a bunch of vehicle sections, for poorly defined reasons.

It's a problem similar to that of Bioshock. Doing a good job of presenting a cool setting, and then having a gameplay structure that can't make good use of it.

 

[MetalCraze]

Shooters aren't just about shooting stuff these days anymore, Wyrmie. It's about creating an environment that has it's own ecosystem, simulations and coherent world structure/lore/history.

FFS don't be stupid. HL is Quake with a few cutscenes. "own ecosystem, simulations and coherent world structure/lore/history" = aliens invading the world and you killing the fuck out of them?

When HL came out people were just playing it like any other shooter, today we have an army of retarded fanboys who suddenly found HL to be DEEP and UNIQUE.


Then again you are the dood who were protecting shitty Biocock Infinite presentation by saying that they didn't show shooting (in a shooter) because showing shooting (in a shooter) is boring. FFS man.

 

[Morgoth]

Then again you are the dood who were protecting shitty Biocock Infinite presentation by saying that they didn't show shooting (in a shooter) because showing shooting (in a shooter) is boring. FFS man.

I didn't say that. And there was lot's of shooting in the Bioshock presentation.

But it's pointless to argue with you, 'cause you already made up your own "truth".

 

[MetalCraze]

There was a lot of shooting of a chick 3d model alright
Player were the one holding the camera during that shooting

 

[Morgoth]

Which video are you talking about? The last one that was released was that E3 2011 demo, that was 15-20 mins long. Of course they wouldn't just show 20 min non-stop shooting, dumbfuck. This isn't a fucking Quake clone.

But there was shooting, pretty sure, and it looked better than that broken crap that is your beloved ARMA franchise.

 

[Metro]

 

[Achilles]

Half-Life 2 is a great game. The fact that many Calll of Duty gamers think it's "boring" should tell you all you need to know about its qualiy. I recently replayed it and it amazes me how much better it still is than most other shooters today.

Sure, the gunplay could be a bit better and a couple of sequences drag on, but other than that it does everything right. It's simply great for what it is.

 

[Admiral jimbob]

There are no cutscenes in HL2, Wyrmie.

The only difference between cutscenes and shit like that long, torturous, utterly uninteractive Kleiner's lab dialogue is that cutscenes are skippable. Thanks for the innovation, guys.

 

[sea]

I don't see how the cut-scenes in half-life are interactive. You can't communicate or change anything at all. You can just move around while the cut-scene is happening and literally do nothing. I remember in HL1 not being able to kill NPCs during cutscenes and in HL2 not being able to fire at friendlies at all. Some interactivity there!
Being able to jump on NPCs heads and literally throw crates at them while they just keep talking breaking the immersion and destroying the illusion of interactivity a lot more than camera fixing on the NPCs face.

There are story portions where you need to solve puzzles, do a bit of platforming, etc. in between in order to continue, just as there are action sequences where people give story background. Which of these qualifies as a cutscene and why? And, if you're suggesting it's better to keep narrative compartmentalized rather than integrated into the play experience, do you also have anything to back that up in objective terms, or is that just personal preference stemming from the fact that you just want to shoot lots of aliens? Because in that case I'd say Half-Life really isn't your kind of game - try Serious Sam instead.

Yes, in Half-Life 2 there are definitely a few long sequences without much to do but bunny-hop around, and I totally agree that skipping them would have been great, but honestly, your first one or two times through the game you probably aren't thinking "this is so boring", you're paying attention and soaking in the characters and exposition. Is it deep? Of course not, but it's also presented well enough to be entertaining. Again, if you'd prefer a non-interactive movie to watch, that's fine as well, but if your argument is "it gets boring after I've played it ten times already" then I'm not really sure anything can help you.

So tell me: if Half-Life 2 did have a "skip story sequence" button, would you still have any outstanding complaints about the way it presents its narrative? Would you still be complaining about how Bink videos are better?

 

[Morgoth]

There are no cutscenes in HL2, Wyrmie.

The only difference between cutscenes and shit like that long, torturous, utterly uninteractive Kleiner's lab dialogue is that cutscenes are skippable. Thanks for the innovation, guys.

Why don't you carry that just further?

"Hey guys, Skyrim was one big, unskippable long torturous cutscene, but I still loved it lolz"

 

[Admiral jimbob]

Yes, that makes perfect sense, will do. I will go and appreciate the rich gameplay experience that was bouncing a cactus off Barney's head for five minutes.

 

[Achilles]

I guess one could argue that the talking bits in HL2 could be considered cutscenes in much the same way that we consider Call of Duty-style first person sequences as cutscenes. The only difference would appear to be that in HL2 you can move around while the "cutscene" is playing, but isn't this seriously stretching the term "cutscene"? Should we consider all interactions with NPCs cutscenes in the same sense? What about travelling from one location to the next without any action inbetween, is this also a cutscene?

 

[Morgoth]

Guise, I followed a mudcrap in Skyrim for 30 minutes before I beat it death, it was the bestest 30 min long cutscene evah 'cuz I could also look around in the meantime and even take a piss.

Really, niggers.

Cutscene to me is if it's a filmic way/quality/rules of capturing attention. I.e. the most lazy and common tool to deliver story in games and elsewhere.

 

[Admiral jimbob]

I guess one could argue that the talking bits in HL2 could be considered cutscenes in much the same way that we consider Call of Duty-style first person sequences as cutscenes. The only difference would appear to be that in HL2 you can move around while the "cutscene" is playing, but isn't this seriously stretching the term "cutscene"? Should we consider all interactions with NPCs cutscenes in the same sense? What about travelling from one location to the next without any action inbetween, is this also a cutscene?

It's a letter of the law vs spirit of the law situation. Yes, going by a spergian definition of the term, they're not cutscenes. There is no gameplay at all, and there is nothing you can do but watch it play out and choose which of the four walls to stare at in the meantime. But hey, you can choose which wall to stare at, so it's not a cutscene. Strictly speaking, yeah, that's true. But what's the point? You are literally stuck in a tiny room in which there is nothing with which to interact whatsoever, with no choice but to watch/hear the scene playing out in front of/behind/beside you. The basic idea might be an evolution over purely static cutscenes, but it was done in the most pointless way possible. I like HL2, I've played it through a few times, but every time I get to scenes like meeting Barney or sitting in the lab juggling cactuses I just want to skip the fucking thing. Not to mention HL2 having plenty of scenes where control is taken away completely - riding the coffin thing through the Citadel, the end of Episode 2 - and I have no idea how those aren't cutscenes by any definition.

 

[Infinitron]

I guess one could argue that the talking bits in HL2 could be considered cutscenes in much the same way that we consider Call of Duty-style first person sequences as cutscenes. The only difference would appear to be that in HL2 you can move around while the "cutscene" is playing, but isn't this seriously stretching the term "cutscene"? Should we consider all interactions with NPCs cutscenes in the same sense? What about travelling from one location to the next without any action inbetween, is this also a cutscene?

It's a letter of the law vs spirit of the law situation. Yes, going by a spergian definition of the term, they're not cutscenes. There is no gameplay at all, and there is nothing you can do but watch it play out and choose which of the four walls to stare at in the meantime. But hey, you can choose which wall to stare at, so it's not a cutscene. Strictly speaking, yeah, that's true. But what's the point? You are literally stuck in a tiny room in which there is nothing with which to interact whatsoever, with no choice but to watch/hear the scene playing out in front of/behind/beside you. The basic idea might be an evolution over purely static cutscenes, but it was done in the most pointless way possible. I like HL2, I've played it through a few times, but every time I get to scenes like meeting Barney or sitting in the lab juggling cactuses I just want to skip the fucking thing. Not to mention HL2 having plenty of scenes where control is taken away completely - riding the coffin thing through the Citadel, the end of Episode 2 - and I have no idea how those aren't cutscenes by any definition.

Fuck it then, we should change the terminology. From now on, we refer not to cutscenes but "heavily scripted scenes" or just scripted scenes.

 

[SoupNazi]

I love how this entire time the HL fanboys knew that the people criticizing the games meant scripted scenes and not cutscenes (you all aren't that dumb) but chose to pursue semantics anyway. And it took a single reasonable Jimbob to change things around. I guess what I'm saying is that you all are idiots to a degree, just on a different side of the argument. This is almost worse than the "what is RPG" debates.

 

[Infinitron]

I love how this entire time the HL fanboys knew that the people criticizing the games meant scripted scenes and not cutscenes (you all aren't that dumb) but chose to pursue semantics anyway. And it took a single reasonable Jimbob to change things around. I guess what I'm saying is that you all are idiots to a degree, just on a different side of the argument. This is almost worse than the "what is RPG" debates.

That's because there's a point where wading into an argument of fools just isn't worth most people's effort.

 

[Andyman Messiah]

"Half-Life lacks replay value." Is that what you're saying?

 

[SoupNazi]

You can disagree all you want, but ultimately, there are people who disliked the scenes even on their first play through. I got sick of them right after I got to Kleiner's lab and prayed for a way to skip them ever since. In the end, the fact that they're unskippable is simply bad design. Personally, I found them even worse than normal cutscenes because the game sort of "teases" you in trying to make it seem as if the whole thing was still interactive. Hell, it even demands you do trivial shit like pull switches and walk into places and if you don't, the stupid scene won't progress, so you can't even go make a coffee or something like you can in other games with shitty, non-interactive cutscenes.

 

[villain of the story]

I would like all the people praising HL series, especially the first game, to be the genre's brigthest examples, to list the other FPS games they have played before and after.

And I mean all of them.

I'm expecting a significant shortage of titles in those lists.