Why HL2 wasnt that good -1 reply

Please wait...


Biggest F-ing A-hole 2010

215,560 XP

24th April 2003

0 Uploads

18,771 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

Ok, sense alot of people have been talking about Half Life 2 and how great it is, I dont think so.

PC Gamer and other mags name it 'Best Game Ever"...and I think that the game is so overrated.

It is a good game, but not "the best ever"..for the reasons below

(1)Loading zones. Even on a fast computer, there could be a bit of a wait on the loading. And right in the middle of an arena, the game would pause to load up the next part. Not between missions, and thankfully not in the heat of a battle, but you will be walking along, and in a hallway the game will pause as the next portion loads.

Why this is bad: Why not just load the entire level at once? Games like Far Cry have MUCH more extensive levels that have very intricate detail, and the game loads an entire level in less than 1 minute for even my 1.3 ghz.

(2)Too much 'in between action' between objectives. Often in Half Life 2, there is just way too much action that goes on between vital areas. Ex: When you fail to teleport and you need to get across the city in Canals with the hovercraft. Well, there are something like 9 levels. By the 5th or 6th one, I forgot why I was riding the damn thing, and I just would ride along the canal pathways, whereever they took me, then I finially remember Im supposed to get to a lab, and thats why ive been riding this thing.

Why this is bad: It just may make you forget what you are trying to accomplish if you need to save and exit, then come back a few days later.

I just dont agree with the 'Best Game Ever' title. I played far better games in the mid 90's, that were better overall. Half life 2 had excellent graphics, but so did Max Payne 2 (same gaming engine). Half Life 2 had a typical storyline of 'lead rebellion to destroy enemy'. Jedi Outcast, Jedi Academy, Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, etc..pretty much every game has the same thing. Half Life 2 lets you ride vehicles. So does Far Cry.

So, in all honesty, I dont see what all the hype was about. I enjoyed the game (I got it for Christmas), but it wouldnt be "the best game I will ever play" quality, nor would I have payed 50 bucks for it. (40 or under is what I would have paid for).


I am the only one who is actually cooler than AzH

50 XP

10th August 2004

0 Uploads

5,934 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

:moved: To rants and raves.

RadioactiveLobster Forum Admin

Jeff is a mean boss

565,400 XP

28th July 2002

0 Uploads

53,121 Posts

1,330 Threads

#3 13 years ago

i agree with you...on some parts...

the loading was annoying...... and max payne didnt use the same engine...but they did use the same physics engine

If there is no image, Mikey broke something...


Phantom of the Forums

50 XP

19th August 2003

0 Uploads

19,146 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

Well, some parts were good, and some were bad, but I think that it was a very good game overall. The only issue I had mainly was the fact that it was so short. After you know when the loading times are, its not as bad. Besides, I just pick up a book, and start reading while its loading, goes by a bit faster that way. :D

I think HL2 was basically a love it or hate it game anyway. Kind of like Doom 3, but with a better story.


I didn't make it!

0 XP

#5 13 years ago

True on the loading. But if there was like one load for three or so, then that one would take much longer. I prefer the semi-often and short. My loads are avraging like .3-2 Min. And my comp is not that good. I run... Compaq Persario s5400nx P4 at 2.6 Ghz, 512 Mb ram, ATi Radeon something with 128 Md of ram.I took the door of my case to cool it down. That worked well actually.