The original was not only technically revolutionary but was also simply awesome, it was the new DOOM (or the new Quake) of its time, everything id Software did to the industry and the FPS genre Half-Life did it as well. There is very little that hasn't been said about Half-Life 1 that we don't know about, unless one would happen to be very new to video gaming, or at least to PC gaming. And even then, Half-Life was ported to the PlayStation 2 (with its then-exclusive Decay episode) and at the time that version did quite well even if at that point it was already a couple of years-old.
The sequel was also a technical revolution on many aspects, perhaps even more than the original was, especially the physics effects, but more importantly the
role of physics in the game (and later, in video gaming in general). Additionally, the body and facial animation system (with clear expressions, showing different types of emotions, etc) was just groundbreaking and still to this day - almost a decade later - holds its ground very well and in my opinion is still one of the best out there, except for the arrival of new technologies for facial animations that is just starting to be used in games such as for L.A. Noire and Crysis 3 (facial animations and expressions in Crysis games, especially Crysis 3 are also great).
The Episodes, although not as revolutionary also included Valve's attempt to create that whole dynamic cinematic + physics system, which they surely did well in Episode Two with that train wreckage falling down the hill following the Citadel "explosion" shock wave, causing dynamic physics plus cut-scene to meld together. In terms of actual game-play, in my opinion, both Episode One and Two were superior to Half-Life 2 overall, although Episode One was way too short (similarly to Blue Shift). I absolutely adored Episode Two which, for me, was (still is) the epitome of the series.
***
SPOILERS BELOW ***
***
COMPLAINTS BELOW ***
Nothing is perfect, however.
I do have some... let's say some "gripes" about the series in regard to its story, but that's about it (really, it's just about the story, I love the rest). I just don't really like how Half-Life 2's story really doesn't "connect" well with Half-Life 1's... but that's my opinion.
Keep reading if you want but I warned you, what follows mostly consists of complaints and exaggerations.
So anyway, on its own, however, Half-Life 2's story is good (good when I can understand it). But still I'm not quite sure about anything regarding "what's going on", there's lack of details in the story telling. I'm not completely certain of what's happening other than the fact that the Combine "is there" and that City 17 is "a city somewhere on Earth", and mostly likely "named" by number because there's probably other Combined-controlled cities out there, like City 9 or City 3,465 for all we know. We don't know much else other than the fact that the Combine's invasion lasted for about seven hours world-wide and that Earth's defenses were crushed under that time. We think that City 17 is probably in Europe although we don't know for sure but it sure looks a lot like it due to the architecture and the obvious Cyrillic text marks on walls here and there (then again why would we move to Europe for H-L2 when H-L1 occurred in a facility in the U.S, but heck why not I guess... we just don't know
why, which was never ever explained in H-L2, E1 nor E2). We do know it's still Earth, of course, and references were made to Half-Life 1's resonance cascade causing all the original mess, and there's nice little nods to Half-Life 1's events scattered around especially concerning the Vorts and their obviously important role (that is "now" important since back in H-L1 they were just regular enemies). Now obviously questions like "where do the Combine come from?" had a very subtle hint for us at the very end Half-Life 2 (with that portal thing tearing through dimension, which is when we could momentarily see what seemed to be the Combine's world, or possibly one of their various conquered worlds "on the other side", but that's about it).
And there's the absolute "I won't speak clearly because my writer doesn't know what's going on himself" rambling by the "G-Man" that we have to deal with since Half-Life 1. He literally forces an end to Half-Life 2 out of the big blue (which frustrated me to no end at the time), we finally seem to get away from him for some time in Episode One, and then, finally, after about a decade, one character in Episode Two acknowledges his existence and not only that but implies that he's most likely very dangerous. And the character who acknowledges him is himself completely baffled about it and seems distraught at the thought that perhaps "after all" he (the G-Man) could have something to do with... well, with everything that's happening? I don't get what's going on with the G-Man but that's ok, no one else in the gaming market really knows anything about him and I bet that the original Half-Life writer still to this day really doesn't know himself.
And what frustrates me about Half-Life's "timeline" of events is that one guy out there tried to connect the dots and posted his own interpretations of "what's really going on" in the series under the form of the
"Half-Life Saga Story Guide". So what's frustrating about that? Well not that guy, nor are his own interpretations of the story, but the fact that Half-Life's writer himself, namely Marc Laidlaw pointed that guide out as being "pretty darn accurate for the most part". Well, ok then, why not telling those details
in the games themselves? No? Oh, right you'll start telling us what's going on with Half-Life 3, alright then I'll keep waiting...
Nah I just sincerely think that Marc Laidlaw heard of that guide, got curious and checked it a bit and thought "holy crap, I could use those details later on" and just pretended that he indeed came up with most those "details" himself. We'll of course never know since he's the writer so obviously if he says the guide is accurate then it really does mean that he originally had the "whole story" in mind when he wrote Half-Life 1 and I'm supposed to blindly believe that just as much as I'm supposed to believe everything my government says like the exemplary good obeying citizen that I am, right.
I don't. And that's because Half-Life 1 and 2's story were told in a passive manner which means that we, the players, were originally all supposed to come up with our own interpretations. That's pretty much like what Mac Walters and Casey Hudson tried to do for the Mass Effect franchise by pretty much removing any forms of canon because now YOUR interpretations are just as good as mine. It's like they thought "OK, seriously there's no way Reapers can be dealt with in a conventional way, so let's Deus Ex Machina the crap out of this and call it a night, and let them speculate about what really happened their own Shepard, no way we're doing this in details with 2 years of development and a limited budget". Was Shepard indoctrinated? Holy crap, who knows, maybe? Some would say "obviously not!", some would say "he obviously was!". But more importantly, who cares? The thing is, if the IT "theory" happened to satisfy me, then that's "my canon".
Well, with Half-Life I have to speculate, interpret and extrapolate the "between the lines details that aren't exactly details because between the lines being kinda subtle". So where on Earth is City 17, where does the Combine come from and how many other worlds or even dimensions they play "I'm the boss here!" on, why do the Vorts suddenly want to help Humanity and basically worship Gordon Freeman, why oh why isn't Gordon Freeman talking. Wait, probably because Valve originally was a small company and couldn't afford a voice actor, but that's just my take on it. Oh but sure it's more simple to just say that it was meant to be, because "artistic integrity", so of course I'm supposed to "be" Gordon Freeman myself and answer Alyx on my own alone in my room, that certainly helps with immersion. But that's ok she thinks I'm a "man of few words" anyway, so it was all intended to start with.
So what do "I believe in", some guy's own interpretations that supposedly just happened by be darn accurate because the writer says so? Well that guy needs to play lottery right now. Look I know this IS "complaining", but I have the right to be pissed off about passive story telling like that, especially when it lasts for a freaking decade. I don't have time nor interests at playing the "let's try to connect the dots myself" game. Just TELL me a story or don't! Gah... sorry I get passionate and upset when it comes to that, and it doesn't just apply to video games I'm like that too with novels. I almost never complete them when by chapter 2 it's obvious I need to incarnate Sherlock Holmes if I want to understand what the hell is going on. Just TELL me who the hell is the G-Man, where he comes from and if the guy can fly or not. Just TELL me why we're apparently in Europe and TELL me why that guy in the train didn't see me "get on". I don't want to know what happened to every single military units around the world when the invasion got on, I just want to understand why we failed to defend Earth in seven hours. Heck we don't even know how much time has passed since Half-Life 1's ending and the moment Freeman's eyes open in Half-Life 2's train. And of course we're in the train because we've chosen or "have been chosen" to go to City 17, so... welcome, welcome to City 17... yeah thanks I don't know why I'm here but thanks anyway, and please at least tell that stupid drone to stop taking pictures of me that flash is annoying.
Alright, got it out of my chest.
Yeah, I got gripes about the series' story BUT other than that it is an amazing series. And I know by now it's probably hard to swallow but there's no sarcasm, I truly love the series anyhow and respect it completely, well expect for the story telling part.
Facebook
Twitter