- This topic has 19 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 19 years ago by Anonymous.
November 19, 2004 at 7:12 pm #3599AnonymousInactive
I’ll presume the majority o the board has played if not seen HL 2 in action. Well, the simple question I find Myself (as have a few mates) asking is; Where next?. Simply HL 2 has raised the bar, undeniably. With out question. Would you all agree when I say that anything less than HL’s quality is now instantly obsolete?. The industry has moved a notch, and I’m not just talking about graphics here ladies and gents, because HL 2 is so much more than that. What I’m saying is that in general everything that makes a game compelling has been raised, considerably. I think it’s a good thing, but I also think it’s something that some developers may struggle to match(because there is no doubt that it will not be surpassed for some time, yes.) And in saying that I think it may have brought us to a questionable high note of which there is no current further progresssion posssibly, even with the impending Next generation of consoles baking away in Japan/America. I suppose the real question being asked in this thread is what do people think the release of HL 2 has done?, and what implications does it have on the industry in it’s current state?. It will be interesting to see how Japan reacts, even if they are indeed not fond of the FPS genre, HL 2 is a global effect. A much needed one at that.
November 21, 2004 at 10:43 pm #15919AnonymousInactive
The orginal HL raised the bar. Zelda: OoT raised the bar. Goldeneye raised the bar. Great games are constantly raising the bar and HL2 is the next game to raise the bar. And other games in the future will do the same. Its just the constant evolution of game creation, and it doesn’t necessarily mean that we have reached a pinnacle! ;)
November 22, 2004 at 11:34 am #15921AnonymousInactive
To me, it means customer expectations are raised:
People will now no longer suspend disbelief during an FPS unless they can interact with its environment.
One thing is for sure, it’s not going to reduce development schedules.
November 22, 2004 at 1:48 pm #15926AnonymousInactive
I don’t think the bar will be raised by making a game “better” then HL2 (at least not for some time) but rather by making a game that excels in an entirely different direction. There seems to be a misconception that withing specific genres, there is only one way to go and you just have to go as far in this direction that you can. The truth is that in any creative field, there are countless directions you can go and aspects you can explore, and through investing your energy into them, you can come up with your own unique inventions that exceed in their own field. Years ago, it seemed like Doom and Quake were unbeatable in the FPS field, but then Duke Nukem came along and was a success because it had a fresh setting, with imaginitive weapons and great amounts of interactivity, traits with Doom and Quake were not aquainted with. It succeeded because it did the best at what it wanted to do, not what the other bigshots were doing at the time.
November 22, 2004 at 1:57 pm #15927AnonymousInactive
True. One thing about Half life is it tells a story ina very linear, only one solution kind of way. If someone were looking at coming up with something as good, more freedom (ala deus ex or gta) wcould bea good direction to start looking.
November 22, 2004 at 4:25 pm #15932AnonymousInactive
I agree with boadle. Expectations will be raised, for those you have the patience one day maybe those expectations will materialize.
November 23, 2004 at 12:09 am #15947AnonymousInactive
Would you all agree when I say that anything less than HL’s quality is now instantly obsolete?. [/quote:e36825ef4f]
Anything that goes onto a console platform, won’t have that quality, therefore anything on a console is lower quality, and therefore obsolete…. :)
How many developers have an engine that can produce visuals that match valve’s…if any, they’re very few. Fan’s of Call of Duty aren’t going to not buy it now because its not as graphically great as HL2. They buy its because it is great in what it does.
The only sense in which this point holds weight is in games that try to look graphically great as their prime objective.
I haven’t played it, so if there are other GREAT things about HL2, I haven’t heard about them, all i’ve heard is that its great and steam is crap. No specifics.
November 23, 2004 at 5:01 am #15950AnonymousInactive
I wasn’t talking Graphivs Omen, I was talking the overall Production quality of HL 2, which I might add is probably a damn sight better than COD. Anyway’s It’s 5am and I’ve just finished up Rank 3 in FF xi online and I’m about to have a hernea so good night all!
November 23, 2004 at 9:34 am #15955AnonymousInactive
Yes, but how can you say everything less is obselete when 99% of everything else is of a lower quality.
November 23, 2004 at 10:53 am #15965AnonymousInactive
I agree with Damian. First of all most companies don’t have the budget to create a triple a game that could rival Half Life 2. This was discussed at Awakenings. This game is simply a quality title like any other; Metal Gear Solid, GTA franchise, etc. While these games have helped push the boundaries of our industry, they certainly haven’t put everything else out of sight into the shadows.
It also depends on your definition of a fantastic game. Others may think that areas of it are going in the wrong direction. For example, the linearity as has been pointed out. Anway, I have yet to play the game so I won’t go any further with this until I have.
November 23, 2004 at 3:05 pm #15998AnonymousInactive
You guys are confusing what I’m trying to say. I am not implying that ‘other’ games will be crap because they are inferior to HL . Just that they will be noticebly lower in the old production quality side of things. Oh and I agree with what you are trying to say Omen, and indeed Ronny other companies just don’t have the techincal or financial resources thta Valve have…which is a pity.
November 23, 2004 at 4:25 pm #16002AnonymousInactive
I still don’t agree :)
Production values of quality games like Zelda:Wind-Waker, Metroid Prime, GTA:SA will still stand up.
In such a diverse medium, I just don’t think your statement be justified unless you only base your agruement purely on FPSs.
November 23, 2004 at 5:16 pm #16004AnonymousInactive
In such a diverse medium, I just don’t think your statement be justified unless you only base your agruement purely on FPSs[/quote:8dcde62d95] I’d agree with you, Omen… except I don’t think the argument holds up even WITHIN the FPS genre
HL2 looks beautiful, no doubt. But it arguably has inferior graphics to Doom3…
Why do I say this? Mainly it’s because ‘graphics’ is a very general term. Are you talking about technically ? Rendering wise? Lighting? Art direction? Some or all of the above? Which?
Both the art direction and lighting in HL2 are both second to none
it doesn’t have dynamic lighting, fully unified models that self-shadow, and a number of other so-called next generation graphics tricks. Does that mean it looks crap or even current generation? Not at all. Does it make it less fun to play? Nope
Of course, Source has a number of other unique bits ‘n’ bobs that set it apart and put it clearly in the next gen category, but they’re not graphical
However, I definitely agree that it has raised the bar on the overall production quality front… it’s less buggy than Halo 2 and GTA: SA for a start…. it’s level design is first class; sound production is once again astounding… gameplay – check… story integration – yep… scripting vs. ‘sandbox’ – fab, etc., etc.
November 23, 2004 at 5:24 pm #16005AnonymousInactive
However, I definitely agree that it has raised the bar on the overall production quality front… it’s less buggy than Halo 2 and GTA: SA for a start…. it’s level design is first class; sound production is once again astounding… gameplay – check… story integration – yep… scripting vs. ‘sandbox’ – fab, etc., etc.[/quote:b2576f8388]
But to put it into perspective, you’d really expect it to have such a high standard with the amount of time that went into it. If gameplay or level design are of a low quality after that amount of time, some serious issues would have to be raised about the developers. 99% of games don’t take 5 years ( unsure of the time period ?? ) to make.
November 23, 2004 at 5:28 pm #16006AnonymousInactive
99% of games don’t take 5 years ( unsure of the time period ?? ) to make.[/quote:9e0840e629] agreed
was 5 and a half years and $40 million (but bear in mind that was developing the tech as well as the game itself)
wonder if it includes Steam as well….hmm
November 23, 2004 at 9:59 pm #16014AnonymousInactive
I was talking the overall Production quality of HL 2, which I might add is probably a damn sight better than COD[/quote:ba3b6d0c19]
COD has excellent production quality. In fact, when playing HL2 I was reminded a lot of COD, they both have high octane action sequences and frantic gameplay in parts, excellent sound design and graphics and great set pieces and squad based combat. HL2 does have better production quality, but not by a “damn sight” in my opinion. Just to clear that up. Remember, COD won quite a few Best FPS of the Year awards!
I also think that HL2 has far better graphics than Doom3….in the broad sense. True Doom3 has great dynamic lighting, but as an overall graphical package, HL2 wipes the floor with it in my opinion. When I played Doom3 I thought, wow nice dynamic lighting, nice normal mapping etc. When I played HL2 I thought……this feels so real. Thats the differance – a combination of great technology AND great art direction.
Doom3 was a lot like a tech demo in my opinion. It was a very good game, and I really enjoyed it. But when compared to HL2, well, there is no comparison really. ;)
November 24, 2004 at 3:41 am #16017AnonymousInactive
I Smell Defeat……
*———————–>>>> *running*—————>>>> *running faster*——————>>>>>>>>>>> *gone*
November 24, 2004 at 9:41 pm #16033AnonymousInactive
I also think that HL2 has far better graphics than Doom3….in the broad sense. True Doom3 has great dynamic lighting, but as an overall graphical package, HL2 wipes the floor with it in my opinion. When I played Doom3 I thought, wow nice dynamic lighting, nice normal mapping etc. When I played HL2 I thought……this feels so real. Thats the differance – a combination of great technology AND great art direction. [/quote:7c3d00d22b] More or less agree with you, Nooptical… and that’s the best explanation so far I’ve heard for the disparity between the graphic quality of the two titles
November 26, 2004 at 2:02 am #16091AnonymousInactive
was 5 and a half years and million (but bear in mind that was developing the tech as well as the game itself)
wonder if it includes Steam as well….hmm [/quote:9a78651fcd]
It does, hence one of the major reasons Valve and VU are embroiled in a thick lawsuit.
Personally, I’d take better direction, vision and execution over better tech anyday (a good example is Tetris) although naturally it helps to have it all.
November 26, 2004 at 9:28 am #16094AnonymousInactive
was 5 and a half years and million (but bear in mind that was developing the tech as well as the game itself)[/quote:0f22cba1a6]
That still means there was 5 anda half years of design. Design would have started before tech so i’d expect superb design.
- The forum ‘General Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.