I defy anyone to talk about PC gaming seriously without talking about Valve Corporation. They are massively important and have done nothing short of revolutionise this medium that we love. It’s easy to forget everything that they have put out there; classic game after classic game, and then a system that has even completely changed how many of us buy and play games.
Here we have every game they have commercially released, affectionately recalled by both us here at Gaming Daily and the people who these games mean more to than anything else out there – journalists, gamers, clan members, even developers. I’ve also included the peak amount of steam accounts concurrently playing each game on the 13th April 2010 – hastily grabbed from the steam stats page at 6pm when I first started this article just to give some sort of scale on how popular they still are. And as a reference, the highest ranking at this point in time was Modern Warfare 2 multiplayer with 94,997 accounts (although it should be noted that this figure doesn’t take into account all non-steam versions of MW2, which I imagine is quite a significant number Droniac pointed out in the comments that MW2 is steamworks so this will, in fact, be all players)
A not so humble beginning
1998 – 2003
Half-Life – Nov 1998; 299 accounts
The game that started it all. Half-Life. It basically re-invented the First Person Shooter, showing the power of scripted sequences for both action and exposition. It also introduced us to Gordon Freeman, the silent protagonist now iconic with PC Gaming. Half-Life had a smart plot, good characters, and it was a solid shooter to boot. To try to summarise how important Half-Life was would be close to impossible here, but it’s up there with the best of them. Half-Life also had a couple of expansions, namely Blue Shift (2001) in which you play as Barney – a major character in the latter sequels; and Opposing Force (1999) in which you play as one of the enemy Marines from the normal game.
Craig Lager: A guilty secret of mine is that I’ve never completed Half-Life. I’ve played it a fair few times, but never to completion. That’s not to say that I wasn’t impressed by it though; the first time I saw it was around a friends house soon after release. I played through the opening section and was amazed – there was nothing like this on my N64 (I did get Zelda that same year, though). Unfortunately I couldn’t fathom getting off a ladder using a keyboard, so I fell and died, then never played HL again for many years.
Paul Millen: I’m not going to write about all the obviously brilliant things that make up the game Half-Life, there’s no more to say. I want to talk about one of its slightly more unusual characteristics: its cruelty. HL’s forefathers: Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem, Unreal, with all their nastiness – they were just fluff really weren’t they? Sci-fi melodrama, high concepts and cartoon killing. Half-Life was one of the first games I played that showed me real people; people beginning another mundane week at work, struggling with malfunctioning IT systems and tetchy vending machines – people just trying to get through the day. Half-Life introduced me to these people, then killed them in front of my eyes. Seeing that lift crash down the shaft leaving nothing but guts and metal, or watching helplessly as a scientist was overpowered by Xen creatures through the glass of a sealed room; very early on Half-Life lays its cards of cruelty on the table. Later, you meet these people again, and you’re thrilled to see them. They grant moments of comforting companionship amid the horror. But (one might say) cruelly, asking them to tag along imposes upon your earnest followers an almost guaranteed death sentence. To progress, they must die – the game causes it but you bear the guilt. The reason Half-Life is a superb computer game is that it pitches a sci-fi horror story but shows the effects in first-hand human terms as the events unspool and the resulting chaos and cruelty strike out at the poor unfortunates trapped within; characters you’ve met and talked to, people who have helped you. Half-Life wouldn’t be the great game it is without this vital caustic quality.
And then there was Blue Shift; generally perceived to be the lesser Half-Life expansion, lacking the team-based fun of Opposing Force or any particularly memorable set-pieces; breaking NPCs out of containers, that seemed to be Blue Shift’s big thing. Well, yeah – it didn’t set the gaming world alight but everything was still smouldering from HL and Opposing Force, and it’s not bad for an axed Dreamcast afterbelch. It’s also the only game in the Half-Life canon where Everything Goes Right. Playing as Barney Calhoun, you’re looking for Dr Rosenberg who’s the only science man able to crank up an old piece of Black Mesa hardware deep in a basement somewhere that’ll allow you all to warp out and escape the gory disasterfest. That’s the plan – what’s surprising is that it actually succeeds. In the finale, leaping into the escape portal, I braced myself for the signature Half-Life anti-ending and was pleasantly shocked to find myself, not in a situation of certain Xen death or the clutches of the G-Man, but next to two SUVs and my relived science chums miles from Black Mesa. Like, what was supposed to happen. It seems those scientists can get it right – once in a blue moon (teee). In closing, if you’re feeling a bit blue, play Blue Shift (ahhaha I am funny). It’s Half Life’s only happy ending.
Steve Peacock:I was sat in a Malaysian hotel room the first time I played Half-Life. My dad was working out there, and his computer was done up with a theme patterned around Alien. It was the perfect atmosphere for my first foray into proper, grown-up gaming: a dark room and a terminal that dragged me into the mindset of a resonance cascade victim before I even started the game. It was magical.
Counter Strike: March 1999; 69,495 accounts
Counter Strike is a phenomenon. Ten years old and still a staggering Seventy Thousand people playing at one time. It’s mind blowing. This is something that started as a mod for Half-Life pre-millenium. After the official release by Valve in 2000 it had one expansion in the west which was the rather unpopular Condition Zero (2004) and also a Japan Arcade exclusive Counter Strike: Neo (2004) that no one seems to talk about. The thing with Counter Strike is that it has the most hardcore fanbase that I know of, possibly outside of Starcraft. People still defend it to the death, even though most would consider it replaced with the later Counter Strike: Source. Someone far more entrenched in the community can explain it better than I can anyway:
Thomas Morgan – yegods clan: people play cs and css still because they have very clean strats, giving you an edge over individual skill. Key knowledge of angles and timing give advantages and getting angles and timing to work correctly while coordinating teams make it the best team game ever made. It just plays a hell of a lot better than most games .. even CoD doesn’t compare with cs or css for teamplay. Neither are better, it’s simply because it takes a long time to get a really keyed in feeling for the game. If you have played a lot of cs even the small changes moving to css feel huge, and as people where playing 1.6 a long time before source was out the game still had a big base; many people didnt feel like changing. There is a lot of stigma between cs players and css players so people tend to keep to their own camps. If you speak to cs gamers they will say css is too easy and not as fast paced, if you speak to css players they will complain about 1.6 hitboxes.
Steve Peacock: My first real online obsession. I’d dabbled with online gaming with Team Fortress, but Counter-Strike was where I really became one with the web, in the way only a self-important child can: clan matches! My years of Counter-Strike were devoted entirely to my position on the clan rankings ladder, it was more important than anything else. It was sadly brought to a sudden end when every other active clan member left to create a clan of their own. I wasn’t invited. I’M NOT BITTER.
Team Fortress Classic – April 1999; 226 accounts
Team Fortress started out as a mod for Quake in 1996 by John Cook and Robin Walker – names now synonymous with Valve. Later, TFC was ported over as a Half-Life mod in 1999, then in 2003 got a standalone release through steam and is still popular today, though not nearly following the continued success of Counter Strike.
thedancingpanda – TFC forumite: I play TFC because it isn’t about the graphics. I play a game depended on the gameplay and how fun it is. TFC is just fun. One of the biggest problems with the industry today is companies focusing more on making the game’s graphics next generation than the gameplay next-generation. and That is why I play TFC. For it’s time, the graphics and the gameplay were both fairly astounding. And in my opinion, they still are today.
sinnah – TFC forumite: [it's] the fact that this is such a multi-faceted game and there’s just so much to learn, and so many ways to improve on what you’ve already learned. Every time I play it’s a chance to practice and perfect upon any number of gameplay techniques, and it gives you a real sense of accomplishment as you see yourself begin to improve. Many other shooters (such as CS) only have a few core elements/strategies that need to be mastered before they become repetitive and boring.
Secondly, the fast-paced style of TFC suits me. It makes no attempt to be realistic, and frankly I find the COD/BF series of realistic strategy shooters to be pretty slow and monotonous by comparison. TFC, in my humble opinion, was the last great twitch-shooter. That’s not to say that other games don’t test your reflexes, but they’re nothing quite like TFC. If you’re not constantly thinking on your feet, you’re dead. There are times I’ve been so tense trying to break through an enemy team’s defense, or trying to hold off an offensive rush, that I was literally on the edge of my seat. No other game thus far has given me quite that level of intensity.
Basically, TFC is like a favorite shirt. Sure it’s old and worn, but it’s still your favorite, and even if you go out and buy a new one, it never really fits quite as comfortably.
Ricochet – November 2000; <150 accounts
Inspired somewhat by platformers and the arcade experience, Ricochet was simplistic, multiplayer shooter. It didn’t give the players full movement control, instead having them bounce between platforms which is possibly why it seemed to die a death. There seems to be no real active communities and the official steam forum has a grand total of 4 posts; this seems to be the one Valve game that’s pretty much dead.
Cainobob – ricochet forumite: I play it because with such a small player base there is more of a feeling of a community. It’s always more fun to play with some people you know and that’s what it is like most if not all the time in ricochet. Also it is really innovative and different so it more fun to play than all of your cookie-cutter WWII games.
Nlessvenom – ricochet forumite: I play it because I can get 45 kills in 5 minutes on a server with 150 ping.
Day of Defeat: August 2000; 1371 accounts
Released as a mod for Half-Life in 2000 then followed up with a commercial release in 2003 when the team joined valve - a template followed from Team Fortress and a pattern Valve would continue to use. Day of Defeat and the later Source version are Valves only forays into the ever saturated WWII genre, though the players of the original seem to hold a cut-throat contempt for the later release.
thegreatergood – DoD Forumite: [Source] was a joke and a slap in the face to dod players.There are still full servers and there still is a good community. I have not found a game with the level of competition that this brings, and it goes without saying that most of the players are older and more mature.
vlad211 – DoD Forumite: [Source] was more friendly to new players because there was less recoil on pretty much all of the weapons. The original has more weapons and more variety to choose from for each class. The maps were excellent but in Source, they were changed around quite a bit. Look at Colmar. Where did Valve pull out Demolition out of their *** for a map back in 1.3 that didn’t even have it?
Gabb – DoD Forumite: I have always been a FPS player and started playing quake and quake 2. Then I moved out from my parents in 2000 and didn´t have any computer. When I bought a PC in 2007 I played q2 mp but the lack of servers and players made me buy Counter Strike (most popular fps game in the world as I have heard) Bought it and played for 2 mins and got kicked because I asked things like how to play the game (had no idea how it worked, it wasen´t CTF or DM). I got kicked from some other servers because I were a NOOB. I were sad, but saw that there were another game that I could install, Day Of Defeat. Connected to a server, choose a weapon, and started spraying like it were death match. But this time were diffrent. There were a polite guy who told me over mic that this was a team game and that I should follow him around the map to know how the game was played. I were so surprised and glad that there were kind ppl on the internet that I started playing on that server. And to my big surprise, every new server I logged on to, I got help when I had questions and everybody was kind and SPEAKING. I have lots of other MP games but no one seams to care about anybody else then themself. So the thing that keeps me playing DoD is the community. We have so much fun together and it doesen´t matter if you are good or bad. Everybody helps new players and most of them get hooked into this old game. I think the reason is that it is simple, easy to learn the rules, you don´t need 20 buttons on your mouse or 400 macro keys. So my vote goes for a freindly community, where everybody is allowed to have fun.
A real nice read.
Considering I really came to PC gaming about 6 years ago, and without an active connection, I missed out on Steam until I finally caved in and installed it on my Dad’s machine. And thus I came online. I finally got the Orange Box 3-4 months after release and played through Half Life and still load up TF2 when I want a laugh.
Nice to see Tex getting a mention. How’d he get on there?
I know him from my J-Server/PCG Chat days (as in when it first started and wasn’t all, like, busy and popular. Man, that was before this whole site even existed. Fucking hell.
He’s the first member of PCG chat I saw in person. Don’t remember you in the J-Server, but always recognised your name in chat.
As an aside, how much is your steam account worth? Little website worked it out for me. It’s quite terrifying when you realise that how much you’ve spent on games and now have an account worth £671 http://www.steamcalculator.com/uk
That values it at £944 but that’s obviously not taking sale prices into account, nor stuff I got for free. Still :S
It said it in dollars in the email. You bastard, I though I was going crazier.
Lol, that site values Lost Coast at $99 because it’s in the Valve complete pack.
Fun piece, really enjoyed this trip down memory road.
Hmm, £913 for the value of my Steam account. Again, not taking sale prices into account, but still… bloody hell!
Going back through them to get screens was a pretty awesome afternoon I tell ya.
A very impressive piece of work :p
I still remember the day I played the Half Life: Opposing Force demo. That opening sequence was awesome, bodies lying everywhere and marines fighting aliens all over the place. It was the first time I played anything Half Life, so while it was a Gearbox game it did introduce me to Valve’s excellent original game.
And those Modern Warfare 2 statistics on Steam display ALL current online MW2 players on the PC. It’s a Steamworks game, so it has to be tied to a Steam account, much like Dawn of War 2 and the newer Total War games. All players boot up via Steam, so no one with a legal copy is excluded.
Re:MW2 – Oh, ace. Edited. Thanks.
Nice rundown there. I must admit I’ve never finished any of the Half-Life games. Always play the first third or so, but for some reason they make me physically sick so I have to stop playing. Which is a shame, ’cause I liked what I played.
In terms of what I’m still playing, particularly loving DoD:S and TF2 at the moment.
Could one of the fools citing Halflife as revolutionary please play Thief, followed by System Shock 2 D:
Visionary games… THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE.
That’s my point, Mr Lambert. Half-Life was already obsolete when it was released, then System Shock 2, a very similar game in theme and content, completely eviscerated it.
As is common in any artform, this kind of thing is not widely recognised. People seem to prefer sensational, zealous worship of something simplistic that doesn’t frighten, intimidate or confuse the player by being more complex than Pac-Man.
Obsolete? How many games of its kind even come by in the whole gaming world?
And the sales of Half Life certainly don’t say that System Shock 2 eviscerated it. How the game compares is subjective of course (I’ve not played SS2, have heard it’s excellent, of course).
I don’t understand, no one is hating on SS2. I have heard nothing but praise for SS2. I have heard a little more hate for HL than it. Are you pulling that out of your ass? No offense, but you just seem a bit butthurt because they talked about Valve (not just HL, mind you) and not SS2.
And would you really categorize HL as something simplistic? Relative to the gaming world, you KNOW that’s not true. By far.
Call me out on anything, and I don’t mean to offend. It’s 7 AM here.
Sales mean nothing in a world where Gears of War/God of War/Modern Warfare/World of Warcraft (noticing a theme?) are this popular.
I’ve no cause to be ‘butthurt’ as you so delicately phrased it ;> I just hate witnessing.. delusion. Half-Life was uglier than Unreal, less freeform than Doom, all it had going were some scripted animated scenes you could rarely have any influence on. A game mimicking films. Not a laudable achievement.
System Shock 2 is almost unheard-of in comparison, despite being very much more a ‘game’, embracing interactivity, freedom, choices, different paths – while also managing to be a far more effective story experience due to the high quality of the writing and voice acting, and the ever-developing plot.
I think that SS2 (bear in mind that it is one of my favourite games) is probably more similar to Pac-Man than Half Life is. Consider: you’re running through a dark environment with thumping music, pursued by creepy, implacable enemies, and haunted by ghosts…
Decent comparison, but Pacman couldn’t levitate medikits off shelves from 20ft away. Touché.
I have never heard System Shock be compared to Pac-Man before. That is most funny.
My point, cloaked in flippant sarcasm as it was, was that you seem to be assuming that only one game of a generation can be hugely influential. Which is, frankly, bullshit. Half-Life was hugely unique in its scripted approach to storytelling. System Shock 2 was a revelation in its superficially open approach to a linear SF horror tale. Thief was a superbly unique mission-based game with a powerful story competently told via its unique scenarios. They were all hugely influential games; why we should seize hold of one and wave its dick around as the GREATEST GAMING DICK OF ALL over the others is beyond me. I played all of these games around the time of release and they have all stuck with me, and one can easily trace their influences through modern gaming. It’s unnecessary to pick a favourite.
I’m arguing that Half-Life and Valve don’t deserve the attention they get. I’m playing the alternate voice, calling out Half-Life as ‘not all that special’, while bringing up lesser-known and far more advanced experiences from the same time period in comparison.
Valve finally hit the bigtime with Portal, Left 4 Dead, TF2 and Episode 2, which were;
1) An outside team acquired.
2) An outside team acquired.
3) A gameplay concept over a decade old, written by comedians.
4) Finally, a decent Half-Life game other than Opposing Force.
I don’t dislike them – I merely regard them.. Well, like Blizzard. A grossly overrated developer who did some decent work, from some aspects of Half-Life, to Diablo 2, but nothing ‘definitive’ in the realm of Grim Fandango, Fallout, System Shock, Shadow of the Colossus, Sacrifice, Jagged Alliance, Men of War, etc.
These are games that redefined genres, or simply sat unchallenged in their place by being so far ahead of the pack.
I don’t understand the hate against Pac-Man, either. It’s a simplistic game, but the reason it’s so deep is because it utilizes this simplicity very well.
No hate, merely a comparison. I wouldn’t pay the same price for Pac-Man as I did for a 30 hour FPSRPG with branching paths, multiple endings and many character options.
Deus Ex versus Half-Life, for example.. The value in terms of depth, options, gameplay-hours and memorable entertainment are incomparable.
And I hate a pet-hate for Pacman after watching a parent play it for around five years, every day D:
I haven’t played the games Thief or System Shock 2. And “griefer” Jakkar makes me very disinclined to do so. But out of curiosity I did look up their Megacritic metascores.
Thief: The Dark Project has a 92 and shows up listed at number 33, System Shock 2 also a 92 and listed at 36. Respectable. But both were beaten out by The Sims, which to me “revolutionized” boredom. Half-Life has a 96, 50 Game of the Year awards and 4th on their all time list.
Yes, I know he’s talking revolution. If the guy wants to argue about his games being revolutionary, fine, so was Donkey Kong and Super Mario World. Calling HL supporters “fools” for doing so, just silly. This guy is a speed bump. Roll over his comments and keep going.
Regardless of what you think of their proponents, both System Shock 2 and Thief are worth playing – they’re classics in every sense of the word. :)
Thanks! That’s advice I can respect and put to good use. Cudos to civil intelligence. LOL.
If you get SS2 working let me know how – I tried and couldn’t. Also I think Thief 2 is better than the first one.
I’ve not played Thief 2 but have heard that it’s better than the first. Or, at least, has more fun breaking into houses and stealing valuables and less boring gnomes and magic trees.
Re. SS2 – I’m sure I’ve gotten it running on XP but not tried since I moved onto W7… still, if you can run the first one on W7 the second has to work too, right? Heh.
There was a time the challenge to run older games would be fun, but now with age, I leave such things to younger souls.
With the current great games, great graphics, great support, and high-end gaming PC’s, I am satisfied to simply take your word on such classics.
@Jakkar: the ‘reply’ button has disappeared (at least in Chrome) so I’m having to reply to you here.
Whilst there is some kernel of truth in your arguments – the other games you’re mentioning are fine titles and influential beyond the level of recognition they received on release – you are also referring to the authors of this post as “fools” who are “deluded”, stating that people disagree with you because they “prefer sensational, zealous worship of something simplistic that doesn’t frighten, intimidate or confuse the player”, and implying that by liking something popular, gamers are idiots. How /dare/ players find something to like in a hit franchise!
By mixing up your not wholly unfair arguments with passive-aggressive insults you’re not doing yourself any favours. I’m certainly inclined to take you less seriously. Especially when you say things like this:
“Valve finally hit the bigtime with Portal, Left 4 Dead, TF2 and Episode 2″
Ah yes, the fabled big time! That must be what comes after Half-Life sells 6 million copies in six years, a feat just beaten by Half-Life 2, which has sold 6.5 million copies to date. And Steam, which in May 2007 had 13 million user accounts. Yeah, those Valve boys were strictly small-time before they used their vast wealth to acquire other promising teams and offer them the resources their projects deserved.
Of course, if you’d like to retroactively alter your statement to “Valve finally made a game I think was good/significant/influential/delicious” then go for it, but then we’re right back to the start of a completely pointless argument in which, simply put, you are wrong – because Half-Life was the first game that made extensive use of scripted sequences to tell its story and it set the mould for linear story-based FPS’s for years to come. This fact is about as uncontroversial as the idea that ducks float.
Anyway, I feel like I’ve been a bit excessively sarcastic so I’ll just add that you have good taste in games. And System Shock 2 is one of the best games ever, I’ll give you that.
Hello Shaun, thanks for the wordy but polite response =)
My implication is rather than people who have poor taste are morons, although in this case I’m deriding those who worship a game series -because it is popular-, as is often the case with the big-time franchises of the moment, such as Call of Duty, Gears of War, God of War, Halo, and as ever- Half-Life.
You should worship a game because you love it, or because it’s great – but this article is the continuation of a trend stretching across a decade to worship Half-Life not because it is GOOD but because it is SUCCESSFUL. Something I find as distasteful as obsessing over stock market reports.
It’s all about numbers and money. Good games that were too difficult, complex, or frightening (or all three, in some cases) frequently lose out in terms of success and profit because of these characteristics, while bad games with good marketting or a snowballing popularity cult around them due to their development pedigree, celebrity involvement or high review scores. Sometimes even just the luck of the moment, the fashion of the times coinciding with a game release in a given style and genre.
I dislike the worship of numbers.
I’m more interested in quality than success. Success, like an elected official, is the result of what most people like. And frankly, across history unto the modern day, most people have liked to burn witches, lynch the black, electroshock the gay and get so drunk every friday night they can’t remember where they live. The majority vote is not an indication of anything worthwhile. Just a general, dull conservatism that appeals to a cowardly mass.
I discuss gaming as an industry and an artform whenever I can, and frequently find a giggly feedback from most gamers that they don’t like difficulty modes beyond easy, or games with many weapons, buttons or multiple paths. “Dun wanna think, lol. Just wanna relax an ave fun.”..
That’s Half-life. Guide the eye, guide the player down a single path, illusions of freedom and engineered reward systems make them run a maze like a lab rat. I prefer an intellectual challenge, and as a matter of opinion, have more respect for like-minded individuals than those who avoid challenge or depth, who avoid intellectual or emotional involvement with their games.
Gamers happy to be led by a carrot on a stick to a predefined conclusion, en masse.
Ech.
Well, I’m rambling and I imagine you’re tired of my pretentious hippie bullshit by about.. now.
I’ll clarify my attitude by apologising for the way I come off – I’m frequently told I come across as offensive or aggressive in debate (online) – it’s something I don’t want to change, as the alternative is to be the type who apologises constantly – the issue is that I speak the same way in person but do so with such a lighthearted attitude and mobile, relaxed bodylanguage that the harsh, authorative bitchy tone is defused. Something about text carries an automatic note of coldness and authority, and poisons my speech.
“Valve finally hit the big time” etc; In terms of quality, yes. TF2 had great art, on par with Pixar with their great ‘Meet the’ shorts. Left 4 Dead embraced dedicated co-operative gaming, something I’d been waiting a long time for, designwise. Pity it was so simple. Portal was actually original. Episode 2 was actually good. I really enjoyed that one, it finally had a real sense of style and immersion, while the others felt like.. chores, shooting galleries. Only Opposing Force really immersed me and gave me an enjoyable experience, until Ep.2. Gearbox are better designers, more creative developers than Valve’s in-house times.
You went on to quote sales numbers. Frankly, you can sell anything to a bored consumer base. It just doesn’t count for anything, either in casual generalisation, nor would it in laboratory conditions. It’s not a pure sample, when these people are victims of peer pressure, fashion, and marketting manipulation. Once something is popular, the growth of popularity becomes.. often expontential.
“but then we’re right back to the start of a completely pointless argument in which, simply put, you are wrong – because Half-Life was the first game that made extensive use of scripted sequences to tell its story and it set the mould for linear story-based FPS’s for years to come.”
What I argue is whether that’s a good thing. Scripted sequences in games have turned games into films, removed interactivity in favour of cinematic drama. Abandoned the interactivity of the medium, its heart and primary strength, in favour of looking cool.
Good game design evolves the player shaping his world by choices, acting and the world reacting to him, and vice versa. If I want to watch a scripted sequence of a zombie punching through a wall and taking down a scientist, I’ll watch a film by George A. Romero. I like that games -can- be cinematic, but not at the expense of gameplay. In order to achieve cool scripted moments, Half-life lost all but the slightest sense of freedom, choice, or meaningful exploration.
Partially personal taste, partially just stating ‘games are an interactive, creative and unpredictable medium, films are a dramatic, detailed and visually attractive medium’ – that these are the strengths of each, and ignoring them doesn’t generally make for a good game or film.
Glad you agree System Shock 2 is good. Maniacal rambling.. COMPLETE! =D
You…Ramble. Quite a bit. Honestly, as a consumer and a gamer I believe one shouldn’t have to choose. All games no matter their gameplay deserve some playtime. Are some invariably better than other in terms of story? Mechanics? Absolutely but that is an individual choice and I have found a many unpopular games extremely rewarding. Point is, limiting yourself is pointless and only hurting yourself in the end. Variety is the spice of life.
Vast as your response is, you reveal the false precept of your argument within the first paragraph:
“in this case I’m deriding those who worship a game series -because it is popular”
“You should worship a game because you love it, or because it’s great”
As the article, I myself and others who have commented here have all stated or argued, this is precisely where we are coming from. You may not agree with us – that’s your prerogative – but you cannot ignore it or invalidate arguments to the contrary simply by the force of your own opinion. That’s absurd rhetorical solipsism.
I appreciate your attempt to elucidate why you don’t think Half-Life is a great game. Ironically its linearity is why I think it is such a success; its storytelling is taut and deliberate as a result of the narrative constraints it places upon the user. It’s a shame that you don’t feel this approach works for you, but this doesn’t invalidate it any more than it does the open-world approach of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. or other such games.
I quoted the sale numbers not to assert the validity of Valve’s “earlier” works, but solely to illustrate that an assertion you had made was fundamentally incorrect, a point which you appear to have missed.
“Scripted sequences in games have turned games into films, removed interactivity in favour of cinematic drama. Abandoned the interactivity of the medium, its heart and primary strength, in favour of looking cool.”
Here, again, you reach a point where you have a valid argument to make. There is a lot to be said about the removal of player authority in heavy-handed efforts to generate a cinematic experience. Games like Gears of War 2, blockbuster titles which make very little narrative sense, are in some ways descendants of Half-Life. Of course, this doesn’t any more invalidate that approach than the existence of ‘Tristram Shandy’ or ‘House of Leaves’ rendered ‘Pride & Prejudice’ or ‘Oronooko’ irrelevant or, to put it crassly, “wrong”.
The world, you see, supports a multiplicity of structure and form, just as does a wealth of different and often antithetical ideas. Personally, I enjoy luxuriating in this variety.
Anyway, I’m not sure there’s more argument to be had here. I understand where you’re coming from, and I agree that you have a point. Where we disagree is that you appear unwilling to accept that a linear and constrained approach to storytelling within a game can be a good thing, and I’m not sure it’s worthwhile trying to continue that line of discussion.
All the best fella, and hope that – like me – you’re looking forward to the new X-COM game. It promises an open-ended experience with a lot of exploration and player-driven development…
Annoyingly I can’t edit comments – should’ve re-read this before posting.
In my first line, “paragraph” should be “paragraphs”.
This line: “It’s a shame that you don’t feel this approach works for you, but this doesn’t invalidate it any more than it does the open-world approach of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. or other such games.”
Should read: “It’s a shame that you don’t feel this approach works for you, but this doesn’t invalidate it any more than the commercial and critical success of linear narratives does the open-world approach of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. or other such games.”
Finally, the fourth paragraph from the end, where I draw the literary analogy – that bit of my argument is poorly articulated. What I was getting at with those comparisons is that they represent different schools of thought in terms of what makes a novel – for the purposes of this discussion, I’m focusing on structure. So my point is simply that it is possible to read or play and enjoy both, as I say in the following paragraph.
Deathmatch Classic (DMC) was an homage to Quake, not a patching-in of basic deathmatch.
Half-Life already had that in the form of HLDM, which was awesome fun because you could kill people with snarks and satchel bombs and laser tripwires, and perform ludicrous manoeuvres such as the gauss-jump, where you used the recoil on the Gauss gun to fling yourself into the air.
Well too many people seem to think I’m wrong. So FINE. Edited.
Having read through a wee bit more of the archives here, and engaged in a few comment debates.. Shit, this blog is as mindless a community as its name implies D:
You’re all horrendous. Closeminded, cynical cunts without taste. Get off my internets!
Well that’s that then lads. Time to close up shop.
Thanks so much for you article and time. Despite the spoilers out there, you are to be highly commended. Looking forward to future articles from you.
Oh, wait! We’re back on! (thanks ;-) )
As I say on my Steam Profile, “Thanks to all the Friendlies out there that make bashers, stompers and griefers look about as useful as speed bumps in a parking lot. They slow us down a little, but are soon forgotten.”
Thanks for invalidating my decision to bother debating with you. Disappointing.
I figure you’re trying to be funny, but you’re not.
Speed bump: A stationary object designed to slow down drivers, but mostly ineffective, often irritating. It is best to drive over or around them, then continue to your destination.
Eh, I like to have faith in people!
Besides, always good to stretch the grey matter a little in a comments thread. Helps you clarify and articulate your own opinions as well as grasp other peoples’. :)
I understand, of course, and have often done so myself. Now, however, I have little patience for such people. I once heard someone say they are “like seagulls that fly into town, shit on everything, then fly off”. I like a good article with good discussion and mostly ignore the “seagulls” other than to avoid their castings. I give you credit for trying.
Aahhh. Apparently over at GameSpot the some “horrendous. Closeminded, cynical cunts without taste” just voted Gordon Freeman the “greatest game hero of all time”. Sorry. And just last month PC gamer readers voted Half-Life 2 Best PC Game of All Time. Half-Life made number 9. Bummer. They listed 100 games so maybe Thief or Shock got in there somewhere.
So sad when artistic, intellectual, know-better-than-all-others can’t get us “fools” off the internet. I guess we will just have to happily carry on, enjoying the games we love, while the self-acclaimed-elite smolder in the ashes of their failed rants. ROFL.