So I go back and play HALF LIFE 2

[vlad321]

Mazty said:

Reasonable said:

I don't think you're getting the approach.  In Half Life Valve take the approach that story is delivered through what you see, visual clues, etc. plus dialogue, etc. but never halt the game to present this via a cut scence.

So, for example, in Half Life 2 a number of levels visually show you that water levels both of open sea and rivers, etc. are low.  This is done via level design and having boats beached, etc.  So you learn (if you chose to pick up on the clues) that amongst other things the Combine are affecting water levels.  You hear announcements about reproduction being blocked, see abandoned playgrounds and never see a child.  You see and hear all you need to to understand a great deal about what's going on.  Or, if you want, you can skip it without even having to press a button, simply don't listen to the annoucement, ignore the dialogue and plow through guns blazing.  Valve leave the choice up to you.

I'd note that, so far anyway, the games are not designed with Gordon as anything other than an observer/participant - he himself doesn't have a character as such, but Alex does, Dog does, Barney does, etc.  HL immerses you in its world better than pretty much any other FPS, but the story is what you see, hear and participate in, nothing about Gorden in the way, say, that Nathan Drake in Uncharted has a clear character.

I'd argue that in HL2 particularly, Valve really used the visual medium of videogames in a mature and intelligent way, and most critics agree hence why the title is so praised for how well it does this.

Of course, you don't have to like this approach - but it's there and its actually pretty elegant next to the average FPS/TPS story which is often told via awkward exposition dumps in cut-scenes rather than in a constant stream as part of gameplay.

 

I think the approach is lazy and at best, dated even for it's time. I mean, even in the first 20 minutes of gameplay Alyx mentions you are a "man of little words". If they wanted an actual immersive system, a KotOR dialogue system would have worked a whole lot better, rather than everyone talking at you the entire game. It just feels very cold and false, being talked at the entire game. I don understand why they did it, but I think it was a poor decision. I have never played HL1, so for a lot of the storyline elements to be hidden away is rediculous. If it was truly immersive, it would give you the knowledge of what's gone on in the world you are trying to be part of, rather than chucking you on a train and sayin "have fun". In HL2 you can accidently miss storyline elements, which is nothing shy of absurd.

If the games are designed only with Gordon as an observer, surly he shouldn't then be a main influence on the storyline - more of a figure in the background etc. I just think it's bizarre to have a game where the main character is nothing but a lifeless shell. If any other FPS tried that, it'd be slated to the hills and back.

I think you are missing the point. Besides the PoV that wass mentioned above, why would you know anything of what happens if you were dropped off a train. Part of the game is figuring out what happened between HL1 and HL2 wjile Gordon was asleep. You can see newspaper clippings in the laboratory talking of the Combine destroying the UN and earth surrendering after 7 hours. Just because you wne through the whole world guns blazing and missed everything does not change the fact that the whole world is thorougly explained to you. You just have to add up the pieces from what you see. You aren't told, you are shown, which is a far more difficult thing to do in ANY media (movie, book, essays, etc.) mostly because it also depends on the intelligence of the user. If anything all the other games use cut-scenes as a crutch to feed you the story, which anyone can do. It's far harder to show you the situation without explocitly telling you.