Half-Life 2 Gets Episode 1 65
Valve has announced that, instead of entitling their first downloadable mini-expansion to Half-Life 2 'Aftermath', the pack is now simply Episode 1. From the Gamespot article: "When asked whether the name change is indicative of a change in direction for the Half-Life 2 franchise, Valve marketing director Doug Lombardi replied, 'episodic.' When asked the follow-up question of whether the new name meant that beginning of a regular flow of content, Lombardi replied, 'yes.'"
Half-Life 2 Episode 1 features a new... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Half-Life 2 Episode 1 features a new... (Score:1)
Re:Half-Life 2 Episode 1 features a new... (Score:2)
Re:Half-Life 2 Episode 1 features a new... (Score:5, Funny)
On the condition the wielder hasn't had a mental break-down first.
Re:Half-Life 2 Episode 1 features a new... (Score:1)
Overpricing Ahead? (Score:5, Insightful)
They're probably right too. It's much easier to sell a game for $100 if you split it up into ten $10 "episodes". Combine this with the advantages of sidestepping traditional retail and I can definitely see the appeal.
Re:Overpricing Ahead? (Score:2, Interesting)
I am optimistic and hope that each episode allows minor innovations that ultimatly result in an evolving sort of engine, bringing ever expanding longevity to the game (as modders revisit the original Half-Life 2 and integrate the new features much like modders such as Black
Re:Overpricing Ahead? (Score:1)
I suppose my experiences with episodic novels, films and TV have left me with a surfeit of cynicism!
Re:Overpricing Ahead? (Score:2)
They will be at risk of taking this shortcut to push out episodes and bring in the cash.
(I never played Half Life, but I am in the middle of playing HL2 on Xbox and quite enjoying it.)
Re:Overpricing Ahead? (Score:2)
Unless, of course, each episode is going to be as long as the entirety of Half-Life 2 (which is possible, since it was pretty damn short compared to Half-Life 1)...
Who Cares? (Score:2)
Too Vague. (Score:5, Interesting)
"Aftermath" was a title that gave direction. It's the story after the events of Half Life 2. For the majority who haven't been following the development of the expansion, and knew nothing of the original title, the new moniker "Episode 1" seems to beg the question "Of what?".
Re:Too Vague. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Too Vague. (Score:3, Insightful)
So, how long are pedants going to persist in this pointless prescriptivism? The language has changed. Deal with it.
Re:Too Vague. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Too Vague. (Score:2)
Re:Too Vague. (Score:2)
Re:Too Vague. (Score:1, Offtopic)
When the language changes to become more ambiguous and less meaningful, those of us with an interest in precise communication can and must complain.
Retail (Score:4, Informative)
Not that I plan on buying retail, but I thought I'd just throw out that possibility just to freakout the retail buyers.
Better choice I think (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Better choice I think (Score:2)
Re:Better choice I think (Score:4, Funny)
The RA expansions are basically hard to find anyway, and thus the naming system should be okay. We'll be fine as long as Valve doesn't choose "Yuri's Revenge" as the next title... Which they will on April 1st.
Re:Better choice I think (Score:1)
Re:Better choice I think (Score:1)
Re:Better choice I think (Score:2)
It wasn't until about 3 years ago did I learn there was a difference.
Ha ha ha ha ha (Score:3, Insightful)
Half Life 2 was incredibly well received, both in terms of reviews (metacritic [metacritic.com], rottentomatoes [rottentomatoes.com] and sales numbers.
It sold massively [slashdot.org], created a new method of distribution, which other vendors have embraced [sinepisodes.com] and cuts out the middle men so hated on Slashdot.
It was first to feature real-time radiosity lighting [devmaster.net], scaled from DirectX 6 to 9 and pushed the character animation and expression envelope considerably.
Do you ever look in the mirror and ask: "Maybe I am wrong this time?"
Re:Ha ha ha ha ha (Score:1)
Combine the quality of the game with Valve's support of third party developers (the mod community) and the Steam delivery method and you have a game that is worth every penny you pay for it. I think I these episodes will definately end up on my steam account.
Re:Ha ha ha ha ha (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, yeah, if only Half Life 2 didn't require an Internet connection to play a single-player game . Most people who buy it probably don't even realize it, except the hundreds of unlucky souls who bought it the first day and went home only to find out that the activation servers were overloaded.
To clarify, apparently Half Life 2 requires Internet connection even after it has been activated. It needs to talk to its servers at least once every couple of weeks, or ir refuses to start.
I remember reading a complaint from soldiers on a military ship - they didn't have an Internet connection while at sea, so they couldn't play the game. Too bad for them :-)
IIRC, Half Life 2 also requires opening a tunnel through the firewall. Again, this also applies to the single-player version.
This is totally unacceptable and it is really sad that the consumers and game reviewers at large have completely ignored this problem. I am looking forward to the day when the tiered Internet [slashdot.org] will require people to pay for the single-player game that they bought one year ago...
Re:Ha ha ha ha ha (Score:1)
I'd probably be more freaked out that my internet is gone and not coming back than my inability to play my old games in singleplayer.
Still, no question that it's a bummer to not be able to play the games of the past. But I suppose I'll just have to console myself
Re:Ha ha ha ha ha (Score:4, Informative)
Hey wait a second..... (Score:4, Funny)
Canonical Order Clarification (Score:5, Funny)
Half-Life 2 is Episode V: The G-Man Strikes Back.
Half-Life 3 is Episode VI: The Return of the Headcrab.
Aftermath is Episode I. Counterstrike is off canon. Day of Defeat is like those Clone Wars cartoons.
Don't blame me. Valve decided to do it out of order.
Re:Canonical Order Clarification (Score:2)
Release date? (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, in a episodic distribution system, I think a pre-announced release date is even more important, so I don't miss anything. Just my pair of pennies...
Re:Release date? (Score:1)
Confirmed with Doug Lombardi by halflife2.net I seem to remember.
Re:Release date? (Score:1)
Re:Release date? (Score:2)
One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:5, Insightful)
The other bit is games tend to be way to short these days. C&C: Generals really needed the add-on pack, as did Warcraft 3, as did many others to feel like a 'real' top tier game. You get what, 7 missions per nation/race/etc, with the several being unit trainers? HL was worth every penny. Opposing Forces was ok and added a lot of fun to multiplayer. Blue shift left me feeling robbed. I waited on HL2 until it hit the bargain bin, and if not for Counter Strike, would have felt shorted had I paid full retail. (lord knows I'm still bitter about Doom3) The point being, while they may be honest - this bit is a mere chapter or so in a longer story - I really resent the current trend to shorten games to generate a better revenue flow and try to price it for optimum wallet extraction. Maybe it works... Won't with me. I won't give them $10 for each three hours of game play.
Re:One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:1)
Re:One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:4, Insightful)
> I really resent the current trend to shorten games
Wow - I feel the opposite. I have memories of wading through level after level of old games and just wishing it would end. There was a Final Fantasty game for the gameboy that was bad, and Crusader: No Regret was enormous. I spent an age playing No Regret and gave up on it eventually (I think I had a hdd crash that killed my save files or something). Later I learned I was probably far less than half way through the game at that point (part of this would be that I insisted on playing on the insane difficulty level but it was stil just huge). I think games are moving towards a model where they have a tighter plot and less mindless filler, and that's a good thing. Consider some of the old 8 bit games as well - you didn't have a hope in hell of finishing a game like Jet Set Willy.
I agree with you that Half Life 2 was just too short. An aspect of this might have been the poor quality of the plot wrapup and closing levels. Some early bits were excellent - the priest in the zombie village; the coastal outpost where you get the buggy; the bug section. But everything after the moment the player has killed the bug in the gym feels like an afterthought. There was a similar feel about the Xen section of the original.They're getting there but there's lots of room to improve.
It's hard to finish a game well though. The original No One Lives Forever was fantastic from start to end, but apart from that, I can't think of many endings that have impressed me. The Interactive Fiction _Spider and Web_ was pretty cool. I imagine the ending of nethack would have to be cool through sheer satisfaction. I think a lot of the problem with endings is they just realise the aims of the game without making a point. That's fine for mario games. But where's the conclusion about the nature of the human spirit at the end of the half life games, or the fact that even if the combine were evil "at least they made the trains run on time"?
Re:One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:2)
There's a demographic split between people who have lots of free time and those that don't. I'm in the former camp, and I always prefer quality over quantity. I would always rather a game felt like it should have gone on longer than the opposite, though I suppose there is some dollar/hour-of-play threshold I wouldn't want to go above, say $5/hr.
The console game 'unlockables' approach is a pretty good way to cater to both demographics- a player can
Re:One of the real losses is the bargain bin. (Score:1)
Shouldn't it be episode two? (Score:2)
Excellent. Great idea. (Score:3, Interesting)
* The game company will be sure of an ongoing revenue stream, so they'll continue to support the storyline, and
* Gamers will be able to continue to enjoy adventures in a world they enjoy. Possibly for YEARS.
I consider this a relationship model, as opposed to current games' "one night stand" model. If you like something, why WOULDN'T you want it to go on for years? Why WOULDN'T you get a subscription to it and keep enjoying it for as long as possible?
This is a natural progression. I think it's great. And I hope they include a persistent multiplayer feature, alongside the storyline episodes. THAT would be almost IDEAL.
Re:Excellent. Great idea. (Score:2)
Re:Excellent. Great idea. (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it might be taking your time and money away from something fresh and different being made by a different company? Because eventually the people who worked on it from the start and made it good are going to get tired and move on, but the less creative ones
Man of few words... (Score:2, Funny)
When asked whether the name change is indicative of a change in direction for the Half-Life 2 franchise, Valve marketing director Doug Lombardi replied, 'episodic.' When asked the follow-up question of whether the new name meant that beginning of a regular flow of content, Lombardi replied, 'yes.'
What is he, a vorlon?
Re:Man of few words... (Score:2)