Game of the Year

norrie rugger

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Pity I absolutely hate bioware games. Can never get into them. I find the battle system boring and the dialogue inane.

I am awaiting the "Pokémon with cars minus the fun" comment for the Gran Turismo suggestion above lol. One of the best ever

Retr0gamer

Meh, F-zero GX is a better racing game. Because it's fun :P

Jazzy

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Meh, F-zero GX is a better racing game. Because it's fun :P

but but but..... have you seen how realistic gran turisimo alpha dragoon epilogue 4 looks? theres queues for the toll on the m50 and everything!

humanji

Jazzy wrote: »

so because it wasnt this big sand box / GTA type thing it wasnt amazing?
there is literally nothing wrong with HL2...
*Music / Sound - amazing
*Graphics - amazing
*Atmosphere - amazing (Ravenholm/Prison level/heck, even the very start of the game when you are running from the law.... or was that linear?.. yes it could have been that word that people throw in with no regard as to how it works.....)
Gameplay - amazing (gravity gun, trains, cars, helicopter chases, tremors + sooo much more)
Story - hard to say amazing for this, but since it does such a sublime job of recrafting Orwells 1984 into a computer game and still have it make sense with the whole sci-fi and x-files buzz then yeah, it dwells on amazing. most importantly, it suits the game down to the ground - something which 95% of games get wrong (games which try and deal with magnificant and large stories *ahem* Halo series *ahem*)

I dunno, people trying to knock Half Life 2 reminds me of people that would try and knock Man Utd back in the 90s when they were obviously amazing (still scum tho :pac: ). its easy to have a go at whats at the top. Deus Ex was/is still a tip-top game but it doesnt do as much as Half Life 2 did.

I think you're giving it too much credit. It was a grand game, but Episode 2 was a hell of a lot better. If you had to vote one as game of the decade, you vote for the better game. Go by your own criteria listed. Episode 2 is better with every single one. It's a better game. (and Deus Ex is better than both :P )

thebman

humanji wrote: »

I think you're giving it too much credit. It was a grand game, but Episode 2 was a hell of a lot better. If you had to vote one as game of the decade, you vote for the better game. Go by your own criteria listed. Episode 2 is better with every single one. It's a better game. (and Deus Ex is better than both :P )

Episode 2 was an expansion built on HL2's code.

It just an example of why HL2 and the Source Engine was a turning point in gaming for this decade.

EP2 had all of HL2's development time in it and years dedicated to its own development as a result.

EP2 is basically a modern day expansion pack. HL2:EP2 is still HL2 and part of the HL2 universe. It merely stands on the shoulder of a giant and had the extra time to refine itself. It is a great game but TBH the game play still isn't much better than HL2 since it has to remain faithful to the universe of HL2 and it still uses the same engine. The storyline may have been better but I guess that is opinion, I thought HL2's storyline was great but it is better if you play HL2 and immediately go into EP1 and EP2 as they aren't meant to be viewed as individual entities. It is all a continuation.

When looking at game of the decade, I think you need to look past the game itself and to its engine too. HL2 allowed the development of the source engine which is the game engine with probably the most top titles this generation and has the best mods too IMO.

Gummy Panda

I think my game of the year is Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story

elekid

Just to be different, my game of the year would be Suikoden Tierkreis on DS. Partly cos I'm a big Suikoden fan and partly because I've spent most of this year playing last years backlog (Bioshock and Mass Effect are two of the best games I played this year for example, but they don't count)

L31mr0d

humanji wrote: »

I think you're giving it too much credit.

No sir, it is YOU who is not giving it enough credit. How dare you trod on my memories of crouching behind Alyx and watching her ass as she walked me to Ravenholm.

You talk about Ep2 without accepting that it wouldn't exist without HL2. HL2 was a turning point in gaming. You could say "meh, the Berlin wall coming down wasn't that big, I've seen bigger walls get knocked down". The size of the wall isn't what's important, it's what bringing it down signifies that is.

EP2 is iteratively better than HL2, whereas HL2 was revolutionary better than everything before it.

humanji

L31mr0d wrote: »

No sir, it is YOU who is not giving it enough credit. How dare you trod on my memories of crouching behind Alyx and watching her ass as she walked me to Ravenholm.

You talk about Ep2 without accepting that it wouldn't exist without HL2. HL2 was a turning point in gaming. You could say "meh, the Berlin wall coming down wasn't that big, I've seen bigger walls get knocked down". The size of the wall isn't what's important, it's what bringing it down signifies that is.

EP2 is iteratively better than HL2, whereas HL2 was revolutionary better than everything before it.

Without Wolfenstein there'd be no Half-Life 2, so is Wolfenstein the better game? It was more of a revolutionary leap from previous games than HL2 was, after all.

Think about it, HL2 is a mindless shooter at heart. It tries to be something more cerebral but as I said, it's all fur coat and no knickers. There's feck all of a story. There's no character developement. The levels are largely empty except in areas where the designers know you'll be spending a few minutes. Gameplay is fairly basic: you run to a waypoint and kill everything, move to the next waypoint and kill everything, rinse and repeat. They toss in a few see-saw puzzles to show off the game engine and that's it.

As a game on it's own, you have to admit that it's nothing special. Ignore the gimmick gun and the physics that they don't use as much as they should, and it's like any other FPS.

And because of this, I don't think it's game of the decade material, regardless of what happened next with the engine. To use your Berlin wall analogy, it's like you see a wall covered in graffiti being blown up with dynamite and say "Wow, that's just as important as the Berlin Wall being knocked down!". It's not. It's just another wall. It was cool that they used dynamite to blow it up. The bricks may go on to be used at the best Stripclub/pizza shop there'll ever be, but that doesn't make the wall any more special. It was just an average wall with some fancy graffiti (and it smelled of piss! :P )

Jazzy

humanji wrote: »

Think about it, HL2 is a mindless shooter at heart.

nope. you lose.

gg

0ubliette

humanji wrote: »

Without Wolfenstein there'd be no Half-Life 2, so is Wolfenstein the better game? It was more of a revolutionary leap from previous games than HL2 was, after all.

Think about it, HL2 is a mindless shooter at heart. It tries to be something more cerebral but as I said, it's all fur coat and no knickers. There's feck all of a story. There's no character developement. The levels are largely empty except in areas where the designers know you'll be spending a few minutes. Gameplay is fairly basic: you run to a waypoint and kill everything, move to the next waypoint and kill everything, rinse and repeat. They toss in a few see-saw puzzles to show off the game engine and that's it.

As a game on it's own, you have to admit that it's nothing special. Ignore the gimmick gun and the physics that they don't use as much as they should, and it's like any other FPS.

And because of this, I don't think it's game of the decade material, regardless of what happened next with the engine. To use your Berlin wall analogy, it's like you see a wall covered in graffiti being blown up with dynamite and say "Wow, that's just as important as the Berlin Wall being knocked down!". It's not. It's just another wall. It was cool that they used dynamite to blow it up. The bricks may go on to be used at the best Stripclub/pizza shop there'll ever be, but that doesn't make the wall any more special. It was just an average wall with some fancy graffiti (and it smelled of piss! :P )

you are KING WRONG of WRONGO, scheming in the mountains of misbelief, we are the mega-monarchs of right, on our thrones in castle TRUFAX

L31mr0d

humanji wrote: »

Without Wolfenstein there'd be no Half-Life 2, so is Wolfenstein the better game? It was more of a revolutionary leap from previous games than HL2 was, after all.

Wolfenstein wasn't released in this decade. Stay on topic please :pac: Whether Wolfenstein was better or not is not relevant to a discussion on why HL2 is the game of this decade.

cherryghost

I have a rather large list:

Civilization IV
Call of Duty 4
Tony Hawks Pro Skater 3
GTA III
Super Mario Galaxy
Bioshock
Elder Scrolls IV
Mario Kart DS
Soul Calibur II
Viewtiful Joe
Resident Evil 4
Unreal Tournament 2004
Pokemon Gold/Silver


theres probably more. Cant think of anything else right now.

thebman

humanji wrote: »

Without Wolfenstein there'd be no Half-Life 2, so is Wolfenstein the better game? It was more of a revolutionary leap from previous games than HL2 was, after all.

Think about it, HL2 is a mindless shooter at heart. It tries to be something more cerebral but as I said, it's all fur coat and no knickers. There's feck all of a story. There's no character developement. The levels are largely empty except in areas where the designers know you'll be spending a few minutes. Gameplay is fairly basic: you run to a waypoint and kill everything, move to the next waypoint and kill everything, rinse and repeat. They toss in a few see-saw puzzles to show off the game engine and that's it.

As a game on it's own, you have to admit that it's nothing special. Ignore the gimmick gun and the physics that they don't use as much as they should, and it's like any other FPS.

Before HL2 there was no proper physics in games. You say they don't use physics as much as they should yet the gravity gun is a physics gun and then you say its a gimmick although its used throughout the game to solve the puzzles and progress through different sections but somehow the game is also just a mindless shooter.

The animations particularly facial in HL2 were never seen on that level in a game before.

TBH it sounds like you didn't play it at release but years after and don't see the fuss. HL2 moved gaming forward in a massive leap. As someone else said, compare it to Doom 3. Doom 3 was not a bad game and one of the best around at the time and even did somethings better than HL2 but compare the two games and HL2 comes out on top.

And no character development are you mad? It might be subtle and doesn't get in your face like something like MGS4 but its there if you want it to be. Just because it isn't a cut scene doesn't mean there is no character development. One of the biggest things about HL2 was the relationship between the characters.

Also HL2 wasn't based on the Wolfenstein engine :P
HL2:EP2 is based on the HL2 engine with some tweaks.

CodeMonkey

Is this one of those threads where everyone subjectively list their favourite films games and try to justify why they're right good? Cool. I liked....

CodeMonkey

The animations particularly facial in HL2 were never seen on that level in a game before.

That's only true for fps shooty shooty games. I mean, FF10 did all that facial animation back in 2001, at least 3 years before HL2 came out. And I haven't seen any animations using in in game 3d engine done as well as they did in Vagrant Story.

To be fair, HL2 is probably up there if you are talking about FPS of the decade. It's not the game of the decade. Ah sure, it's all so subjective anyway. Everyone will pick different games based on their gaming tastes.

thebman

CodeMonkey wrote: »

That's only true for fps shooty shooty games. I mean, FF10 did all that facial animation back in 2001, at least 3 years before HL2 came out. And I haven't seen any animations using in in game 3d engine done as well as they did in Vagrant Story.

To be fair, HL2 is probably up there if you are talking about FPS of the decade. It's not the game of the decade. Ah sure, it's all so subjective anyway. Everyone will pick different games based on their gaming tastes.

Are you talking about the CG cut scenes? I'm talking about the ingame engine achievement not just doing it in a scripted cut scene.

I'm sure it had been done plenty in cut scenes before.

L31mr0d

CodeMonkey wrote: »

Ah sure, it's all so subjective anyway. Everyone will pick different games based on their gaming tastes.

I don't see the purpose of making this point. There is really no way to objectively choose the game of the decade. It's more a matter of reaching a subjective consensus.

Overheal

mewso wrote: »

How about Fail of the Decade? Half-Life 2 could take that one too for "Episodic Gaming". As I sit here wondering when Episode 3 will be released I can't help thinking it's a major fail in terms of what they originally claimed the advantages would be.

Anyway I will ban myself from voting on Game of the Decade since I am PC till I die it means I know no other kind of gaming except keyboard/mouse and it would be a basic tie between Deus Ex and Half-Life 2.

Marketing Fail. Not Game Fail.

And even then: When this ep finally goes to launch, you can bet it will break sales records.

CodeMonkey

thebman wrote: »

Are you talking about the CG cut scenes? I'm talking about the ingame engine achievement not just doing it in a scripted cut scene.

I'm sure it had been done plenty in cut scenes before.

Games like FF10 used a mix of pre-rendered high quality CG cut scenes and scripted cut scenes using the in game engine with close ups and lip syncing during talky scenes to tell the story. Just saying HL2 are hardly pioneers unless you restrict the claim to FPS.

L31mr0d wrote:

I don't see the purpose of making this point. There is really no way to objectively choose the game of the decade. It's more a matter of reaching a subjective consensus.

I guess the highlighted might have been my point. You'll never reach a subjective consensus though as people have way too different taste in games even within the same genre. You might be able to reach a subjective consensus on the game of the decade for specific genres though. It looks like a lot of people sticks to games in specific genres.

What do I know really...just bored at work and felt like joining in

CodeMonkey

This is not a perfect system but the most objective way of getting the game of the year is use sites like gamerankings to list the game with the best average scores from profession game reviewers like this. Top 3 from 2009 are:

1. Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
2. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
3. Street Fighter IV

Everything else are just personal favourites.

thebman

CodeMonkey wrote: »

Games like FF10 used a mix of pre-rendered high quality CG cut scenes and scripted cut scenes using the in game engine with close ups and lip syncing during talky scenes to tell the story. Just saying HL2 are hardly pioneers unless you restrict the claim to FPS.

I'll be honest, I'm pretty sure HL2's was more advanced than FF10 facial animations but I can't be sure since I never played FF10 because I think turn based gaming should be restricted to board games :P

alastair_doom

cherryghost wrote: »

...
GTA III...

+1 for this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoQStKto_n4#t=4m27s

GTA3 was the only one I was actually incredulous while playing for the first few minutes.

DOC09UNAM

assassins creed 2 is pretty awesome let it be said, nothing short of amazing.

James Howlett

cherryghost wrote: »

I have a rather large list:

Civilization IV
Call of Duty 4
Tony Hawks Pro Skater 3
GTA III
Super Mario Galaxy
Bioshock
Elder Scrolls IV
Mario Kart DS
Soul Calibur II
Viewtiful Joe
Resident Evil 4
Unreal Tournament 2004
Pokemon Gold/Silver


theres probably more. Cant think of anything else right now.

Phew, I'm not the only one who ranks THPS3 that high.

mailrewop

James Howlett wrote: »

Phew, I'm not the only one who ranks THPS3 that high.

thats the best one, great game. went downhill after that

Retr0gamer

GTA 3 is indeed hugely influential but I'm not sure I could include it in a best game of the decade list. It's formula has been built upon and been bettered.

cherryghost

Retr0gamer wrote: »

GTA 3 is indeed hugely influential but I'm not sure I could include it in a best game of the decade list. It's formula has been built upon and been bettered.

but its the foundations of what would become a fiercely competitive and ingruiting genre. i loved the amount of interaction in a city like that, it was never done before (in 3D), and done well.

Retr0gamer

Yeah but I really couldn't call it a great game. I'm not as enamoured with GTA as most people. It's got a load of bugs and faults. What I did like about the game was that the missions weren't scripted like in the later games, it made it more interesting. In GTA 4 for instance the game world resets and sets up triggers so there was really only 1 way to beat each mission. Snadbox games really should be more sandboxy like GTA 3 instead of being linear games where the linear missions are seperated by a sandbox enviroment.

Leprachaun

1. Assassins Creed 2
2. Uncharted 2
3. Arkham Asylum

They're the only games I've really enjoyed this year. Brutal Ledgend was pretty good too but not GOTY material. I also haven't played New Super Mario Bros Wii yet so that might be a contender. Apart from that, Mortal Online 'should' be out in December and that has a slight chance of being my GOTY if it turns out the way the developers say it will.