Viewing Thread:
"Is the original Half-Life still worth getting?"

For £10.

Yes/No

Hedfix wrote:
> But compared to HL it was quality.

Heh. I saw "Hedfix" posting in the PC gaming forums from the main page. My immediate thought was, "Bet he's going on about how bad HL is again." :D

But compared to HL it was quality.

Turok was rubbish.

It was fantastic back in the day.

Where is Source exactly? I'm confused. Don't tend to get PC games bar Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Goldeneye was better than it I seem to re-call.

So, to summarise.

1) Cheap
2) Loads of free valve stuff when you register
3) milestone pc game

Aye, buy it.

In 1999-2000 it was already old.

Its incredably old now and whether it'll entertain will be questionable by todays standards (and half life 2 around).

I suppose its cheap enough to warrent a try, just don't expect it to blow you away like it did back in 1999-2000.

The fuss was about the presentation.

Presentation is not good gameplay. :P

and actually I did like it until I came to the 30Oth corridor and another stupid jump.

Hedfix wrote:

....


Yes Hedfix, we know you don't like the game....

Basically Xbgamer, I'd say if you can pick Hl up for a fiver, buy it. You'll get a few more hours entertainment out of it than a two hour video.

Sure, it's dated, but then again, so are Goldeneye and Turok which Headfix loves to go on about. regardless of what was better at the time, HL is still worth a play, if simply to see what all the fuss was about at the time. ;)

I'll admit presentation-wise it did a grand job. Gameplay-wise Turok and Goldeneye were both already light years ahead.