HL2 Not Required For Episode 1

Eurogamer reports that Half-Life 2 will not be required to run Episode 1, the first content pack for Valve's hit game. From the article: "Half-Life 2: Episode 1 won't actually require Half-Life 2 to play, Valve's explained, and although the game will be 'four to six hours' long, marketing director Doug Lombardi reckons it's 'markedly richer' in terms of content quality ... The change from Aftermath to Episode 1 was 'simply a name change' he says, when asked about the shift to episodic content - which wasn't a shift at all, he adds, since 'the format of episodic releases was decided before Half-Life 2 was made available'."

Comments

$20?

[PhrostyMcByte]

$20 for four hours of gameplay and old crap that I already have (and don't play)? No thanks. Make it $10 if you already have HL2 - then I'll buy it.

Re:$20?

[Chimera512]

luckily for me, i'm terrible at computer games so it will take me longer then 4-6 hours to complete the game once.

Re:$20?

[rustbear]

I don't really see your point. That's much better value than you get at the cinema (and the game is replayable), so what's the big deal?

Re:$20?

[billcopc]

Holy batclocks batman! He's using 48-hour days!

Re:$20?

[Chi Hsuan Men]

Mod parent up.

This is the second article where I have seen a lot of complaining about the price point. Consider the four to six hours of re-playable entertainment you will receive with the expansion (sorry, episode) for $20.

Considering most new releases on DVD are usually around $18 - 20, why is it unfair that Valve charge $20? IMHO, I think the price is entirely reasonable and will definitely purchase it when it comes out.

Re:$20?

[ChaosDiscord]

I don't really see your point. That's much better value than you get at the cinema (and the game is replayable), so what's the big deal?

That's a false comparision. Half-Life 2 Episode 1 isn't up against movies. It's up against other video games who can potentially offer a better dollars per fun-hour ratio. $5 per hour is pretty expensive for video games. Suggesting that it's all okay by comparing it to movies is as silly as suggesting that both movies (about $4/hour locally) and video games are grossly overpriced because I assuming a moderately regular play schedule I can enjoy myself for about $0.37/hour (Assuming a $90 investment, 2 year lifespan, playing about 30 times a year for 4 hours a game).

The reality is that different forms of entertainment are not interchangable. I've happily paid $125 for 3 hours of entertainment; that doesn't mean I'm willing to pay $400 for a game I expect to play for ten hours.

Even assuming we can compare such forms of entertainment, it's hardly a clear win. The proposed Half-Life pricing is roughly $5/hour. Locally I pay around $4/hour for first run movies. If I'm willing to catch a matinee, I can pay about $3/hour. Budget theatres after a few months: $1/hour. Rental: $1/hour, assuming one other person watches it with me. When I purchase a first person shooter, I'm hoping for about 15 hours of gameplay in exchange for $50; roughly $3.50/hour. At $5/hour Half-Life Episode 1 is expensive. However, if it's as good or better than HL2, I'm willing to consider it.

Re:$20?

[Pentagram]

Are you serious!? Talked about overpriced. I pay $15 per month for World of Warcraft, which could easily be 1200 hours of entertainment. A good game that provides 80-100 hours of gameplay normally sells for $50 to $60.

I don't quite understand this obsession with duration. If I go to watch a film, I don't feel disappointed if it only lasts 90 minutes compared to one lasting 2 hours. Nor would I pick the second over the first on that basis; some films just take a different amount of time to tell their story.

Most games I've played are packed with filler. Half Life and sequel managed it OK (with only about a third of the game made up of tedious bits) but some, like Doom3 and Halo were ridiculous. Why should I fight my way through another corridor of zombies almost identical to the previous ten when they could make it a bit more concentrated? "Just condense it!" I keep thinking, "I want to get to the fun bits!"

I could then use the time saved to go out and do something more interesting. Or even play another game.

Just play on Extreme Difficulty setting

[i_am_the_r00t]

Put it on Extreme Difficulty and it will be easily a 20-30 hour game. It took me 2 years to finish HL2.

btw. Extreme Difficulty is "Hard" + the following:

1. New house and mortgage
2. 2 young children
3. yard to mow and maintain
4. Wife (nuff said there)
5. 60 hr/week Job

Erm..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I don't care if it requires HL2 or not. What I want to know if it's going to act like ET andphone home again.

I've got my firewall to totally lock out Steam. Aftermath will have to give a blowjob and a fridge full of beer to get me to want to unblock the damn thing.

Hopefully others feel the same way as me and Valve will get punished for using such an amusive system. But knowing the mass market as I do, I guess HL's name alone will make it top the charts for a couple of weeks.

Re:Erm..

[Solder Fumes]

punished for using such an amusive system

Were you amused as a child?

Re:Erm..

[Sepodati]

amusive

Amusing and abusive? Like how it's funny watching your kid brother get his ass whupped?

Re:i don't get it

[BinaryOpty]

That's exactly what it means: That you can buy the $20 Episode 1 and get CS:S with it (as well as play any free mods)