Support NeoGAF

[HL3.exe]

It's been 20 years since Half-Life 2's incredible demonstration was revealed at E3 2003. I recently came across it again, and there are still parts of this demo that I've rarely seen being tried in a game, or it's been implement fairly artificial, not ad flexible/dynamic ad this demo wants to present. Some stuff that would be considered today as "downgrade" (which I personally don't believe in, something things just don't work out), because a lot of stuff in this demo from a mechanics and systems point of view are missing in the retail release.

But in this demo, specifically the 'Traptown' section, you can see 'Immersive Sim' type improvisational tactics being used. Utilizing a dynamic environment and the AI reacting to this changing environment:

• Pushing physics in front of the door, AI reacting by suppressing/shooting through the windows, while another one kicks the physics away.
• The combine surrounding the building, the player improving by pulling a radiator of the wall as a shield.
• Blocking AI from coming upstairs by shoving physics down the staircase.
• Being pinned down, and using a grenades to destroy two supports to drop a big container.

All of this turn out to be scripted bullshit of course, but it's crazy that 20 years on and games still don't feel this dynamically reactive like this demo presents. Really neat 'Immersive Sim' type stuff that in the end we never got in retail. I was hoping HL2 would've turn out a Immersive Sim because of the huge influx of Looking Glass staff that migrated to Valve at that time when Looking Glass closed down.

(Another part of that impressive demo showing the promise of a -seemingly- reactive environment and NPC's that games still don't do to this degree. And just to show your how incredibly ahead of it's time Valve was in that era)

What are some unfulfilled game concepts/systems/moments you remember, and never got to play?

 

[kvltus lvlzvs]

Whats crazy is that if someone was good enough, they could make a mod of this with good ol hl2. Lots of *quality* enemy ai is partially scripted. imho enemy ai requires the same kind of loving touch as level design.

 

[HL3.exe]

Whats crazy is that if someone was good enough, they could make a mod of this with good ol hl2. Lots of *quality* enemy ai is partially scripted. imho enemy ai requires the same kind of loving touch as level design.

Fun fact: I tried this some 10 years ago, but non-scripted AI module are too limited to actually make this work. The only thing NPC's react to in a changing environment, is taking cover behind physics that are larger then their own boundary box (like a huge container). Not even crouching.

Almost every 'clever/believable' ai interaction in the game is canned/scripted/triggered.

 

[Success]

I was going to enter this thread and shout at you for having nostalgia glasses on but the "Traptown" video you showed really changed my mind.

It has been 20 years and I can't think of any other game that would play like the video.

Well done on making an excellent thread

H HL3.exe​

 

[oji-san]

Perhaps Redwood Fall with it's gore system but we did get Dead Island 2 recently so it might be better, still haven't played it.

The original Prey 2 before we got Arkane Prey was also something i really wanted as we don't have lot of games playing as a bounty hunter.

 

[HL3.exe]

I was going to enter this thread and shout at you for having nostalgia glasses on but the "Traptown" video you showed really changed my mind.

It has been 20 years and I can't think of any other game that would play like the video.

Well done on making an excellent thread

H HL3.exe​

Thanks! Funny enough, i'm not a big fan of nostalgia. I believe modern games are/can be really impressive. I mean, TOTK just released. But i'm currently playing the System Shock remake and from a baseline mechanics/systems standpoint, not much has changed in 20 years (which is fine). But seeing this HL2 demo again, got me thinking.

 

[ProgenitorCastle]

The Resident Evil 3.5 collective of unused RE4 gameplay systems/concepts still amazes me to this day, I'd be beyond stoked if it ever leaked one day as a playable build/s...a man can dream...

 

[Drizzlehell]

Damn, 20 years is a long time to hold on to a disappointment, especially since it was your own damn fault that you overhyped yourself, lol.

I can't see anything in these trailers that hasn't been incorporated into the finished game, and in some cases done even better. Are you saying that you're disappointed because they didn't include those scenes exactly as they appeared in those tech demos? Like, seriously?

 

[PaddyOCanager]

What are some unfulfilled game concepts/systems/moments you remember, and never got to play?

It's not the same, but I remember playing Red Faction and being excited that this level of environmental interaction/destruction would not only be standard but be crazy advanced in 20 years.

Fast forward to present times and most games have zero environmental interaction. The industry has actively regressed in favor of prettier textures, higher resolutions and framerates.

When I was a graphics whore, it was because there were generational leaps in visual fidelity. Now that we're reaching the point of diminishing returns, the shallowness of this perspective couldn't be more evident. TotK putting the entire industry to shame has made me so goddamn happy.

 

[GymWolf]

I think condemned 1 and fear1 are the closest thing to somehow intelligent human enemies, but they still don't use much physics.

But yeah it would be a dream to play a game with such emergent gameplay caused by both smart ia and interaction with the world.

The 2 fake demos for tlou1 and 2 have a similar feeling to that hl2 video, too bad the reality is much worse.

 

[Fbh]

I miss the times when the idea of a next gen game was stuff like this instead of 4K and ray tracing.

 

[feynoob]

May I introduce you to this gem?

 

[Fuz]

• Pushing physics in front of the door, AI reacting by suppressing/shooting through the windows, while another one kicks the physics away.
• The combine surrounding the building, the player improving by pulling a radiator of the wall as a shield.
• Blocking AI from coming upstairs by shoving physics down the staircase.
• A stealth section and cleverly using physics to ambush the group.
• Being pinned down, and using a grenades to destroy two supports to drop a big container.

This is too smart for 99,9% of gamers (including myself). Those things are good only for a dev demonstration. (also, 1:44, soldier standing still while the swinging trap is coming right on his teeth, lol)

Although, HL1 had something like this on its soldiers.

 

[HL3.exe]

Damn, 20 years is a long time to hold on to a disappointment, especially since it was your own damn fault that you overhyped yourself, lol.

I can't see anything in these trailers that hasn't been incorporated into the finished game, and in some cases done even better. Are you saying that you're disappointed because they didn't include those scenes exactly as they appeared in those tech demos? Like, seriously?

I'm guessing your not really understanding what the demo implies or probably didn't read the accompanied post, which is fine. It not that I want to play those 'specific scenes'. It's that they clearly show concepts environmental improvisation and reactivity from the world/ai that the retail release definitely didn't have. I don't want to play 'this specific scene', I want to experience games with world reactivity, simulational complexity and a possibility space, on the level of this promised demo whilst supporting a minimal immersive interface.

Maybe you don't notice it, but there is a clear distinction between stuff like a simple cod zombies mode for example, where blocking a route means boarding up the window by scripted floorboards. Not by actually utilizing the physical environment. Why they do it this strict way makes sense because it's more foolproof and limits the dynamic 'possibility space' creating less bugs, but at the same time is less exciting.

That's why Immersive Sim try yo break these design barriers, even if they don't always succeed. And this Half-Life demo leaned heavily in this direction. In design academia, they call this the 'Simulationist dream'.

 

[HL3.exe]

This is too smart for 99,9% of gamers (including myself). Those things are good only for a dev demonstration. (also, 1:44, soldier standing still while the swinging trap is coming right on his teeth, lol)

Although, HL1 had something like this on its soldiers.

Maybe, I don't believe that personally. Look at what TOTK brought to the conversation of 'simulation complexity in mainstream games'.

But sure, maybe I shared a incidental 169 IQ take on 'the unfulfilled promise of Half-Life and games in general' or something. Lol

 

[kvltus lvlzvs]

May I introduce you to this gem?

damn, that looks really cool.

 

[Drizzlehell]

I'm guessing your not really understanding what the demo implies or probably didn't read the accompanied post, which is fine. It not that I want to play those 'specific scenes'. It's that they clearly show concepts environmental improvisation and reactivity from the world/ai that the retail release definitely didn't have. I don't want to play 'this specific scene', I want to experience games with world reactivity, simulational complexity and a possibility space, on the level of this promised demo whilst supporting a minimal immersive interface.

Maybe you don't notice it, but there is a clear distinction between stuff like a simple cod zombies mode for example, where blocking a route means boarding up the window by scripted floorboards. Not by actually utilizing the physical environment. Why they do it this strict way makes sense because it's more foolproof and limits the dynamic 'possibility space' creating less bugs, but at the same time is less exciting.

That's why Immersive Sim try yo break these design barriers, even if they don't always succeed. And this Half-Life demo leaned heavily in this direction. In design academia, they call this the 'Simulationist dream'.

Well, it's so obviously just a tech demo that aimed to showcase the physics engine so of course it would be designed to show off the juiciest features front and center. Like I said, pretty much everything that you listed in those bullet points is present in the game in one way or another so I still don't get why would it warrant such a disappointment.

 

[feynoob]

damn, that looks really cool.

Bethesda cancelled this game, and released that garbage fallout 76 in the process.

At least, there was a new prey, but kind a different one.

 

[GymWolf]

This is too smart for 99,9% of gamers (including myself). Those things are good only for a dev demonstration. (also, 1:44, soldier standing still while the swinging trap is coming right on his teeth, lol)

Although, HL1 had something like this on its soldiers.

That's why we have difficulty modes.

That excuse is rotten at the core when players can tailor the challenge they want from a simple ingame menu.

Are devs really capable of giving me human like ia that has both the flaws and plus of being humans? show me in your hardest difficulty mode, for everyone else there is still easy, normal, hard and very hard.

The reality is that making that type of ia is almost impossible because we are not just talking of giving super sight or super hearing, but a way more nuanced type of ia, and the devs want none of this type of challenge because advanced IA doesn't sell.

 

[Fuz]

That's why we have difficulty modes.

That excuse is rotten at the core when players can tailor the challenge they want from a simple ingame menu.

Are devs really capable of giving me human like ia that has both the flaws and plus of being humans? show me in your hardest difficulty mode, for everyone else there is still easy, normal, hard and very hard.

I'm not talking about difficulty, I'm saying that 99% of players won't even notice the AI, adapt and counter adapt, and just go UNGA BUNGA.

 

[HL3.exe]

Well, it's so obviously just a tech demo that aimed to showcase the physics engine so of course it would be designed to show off the juiciest features front and center. Like I said, pretty much everything that you listed in those bullet points is present in the game in one way or another so I still don't get why would it warrant such a disappointment.

I get ya. Not 'disappointed', never mentioned it. Just 'unfulfilled potential'.

Wouldn't it be more interesting if we do more with world interactivity or combat AI then just 'click on their heads until they're deleted'? That's my point.

Also, no a lot of minute stuff missing presented in this demo (which again, is fine as stated above). I even worked source modding, and believe you me, I tried making this a.i. and physics stuff to work.

 

[GymWolf]

I'm not talking about difficulty, I'm saying that 99% of players won't even notice the AI, adapt and counter adapt, and just go UNGA BUNGA.

That's a bit generalistic don't you think?

If that was the case, we would not have so many discussion in every videogame board about bad ia with examples of fake demos like in this very topic.

 

[Fuz]

That's a bit generalistic don't you think?

If that was the case, we would not have so many discussion in every videogame board about bad ia with examples of fake demos like in this very topic.

Well, there's a big difference between bad ai, good ai and adaptive ai. I don't think it's even the same playing field.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Wouldn't it be more interesting if we do more with world interactivity or combat AI then just 'click on their heads until they're deleted'? That's my point.

Yeah it would, but again, what's shown in that (very) scripted sequence does happen in the game.

You can use objects to block incoming fire (eg. remember when you had to run past a sniper while holding barrels and crates for cover?)

Enemy AI does kick objects around if it's in their way. Most notably combine soldiers knocking out friendly turrets or headcrab zombies throwing shit at you or smacking it around if it blocks their path.

Enemy soldiers do switch tactics depending on what you do.

There's a number of precariously (and conveniently) placed heavy objects that you can knock down to crush enemies.

At best I would agree that maybe there should've been more scenarios in the game that forced the AI into similar behavior that's showcased in these demos to make things more interesting. But on the other hand, there are also so many other "gags" in the finished game that aren't even present in here that it still ended up being just as impressive in my opinion. I even recently replayed this game in VR and sure enough, there were still plenty of situations where the AI kinda surprised me and it was even easier to pull off some of those physics tricks with added mobility thanks to motion controls.

 

[HL3.exe]

Yeah it would, but again, what's shown in that (very) scripted sequence does happen in the game.

You can use objects to block incoming fire (eg. remember when you had to run past a sniper while holding barrels and crates for cover?)

Enemy AI does kick objects around if it's in their way. Most notably combine soldiers knocking out friendly turrets or headcrab zombies throwing shit at you or smacking it around if it blocks their path.

Enemy soldiers do switch tactics depending on what you do.

There's a number of precariously (and conveniently) placed heavy objects that you can knock down to crush enemies.

At best I would agree that maybe there should've been more scenarios in the game that forced the AI into similar behavior that's showcased in these demos to make things more interesting. But on the other hand, there are also so many other "gags" in the finished game that aren't even present in here that it still ended up being just as impressive in my opinion. I even recently replayed this game in VR and sure enough, there were still plenty of situations where the AI kinda surprised me and it was even easier to pull off some of those physics tricks with added mobility thanks to motion controls.

True, I think the retail AI is alright. They do fun stuff (even though they where blown out of the water when F.E.A.R arrived a year later.) But it's not like this demo is surprising that it's 'fake' (even though expectations where different in that era compared to now) I knew that at the time (yes, i'm old). I immediately tested it when the infamous leak hit the web at the end of 2003.

But my point is not that the AI in this specific game is bad, event though a lot of the stuff that is shown simply is not possible: You can't block doors with physics, they just slide out of the way. Can't block AI either, they just clip/glitch through the physics at a certain point, and don't look for a alternative route that it not 'ai-graphed' out with nodes by a dev. Ai don't maneuver around the buildings or cleverly shoot through windows, most of the times they just rush you. Etc. But it's completely understandable that they didn't reached these heights, because they'd accomplished a whole lot of other things like their facial tech, or basic 'Newtonian' physics in the first place (wasn't that common back then)

My point is that, we're 20 year further by now and I still haven't played a game where these kinds of sophisticated interactions and reactivity is possible. And I played pretty much everything action-adventure, shooter, immersive sim released since then haha.

 

[Represent.]

Welcome to my world of disappointment.

20 years later and the things in this video are not even fucking close to being the norm.

Not even close to being common in games.

I remember saying WOW when I first saw the player use the grenade, to blow up the garbage bin, which then fell onto the enemies below, crushing them. Meanwhile, in COD MW2 (one of the most expensive games ever, developed by nearly 3000 people), in 2023, my grenade does absolutely nothing to its surrounding environments. Doesnt even impact the enemy I throw it at if he's behind a piece of cardboard.

Why does no developer implement any of these things into their games? No idea.

Physics and destruction. No one seems to give a single shit about them. Framerate or bust.

Sickening.

 

[Wildebeest]

It isn't easy. They said the problem with Crackdown 3 was that each building in a game would need its own server in the cloud to simulate the destruction physics for it. If you have 10,000 games with five buildings being damaged in each game then obviously that is a huge challenge. I think the last game I saw that really tried to use PhysX was Control, and that really showed the abandonware state of that API since it causes crashes and instability on a lot of modern PC hardware.

 

[Guilty_AI]

The problem with the whole "using destructible enviroment" to your favor thing is that, while it sounds cool in concept, most players just choose the highly efficient solution of... shooting.

Instead of throwing the grenade to destroy some prop and hope it'll somehow crush your enemies, its much more simple and easy to throw the grenade directly at them. Overall, the whole destructible enviroment thing doesn't work all that well for straightforward combat like this, so many devs just stopped bothering.

One way it does work though is how it alters the enviroment, forcing players to adapt and change tactics. You can observe this in games like ARMA 3 and Battlefield.

 

[HL3.exe]

The problem with the whole "using destructible enviroment" to your favor thing is that, while it sounds cool in concept, most players just choose the highly efficient solution of... shooting.

Instead of throwing the grenade to destroy some prop and hope it'll somehow crush your enemies, its much more simple and easy to throw the grenade directly at them. Overall, the whole destructible enviroment thing doesn't work all that well for straightforward combat like this, so many devs just stopped bothering.

One way it does work though is how it alters the enviroment, forcing players to adapt and change tactics. You can observe this in games like ARMA 3 and Battlefield.

You're not wrong. I just feel it's a balancing act that's not even attempted in a lot of games, instead just to hit that power fantasy high. To incentivize the player to use these tactics, is to underpower the player. (Which not a lot of mainstream players appreciate)

For everyone who complains about BOTW and TOTK's weapon durability systems, It's actually a smart system that incentivizes creative/alternative thinking and on-the-fly problem solving. For instance, Half-Life could've just undercut it's weapons, make ammo more scarce and make them multi interpretational tools (pistol to hit a switch/shoot off locks, grenades to clear paths/distract attention, etc) that can be put to more interesting use than just, 'point and delete enemy' guns. Immersive Sim's usually go for this type of balancing, creating more interesting and dynamic challenges.

 

[Guilty_AI]

You're not wrong. I just feel it's a balancing act that's not even attempted in a lot of games, instead just to hit that power fantasy high. To incentivize the player to use these tactics, is to underpower the player. (Which not a lot of mainstream players appreciate)

For everyone who complains about BOTW and TOTK's weapon durability systems, It's actually a smart system that incentivizes creative/alternative thinking and on-the-fly problem solving. For instance, Half-Life could've just undercut it's weapons, make ammo more scarce and make them multi interpretational tools (pistol to hit a switch/shoot off locks, grenades to clear paths/distract attention, etc) that can be put to more interesting use than just, 'point and delete enemy' guns. Immersive Sim's usually go for this type of balancing, creating more interesting and dynamic challenges.

If you wanna see a game that attempts that kind of approach in a FPS/combat focused enviroment, i highly suggest you check out Ctrl Alt Ego (both on steam or GOG). Its basically an immersive-sim (or Looking Glass inspired if the term triggers you) with a heavy emphasis on creative thinking and using the environment to your favor.
As you said, the game does make things like ammo scarcer and direct confrontations much harder to achieve, forcing you to think your approaches more.

Of course, there is none of the spetacle of those videos, but you do get that feeling of things just coming together and using everything you can to your favor.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Thought this thread was gonna be about Pragmata or Little Devil Inside.

Half-Life in 2023? Lol, yeah I'm out.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Thought this thread was gonna be about Pragmata or Little Devil Inside.

I guess you missed the username?

 

[German Hops]

There was that Mario game that was supposed to feature his long lost brother, Xario;

 

[Guilty_AI]

There was that Mario game that was supposed to feature his long lost brother, Xario;

Thats Σario

 

[daveonezero]

Dang the sound in HL2 is so good.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

*looking at username*
HL3.exe
I have the feeling you are a little too much obsessed with Half-Life.

 

[apowhungo]

i'm still waiting for this game

 

[HL3.exe]

If you wanna see a game that attempts that kind of approach in a FPS/combat focused enviroment, i highly suggest you check out Ctrl Alt Ego (both on steam or GOG). Its basically an immersive-sim (or Looking Glass inspired if the term triggers you) with a heavy emphasis on creative thinking and using the environment to your favor.
As you said, the game does make things like ammo scarcer and direct confrontations much harder to achieve, forcing you to think your approaches more.

Of course, there is none of the spetacle of those videos, but you do get that feeling of things just coming together and using everything you can to your favor.

Played it, liked it. I'll try everything ImmSim that comes out!

 

[HL3.exe]

*looking at username*
HL3.exe
I have the feeling you are a little too much obsessed with Half-Life.

Haha, nah in reality it's s coincidental alias. If you read the content-related post i'm actually obsessed with 'Immersive Sim' design.