[watwut]

Games were showing rather then telling long before half life. That was not something special. I don't know whether people here did not played games other then half life back then or half life is only thing they remember.

And the difference between full cit scene and what happened in half life was really really minor.

[crtasm]

But not in first person, you-are-present-in-a-3D-world games? At least I'm not remembering any that felt like Half Life 1 did.

The difference between a cut scene and embodying a character while things happen around you isn't a minor thing for many of us.

[watwut]

The castle of wolfestein or doom are both significantly older and allow more freedom. System shock was a year later and allowed actual tactical choices and somewhat strategical o es.

Half life was part of pattern of moving towards extremely linear. It had better graphics than normal at the time. It had attempt at actual story. It was not move toward more agency to the player nor toward subtlety.

It had less choices than normal at the time, not even in terms of whether to hide on left or right, less options for tactical decisions, less of anything like that.

[crtasm]

You've jumped from talking about storytelling to player freedom, I'm certain I way had more agency in HL1 than Doom.

[hypertele-Xii]

You're gonna have to list some pre-Half-Life games that did a better job.

[watwut]

Wolfestein or doom. The thing is, half life allowed exactly zero choice. So anything where you can go back or have a choice between opening left or right door is better in terms of player agency.

In terms of showing rather then telling via text, almost anything has that aspect.

Half life had very good graphics for the time. That is where it shined.

[hypertele-Xii]

Half-Life has a bunch of player/story choices. Most of them small and inconsequential, I'll grant you, like the microwave incident, but Half-Life even ends on a meaningul story player choice - whether to accept the job proposal.

Wolfenstein and Doom have literally zero story choices of any kind. Not even inconsequential ones!

Clearly, Half-Life has superior story telling to Wolfenstein or Doom. Not by much, can be argued, but it clearly does. And at the time, the little bit felt like a whole lot compared to literally nothing.

[watwut]

Half life is going through exactly determined road with no option to turn left or right. There were token decisions, but that is it, they were just covers.

In wolfesrwin, you could at least go back and had choice between left or right doors. Half life had only way to go - forward. It was like sitting on train moving on railroad.

[hypertele-Xii]

I think you are remembering things unfavorably. Half-Life has many dead ends that do not advance the game, but contain nuggets of story activated by player interaction.

Maybe you just missed them all!

Just off the top of my head from the start of the game: Activating the alarm from the button on the reception desk, getting the guard into trouble. Going into the kitchen and playing with the microwave cassarole (referenced from later sequel!). Opening lockers in the locker room (looking at people's stuff), getting the hazard suit and heading back (if you try to proceed without suit, guard will tell you to go get it - nonlinear maps!). Pressing the broken elevator button, sending people plummeting. Opening the dumpster to find the hiding scientist. Operating vending machines.

Did Wolfenstein or Doom have anything like this? In Wolfenstein you can optionally open cells and find hidden doors behind walls. In Doom you can push buttons, and you are always required to do so to proceed.