SPIKE Game of the DECADE

Half Life 2 some please tell me this is a joke? Don'tgetmewrong its a great game and all but not even close to game of the decade.

Award shows make decisions people disagree with. That's [part of the reason] why I don't watch award shows.

Half-Life 2 wouldn't be my first choice but I think it's an amazing and fits the criteria (whatever Spike's criteria may be) well considering how well it aged when I played it in 2010.

I think it is a great candidate for game of the decade, what do you think is more deserving?

Game of the Year is divisive enough; coming to a consensus on a Game of the Decade would be next to impossible. I agree that Half Life 2 maybe isn't the best game, but I think it's a very intelligent choice nonetheless. It informed a lot of games that followed it - things like involved physics systems and having character moments happen as you are walking your character around are concepts that dozens of games have used since its release.

@SirPsychoSexy said:

I think it is a great candidate for game of the decade, what do you think is more deserving?

Too Human.

The best part was when they called Gabe Newell, Garry.

It's a deserving game. Many of the systems you see today regarding interactive storytelling were born in HL2, not to mention pure technical stuff like physics in games. I would debate if you actually need a "game of the decade" award ... but if you want to have one HL2 is not a bad choice.

Entertainment Weekly picked the list from that list i see world of warcraft i kind of feel it would have been a better pick.

50 Cent: Blood on the Sand was ROBBED I say!

@thugg1280 said:

Entertainment Weekly picked the list from that list i see world of warcraft i kind of feel it would have been a better pick.

WoW (and dont get me wrong, I dont doubt the quality of that game) just took systems that were always established by other games and polished them. There were not many original ideas in that game when it came out. Heck even the whole artstyle is lifted from Warhammer. HL2 in large parts reinvented the FPS genre.

Even within the shooter genre, I'd argue that Halo: Combat Evolved was more influential towards future FPS titles than Half-Life 2. Halo popularized mechanics like recharging health, limited inventory, one button melee/grenades, seamless vehicle combat, etc. that would become staples of the shooter genre for the rest of the decade. On the other hand, Half-Life 2 featured incredibly high production values and some really fantastic and innovative gameplay, but most the mechanics are sort of intrinsic to Half-Life 2--for example, it wouldn't make sense for every game to have a gravity gun and Antlion warriors. So a lot of the cool stuff found in Half-Life 2 never made it into other games.

BUT WHO REALLY GIVES A FUCK

Noby Noby Boy

There were not many original ideas in that game the same can be said for hl2

Wouldn't it have made more sense to have this award in 2009?

Wouldn't it have made more sense to have this award in 2010?

i think its because the spikes vga is just now ten years old predator.

@thugg1280 said:

Wouldn't it have made more sense to have this award in 2010?

My first thought, really. Guess they needed a new category this year and couldn't come up with anything better.

'Game of the Decade' is a bit like 'the Best Game ever Made' argument, kind of pointless. Having said that, Half Life 2 deserves to be in the nomination for that category, which I think really says enough. Personally I might agree with the decision, there really wasn't another example of me sitting down at a friend's house and playing HL2 and immediately being completely blown away by the graphics, physics, story, setting, etc. Everything about that game was amazing and I think a lot of people underestimate how influential it was. Sure Halo: CE created many systems now employed in FPS, and really proved FPS could be done on consoles (although you could argue Goldeneye had already demonstrated that), it didn't do a whole lot else.

I was personally going for Bioshock, but whether you like Half-Life 2 or not, I'm sure you can understand how it's a reasonable choice...

@Willin said:

50 Cent: Blood on the Sand was ROBBED I say!

Word!

@thugg1280 said:

Entertainment Weekly picked the list from that list i see world of warcraft i kind of feel it would have been a better pick.

And I can absolutely see your reasoning there, WoW is a great game, but you have to remember that there are a lot of people who are going to feel the way about WoW that you feel about Half-Life 2. It's always the situation with things like this that they're so subjective, that however well the people behind the award pick their answer, there are always going to be large numbers of people disagreeing. I think Spike made a very fair choice though, I'm not sure I'd call HL2 my game of the decade, but considering the reception it got from fans and critics at its peak, I think it makes sense that they'd choose it.

When I tried to play Half Life 2 last year I thought it was bad, so it definitely wouldn't have been my pick. I only played the first hour and a half though, so maybe they intentionally made those first parts bad just to trick me, and all the stuff afterwards is totally radical. I think the VGA's went for innovation over execution for their criteria, which isn't a measure I agree with. If a game is the best game of the decade, then if I sit down to play it right now it should be more fun than any other game I could be playing from the last ten years. Doing something first doesn't mean you did it best.

Poorly paced, waiting for scripting to happen and also slow elevators or valves that need turning, sure as hell wasn't my decision but I can see why it won.  
People seem to like games like that. 

Not saying anyone has to agree that HL2 is the game of the decade. Not by any means. But, if you think its "bad", you're just wrong. And probably a horrible person.

Sounds like it's time for another "Can we canonize any of the best games of _[insert year here]?" thread!

But to be on-topic note, Half Life 2 is probably the choice I think most committees would choose. Runners-up would probably be StarCraft II and BioShock.

I would choose many other games first because I think Half Life 2 is kind of rubbish for its majority. Of course, the previous decade, Ocarina of Time would also be a frontrunner, which I maintain is also mostly rubbish.

Not my first choice, but I think it's a good candidate.

A perfect choise for me? Half Life 2 and Journey are my 2 favorite games this decade.

The stupid thing is not so much that they happened to choose a game you didn't agree with, but the fact that they felt the need to define one game as THE BEST.

Award shows are about opinions. I get why Half-Life 2 won, and I agree that Halo was also important. But games being influential don't necessarily make them good. To me personally, Mass Effect (as a whole) is the best game of the past 10 years. Half-Life 2 was an incredible game, and influenced many shooters that came after it. It's a fair choice. I can't imagine anyone thinking it's a crazy decision. Combining all the factors that are important to me, and just simply having fun and being absorbed into a game's universe... Mass Effect surpasses books, movies, and tv. Best entertainment experience I've ever had. I respect and love HL2, but it's not even on the same plane of existence, in my opinion, But I'm cool with it being awarded. Opinions are opinions. There's no wrong answer. I think Assassin's Creed is terrible. It just doesn't vibe with me, no matter how good it is technically or well-reviewed it is. I like games like it, and there's no one thing about it I dislike. It's just not fun or interesting to me. Point is, there will never be a "best game" that anyone will agree on. Even if you disagree with the choice, you have to see why they made it at least.

@FilipHolm: Psst....Just a word from the Wise, Journey and Half Life 2 didn't come out in the same Decade....

Anyways, I'm not sure how react to this award. As I really don't know what are the credentials for the award. Is this for games that were just amazing, or were they for games that were so influential that they changed in the industry some how? I've never personally played HL2, however I have heard that it was extremely innovative in its game design and use of physics (maybe not that exactly, but I do remember people saying it was innovative for its time). However, because I never played it, I don't know how influential the game was.

If I was going to say which game was the most influential of the decade, just from a quick glance, I'd say either Halo, CoD4, or WoW. Halo really did show how shooters work on consoles, and set the groundwork for what would become and huge genre in console gaming, CoD revolutionized Console online gameplay, for better or worse is up to interpertation. And really, WoW basically created a genre, or at least put it in the spotlight and definitively cause many publishers to chase after the gold that WoW created, changing the way they did business and what type of games they made. I personally believe that Social games, F2P games, and online persistence wouldn't be where it is today without World of Warcraft.

A game of the decade award in 2012? What?

Thinking that WoW would make a great candidate is laughable, to be honest. While it was extremely high quality compared to other MMOs at release, it didn't do anything that hadn't already been done before in Everquest.

Half-Life 1 and 2 both brought plenty of new things to the genre.

@Gamer_152 said:

@thugg1280 said:

Entertainment Weekly picked the list from that list i see world of warcraft i kind of feel it would have been a better pick.

And I can absolutely see your reasoning there, WoW is a great game, but you have to remember that there are a lot of people who are going to feel the way about WoW that you feel about Half-Life 2. It's always the situation with things like this that they're so subjective, that however well the people behind the award pick their answer, there are always going to be large numbers of people disagreeing. I think Spike made a very fair choice though, I'm not sure I'd call HL2 my game of the decade, but considering the reception it got from fans and critics at its peak, I think it makes sense that they'd choose it.

I can get behind WoW even though I don't like the game purely due to cultural impact. I don't there's a game that has affected so many people over such a long period of time. Half Life 2 was the safe option, but I can see why they picked it.

I have no problem with Half-Life 2 winning. It's not my pick, but it's a great game and I can understand the choice.

If I were going to lodge a complaint, it would be more targeted toward a few questionable nominees. However, it's moot at this point, and a VGA award isn't exactly prestigious, so if you have any vitriol stored up, this isn't really worth wasting it on.

I see nothing wrong with Half-Life 2 being game of the decade. I blew me away when I played it at launch, and it's still a solid shooter to this day.

Half-Life 2 is a superb choice, that game blew my mind in 2004.

If you went back to it in 2009 or something you largely missed the point. Many games had already copied it to hell and back by then.

Half Life 2 a pretty good choice, I would of said either GTA San Andreas or COD4

It's not what I personally would have chosen BUT it do understand everything Half-Life 2 has done as an historical landmark in gaming.

It's without doubt a well deserving choice.

It's a worthy choice, but probably WoW or CoD4 (as representative for all of the CoD games of that blueprint) would be fairer. They've effectively been top of the pile for 5 years and counting. It's really a phenomenal level of success which is pretty hard to argue with, even if you aren't a fan yourself.

I was shooting for Shadow of the Colossus but i'm not unhappy about Half-Life 2 winning. I'm glad Red Dead Redemption or Mass Effect 2 didn't win, not because I don't think those are fantastic games, but just because I feel like there'd have been an air of "we gave the award to this game because it's the last one we played on the list" to it.

Oh NO!

Someone somewhere said something that I disagree with? Better start a thread on the internet

I actually think it is the most logical pick. And probably the one most people feel is the right one or have the least amount of problems with.

Half Life 2 was a big fucking deal for me. It's one of the few games I've played more than twice and finished. Actually, I've thought about plugging away at it again. At the time, I had never played anything like it. The naysayers might break it down now, but that's like shitting on Goldeneye 007 too. So, fuck you.

From that list, I would probably pick Half-Life 2 as well. It's a good choice, I don't see any problem with it.

@Claude said:

Half Life 2 was a big fucking deal for me. It's one of the few games I've played more than twice and finished. Actually, I've thought about plugging away at it again. At the time, I had never played anything like it. The naysayers might break it down now, but that's like shitting on Goldeneye 007 too. So, fuck you.

Word. It sure amazed the hell out of me when it came out.

Nope. Half-Life 2 was a masterpiece. I think I'd make it my game of last decade, too. Of course Valve has had time to learn from their mistakes with it and improved upon the gameplay and narrative in subsequent episodes, but that game, for its time, being the first real physics sandbox I can remember on top of providing a lengthy campaign, turning the cliche characters from the first game into something more (maybe still mostly cliche, but if so in a funny way), having a groundbreaking facial animation system that brought the characters and acting to life, and the level design to back up memorable combat sequences and yeah... I could go on, but let's just leave it at: that game is as fucking amazing as the first was for its time.

@Jimbo said:

It's a worthy choice, but probably WoW or CoD4 (as representative for all of the CoD games of that blueprint) would be fairer. They've effectively been top of the pile for 5 years and counting. It's really a phenomenal level of success which is pretty hard to argue with, even if you aren't a fan yourself.

This is pretty much exactly what I'm thinking, those two games both turned the industry on their heads and changed everything, a game of the decade has to be more than just a good game, it has to have a lasting effect. Warcraft 3 is probably the only other game that would even qualify due to it's very loose ties to DotA and essentially creating the free to play genre.

@Jimbo said:

It's a worthy choice, but probably WoW or CoD4 (as representative for all of the CoD games of that blueprint) would be fairer. They've effectively been top of the pile for 5 years and counting. It's really a phenomenal level of success which is pretty hard to argue with, even if you aren't a fan yourself.

This is pretty much exactly what I'm thinking, those two games both turned the industry on their heads and changed everything, a game of the decade has to be more than just a good game, it has to have a lasting effect. Warcraft 3 is probably the only other game that would even qualify due to it's very loose ties to DotA and essentially creating the free to play genre.

It would be my choice as well. It redefined in game storytelling, implemented physics in the game that would go on to influence tons of games, had more variety in one 20 hour period than most entire series do over 20 years of games, was perfectly paced, had some of the best enemy AI out there, and so on. I would say Bioshock would be number 2 probably, but Half Life 2 is easily my choice.

HL2 created story in an FPS as we know it, and probably does it better than 90% of games that followed it, a decade later.

HL2 was the beginning of the Source engine.

HL2 classified half the shit in games you take for granted these days.

Out of all the possible choices Spike could have made, they made the right one. HL2 breathed new life into a genre. WoW (why the fuck would you pick this, other than brand loyalty?) has choked the life out of RPGs as a whole.

People keep overlooking Dark Souls. HL2 I've started it countless times since the game was released but once you get to the stupid bike/boat thing section it's just so much of a drag that I've never get past that. If it was "best first hour in the last decade" then I would agree with HL2, I had the same problem with HL1.

While Half Life2 had some great moments in it, the more & more I get away from it, the more that whole silent protagonist thing gets to me. That already takes out some of the life out of this game as the awesome moments in that game, it'd be hard to be quiet about if I was in the game. Out of this category I feel that Mass Effect 1 or 2, wow or something better would have been a better choice for such a silly award when so many good games came out every year it makes this decision a silly one to pick from. Now that we are far into the vg history there's going to be less landmark perfect10 scored games that everyone not only enjoys but agrees it was something good for this category.