Talk:Half-Life (series)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Halflife Timeline info box

Why is Counterstrike on there?

I guess someone put it on there because it's technologically related, but I've removed it now. Mezigue (talk) 09:25, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

More Information

I think the Half-Life series article should include more complete facts, such as dates of release, sales, and critical reception. 67.172.204.135 13:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Lack of a Weapons List

I noticed a red-link in the Combine (Half-Life 2) article. Combine Standard Issue Pulse Rifle, to be specific, We need a weapons list for either the entire series, or each individual game. Black Mercy 21:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

A recent precedent has removed all weapon lists I believe. If you see any red links to weapons, feel free to remove them. Qjuad 06:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Episode Four?

Since Ep4 has been announced, why isn't it listed here? 82.117.101.124 19:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Because it wont be called Ep4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.233.247.10 (talk) 00:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Half life.

I agree with the comments above, about having more complete facts would be good. I noticed half life shown on a TV show, Lost season 1, Ep 21, near the beggining of the show.. just for some information for other people in case some one wants to use this data. Jessycormier 20:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Portal

I could be mistaken, but as far as I know, Portal has not been given a confirmed place within the Half-Life series time-line, so it seems wrong to place it in the "Half-Life 2 era". Although perhaps HL2:Ep3 will shed more light on this. --Beeurd 00:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You can find evidence of this in Portal itself (references to Black Mesa), the Portal "hacked" site, and Aperture Science is refered to at one point in Episode 2. The link is also mentioned in several interviews with personnel at Valve, so it seems to be a pretty firm tie in to me. 38.112.96.194 20:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Races merge

The following fail WP:FICT and should be merged: Race X, Tentacle (Half-Life), Nihilanth, Ichthyosaur (Half-Life), Headcrab, Gonarch, Gargantua (Half-Life), Carnivorous_Leech, Bullsquid, Black Ops (Half-Life), Houndeye, Barnacle (Half-Life), Alien Grunt, Alien Controller, Hazardous Environment Combat Unit and Antlion (Half-Life 2) --David Fuchs ^(talk) 19:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Merged info is now here. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 21:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Why does HECU Redirect here?

Why was the HECU page removed and instead HECU redirects here? I thought the former page was fine. Besides, this article makes no mention of the HECU, what they are, or what role they play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.122.97 (talk) 04:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, when they moved all the races into 1 talk page, they forgot the HECU page. Not only that, but without the HECU page, someone needs to edit all the articles and replace "HECU" with "Marines". I would do it, but I'm using a shared IP (this IP is used on about 100+ computers throughout the building) and somebody got it banned. So I can't edit until I get an account (It's on my to-do list).204.14.12.35 (talk) 14:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Dog

I'm wondering why all the characters listed in the expandable section on Half-Life have their own page, except Dog? His (its) link redirects to the Half-Life 2 page (specifically the section on technology). While I am a Dog fan, Wikipedia should either have a page about him or remove him from the "important characters" section. As far as his importance to the plot goes, it falls somewhere between Huey Dewey and Louie from Silent Running and See-Threepio and Artoo DeeToo from Star Wars. 24.243.102.5 (talk) 03:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Ease of Navigation and Continuity

I tried to find out some info about the Half-Life series a while ago, and found it quite difficult to navigate Wikipedia on this subject. This was partly due to the fact that few (or none) of the pages list here (the Half-Life (series) page). This means that there is no continuous thread or common link between all these pages. I wanted to add it to "see allso" , but I think its important enough to rather be worked into all of the introductions of these pages. Thus one could find your way about Half-Life through this page. =GeiwTeol 23:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

"Editing Half Life"

I deleted the horrendous "Editing Half Life" section. I don't know who wrote it, but it was terrible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Viper (talk • contribs) 23:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add the {{Half-Life}} navbox to any Half-Life related article that doesn't have it already. --Geniac (talk) 13:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Half-Life Cover Art.jpg

The image Image:Half-Life Cover Art.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Cultural Impact section should be changed or outright removed.

First off, trivia sections are discouraged. Furthermore, this is one of the most influential and innovative video games and works of science fiction and all there is in that section is a low budget unauthorized film? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.107.95.52 (talk) 07:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

It's hardly trivia, it has four sources. Removing it won't do a lot of good. Maybe you can expand it? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

As Daragon states, its not trivia, its a sourced example of impact with fans. Yes, more is needed, but that is no reason to remove this one, which is here as a consequence of a merge result in a recent AfD. Currently this article is little more than a disambiguation page, but there are plans to expand it to meet higher quality series articles such as Halo series and StarCraft series, providing full development and impact information. -- Sabre (talk) 10:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge headcrab into this article

The article headcrab has multiple issues, is unreferenced and crufty. Since the same thing happened with Metroid (creature), I suggest that the article be shortened and merged here as a recurring enemy.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 00:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I oppose any merge. This one's the more iconic and will be the more widely commented of the Half-Life creatures, I know there's several points of analysis in PC Gamer UK for a start. The lesser commented on Half-Life species, Vortigaunt and Combine (Half-Life) (which looked little different to the current version of headcrab before I cleaned them up), prove that it these articles can survive alone (regardless of whatever Metroid does, which is irrelevant anyway), even if Vortigaunt is a little lacking in design info at the moment. I was rather hoping that after doing those two articles, someone else might try headcrab, but merging it is the entirely wrong way to go about it, especially as this rather WIP article is meant to cover the products, not the fiction. I've been slowly cleaning my way through the Half-Life series in recent months, I will endeavour to fix up the article when I have a moment. -- Sabre (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the article can probably stand on its own, so I oppose this merge, too. Gary King (talk) 02:36, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Film Adaption

Has there ever been any section written on the speculation of a movie? I'm not saying that we should put in anything that would fall under WP:Crystal but there have been many articles published on the proposed film adaption. I would normally be against it but I read Halo's film speculation section Halo_(series)#Film and found that it was well done and highly sourced. To be more specific, there was an interview conducted with Gabe Newell (of Valve) where he explains the current state of a film being made. I personally think it's important to note. OlYeller^Talktome 03:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a link? Gary King (talk) 03:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Should Not Be Redirected To The Series Aricle

Haipa Doragon's redirecting of this article to the Half-Life series article is rash and hinders the growth of a long confirmed game of a highly reputable company. Valve itself has confirmed Half Life 2: Episode Three's existence and since the game is listed as a Primary Video Game on the Valve Task Force page, it should continue to warrant it's own article. This article has seen drastic improvements and has gone through numerous iterations in the last year or so: weeding out false information, removing user-made logos, unverifiable rumors, and endless speculation and it should continue to do so as long as there is a notable interest in the game.

"A stub will be seen and improved, a missing article is less likely to be created if you, the person who sees the need, fails to create it. So better create a stub than leave a gap."

--Andrew James Richards (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Currently there is little known information so the article cannot currently be expanded beyond a stub. Rehevkor ✉ 20:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is common practice on Wikipedia to merge articles with little content to "parent" articles, such as the series article for this, where need be. This is an issue of style, not notability, and the coverage at Half-Life (series) is sufficient for now. Whether or not future information may turn up for the subject is irrelevant, as it has no bearing on the current iteration of the article. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 21:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Considering all I did when I wrote the paragraph for EP3 in this article was copy and paste the prose of the EP3 article itself, its not exactly like anything's been lost. It will get spun out again when there's actually enough information for a proper article to develop and sustain itself; as said, this is a style issue, no-one disputes the notability or existance of EP3. -- Sabre (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand and agree now. I apologize for my, err... forcefulness. --Andrew James Richards (talk) 22:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Just be wary of consensus and the three-revert rule, though. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 23:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

In an attempt reach consensus, there is further discussion on the issue here. Rehevkor ✉ 00:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Breen

The plot summary states that Breen is dead, but this may not be true- he could still be alive, since it is never explicitly stated that he died. AYoungMan68 (talk) 04:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Its never explicitly stated he's alive, so its probably better to keep it that he's dead until otherwise shown without a doubt. Nevertheless, I've changed the wording to "presumed dead" in the interest of compromise; other characters in the game think he's dead, regardless. -- Sabre (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

*other characters in the game think he's dead, regardless.

That doesn't mean anything, they thought Gordon was dead too..he isn't :p —Preceding unsigned comment added by Predator106 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Did EA really take over publishing in 2005?

I was pretty sure Valve self-published for a few years and EA only started publishing in 2008. Smurfy 20:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC) EA NEVER took over publishing. It always has been valve, anyway valve and ea have had fallings out and it won't happen in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.170.58 (talk) 19:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Source edit on Codename Gordon

I edited the Spin-offs section with information that the game Codename Gordon is still available on steam, although unlisted. I added the Steam User's Forum thread in which a link is given as a source, although I'm not sure if I'm using citation correctly here. 82.95.216.22 (talk) 14:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Mac OS X Availability?

In the sidebar it says that Half-Life is available for Mac OS X, but nowhere else does it elaborate. I am aware that it was developed for Mac before being axed by Sierra and that there are Cider ports, but was there an official release? LeftClicker (talk) 21:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Episode 3/Portal 2 content in Alien Swarm SDK

Some of you may have heard about this, but apparently there has are mentions to Episode 3 and (possibly) Portal 2 within an AI-centered entity in the Alien Swarm SDK: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1471205/episode3proofstickzero.JPG

And don't even try to say this is fake - load up the AS SDK Hammer editor, place an info_node_hint and check the hint options.

What do you think? Should we possibly add this to part about Episode 3? --98.197.232.66 (talk) 01:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I doubt this is notable. Rehevkor ✉ 11:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Was the concept art notable? --98.197.232.66 (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't know? Certainly more notable than a passing mention within game code. Rehevkor ✉ 10:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The media reported on the concept art emerging, so yes. They haven't commented on the code in the Alien Swarm SDK. -- Sabre (talk) 10:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Black Mesa Movie

http://beyondblackmesa.com/

Why is my edit of this movie deleted? It is as important as "In early 2009, the Purchase Brothers, a Toronto-based film company, released a five-minute film based on Half-Life 2: Episode One called Half-Life: Escape from City-17. The film combines live-action footage with 3D animation created using the Source SDK for the video game.[53] It was well received by Valve.[54]" And also a Cultural Influence.

We'd need an independent source to establish it's notability. Rehevkor ✉ 13:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a example for such notability source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.97.75.130 (talk) 09:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

A reliable news outlet reporting on the movie, perhaps? Rehevkor ✉ 14:49, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

It was reported by a fairly high profile gaming news blog, <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/07/15/fan-film-beyond-black-mesa/">Rock, Paper, Shotgun</a>, if that counts. Rmd1023 (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Valve Task Force Re-vitalization

Attention, all contributors to the Valve Task Force and the articles it constitutes!
I am here to announce that I will be re-vitalizing the Valve Task Force, aimed at universally improving articles constituting Valve Corporation, their employees, associates and products. This specific task force has been dormant for quite some time and with two very notable releases coming out this year, I feel like this is the appropriate time to re-stimulate the general aim of this group. For those who are not already members of the Valve Task Force, feel free to add your name to our members list and contribute to whatever articles you feel your contributions may prove beneficial for. Valve, its products and notable employees have proven to be essential to the progression of the video game industry, so I'd like to make a call of arms for this cause. DarthBotto _talk•cont 21:58, 08 February 2011 (UTC)

The Vortigaunts are parasites?

What What? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.184.227.42 (talk) 22:40, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Someone messed up the plot section with that kind of inaccuracies. Its been put back. -- Sabre (talk) 23:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Portal

Portal isn't a spin-off, not by definition. Wiki: In media, a spin-off, sometimes called a sidequel,[1] is a radio program, television program, video game, or any narrative work, derived from one or more already existing works, that focuses, in particular, in more detail on one aspect of that original work (e.g. a particular topic, character, or event). As the Aperture Science Enrichment Centre isn't mentioned in the original Half Life, it's not a spin-off. The best one can say is that it's a game within the same universe as Half Life. I've changed that accordingly. 93.125.198.182 (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

That would be original research - which is not acceptable on Wikipedia. If you can find sources to support when you're suggesting then please present them here, but without them there's nothing to change. Яehevkor ✉ 19:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Overwiki

I can see some kind of edit war over a link to an open Wiki, including some suggestions of discussing it, but no one actually discussing it. It's good to talk. WP:ELNO#12 was raised, but the wiki itself [www.combineoverwiki.net Combine OverWiki] is actually pretty new. Sure they took the name and article articles from the Wikia wiki, but who's to say all the contributors went with it? It's only a couple of months old, so it having a "substantial history of stability" shouldn't be presumed, moving is in itself is a sign of instability. The now "Half-Life Wiki" on Wikia is the wiki that earned a place here even with a different name, the now OverWiki is a tangent from that and should be considered on its own merits. Яehevkor ✉ 11:23, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. Comparing the statistics pages of both (Half-Life Wiki and Combine OverWiki), the Wikia site is much more active and probably should be listed instead. I was reverting as the result of an edit dispute that started on Talk:Minecraft and ended up spilling over to a whole bunch of places before finally ending at AN/I. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 15:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

HL3 TBA?

Why is Half-Life 3 in the list with TBA? As far as I know, HL3 has not ever been officially announced so it cannot be assumed to be released. Maybe it will be some day, but it shouldn't be on that list at all yet. 212.226.74.192 (talk) 06:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. It was in a template rather than this article, so didn't appear on the edit history. I've removed HL3 again. -- ferret (talk) 12:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

HL3 was announced for fall 2013 ([1]) -- cu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.220.248.14 (talk) 00:40, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

That's not an announcement and fall 2013 has passed already. --Geniac (talk) 02:25, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Also it's not actually the Steam Store - it's a fake ("stearn") Philipwhiuk (talk) 01:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Wow, good catch. I didn't notice that tricksy keming! --Geniac (talk) 06:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Half-Life Dedicated Server

So a search for sourcing on Half-Life Dedicated Server is coming up dry. A WP:VG/RS search showed a ton of patch listings (e.g., [2][3]), but this[4] is the closest to any actual coverage. I'm recommending that this topic be merged (or simply redirected) into Half-Life (series). czar ♔ 19:00, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

• Support Because I hate stale tags on articles, plus I agree. I figure after all this time you're free to do it User:Czar. -- ferret (talk) 20:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

✓ redirected czar ♔ 23:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

who is they in this article

in the article it said ""They began working on the first game of the series soon after the company's formation," who is meaning by they? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.246.139.144 (talk) 15:44, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

From the preceding sentence.. "by former Microsoft employees Mike Harrington and Gabe Newell. They began working on the first game of the series soon after the company's formation,". -- ferret (talk) 15:46, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

a mistake in the article

in the article it said that Mike Harrington and Gabe Newell began working on the first game soon after the company formation but in this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Life_(video_game) it said it developed by valve and not by gabe newell and mike harrington please fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.32.179.180 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Gabe and Mike founded Valve. There's no real issue here but since IPs are really focused on this pronoun for some reason today, I've changed They to Valve. -- ferret (talk) 17:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)