Support NeoGAF

[TissueBox]

NOOOOONE MUAHAHAHA NOOONE!!

Edit: Several FPS's have built on the formula and shown great craft since HL2. It is still probably the most groundbreaking in terms of influence though since Combat Evolved.

 

[tanooki27]

there's an intentionality to hl2 you don't see often in fps campaigns anymore. difficult to describe. it has something to do with atmosphere.

 

[scitek]

If we're counting FEAR for its AI, then we also have to include its level design, which is intrisically linked to the AI.

And if we're saying its AI, gunplay, and level design are all better, we may as well concede that the game as a whole is better.

FEAR's level design is a trash fire. Boring game with a cool slomo gimmick that gets old after 30 minutes. FEAR 2 actually has the best campaign in the series.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

FEAR's level design is a trash fire. Boring game with a cool slomo gimmick that gets old after 30 minutes. FEAR 2 actually has the best campaign in the series.

Huh? No way is fear level design trash.

 

[One Eyed Willy]

Most have, sorry bruhs. HL2 was a long time ago and doesn't hold up that well.

The big ones are Titanfall 2, DOOM (2016) and the latest installations of Wolfenstein. Shout out to Binary Domain.. ya thats right.

 

[StrategyFan]

most of the ones i've played

hl2 is pretty boring

 

[abracadaver]

None

I can replay HL2 every year because it's so good

 

[Putty]

Honestly when you compare HL2 to the games before it and the games that released up until today to HL2, there's not much that's nearly as revolutionary as HL2 was.

Marginally better games today? Maybe. As revolutionary? Not even fucking close.

HL2 took games to the next level. I haven't seen a game since that advanced the tech and gameplay variety and versatility as much as HL2 did.

Well said.

 

[acm2000]

Most of them? Hl2 is horribly over rated

 

[Chumley]

Doom (2016) absolutely kills Half life 2:s gameplay. In fact it sets a new standard in fps gameplay

HL2 is still the king when it comes to atmosphere imo and only Bioshock 1 comes close

Titanfall 2 - vastly overrated, barely finished the campaign because of the campy story/dialogue

HL2's atmosphere is some magical shit. The game just looks real regardless of how much the graphics themselves might be dated now. Valve was always so good at evoking a sense of place, even when the people who helped with that area of the HL games went off and did stuff like Dishonored, they still were never able to recreate that same magic.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Uh... too many to name? Half-Life 2 isn't great from a mechanical or a narrative perspective, which are the two things we play FPSes for.

Halo 3 shits on Half-Life 2. Bulletstorm demolishes it on a narrative front. Titanfall 2 blows it away. Doom outplays it. Call of Duty 4 has dramatically better pacing. Crysis is way more interesting in the combat department. FEAR is the second greatest first person shooter of all time.

Half-Life 2 is a low bar. It would be easier to list worse FPSes. You got Killzone 2, Resistance 2, Darkest of Days, Legendary, Turning Point: Fall of Liberty, Halo 4, Halo 5, Black Ops 1-3... probably some others?

Oof, embarrassing.

 

[Perineum]

Can we count Prey?

Prey.

 

[Dr. Carroll]

Homefront: The Revolution aspired to be "open world Half-Life", and while its troubled development shows, I think it surpassed HL2 in a few important areas. It took various HL2 vignettes and worked them into an open world formula. Being chased through an apartment building and escaping over the rooftops, for example. Or fighting in the streets with a group of resistance fighters who follow you around. It didn't always work right, but when it did work, it was magical. Emergent gameplay is always better than 100% scripted gameplay, assuming it actually works.

Then there is HFTR's DLC, which is far more linear, but this ends up being a strength. HFTR slavishly mimicked HL2's style to the point of having a silent protagonist, which was a really bad idea because silent protagonists don't work very well in games that are very grey, morally and ethically. The DLCs backflipped on this and feature voiced protagonists -- lampshaded with "I preferred you when you kept your mouth shut." -- which solves a lot of storytelling issues. Half-Life 2 was really pushing the limits of silent protagonist storytelling in a bad way.

I would say that HFTR's DLC Beyond the Walls is better than Half-Life 2: Episode 2 for the most part. It wants to be HL2: Episode 2. There's even a rocket. Beyond the Walls is really HL2 design tropes distilled and combined with Crysis 2/3-style level design. The biggest design trope they appropriate is the use of a distant landmark. In HL2 it was the Citadel. In Beyond the Walls, it is the satellite dish you first glimpse across the lake. This dish gets closer and closer, and we implicitly understand that the game will climax at this location.

I think Half-Life 2 is a difficult game to boil down because it has some severe flaws. To put it bluntly, HL2's combat is abysmal. The core loop is bad. The dynamic item drops serve as a band-aid fix for the fact that avoiding damage is stupidly difficult and a majority of the gameplay involves shooting at the bullet sponge enemies with barely existent hit reactions hoping that they'll drop dead before you do. HL2's redeeming factor is "the journey". One endures the actual moment to moment gameplay because "the journey" is quite remarkable. Also, while HL2's writing is competent at best, the mystery of the G-Man is a superb hook. When people talk about wanting a conclusion in HL3, they really want to understand who the G-Man is, what he wants, and why he does the things he does.

 

[Bydobob]

I think Half-Life 2 is a difficult game to boil down because it has some severe flaws. To put it bluntly, HL2's combat is abysmal. The core loop is bad. The dynamic item drops serve as a band-aid fix for the fact that avoiding damage is stupidly difficult and a majority of the gameplay involves shooting at the bullet sponge enemies with barely existent hit reactions hoping that they'll drop dead before you do. HL2's redeeming factor is "the journey". One endures the actual moment to moment gameplay because "the journey" is quite remarkable. Also, while HL2's writing is competent at best, the mystery of the G-Man is a superb hook. When people talk about wanting a conclusion in HL3, they really want to understand who the G-Man is, what he wants, and why he does the things he does.

No, they want a game as revolutionary as HL2 was, and Half-Life before it. Honestly, the idea that HL2 is all story while gameplay is something to be "endured" is a little hysterical.

Agreed. It's crazy how many different styles and settings HL2 successfully juggles. It's an immersive sim, a horror game, a puzzle game, a road trip game, a platformed, an FPS. You move from cityscapes to the open road to industrial installations to futuristic towers. You are hunted, then you are the hunter, you are weak and then you become a badass, you fight everything from tiny headcrabs to huge striders. It has a tight linear campaign that still gives you a lot of opportunities for emergent gameplay. The game has everything.

Couldn't have summed it up better.

 

[pr0cs]

Someone start a petition to have Respawn finish the hl2 storyline

 

[spineduke]

So many FEAR mentions. FEAR has great FPS combat (weapons, AI) riding on a super dull and flawed campaign. The levels are poor and the design is one note. Despite that, it still has its moments of greatness. It's nowhere comparable to HL2, get out of here with that shit.

 

[RobRivers]

Miss halo reach, infinite warfare and singularity too

 

[Enzo88]

None.

 

[osnameless]

The Darkness II had a pretty awesome narrative and campaign, a bit short though.

I am not sure it is better than Half Life 2, but it is the most fun I had with a FPS campaign.

 

[Nev]

Lmao.

Portal 1 and 2, Amnesia, SOMA, Bioshock Infinite, Mirror's Edge, Dark Messiah, Resistance 1, Left 4 Dead 1 and 2 off the top of my head.

'Blow me away' what? If you like boring driving sections, base defense trash and staring at NPCs talking I guess.

'You're my new hero Gordon'.

Half-Life 2 sucks. Good thing is you can only go up when you play an actually good FPS and not a glorified tech demo.

Play Half-Life 1 and open your eyes.

 

[Dr. Carroll]

No, they want a game as revolutionary as HL2 was, and Half-Life before it.

Half-Life 1/2's innovations were largely experimental first person storytelling. Most of what HL1 accomplished had previously been accomplished by System Shock and GoldenEye, but HL1 was an extremely slick and extremely consistent execution of concepts they toyed with. In particular, where GoldenEye told most of its story through Bond's eyes, HL1 told ALL of its story through Gordon's eyes. The idea of seamless levels was lifted directly from Quake II, but HL1 executed this masterfully.

HL1 also favored extremely stripped down level design. A corridor convincingly dressed up as a series of engaging locales. A lot of fake doors and clever backdrops creating the illusion of a bigger world.

This slickness did not extend to the combat, which was really not very good. The saving grace of HL1's combat model is that marines cannot shoot while moving. This is where HL2 screwed up incredibly badly. It is possible to tactically move in HL1 in a way that avoids taking damage. In HL2, this is extremely difficult. Both games suffer from poor enemy hit responses and irritatingly spongey human enemies.

Honestly, the idea that HL2 is all story while gameplay is something to be "endured" is a little hysterical.

Half-Life 2 is a very bad first person shooter. However, a huge part of HL2's gameplay is not shooting, but rather the journey you take from A to B to C. This is why HL2 is a classic. It's a classic in spite of its poor gameplay. There is nothing fun about shooting bullet sponge enemies who don't respond to being shot and who fire back at you with razor sharp accuracy while running. The gravity gun is somewhat enjoyable, but it doesn't solve the core combat problems.

If Half-Life 2 didn't have quicksave, and had checkpoint saves spaced 20 minutes apart, and didn't have dynamic item drops, people would not be as forgiving of its terrible combat because the crappy qualities wouldn't be masked behind save scumming and the game literally throwing health at you every time you take damage.

 

[Neith]

I've been waiting to play this with that updated version on Steam, but the guy is supposedly porting the update over to a new engine. I guess I will just wait longer. This is one game I just never got around to, and then it was just too old when I had time. But now that update looks good. He takes a long ass time though.

 

[Patrick Young]

Shooters in general? Maybe Uncharted 2 and 4, but off the top of my head I can't think of a first person shooter that I enjoyed more.

 

[Dr. Carroll]

If you like boring driving sections, base defense trash and staring at NPCs talking I guess.

The driving sections are integral to the "journey" feeling that makes HL2 the game it is. A seamless journey across widely spaced locations.

'You're my new hero Gordon'.

Valve struggled with Alyx and Gordon as characters because Gordon is a paper thin silent protagonist, which makes Alyx's escalating fawning driven by conversations we are never privy to difficult to convincingly convey to the player.

Half-Life 2 sucks. Good thing is you can only go up when you play an actually good FPS and not a glorified tech demo.

I resent the term "tech demo". Mario 64 is a tech demo. Many great games are essentially "tech demos." Especially Halo, the game that was basically made in 6 months, as I recall. Despite its combat being really, really, really not good, HL2 is a full fledged FPS game that does a number of things really well.

 

[Cepheus]

Zero.

 

[rackham]

Portal 1 and 2 if you consider them fps games.


Dishonored 1 was really amazing imo.(2 sucked)

 

[Soulblighter31]

Half-Life 1/2's innovations were largely experimental first person storytelling. Most of what HL1 accomplished had previously been accomplished by System Shock and GoldenEye, but HL1 was an extremely slick and extremely consistent execution of concepts they toyed with. In particular, where GoldenEye told most of its story through Bond's eyes, HL1 told ALL of its story through Gordon's eyes. The idea of seamless levels was lifted directly from Quake II, but HL1 executed this masterfully.

HL1 also favored extremely stripped down level design. A corridor convincingly dressed up as a series of engaging locales. A lot of fake doors and clever backdrops creating the illusion of a bigger world.

This slickness did not extend to the combat, which was really not very good. The saving grace of HL1's combat model is that marines cannot shoot while moving. This is where HL2 screwed up incredibly badly. It is possible to tactically move in HL1 in a way that avoids taking damage. In HL2, this is extremely difficult. Both games suffer from poor enemy hit responses and irritatingly spongey human enemies.

The combat was probably the best out of any FPS. The weapons were better than probably any fps. The marine's skeletal animation and AI was second to none in gaming.

But my god, this thread. There are few things more horrible than readin a Half Life thread on neogaf. The insanity you read here is mind blowing.

 

[Alpha Phoenix]

Blows me away how people seriously find Doom better, when HL2 beats it in story, atmosphere, characters, level design, lasting appeal, and just about other aspect that isn't shooting. I doubt we'll still be talking about Doom 2016 in 13 years.

 

[Santar]

A lot?
Half-Life 2 wasn't that great I though and I bought it on pc when it came out. Just found it pretty boring and with a lot of "look we've got physics now" gimmicks. Shooting lacked omph and all in all it was nothing special.

 

[Paragon]

I'm really surprised at what I'm reading here, with the majority opinion seeming to be that it's average, trending towards negative - especially when people are listing things like any of the Call of Duty games as FPS campaigns which are better.
If anything, I appreciate Half-Life 2 more today than I did originally, considering the direction that most FPS games have taken now.

I can only think that most of these opinions must be based on the console versions of the game and not PC.
I have to admit that I had a fairly negative opinion on F.E.A.R. after trying it out on 360 originally, which completely changed after playing it on PC with a keyboard & mouse - and I'm thinking it's probably the same thing here.
You just don't have the mobility or accuracy with a gamepad to handle the frantic and fast-paced combat in games like these. I saw similar complaints about Prey (2017) as well (enemies move too fast etc.) since that was clearly a PC-first design - which is rare these days.

Not to get too off topic but I'm surprised so many people are mentioning far cry 2. Thought I was in the minority in thinking it's the best far cry campaign. I remember it getting mountains of hate back when it released.

I think that's another console vs PC mentality thing.
The PC audience tends to want a different experience from FPS games than the console audience.

Can we count Prey?
Prey.

Prey (2017) is fantastic.
There hasn't been a single player game which has drawn me in and had me completely obsessed with it like that in years.
I wouldn't say that it has surpassed Half-Life 2, but it's trying to do different things.
I wouldn't try to compare Half-Life and System Shock 2 either.

Best FPS campaigns (IMO) by year with runner up in parentheses.
[...]
I wonder how many of those still hold up today.

I don't necessarily agree with all of the choices, but that seems like a solid list.

On PC without a logitech mouse.

It's not specific to Logitech mice, nor does it always affect systems using Logitech mice.
The issue is caused by having a large number of HID devices connected to the system - which applies to a lot of gaming hardware today.
And there's been a fix for a while now: https://community.pcgamingwiki.com/files/file/789-directinput-fps-fix/

 

[Dr. Carroll]

The combat was probably the best out of any FPS. The weapons were better than probably any fps.

The combat was stiff and unresponsive. HL1's weapons were a bit better, but both HL1 and HL2 suffer from "BB gun" syndrome where it feels like you're shooting at enemies with pellets until they suddenly fall dead. You fire an assault rifle at someone's leg, and nothing happens. They just grunt, at most. HL1 was a massive step back from GoldenEye in terms of FPS NPC animation. And HL2 was fairly similar to HL1, but with a worse combat loop.

The marine's skeletal animation and AI was second to none in gaming.

HL1's AI was quite decent for the time, and certainly industry leading in some ways. However, the marines being well animated doesn't change the fact they lacked proper hit reactions. That there be a response to shooting an enemy is absolutely essential in a singleplayer FPS game. It's what makes guns feel punchy and responsive.

Turok 2 from 1998 has sublime hit reactions. You fire a shotgun, and enemies stagger, sometimes with limbs missing, huge gushes of blood spraying.

Turok 3 from 2000, which was a slavish clone of Half-Life 1, has enemies that barely react to being shot. They jerk, at most.

Guess which game has better feeling combat? Turok 2, by a long shot. And that is the problem with Half-Life 1 and Half-Life 2 alike. The combat loop is unresponsive. The entire combat model in HL2 uses the tailored item drop system, added late in development I believe, as a crutch because the AI are unresponsive damage sponges that the player can't really tactically engage. HL2 does not have "good feeling" combat. Its combat is light, empty, and unsatisfying.

 

[Bedameister]

For me none. Bioshock is a better game but it's to really a FPS in my eyes. Half-Life 2 is still the best FPS single-player campaign for me personally

 

[KillLaCam]

Titanfall 2

 

[spineduke]

The entire combat model in HL2 uses the tailored item drop system, added late in development I believe, as a crutch because the AI are unresponsive damage sponges that the player can't really tactically engage. HL2 does not have "good feeling" combat. Its combat is light, empty, and unsatisfying.

Where can I read about this?

 

[HooYaH]

HL2 campaign wasn't that great because it was never finished.

 

[gelf]

I don't think a single game has ever matched the journey Half Life 2 sent me on, especially if you include the episodes. I'm no expert on the FPS gameplay and how it compares to others as it's not my genre in general but I still managed to adore HL2 while dropping many of the games mentioned in this thread through lack of interest.

And yes I loved the vehicle sections.

 

[Dr. Carroll]

Where can I read about this?

I remember hearing that dynamic item resupply was a late development thing from this video, from memory. But I dunno what his source was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsDM7GKb0xU

I think this video extensively covers a lot of what is "wrong feeling" about HL2 as an FPS game more elegantly than I ever could. Watching the video, it's really jarring how unresponsive HL2's NPCs are. You pump SMG bullets into their torso and limbs, and they don't react. They continue to unload their weapons at you, completely unresponsive to your attempts to damage them. They don't even limp when injured like HL1's marines did. They're simply unenjoyable to engage in combat with, IMO.

 

[Mr.Deadshot]

Killzone 2 and Resistance 3 are the only ones that are on a similar level of brilliance. Killzone 2 because of it's atmosphere, art-style and second-to-none gunplay. Resistance 3 because of it's great variety in weapon and enemy design.

 

[AJ_Wings]

HL2 have surpassed in many areas when looking at individual components like gunplay, encounter design, level design, AI & enemy design, pacing...etc.

This thread already many examples that do things much better from HL2 (and some are flat out better but I digress). HL2 is the more than sum of its parts type of game for me because despite its well documented shortcomings, I still love replaying it every couple of months. It's still is a great journey in one of the most well realized FPS worlds ever crafted.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

FEAR's level design is a trash fire. Boring game with a cool slomo gimmick that gets old after 30 minutes. FEAR 2 actually has the best campaign in the series.

lol what.

FEAR has fantastic level design. But I guess I can see why you dislike it if you prefer the generic corridor popamole design of the sequel.

 

[Hojaho]

Uh... too many to name? Half-Life 2 isn't great from a mechanical or a narrative perspective, which are the two things we play FPSes for.

Halo 3 shits on Half-Life 2. Bulletstorm demolishes it on a narrative front. Titanfall 2 blows it away. Doom outplays it. Call of Duty 4 has dramatically better pacing. Crysis is way more interesting in the combat department. FEAR is the second greatest first person shooter of all time.

Half-Life 2 is a low bar. It would be easier to list worse FPSes. You got Killzone 2, Resistance 2, Darkest of Days, Legendary, Turning Point: Fall of Liberty, Halo 4, Halo 5, Black Ops 1-3... probably some others?

Agree mostly. HL2 is so overrated, I'm still fascinated how people keep it on such a high pedestal in 2017.

 

[HelloNewman]

I liked Titanfall 2 but the story mode was just one big intro to multiplayer and the only really cool part ended about twenty minutes after you got the skill.

 

[Dr. Carroll]

lol what.

FEAR has fantastic level design. But I guess I can see why you dislike it if you prefer the generic hallway popamole design of the sequel.

FEAR does fall victim to repetition. The strength of the AI is driven by the tightly constrained environments which are warehouses, office buildings, hospitals, and underground complexes. It's all a little... cookie cutter. It is a very good game, though. And I prefer it to FEAR 2, personally. I'm especially fond of Extraction Point.

In some ways, FEAR 2 is like Crysis 2. It doesn't necessarily reach the heights of its predecessor, but it's a more consistent experience with some mechanical polish that doesn't wear out its welcome. The original FEAR is way too long. The first Crysis hits the repetition skids after about 3-4 hours.

The irony is that both Crysis 2 and FEAR 2 were hamstrung by audience expectations. It makes zero sense that Michael Becket has slow motion powers, but that's what "the fans" expected from a FEAR sequel. Similarly, Crysis 2 suffered from the nanosuit being shoved into the game despite it being gimmicky and almost impossible to balance.

I wish developers were a bit braver, and more willing to completely ignore audience expectations for sequels in order to make something special.

 

[Eccocid]

HL 2 felt like a snoozefest to me. Even tho i played it on its time it was very boring almost like a walking simulator. I remember Wolfenstein had a much better campaign in that era.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

FEAR does fall victim to repetition. The strength of the AI is driven by the tightly constrained environments which are warehouses, office buildings, hospitals, and underground complexes. It's all a little... cookie cutter. It is a very good game, though. And I prefer it to FEAR 2, personally. I'm especially fond of Extraction Point.

I can agree that the level aesthetic is fairly bland and repetitive. The actual level design is stellar.

In some ways, FEAR 2 is like Crysis 2. It doesn't necessarily reach the heights of its predecessor, but it's a more consistent experience with some mechanical polish that doesn't wear out its welcome. The original FEAR is way too long. The first Crysis hits the repetition skids after about 3-4 hours.

The irony is that both Crysis 2 and FEAR 2 were hamstrung by audience expectations. It makes zero sense that Michael Becket has slow motion powers, but that's what "the fans" expected from a FEAR sequel. Similarly, Crysis 2 suffered from the nanosuit being shoved into the game despite it being gimmicky and almost impossible to balance.

I wish developers were a bit braver, and more willing to completely ignore audience expectations for sequels in order to make something special.

I can agree that Crysis 2 was more consistent (although I think you're confusing "mechanical polish" with "dumbing down for gamepads), but FEAR 2 is a huge step down from the original. You're one of exactly three people I've seen say it's at least on par with FEAR (the poster above being the second).

 

[eot]

Uh... too many to name? Half-Life 2 isn't great from a mechanical or a narrative perspective, which are the two things we play FPSes for.

Halo 3 shits on Half-Life 2. Bulletstorm demolishes it on a narrative front. Titanfall 2 blows it away. Doom outplays it. Call of Duty 4 has dramatically better pacing. Crysis is way more interesting in the combat department. FEAR is the second greatest first person shooter of all time.

Half-Life 2 is a low bar. It would be easier to list worse FPSes. You got Killzone 2, Resistance 2, Darkest of Days, Legendary, Turning Point: Fall of Liberty, Halo 4, Halo 5, Black Ops 1-3... probably some others?

Gotta disagree with you on Bulletstorm and maybe CoD4. The narrative in Bulletstorm only serves to interrupt the gameplay, there is nothing redeeming about it. As for CoD4 I don't think that game has any pacing, but I agree that HL2 is bad in this regard as well.

 

[MontyBrown]

COD4 and STALKER are just as great.

Surpassed? None.

 

[Soulblighter31]

FEAR does fall victim to repetition. The strength of the AI is driven by the tightly constrained environments which are warehouses, office buildings, hospitals, and underground complexes. It's all a little... cookie cutter.

The strength of the AI is driven by the level design which is designed in such a way that at all times the enemies can flank you, use decoir elements for cover, movement and so on. The game needed enviroments like these for their AI and combat feel objectives to be reached. Its a tradeoff in other areas i guess, but non-important since it gave birth to maybe the best firefights in an FPS.

In some ways, FEAR 2 is like Crysis 2. It doesn't necessarily reach the heights of its predecessor, but it's a more consistent experience with some mechanical polish that doesn't wear out its welcome. The original FEAR is way too long. The first Crysis hits the repetition skids after about 3-4 hours.

Fear is way too long? 10 hours or so? The single biggest worry i had after playing the demo millions of times anticipating its release was "please god dont make it too short since the game is so once in a lifetime good". The full game came and it was too short. Since 2002 or so games kept reducing their lenght since previous years. FEAR's shortness i consider its main weakness since it came out. Too long? WAY too long? Not in this world.

Crysis hits repetitiveness after 3 hours? Another 8 hour long game in total? Repetitiveness in a sandbox game that offers you multiple ways of tackling each objective, with different npc behaviour and reactions everytime, with multiple ways of locomotion, multiple ways of using and combining the suits powers? You see, this is all the exact complete opposite of repetitive



The only thing both Crysis 2 and FEAR 2 suffered werent more polish or audience expectations, it was the necesity to force PC design into a piece of shit like a controller and couch playing. Thats why there are light halos around enemies in FEAR 2, the HUD is gigantic, the weapons nerfed and with no recoil in both games, movement speed reduced, weapons feeling like shit. Standard stuff every game has to compromise because it needs to be playable on consoles

 

[Broank]

IMO Episode 2 is still easily the best fps campaign. That last couple hours is just a masterclass far above anything else.

 

[O.DOGG]

I wasn't as impressed with the campaign as some people I know, and that's after the two times I played through it. The second episode was far better I thought.

As for games that surpassed it, in recent years that was certainly DOOM, Titanfall 2, COD4: MW, MW2, MW3, Call of Juarez: Gunslinger (what? I had a lot more fun with it than with HL2), Wolfenstein: TNO, Metro 2033, Metro: LL.

And these are the more action-oriented FPS campaigns. I'm not counting the immersive sim sub genre where most of the games I would consider as having better campaigns than Half-Life 2.