Winner of over 50 Game of the Year awards, Half-Life set new standards for action games when it was released in 1998. Half-Life: Source is a digitally remastered version of the critically acclaimed and best selling PC game, enhanced via Source technology to include physics simulation, enhanced effects, and more.
User reviews:
Mixed (42 reviews) - 57% of the 42 user reviews in the last 30 days are positive.
Very Positive (2,573 reviews) - 81% of the 2,573 user reviews for this game are positive.
Release Date: Jun 1, 2004

Sign in to add this item to your wishlist, follow it, or mark it as not interested


Recommended By Curators

"Dont expect anything its Half-Life 1 with ragdolls and better water."

About This Game

Winner of over 50 Game of the Year awards, Half-Life set new standards for action games when it was released in 1998. Half-Life: Source is a digitally remastered version of the critically acclaimed and best selling PC game, enhanced via Source technology to include physics simulation, enhanced effects, and more.

System Requirements

Mac OS X
SteamOS + Linux

    Minimum: 1.2 GHz Processor, 256MB RAM, DirectX 7 level graphics card, Windows XP, Mouse, Keyboard, Internet Connection

    Recommended: 2.4 GHz Processor, 512MB RAM, DirectX 9 level graphics card, Windows XP, Mouse, Keyboard, Internet Connection

    Minimum: OS:OS X version Leopard 10.5.8, Snow Leopard 10.6.3
    Memory: 1GB RAM
    Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 8 or higher, ATI X1600 or higher, or Intel HD 3000 or higher
    Network: Internet Connection
    Other: Mouse, Keyboard
    Minimum: OS: Ubuntu 12.04
    Processor: Dual core from Intel or AMD at 2.8 GHz
    Memory: 4 GB RAM
    Graphics: nVidia GeForce 8600/9600GT, ATI/AMD Radeaon HD2600/3600 (Graphic Drivers: nVidia 310, AMD 12.11), OpenGL 2.1
    Network: Broadband Internet connection
    Hard Drive: 8 GB available space
    Sound Card: OpenAL Compatible Sound Card
Customer reviews
Customer Review system updated Sept. 2016! Learn more
Mixed (42 reviews)
Very Positive (2,573 reviews)
Review Type

Purchase Type


Display As:

(what is this?)
1,579 reviews match the filters above ( Mostly Positive)
Most Helpful Reviews  In the past 30 days
3 of 4 people (75%) found this review helpful
2 people found this review funny
Not Recommended
4.3 hrs on record
Posted: September 22
I should have listened to the reviews that mentioned all the bugs. I managed to keep playing through the seemingly minor glitches all the way up to the On A Rail level. Halfway through, I get off the tram to fight some people, and when I come back it's gone.

I thought I just came back to the wrong part of the track, but I ran all the way up and down the track, and around all the turns, and just couldn't find it. Game breaking bug.
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
Most Helpful Reviews  Overall
516 of 570 people (91%) found this review helpful
75 people found this review funny
41.3 hrs on record
Posted: April 11, 2015
Half-Life vs Half-Life: Source

Feature Half-Life Half-Life: Source
Mods Many not many
Soundtrack free DLC Yes -
usable in Garry's Mod - Yes
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
361 of 412 people (88%) found this review helpful
189 people found this review funny
12.0 hrs on record
Posted: September 28, 2014
This game is history
Children should be taught this in school
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
154 of 165 people (93%) found this review helpful
2 people found this review funny
13.9 hrs on record
Posted: July 28, 2013
I know this almost goes without saying, but any gamer alive should play the Half-Life games. Even compared with the modern flashy big-budget single-player shooter extravaganzas of today (I'm looking at you, Far Cry and Bioshock), which are rightly heralded as amazing games, Half-Life makes your jaw drop at how amazing of an experience it is to fight throuth the crumbling Black Mesa facility battling humans and headcrabs alike. This game really makes you realize how much Jason Brody, Booker Dewitt, and every other major fps protagonist since owe the man with the crowbar, Gordon Freeman. If you are a sane human being who can play a video game, there is no excuse for you to not play Half-Life. None!
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
169 of 199 people (85%) found this review helpful
120 people found this review funny
21.2 hrs on record
Posted: January 15, 2015
It's Half-Life.
You like it or you're wrong.
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
108 of 118 people (92%) found this review helpful
12.8 hrs on record
Posted: May 28, 2014
I've stayed away from the Half Life series for a very long time, solely because I didn't even have a Steam account! But I recently bought Half Life: Source and Half Life 2, and I must say, they've already become some of my favourite games.

The formula in this game, although the game is 10 years old, still feels fresh to me, and feels like a new game. It's also one of the first games I've tried of this genre that I've actually enjoyed. The graphics are also fantastic for their age.

Well done Valve!
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
197 of 242 people (81%) found this review helpful
4 people found this review funny
19.0 hrs on record
Posted: December 28, 2013
I rode a monorail for 20 minutes In the very beginning of the game.
10/10 Game of the year.
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
441 of 588 people (75%) found this review helpful
49 people found this review funny
Not Recommended
49.3 hrs on record
Posted: August 10, 2015
Half-Life: Source is the 2004 port of Valve's award winning game to the Source Engine. With just that knowledge, it would sound like Half-Life: Source was a gift from above, but it's anything BUT that. Half-Life: Source was critically panned, which makes you wonder HOW it has a "Very Positive" on Steam Reviews. Half-Life: Source is one of those games Valve chooses to forget, with the likes of the first Left 4 Dead and Ricochet. But, before we get into a review, lets go over the history of Half-Life: Source.

The History:
In 1999, Valve started development of Half-Life 2, the award winning squeal to Half-Life, originally running on the GoldSource engine. Around 2001/2002, the Source Engine was created, and it surpassed what the GoldSource engine could do, so, Valve planned to port Half-Life to the Source Engine to have it replace the GoldSource counter parts. In 2003, Axel Gambe got a hold of the full Half-Life 2 Source Code, raw map data, and a build of Half-Life 2, who later gave it to some friends, who leaked it. In those leak files, there was the Half-Life Source port, along with files to a Source port of TFC, DMC, and CS 1.6 (which was remotely playable, but at this time, this port was starting to become the game we know today as CS:S.) The port of Half-Life: Source was quite buggy and unfinished, which is to be expected for it being a leak of a beta. So, 2004 comes around, and then Half-Life 2 is coming around the corner, as a bundle with Half-Life 2, you could get Counter-Strike: Source (by this time is the game we all know and probably love) and Half-Life: Source. Half-Life: Source saw little change from the 2003 leak of Half-Life 2, minus some minor bug fixes and having the Half-Life 1 HUD. At this point, be expected Half-Life: Source to be just like Counter-Strike: Source, a re-imagining of the game, in HD (for 2004 standards), but what they got was a direct Half-Life port that didn't seam quite finished. This is why if you ask anyone why they don't like Half-Life: Source for the most part (especially pre-2013) you get told it's graphics were just the Half-Life graphics. But as stated before, Half-Life: Source was meant to replace Half-Life as a whole, but due to how poorly received it was, Half-Life Original saw another day. In 2006, Valve ported the Deathmatch counter part of Half-Life into the Source Engine, and if you thought Half-Life: Source was a bad port, you should of saw this game. All player ragdolls had broken physics, some weapons were broken (the Shotgun's double barrel sound is just the single barrel sound), and the gameplay was more like Half-Life 2 Deathmatch with minor HLDM gameplay stuff slapped in (the game even lacks the backpack pickups that were in Half-Life Deathmatch), the only reason I can see for this port, was just to give EP1 a pack-in game. Around 2007, Half-Life: Source and Deathmatch: Source were ported to Source Base 2007, but due to the amount of bugs now included with the game, Valve didn't release this patch to the public, it wasn't until 2012 that the public knew of this update's existence, since in 2012, the whole 2008/2007 source code to Source Base 2007 was leaked into the public, it also confirmed that the Team Fortress Classic port was in further development than what everyone thought. But due to the amount of hate towards Half-Life: Source and Deathmatch: Source would mean we would probably never seen of these ports.

So, that runs down a good chunk of the history of Half-Life: Source besides one of the more major things, the 2013 update. Valve in an effort to ditch the GCF system and upgrade everything to VPK and have a better downloading system and a better game asset pack to engine communication, they created Steampipe, but since Valve decided it would be best to port all games to Source Base 2013, they decided to do that, and try to provide updates to all Valve games. In the same year, Valve canned the project, leaving a ton of games in a broken state, Half-Life: Source being one of them.

So, this leads us into the review.

The Review
Half-Life: Source was a mediocre port to the Source Engine, where it would be mixed who liked the game and disliked the game, since Half-Life: Source had that audience. Half-Life: Source is now a BAD port to the Source Engine, since those 2013 updates broke more than what it fixed. Not only did Valve cancel the updates to these games, they released the beta depots into the release depot to remove traces of GCFs. So, those games that had a good release depot, now have a beta released into them, and a lot of these betas were far from done. We now have broken Save/Restore errors in various NPCs, 2 out of the 3 tentacles in Blast Pit can harm the player or AI, one of the maps in Residue Processing will blind the player if your flashlight is turned on, skill configurations are broken (so now the AI is harder), Gonarch spit is now black squares, one of the maps in Surface Tension has a broken skybox, you can jump over a lot of things making it so you can skip half of "We got Hostiles" and skip various other parts in other chapters, all of the Chrome shaders are complete ♥♥♥ (they were never good, but this is just worse), and even more. It's sad when a 2003 leak is better and more playable than a 2013 update. Plus, if you load the HD Pack you get a GameBanana skin pack, since Valve was too lazy to port the assets their selves of even double check to be everything matched in the first place. But the icing on the cake is that, well, at first install, you can't even PLAY Half-Life: Source since Valve provided corrupted or outdated DLLs to Steam VR, so every time you reinstall Half-Life: Source you have to verify the cache of Half-Life 2 or Steam VR. Not only that, the person who was working on these updates, Alfred, shrugged off a few errors as design points.

Half-Life: Source had potential to be a great port, to even be on par with the Original Half-Life (definitely should NEVER replace the Original), but its potential was lost with a company who couldn't care enough about the game, which is why it was left for about 6 years without an update.

I recommend to play Half-Life: Source and Deathmatch: Source so you can see what happens when a company just flat out doesn't give a ♥♥♥♥ing ♥♥♥♥.

Even though I didn't review the pre-2013 build, I'm still going to give it a rating

The Half-Life: Source that existed before 2013, I give that a 6 out of 10

I give the current Half-Life: Source a 4 out of 10, avoid at all costs.

Actually, I recommend you report both Half-Life: Source and Deathmatch: Source, as it very unplayable and is using stolen assets. You shouldn't let Valve sell this to people, especially when people think this is the better version of Half-Life
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
76 of 82 people (93%) found this review helpful
10.4 hrs on record
Posted: July 2, 2014
Would I recommend Half-Life? Hell yes. Would I recommend Half-Life: Source? Er, maybe. The original Half-Life was, and still is, an absolutely fantastic game. The story and how it’s conveyed to the player works extremely well, and the controls, gameplay mechanics, visuals, and sound are all phenomenal. Very few bugs, and certainly none game-breakingly noteworthy.

However, this is where Half-Life: Source fails. This game’s major problem is its glitches and bugs. Some minor, some absolutely game-breaking. On one hand, you have scientist’s AI screwed up, running into open fire, constantly shooting off their response lines. On the other hand, you have some parts of the game where the textures and models go ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, essentially simulating your graphics card melting.

Even with the bugs, the game does try to make it up with some enhancements thanks to the Source engine. The water effects are slightly better (although in my experiences it’s just extraordinarily shiny and reflective), and the lighting effects are significantly improved, although inconsistent when walking into an area that needs to load. However, the HL2 bullet hole decals make it possible to create magnificent works of art with your crowbar on walls.

Thankfully, the gameplay, controls, and overall look and appeal of the game is still there, unaltered. There’s no denying that the game is awesome. Half-Life in general is awesome. I just love how people on the GoldSrc version of Half-Life were complaining about the game having extremely old and outdated graphics, saying HL:Source is better in this field. Well, it’s not. A majority of textures and models are completely identical. Aside from the water and bullet decals, the games are visually the same, which is something I’m completely fine with. The regular version of Half-Life actually comes with the HD texture pack, something this port lacks. It essentially gives the game updated models to characters and weapons, and slightly enhanced textures in some areas. It’s nice, but not essential, which is fine.

Overall, yeah, go ahead and get it. If this is ever on sale for cheaper than the regular Half-Life, and you own neither, by all means, go ahead and get it. You (hopefully) won’t regret it.
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
316 of 434 people (73%) found this review helpful
18 people found this review funny
Not Recommended
0.5 hrs on record
Posted: September 27, 2014
I'm not some trolling idiot, I actually love HL1... so please, at least read what I have to say before downvoting, don't act like that just instantly means I hate HL1.

Yes, Half Life 1 is one of the best games you'll ever play. Assuming, of course, that it was designed for its engine. Meet Half-Life Source, a game that was made on GoldSrc then converted to show off the new engine they had made.

HL simply wasn't designed for Source, and no effort was put into properly re-writing the game for the new engine. The AI is bugged to eternally walk into any wall, I've yet to see a working hitbox, and HL1's graphics are better than this remake. It's actually unplayable due to the scripted events being broken. Sorry, that door isn't opening.

So you may ask about the low playtime. Well, when I realized I wouldn't be entering the test chamber, I tried skipping forward a few levels with the map command. Guess what? BUGS! LOTS OF EM! Nearly anything involving AI interaction would NEVER happen, half the time your enemies can't even hurt you (and vice versa), and a few levelskips forward, I even fell out of the world once when I got hit by a box.

Overall, I'm scoring HL Source with a 3/10. A complete waste of money you're seeing here, it's got to be some sort of joke on Valve's part. It only scores anything because under the technical crapshow is the 1998 classic that, Xen aside, is nearly perfect.

If you want to play the REAL Half-Life bug-free on the GoldSrc engine, click here.
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny
Recently Posted
10.2 hrs
Posted: October 18
Half-Life is fantastic, but Half-Life: Source is far from a remaster. Whilst rag-dolls and improved water are nice, drawbacks like: incorrect lighting in many areas, unnecessary reflections on weapons/models, and various source engine related bugs; it leaves a lot to be desired in a so-called remaster. That's not even taking into account the long loading times that weren't present in the GoldSrc version. Perhaps the only real benefit of Source is proper widescreen, but if you're like me you'll prefer playing Half-Life in 4:3 as originally intended. To summarise just play the GoldSrc version of Half-Life.
Helpful? Yes No Funny
1418-0Pliskin Iroquois
11.4 hrs
Posted: October 16
To this day, one of the best games ever.
Helpful? Yes No Funny
**NinjaBoyy**~ LIKE A BOSS
7.0 hrs
Posted: October 15
Helpful? Yes No Funny
14.4 hrs
Posted: October 14
Love this game it's not the original but it's in HD
Helpful? Yes No Funny
35.3 hrs
Posted: October 13
It's crap. It's legit crap. I expected this game to be very good, but not. It's like Half-Life 1's files moved over to Half-Life 2's files. I geuss it's good for movie making, but if you just PLAY games, don't waste £/$5.99 on this.
Helpful? Yes No Funny
12.0 hrs
Posted: October 12
Was a good game back then and it is good to see a source engine port of the beloved Half-Life game. Though I am late to the party, I have to say I'm fairly dissappointed as the HD content is glitchy, only improves models and sounds and the reloading sound for the MP5 (Submachine Gun) is broken/missing. There is added physics in the game but not a lot of Source Engine's full potential of physics. 3/10
Helpful? Yes No Funny
12.6 hrs
Posted: October 10
Save your money and buy the original. (Unless you want a couple NPCs on Garry's Mod.)
Helpful? Yes No Funny
21.9 hrs
Posted: October 10
Watch out for the briefcase guy...
Helpful? Yes No Funny
KrazY MaN
27.5 hrs
Posted: October 8
Unbelievably buggy. Nuff said.
Helpful? Yes No Funny
0.4 hrs
Posted: October 8
Product received for free
Helpful? Yes No Funny