Gragt: Not plot holes, more like holes in the plot, like stuff that is left unexplained, like why do everyone believes GF is a messiah, what's the deal with the Combine and the vortigaunts, who's the G-Man and his plans, etc. Some of these elements may not really need to be explained after all, but my point was that HL2 fanboïswill just yell at "genius!" because of it while the whole thing is pretty simplistic and not really told well, despite being cynics and media savvy.
I see where you're coming from.
BladderOfDoom: I don't really understand why there is so much butthurt over the way they have used Dante's Inferno to spin an action game out of it. There are plenty of other examples noone cares about. How closely does God of War stick to greek mythology? The Dune games had very little in common with the books themselves except the names and the planet. So how comes the divine comedy gets special treatment?
First of all, my main beef with it is that they stole the commonly used name of the Inferno in order to portray their bastardization of it. If they had a title like, say, (bad example) Hellacious Horrors, I wouldn't have a problem with it, even if they said that it was influenced by Dante's depiction of hell because it wouldn't be essentially saying that it was just a video game adaption of the epic poem.
As far as I know, there's no Greek myth called God of War, and God of War is a quite a bit more applicable to the source material, as Greek myths tend to have violence and gore involving the main character, which Dante's Inferno definitely does not.
The Dune game which, admittedly, I have not played, seems to be similar in tone and is supposed to be loosely based upon the story. However, if I had been older than three at the time, familiar with the books, had access to a location where I could be "butthurt" and people could hear me, and aware that the game was a bastardization of the novels, then I would complain about it as well.