It is you who obviously needs to consult a dictionary more often (and not just on this occasion). Innovative means characterized by something new. If something is of the best quality ever, then that is a NEW height in quality, hence it IS innovative.
I can't believe the lengths that you'll stretch to in a futile attempt to defend your positions. A "new height in quality" somehow being innovative. That's just rich.
But you didn't have to do that for me, I already knew you didn't know what innovative means. I guess it's always nice to have more evidence to prove it.
It does not make in original in subject matter, but it can make it original or otherwise innovative if it is of unparalleled quality or created using a new, i.e. innovative, technique or method.
You know, HL2 might have used some completely new technique in memory management. It might have made memory manipulation 10x easier and safer.
However, in no way would that make HL2, the game, innovative. So, no, once again you are wrong.
If you don't care, don't reply.
My posting here has nothing to do with caring about you or your opinions. Don't flatter yourself.
You need to read the previous thread on the subject in its entirety then because others stated in it that HL2 was unique in its use of facial animations to display emotion and that the facial animation system itself was unique in its ease of implementation.
No wonder you lost the other argument, you didn't even understand it. I've already conceded the point they were making - that the facial expressions (and the underlying animation system) are better than any other game to-date. However, they never claimed it was unique, they just claimed it was successful and the best. Which it was.