Source 2: What do you want to see? - Games

So by now you all should know theres has been a massive leak of Valve's upcoming engine: Source 2! This thread is for you to tell other people what you want to see in this engine. Heres what I would like in it (mainly SDK stuff): 1) DirectX 11.1 rendering compacity- For any hope of source 2 standing a chance with CE3 and the upcoming Unreal Engine 4 valve needs to include directX 11.1 support. 2) A new, redesigned version of hammer- Lets face it: the current version is nearing the end of its life. I invision A Dark grey look with a single 3d view and no 2d views 3)To release the source code with the SDK-When the source SDK was orginally released it came with the source code of the game, what I would like to see from this is Valve releasing the source code of Source 2 upon the sdk release of Half Life 3. 4)Hammer saving in .vbsp- instead saving in something like vvmf I would like valve make hammer to save in .vbsp to save us compiling every time we want to play test our maps. 5) A more efficient way of creating custom particles and materials- even though the current material and particle editor is pretty powerful, I would like to see a more user friendly interface yet even more powerful tools. 6)Keeping the easy to use input, output system thats in the current version of hammer- Even though hammer 4.1 is reaching the end it still has a simple input output systems rather than the flowchart in other engines, I would like valve to keep the input, output system thats we all have come to know with hammer. 7)a 3D view like in CE3 sandbox with easy manipulation- with the single 3d and 2d views I hop that there will still be a easy way to manipulate objects and brushes. 8)A Source 2 version of Portal 2 and CSGO (not anything with engine or sdk itself, but its what I would like)- Just think it would be really neat of a HD version of these games powered by Source 2! 9)C# base code to replace the current c++ code in Source- An upgrade to the code could prove that the engine would be more efficient yet easily moddable, hopping that c++ code still be compatable so we modders don't start from scratch! 10)An updated Developer Console- with more commands and a revamped look. 11)Real-time and shading and lighting in hammer- This feature will be useful to game developers and modders alike, knowing what shadows the light is going to cast, seeing how bright and see if thats the right colour for the scene without compiling each time. That would be great! well theres my wishlist like I said at the beginning is mainly sdk based-stuff. more stuff will be added as time goes on. Now I have to ask: What do you want to see in this next-gen engine?

I do not know about the massive leak...link?

[QUOTE=stargate660;37478883]Giant wall of text[/QUOTE] Dx 11 is not even being used 5% now. Dx 11.1 is a gimmick which ms left out from dx11 to have something to release windows 8 with. With Valve and Gabe not being very found of windows 8 I doubt they would reach into something that is only supported by it. So I hope they start using dx11 in the next source update.

A redisgned hammer is irrelevant to Source 2? And i like 2d views, we already have a 3d view in it anyways why remove he 2d ones? The points that mention that talks about modding tools (2,4,5,6,7,11) are totally irrelevant to Source 2, those are just the tools, what does Source 2 have to do with them?

[QUOTE=VitaminAG;37478930]I do not know about the massive leak...link?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.valvetime.net/threads/exclusive-next-gen-source-2-engine-is-in-development.215336/[/url] [editline]31st August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=t h e;37478941]A redisgned hammer is irrelevant to Source 2? And i like 2d views, we already have a 3d view in it anyways why remove he 2d ones? The points that mention that talks about modding tools (2,4,5,6,7,11) are totally irrelevant to Source 2, those are just the tools, what does Source 2 have to do with them?[/QUOTE] Just my opinions, like that is your opinion, I know must of the items on that list is irrelevant but I putted it down anyway. so thanks for letting me know what you think

1) No, don't listen to Microsoft. 2) Hammer does suck, and I'm sure Valve are working on Improving it internally, hopefully they're also refreshing the VBSP format to be a tad more flexible with regards to terrain and perhaps even size. 3) I imagine Valve would continue to release the source, I can see why they've wouldn't release the source for Dota 2 or CS:GO. 4) You realize that saving as VBSP would just mean that you'd have to compile the map every time you saved right? It would make more sense to add incremental building to VBSP, VVIS and VRAD so that they didn't take so god damn long. 5) I guess that makes sense. 6) The I/O system isn't anything to do with Hammer, it's part of the Source Engine. And I don't see why they'd get rid of it. If anything they should expand on it, newer source games have the ability to script levels, and in combination with the entity I/O that could create some interesting experiences. 7) Most of the lighting in the source engine is baked, it cannot be re-calculated in real time. Though with incremental building I could see some kind of "preview" working. 8) Portal 2 already looks good, putting it in a different engine won't magically make the game look any better. 9) haha, good one. 10) I don't see what's wrong with the current console, I guess you could add support for scripting with it but I don't see anything else that'd need changing. 11) Like I said, real-time radiosity is currently not possible, but a per-light preview could be fairly quick. That should cover it.

removed

[QUOTE=stargate660;37478883] 1) DirectX 11.1 rendering compacity- For any hope of source 2 standing a chance with CE3 and the upcoming Unreal Engine 4 valve needs to include directX 11.1 support. [/quote] Sure, it would be nice if they used a deferred lighting engine as-well, to take advantage of DX11. [QUOTE=stargate660;37478883] 2) A new, redesigned version of hammer- Lets face it: the current version is nearing the end of its life. I invision A Dark grey look with a single 3d view and no 2d views [/quote] What? We love the 2D views, it lets us move objects with really good spatial awareness. [QUOTE=stargate660;37478883] 3)To release the source code with the SDK-Whenpte the source SDK was orginally released it came with the source code of the game, what I would like to see from this is Valve releasing the source code of Source 2 upon the sdk release of Half Life 3. [/quote] They released parts of the source code, enough to make mods. [QUOTE=stargate660;37478883] 4)Hammer saving in .vbsp- instead saving in something like vvmf I would like valve make hammer to save in .vbsp to save us compiling every time we want to play test our maps. [/quote] I like the VMF format, its easy to write programs for, and you could make easy live BSP integration with it. [QUOTE=stargate660;37478883] 10)An updated Developer Console- with more commands and a revamped look. [/quote] "More commands" I only need commands for control over the features that we have, and they are going to add; nothing more- we don't need huge buttons that waste 300 pixels. [QUOTE=stargate660;37478883] 11)Real-time and shading and lighting in hammer- This feature will be useful to game developers and modders alike, knowing what shadows the light is going to cast, seeing how bright and see if thats the right colour for the scene without compiling each time. That would be great! [/quote] Sure, but It needs to be hybrid; like Frostbite 2.

[QUOTE=danharibo;37478962]8) Portal 2 already looks good, putting it in a different engine won't magically make the game look any better.[/QUOTE] noted

No offense, but this thread seems slightly pointless. Its not really "what would you like to see in Source 2" but more "what would you like to see in a game engine" That being said, i do like the ideas. Just not removing the 2d views in hammer.

[QUOTE=t h e;37478985]No offense, but this thread seems slightly pointless. Its not really "what would you like to see in Source 2" but more "what would you like to see in a game engine"[/QUOTE] non taken, I will make a note for next time

Having multiple windows in the editor means precision. Hammer looks hard, but it's really easy once the basics are done. Source is kinda meant to run on virtually all systems. Decent graphics on several low-end computers. They'd never release the source code to the public. The only reason is that licensed game developers use it like garry for example.

[QUOTE=digigamer17;37479026]Having multiple windows in the editor means precision. Hammer looks hard, but it's really easy once the basics are done. Source is kinda meant to run on virtually all systems. Decent graphics on several low-end computers. They'd never release the source code to the public. The only reason is that licensed game developers use it like garry for example.[/QUOTE] kay, see where you going with this but from 2004-2007/08 valve allowed modders modify the code to what the mods need to be, first hl2, than deathmatch, followed up by ep1 and 2 in the orange box engine update. 2009 and upwards haven't get code we can modify with. thanks for your opinions nether the less.

[QUOTE=stargate660;37479036]kay, see where you going with this but from 2004-2007/08 valve allowed modders modify the code to what the mods need to be, first hl2, than deathmatch, followed up by ep1 and 2 in the orange box engine update. 2009 and upwards haven't get code we can modify with. thanks for your opinions nether the less.[/QUOTE] I take your point on the older engine versions. Valve might not be ready yet.

[QUOTE=digigamer17;37479061]I take your point on the older engine versions. Valve might not be ready yet.[/QUOTE] noted and done

[QUOTE=stargate660;37479853]noted and done[/QUOTE] what are you doing

[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;37479938]what are you doing[/QUOTE] Making notes of what other people think... Highly informative!

[QUOTE=stargate660;37480249]Making notes of what other people think... Highly informative![/QUOTE] are you a notebook or something what the hell

[QUOTE=The very best;37480518]are you a notebook or something what the hell[/QUOTE] no... I just want to hear what other people think... besides this is going of subject off this thread.

You know, instead of writing an ugly and un-comprehensible wall of text, you could've just looked to the 2nd page of this sub-forum and found the general thread of Source 2. Where EVERYTHING has already been said.

[QUOTE=Emo Panda;37480789]You know, instead of writing an ugly and un-comprehensible wall of text, you could've just looked to the 2nd page of this sub-forum and found the general thread of Source 2. Where EVERYTHING has already been said.[/QUOTE] but that would make sense but noted

[QUOTE=stargate660;37479036]kay, see where you going with this but from 2004-2007/08 valve allowed modders modify the code to what the mods need to be, first hl2, than deathmatch, followed up by ep1 and 2 in the orange box engine update. 2009 and upwards haven't get code we can modify with. thanks for your opinions nether the less.[/QUOTE] We have the 2010 code with Alien Swarm.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;37487007]We have the 2010 code with Alien Swarm.[/QUOTE] noted

[QUOTE=cbrain;37492771]noted[/QUOTE] Noted

I think nice graphics doesn't affect gameplay at all, game is important in story and idea, but not shooting bullet to the wall in HD quality. Also Source Engine's "Old computer" support is a advantage for me IMO, but people seems like "High System Requirements" more. Plus, you can port HL2 into Alien Swarm code yourself, don't you think?

[QUOTE=Ken Chan;37496350]I think nice graphics doesn't affect gameplay at all, game is important in story and idea, but not shooting bullet to the wall in HD quality.[/QUOTE] Because if we where still using 2d sidescrolling graphics, we would have complicated storytelling and gameplay like in Portal 2 or Half-Life 2 ... Right ?

[QUOTE=Ken Chan;37496350]I think nice graphics doesn't affect gameplay at all, game is important in story and idea, but not shooting bullet to the wall in HD quality. Also Source Engine's "Old computer" support is a advantage for me IMO, but people seems like "High System Requirements" more.[/QUOTE] You don't understand the idea of technological development, do you?

[QUOTE=Ken Chan;37496350]I think nice graphics doesn't affect gameplay at all, game is important in story and idea, but not shooting bullet to the wall in HD quality. Also Source Engine's "Old computer" support is a advantage for me IMO, but people seems like "High System Requirements" more. Plus, you can port HL2 into Alien Swarm code yourself, don't you think?[/QUOTE] Depends on what you mean port HL2. HL2 runs on a entirely different branch of the Source Engine, while Alien Swarm works on the 2010 branch. It would take alot of work to make HL2 work in AS.

[QUOTE=SFC3;37501369]Depends on what you mean port HL2. HL2 runs on a entirely different branch of the Source Engine, while Alien Swarm works on the 2010 branch. It would take alot of work to make HL2 work in AS.[/QUOTE] AS has it's own unique branch of Source.

[QUOTE=SFC3;37501369]Depends on what you mean port HL2. HL2 runs on a entirely different branch of the Source Engine, while Alien Swarm works on the 2010 branch. It would take alot of work to make HL2 work in AS.[/QUOTE] You could port HL2 to the AWS engine, but there is no real reason; even if you wanted to use the deferred lighting with it point lights are broken, so you'd need to modify it to use static lighting + deferred ontop of that, then placing everything and getting everything to look right / better would be a ton of work.