Game Informer does an interview with an anonymous Valve employee on HL3 - Polidicks

[url]http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2017/01/11/searching-for-half-life-3.aspx[/url] [QUOTE]On my first day of actively working on my piece, I sent emails to 20 to 30 people. Roughly 70 percent were still employed by Valve, and the remainder had either left the company or worked with it on Half-Life-related titles. I had a good feeling about getting a lead. Someone would talk. They always do. I just needed one person to open up. The first response I received, from a person who worked on Half-Life’s episodic content, yet didn’t want to be named, said “No comment.” Minutes later I received an email that said, “Good luck with the story. Out of respect to my friends and family at Valve, it wouldn’t be right for me to say anything. Sorry!” All of my inquiries were either shot down or ignored. As one developer so accurately put it, “You’re hunting for unicorns, Reiner.” For whatever reason, no one wanted to say anything about Valve or Half-Life. Were they bound contractually? I couldn’t even get an answer to that. In the months that followed in early 2015, I reached out to another dozen-plus people. Again, I received nothing but rejection or silence. I was crushed. All of my research and prep work would amount to nothing. I shelved the story and moved on to other writing ventures. A few months went by, and in the summer of 2015, I received an email from someone I originally pitched but never heard back from. The subject line read “Half-Life 3.” The person said they could talk to me for 30 minutes, but they wanted to remain anonymous. The interview was a real eye-opener. This person didn’t hold back from discussing anything. I finally had the lead I needed for the framework of the story. The one source wasn’t enough, though. I at least needed more people to verify what was said. I again ran into a brick wall of “no comments” and “no thank yous.” The story was once again thrown into its own development hell. That was in October 2015. I haven’t put much thought into it in the year that followed. I was reminded of what it could have been on last week’s Game Informer Show, when a listener asked us if we thought Valve would ever release Half-Life 3. I filled him in on a small sliver of information I knew from my source, which led to an avalanche of requests to publish the entire interview. [B]The idea of running an interview with unverified information kills me a little (especially given the current state of political journalism), but I do trust this source, and believe what was said to be truthful. Even with my approval, take what is said with a grain of salt. Unless other Valve employees come forward and say, “Yes, all of that is true,” or “This one part is a little off; here’s what really happened,” we just won’t know the validity of what was said.[/B] [/QUOTE] Interview itself is in the source. tl;dr:[sp]Valve has tried to make HL3 multiple times over the years by lots of different teams, but never got it off the ground. They don't outsource it to a third party dev because they don't want it to be an inferior product.[/sp]

Its understandable hopefully it can have a conclusion of some kind though

These things, they take time. Time and time again.

The whole lead-up to the interview sounds like some real Deepthroat shit

Doesn't really matter if any of this is true or not anymore, i gave up hope a long time ago

[QUOTE=AbbaDee;51659035] tl;dr:[sp]Valve has tried to make HL3 multiple times over the years by lots of different teams, but never got it off the ground. They don't outsource it to a third party dev because they don't want it to be an inferior product.[/sp][/QUOTE] Doesn't seem like anything new, then. It's a shame, but it beats getting a subpar game.

I feel like part of the reason the developers are all over the place is because of the supposed flat hierarchy. There's no one to definitely say that HL3 must happen. It's like a cattle of sheep, and Gabe is (from what I understand of the interview) usually the one to jump the fence first. Sure, restricting your sheep to one pen may cause them to feel unhappy because they wanna be on the other side of the fence. They need to be coerced, steered, into believing they wanna be in this pen, and deep down they want to, but the other side of the fence feels more appealing because the other sheep are over there.

[QUOTE=Recurracy;51659065]I feel like part of the reason the developers are all over the place is because of the supposed flat hierarchy. There's no one to definitely say that HL3 must happen. It's like a cattle of sheep, and Gabe is (from what I understand of the interview) usually the one to jump the fence first. Sure, restricting your sheep to one pen may cause them to feel unhappy because they wanna be on the other side of the fence. They need to be coerced, steered, into believing they wanna be in this pen, and deep down they want to, but the other side of the fence feels more appealing because the other sheep are over there.[/QUOTE] what

It's funny though because you can't say things don't work internally for Valve because they sorta do.

I really can't see a reason valve needs to make half life 3 from a financial standpoint. They make so much from Steam, Dota 2 and CS:GO, I can't see a single player one and done game competing.

I don't think anyone really wants Half Life 3 the ultimate megagame of games anymore, people just want the fucking story to finally wrap up. See what id did with Wolfenstein, do something like that, have it have a definitive ending, ship that and everyone will be happy. Then feel free to go on with the VR gimmicks and shit.

[QUOTE=Oizen;51659071]I really can't see a reason valve needs to make half life 3 from a financial standpoint. They make so much from Steam, Dota 2 and CS:GO, I can't see a single player one and done game competing.[/QUOTE] It's not impossible. Look at Witcher 3, or Fallout 4, or D44M. Single player games can still make a lot of bank.

I'll admit, at least if it's true, it does provide some kind of closure and even a little hope. We at least know they've tried and haven't been ignoring the series in it's entirety. To be honest, it's just the vagueness of what little we get that makes the whole "wait" frustrating. People probably wouldn't have given up waiting if they were just plain honest and gave them that peace of mind. HL3 I personally don't see happening anytime soon, but it's still very possible to happen someday.

No point in holding anymore hype for Valve to continue the story, I guess. Really sucks because Half Life is what got me into Steam and all of the other Valve games, and Garry's Mod as well. For Half Life being Valve's first and well known series, it always seemed odd they'd back off making a third to finish off the story. I guess they have their reasons, like maybe they don't want to upset the fans if the third doesn't live up to the expectations.

Get the writers to sit in a room for a while and write a short novel. Some conclusion to the narrative would be appreciated if they can't successfully make the game. Episode 2 had a bullshit cliffhanger at the time and it's only gotten worse ten years after the fact.

That falls about in line with everything else we know about Valve. In particular how they gravitate around projects that pique their interest, rather than franchise loyalty (which they're rich and independent enough to ignore). During the HL2 episodes, they were looking for a way to make shorter and more frequent release cycles happen, and that road eventually lead to their "games as service" model that TF2, CSGO and Dota 2 now use. Dota 2 itself came out during a time where MOBAs were all the rage and every dev tried their version of it. Right now VR seems to be the big new exciting thing to work on. Unless they can find something that interesting for Episode 3, I doubt it's ever gonna happen. Which I'd say would be a great general attitude for devs to have when it comes to sequels - don't make one unless you've got something really interesting planned for it - but unfortunately Ep2's cliffhanger makes it a bit of a different scenario.

So basically what most sensible people have said throughout the years; the franchise has basically starved because Valve hasn't been able to get anything going that would live up to expectations, what with everything else going on, and would rather do nothing than force a mediocre continuation just for the sake of closure. Assuming the source is true, of course. EDIT: Like the article says, disappointing but completely expected. We just need to come to terms with the fact that the time when Half-Life Valve's most important IP, and the likes of Portal, CS and TF2 mere distractions in the greater scheme of things, is long since gone.

[QUOTE=Recurracy;51659065]I feel like part of the reason the developers are all over the place is because of the supposed flat hierarchy. There's no one to definitely say that HL3 must happen. It's like a cattle of sheep, and Gabe is (from what I understand of the interview) usually the one to jump the fence first. Sure, restricting your sheep to one pen may cause them to feel unhappy because they wanna be on the other side of the fence. They need to be coerced, steered, into believing they wanna be in this pen, and deep down they want to, but the other side of the fence feels more appealing because the other sheep are over there.[/QUOTE] You don't need to feel, you can read about this in this very interview, as well as the new employee booklet. In Valve's management structure, top-down pressure from a boss is more or less replaced by peer pressure from colleagues and the various cliques they naturally form. It's not total anarchy, but it does lead to projects living or dying depending on whether Valve as a whole feels excited about it.

There's four ways this situation I feel can end (note: I only got around to the HL games around 2015, so I might be forgetting/ignoring some things/making too many assumptions); 1) They never release a HL 3, upsetting fans for not finishing the story and not creating another great singleplayer FPS 2) They release HL 3 but it's not at the same quality, upsetting everyone and probably causing a huge backlash in terms of quality 3) They release the [I]story[/I] of HL 3, more than likely giving a satisfactory or great ending to the series but still upsetting people for not releasing an actual game. 4) Actually release HL 3 and ensuring it's at-least on par with the previous games, but still upsetting some people for taking too long. I'd say only 1 or 4 are possible, knowing Valve.

Valve sounds absolutely retarded from that interview.

On the assumption that this is all true (and it does sound pretty reasonable to me), I think of Half Life 3 like it's schrodinger's cat. I don't think you can say "Oh it's going to come out some day" because it implies more organization and planning at valve than there actually is. It's like playing a slot machine over and over, losing every time, but being steadfast in believing you're going to win. Even if you do win, that doesn't mean it was logical or right for you to think you were going to. I dunno that I'm making any sense with that but that's the best analogy I could come up with. So like, even if Half Life 3 does come out in 2036, people are gonna dance around smugly going "I TOLD YOU SO I TOLD YOU SO", believing it justified the past 30 years of obsessing, and rumors, and guessing. Like, no, you had no way of knowing either and you could have just as easily been wrong forever. You were still wrong. You would have been better off letting it go and finding something else. I think the more time passes, the more Half Life 3 becomes unlikely, and the more unlikely it becomes for us to get the Half Life 3 we would want anyway. The people aren't the same anymore. The expectations are so much higher than they used to be. Valve as a company is in a completely different place with a completely different direction. It wouldn't have to be this way if they operated like a normal game dev. And the kicker is, if this all is true, that in another universe, they had Half Life 3 years ago and the only difference between there's and ours is certain people got around to making it happen. It's almost poetic in a way. The biggest victim of Valve's flat hierarchy is their own flagship franchise.

pretty sad that there's barely anyone left at valve from the original half life 1 and 2 teams, no wonder things didn't get anywhere without a coordinated effort from people who worked on things other than microtransactions and MOBAs

[QUOTE=Lolkork;51659126][url]http://store.steampowered.com/sale/2016_top_sellers/[/url][/QUOTE] I don't think Valve would have a problem selling Half Life 3 but devil's avocado, how many linear, single player only first person shooters are on that list?

[QUOTE=Nautsabes;51659113]Valve sounds absolutely retarded from that interview.[/QUOTE] Maybe not. Maybe it's for the best. In any other company, the top brass would say "Alright, you're making Half-Life 3 now," and then the team assigned to it would be forced to shit out some bland, uninspired, poorly-thought-out rubbish. In any other company, Half-Life would be like a Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed annual snoozefest. Valve is slow to wake or get excited about something, but when they do they usually put out top-notch games, among the most successful or popular in the world. If Valve couldn't get excited about making the next great FPS in Half-Life 3 or Episode 3 or what have you, it's probably for the best to let it die. It wouldn't be up to par and we would all be disappointed.

[QUOTE=Nautsabes;51659113]Valve sounds absolutely retarded from that interview.[/QUOTE] On one hand, I want to be optimistic about the concept of developers being free to work on whatever project interests them the most, because it's sure to result in games that have had plenty of effort and care put into them On the other hand, I'm sure it just results in people going for whatever's popular and successful and safe from risk

[QUOTE=AbbaDee;51659035] tl;dr:[sp]Valve has tried to make HL3 multiple times over the years by lots of different teams, but never got it off the ground. They don't outsource it to a third party dev because they don't want it to be an inferior product.[/sp][/QUOTE] I think we all had this figured. I guess they're just waiting for some strike of inspiration, like Half Life 1 and 2 both offered [I]something[/I] new to gaming as a whole, it'd be shitty for HL3 to be just a Half Life sequel.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51659152]Maybe not. Maybe it's for the best. In any other company, the top brass would say "Alright, you're making Half-Life 3 now," and then the team assigned to it would be forced to shit out some bland, uninspired, poorly-thought-out rubbish. In any other company, Half-Life would be like a Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed annual snoozefest. Valve is slow to wake or get excited about something, but when they do they usually put out top-notch games, among the most successful or popular in the world. If Valve couldn't get excited about making the next great FPS in Half-Life 3 or Episode 3 or what have you, it's probably for the best to let it die. It wouldn't be up to par and we would all be disappointed.[/QUOTE] This is some battered wife type shit right here

[QUOTE=Nautsabes;51659113]Valve sounds absolutely retarded from that interview.[/QUOTE] They are. You only need to look at the lack of communication about Steam, their games and their support system for Steam. Why does someone need to go undercover in order to tell the public that they're not happy with their progress on HL3, and so they're not working on it right now? I think everyone would appreciate a bit of honesty and communication from Valve for a bloody change. But instead we're left with bullshit and rumours. Even Blizzard handled the old school private server business better, even if there was no satisfactory conclusion between the two parties. Valve need to get their fucking act together. They're quickly falling in my books of top companies.

I hope at some point Gabe Newell will realize how fucked things are and ask the teams to make HL3 for real, and maybe issue a public apology or something. Maybe this article could be the wake-up call. As you can tell, I'm kind of an optimist.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51659152]Maybe not. Maybe it's for the best. In any other company, the top brass would say "Alright, you're making Half-Life 3 now," and then the team assigned to it would be forced to shit out some bland, uninspired, poorly-thought-out rubbish. In any other company, Half-Life would be like a Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed annual snoozefest. Valve is slow to wake or get excited about something, but when they do they usually put out top-notch games, among the most successful or popular in the world. If Valve couldn't get excited about making the next great FPS in Half-Life 3 or Episode 3 or what have you, it's probably for the best to let it die. It wouldn't be up to par and we would all be disappointed.[/QUOTE] I don't really think that's a good mindset for a company to have that's a mindset for like an individual artist to have, and it's not a particularly good one even then because if you sit and wait to be inspired you'll never go anywhere, you have to make yourself inspired, or at least that's what I think. For a whole group of people, waiting for them all to get excited or trying to make all of them excited sounds exceptionally difficult. It sounds like anything that gets off the ground is an uncontrollable coincidence that happens when enough people happen to start working on something and it starts to snowball. Hence why most 'Half Life 3' projects according to this have died after the 3 people that felt like working on it stopped. It sounds really, truly inefficient and has probably left so many amazing things behind we'd probably balk at all the things that never got off the ground just because the valve employees weren't feeling particularly in to it enough, even forgetting just Half Life 3.