[QUOTE=TheRealRudy;49689651]fixed that for you. i don't know if you have noticed yet, but tf2 is dying and is pretty much used as experimental box by valve nowadays to look at what they can shove into dota 2 and csgo[/QUOTE]
I know and it's still fucking sad as someone whose played since 2008 :C
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49689163]Its really zingy when people post memes.[/QUOTE]
The latest CS:GO update banned all non-official custom servers that allowed players to server-side equip weapon skins in the game that they didn't own. This is just another stepping stone for a company that is turning into a games developer on the tier of EA in greediness.
Valve is literally going against their own, old philosophy of letting games be totally modable for no other reason than to enforce $200 knife skins. Hypocritical since that sense of mod-ability literally created the three major titles that Valve are milking today.
You know why Portal 2 was the last story game that Valve ever made? Because they tried to shoehorn a hat economy into it and the formula didn't work out for it.
Only Half Life fans can read news like "Major Half-Life centric developers disembark from Valve." and take that as a sign of "Wow guys this is fantastic! That means it's nearly finished and going to be announced in 2016!"
[I]If[/I] Half-Life is announced in 2016. You bet your ass it's going to have a flaccid multiplayer gamemode tacked onto it for that sick hat cash. Because that's honestly what Valve is as a games developer today.
[editline]7th February 2016[/editline]
The only good things that I can forgive Valve for recently are Greenlight and Vive
[QUOTE=General J;49692716]The latest CS:GO update banned all non-official custom servers that allowed players to server-side equip weapon skins in the game that they didn't own. This is just another stepping stone for a company that is turning into a games developer on the tier of EA in greediness.
Valve is literally going against their own, old philosophy of letting games be totally modable for no other reason than to enforce $200 knife skins. Hypocritical since that sense of mod-ability literally created the three major titles that Valve are milking today. [/QUOTE]
That was rescinded and likely due to miscommunication/lack of communication between teams internally. Still a problem, but a far lesser and far more known issue they have.
[QUOTE=General J;49692716]You know why Portal 2 was the last story game that Valve ever made? Because they tried to shoehorn a hat economy into it and the formula didn't work out for it.[/QUOTE]
Or because it only came out in 2012 and Valve titles with a focus on story take longer than the ones that dont?
[QUOTE=General J;49692716]Only Half Life fans can read news like "Major Half-Life centric developers disembark from Valve." and take that as a sign of "Wow guys this is fantastic! That means it's nearly finished and going to be announced in 2016!"[/QUOTE]
Which is speculation. It could be, it could turn out not to be. They've been working on it, theres proof they've been working on it for years at this point, its not unlikely, its one of a couple possible scenarios.
[QUOTE=General J;49692716][I]If[/I] Half-Life is announced in 2016. You bet your ass it's going to have a flaccid multiplayer gamemode tacked onto it for that sick hat cash. Because that's honestly what Valve is as a games developer today.[/QUOTE]
I would be totally okay with a multiplayer component to Half-Life 3, if it were good.
Also since every Half-Life has had a multiplayer component. Even Half-Life: Source.
Before you reply with a spiel about hat memes and hat economies and hats hats hats hats hats hats hats, lemme ask you something: Why should i give a shit if they sell cosmetic items? Why should i care if they even sell weapons like in TF2 if they keep the same type of model where just playing the game will award you with shit and you can trade with people for their items anyway if you dont have money? Why should i care? Clearly their attempts at shoehorning it into Portal 2 had little to no discernible impact (read: it had no impact) on the quality of that game. Whats your point?
My point is since Portal 2 (a singleplayer game) doesn't work as a skin economy, Valve has not been motivated to do these kind of games anymore.
Instead, they now focus on absorbing popular multiplayer mod ideas with the intention to push their market module inside of them.
You should care because even though the markets for these games do not impact the games themselves (Although that is subject to change. The intrusiveness increases with every new Compendium or CS:GO mission- locking a growing amount of pseudo-content behind a paywall) they do in fact impact Valve's decision making as a whole, and the company identity of what kind of content they want to embrace.
[QUOTE=General J;49693566]My point is since Portal 2 (a singleplayer game) doesn't work as a skin economy, Valve has not been motivated to do these kind of games anymore.
Instead, they now focus on absorbing popular multiplayer mod ideas with the intention to push their market module inside of them.
You should care because even though the markets for these games do not impact the games themselves (Although that is subject to change. The intrusiveness increases with every new Compendium or CS:GO mission- locking a growing amount of pseudo-content behind a paywall) they do in fact impact Valve's decision making as a whole, and the company identity of what kind of content they want to embrace.[/QUOTE]
Dude.
its been.
Less than 5 years since Portal 2. In that time they've made two multiplayer focused games.
Calm the hell down, do you know how long it takes them to MAKE games like Portal 2?
Like Half-Life 2? Like Half-Life?
Where are you getting this fact from that they've abandoned games like Portal for some fuckin MOONNEEEY? I dont see it. Stop being ridiculously pessimistic. Like, its hilariously pessimistic.
[editline]7th February 2016[/editline]
Also, "Decision making as a whole"
Do you know anything about the company you're talking about right now? At all? You know about their flat structure right? Anyone can do anything, no 'real' bosses?
The company doesnt sit down in a little office with a big oval table and go "LETS PUT IN SOME FUCKIN HATS", its the teams who WORK on those games individually that do.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49693582]Where are you getting this fact from that they've abandoned games like Portal for some fuckin MOONNEEEY? I dont see it. Stop being ridiculously pessimistic. Like, its hilariously pessimistic.[/QUOTE]
Facts like core Half-Life & Portal (single-player) developers jumping ship. Fact's like Gabe Newell [I]actually[/I] quoting that if "People want to work on story-centric things, they'll work on Dota characters", etc.
That's just how I feel as someone who's no longer a fan of Valve's market games. Opinions are opinions.
[I]But hey![/I] If Valve announces Half-Life in the next two years, comes out in the next five, and doesn't suck- I'll come back to this thread and apologize.
[QUOTE=General J;49693649]Facts like core Half-Life & Portal (single-player) developers jumping ship.[/QUOTE]
Marc Laidlaw and an animator, both of whom are old. And we dont know the context.
[QUOTE=General J;49693649]Fact's like Gabe Newell [I]actually[/I] quoting that if "People want to work on story-centric things, they'll work on Dota characters", etc.[/QUOTE]
Whats the context.
]
Honestly I feel like the shift of Valve from high-quality singleplayer games to micotransaction-fest multiplayer games is because a lot of the old guard are now leaving and being replaced with people who either don't want to do anything other then the multiplayer games or don't speak up against it.
Im pretty sure two people, one of which being known as "Old Man Laidlaw" even when he first was hired retiring after spending [I]years[/I] at a time working for a company means nothing about whether or not a game series will get a proper sequel or not.
If HL3 is a thing inside of Valve's offices Marc probably finished a final, proper story treatment for the game before leaving. He wouldn't be doing nothing if he was working there.
[editline]8th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49693951]Honestly I feel like the shift of Valve from high-quality singleplayer games to micotransaction-fest multiplayer games is because a lot of the old guard are now leaving and being replaced with people who either don't want to do anything other then the multiplayer games or don't speak up against it.[/QUOTE]
Likely not the case, i'd imagine.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49693680]Marc Laidlaw and an animator, both of whom are old. And we dont know the context.
Whats the context.
][/QUOTE]There isn't any. I've literally never seen that quote before this specific post. Near as I can tell, its entirely fabricated. The closest he has said was that, unless someone could bring up a good reason, they'd not go back and do an old school singleplayer game again. Which doesn't mean a whole lot on its own.
[editline]7th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=MacD11;49693961]Im pretty sure two people, one of which being known as "Old Man Laidlaw" even when he first was hired retiring after spending [I]years[/I] at a time working for a company means nothing about whether or not a game series will get a proper sequel or not.
If HL3 is a thing inside of Valve's offices Marc probably finished a final, proper story treatment for the game before leaving. He wouldn't be doing nothing if he was working there.[/QUOTE]
Goes back to what I said on the previous page: If they've been getting paid to do nothing this whole time, then why retire now?
Maybe Laidlaw doesn't need more money and was just bored doing nothing.
[QUOTE=CB1993;49694163]Maybe Laidlaw doesn't need more money and was just bored doing nothing.[/QUOTE]
Laidlaws a writer. Valve primarily focuses on video games and video game tech, but that couldnt've stopped him from writing things for the company otherwise.
Like comics.
Valve loves to make comics.
He could've done a Half-Life comic exploring the world inbetween games. Or perhaps a book. Publish it on steam.
You know what I'm beginning to think? The project that would be the next installation of the Half-Life series will most definitely be the final one. Valve as a studio seems gravitate towards the more experimental side of development. Being tethered by this grand saga is probably not very fulfilling for them. I believe they are going to the extremes developing this game, trying to keep it all secret, just to give it a good and proper ending to the story. I don't think they aim to create the 11/10 magnus opus that would trump gaming for generations to come. No, they are just putting as much effort into their details as possible to create something they can be proud of.
I dont know if Half-Life 3 will be the LAST Half-Life game, but im almost certain it will be the last with the current story.
A spin off i can see happening in the future. The world has a lot of potential beyond the Combine and Gordon Freeman.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49693582]Dude.
its been.
Less than 5 years since Portal 2. In that time they've made two multiplayer focused games.
Calm the hell down
[/QUOTE]
I believe it would be in your best interest to follow your own advice and calm down, man. He is not directly accusing you or anyone in this thread of anything, instead he is explaining why he believes what he does. Using fallacies in place of argument doesn't make it any better, either. I would suggest looking up the ad ignorantiam fallacy, which in this case is very rampant in almost every argument in this thread.
[QUOTE]do you know how long it takes them to MAKE games like Portal 2?
Like Half-Life 2? Like Half-Life?[/QUOTE]
Then we move on to this part, in which you use the genetic fallacy that, since all other games they've made took such a long time, that them being silent for so long has no other conclusion than that they've been, and still are, working on it. And while that is a possibility, it isn't more than speculation on your part. (and if your opponent's opinions are also speculation, how do you expect to prove him wrong?)
[QUOTE]Where are you getting this fact from that they've abandoned games like Portal for some fuckin MOONNEEEY? I dont see it. Stop being ridiculously pessimistic. Like, its hilariously pessimistic.[/QUOTE]
On to the next one, we get into the classic ad hominem fallacy, at which you label your opponent with a characteristic that should somehow undermine his stance and criticism, in place of actually rebuttling said stance and criticism.
[QUOTE]Also, "Decision making as a whole"
Do you know anything about the company you're talking about right now? At all? You know about their flat structure right? Anyone can do anything, no 'real' bosses?
The company doesnt sit down in a little office with a big oval table and go "LETS PUT IN SOME FUCKIN HATS", its the teams who WORK on those games individually that do.[/QUOTE]
Then we get to this part, where you actively appeal to shame in substitute of a real argument, implying that he isn't educated enough to discern what he has in his verdict. Then on to a simple straw-man fallacy, in which you present an unfairly weak version of the original argument, and then you directly refute that version of the argument instead of the more logically sound, original one.
I'd like you to take a deep breath, and understand that this debate (logically) will never go anywhere if all you do is disregard genuine theory, criticism and assumptions, from your opponent and instead argue with yourself; which is practically what you're doing when you use fallacies so heavily as you do, in place of true rebuttle.
Now; do you see what I've done with this post? I've logically deconstructed your post, without accusation, while staying calm, and tried my hardest to use logical un-fallacitical rebuttles. If you want to persuade someone, especially on an internet forum, it kind of requires finesse. As far as I'm aware I don't have any fallacies in my approach, except for maybe broadening your point in quote 2, which could be a straw-man (if I misinterpreted your point). Stay away from emotional appeals, man.
And you followed through the fallacy fallacy, that just because you can point out supposed fallacies in his argument, you've defeated it. But that assumes that first of all those fallacies actually apply and second that pointing them out somehow actually compromises his argument. You didn't actually win anything, his points still stand, and you misrepresented it in at least one case (That's not how the genetic fallacy works, yo). And you hardly addressed his points, hoping that going "That's a fallacy!" instead would work. You're not in high-school debate, so don't act like it. Its not going to net you a win, and its not impressive. His point about how long the development takes is valid, because that's actually the issue, the length of development. We can actually reference other game developers and their work schedules: Bethesda for instance released Fallout 4 this year, their last game was Skyrim in 2012. Open world RPGs tend to take longer to develop, but Bethesda had an advantage in that they were already working from an existing engine they've been using since 2002 (even earlier for the actual development, but we'll leave it at that). Valve has been in the process of building an entirely new engine, one that only in about the last six months has really entered anything like a finished state, and even that is debatable. Activision has actually given the Call of Duty studios each an extra year to develop their titles, no longer having to have a finished game every other year. The first Firaxis XCOM game was released in 2012, and only just a few days ago did they release XCOM 2.
Ever since the "ARG" I've seen AaronM202 become the biggest Half-Life apologist on this forum. I understand wanting a new Half-Life game, I don't think there is a single person who played Episode 2 that wasn't blue balled at least for a little while because of that ending, but to not see the change in priorities at Valve through their actions applied to their games is just blindly defending against an obvious trend.
[QUOTE=Banned?;49694660][b]Ever since the "ARG"[/b] I've seen AaronM202 become the biggest Half-Life apologist on this forum. I understand wanting a new Half-Life game, I don't think there is a single person who played Episode 2 that wasn't blue balled at least for a little while because of that ending, but to not see the change in priorities at Valve through their actions applied to their games is just blindly defending against an obvious trend.[/QUOTE]
I dont want to talk about it.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;49694064]There isn't any. I've literally never seen that quote before this specific post. Near as I can tell, its entirely fabricated. The closest he has said was that, unless someone could bring up a good reason, they'd not go back and do an old school singleplayer game again. Which doesn't mean a whole lot on its own.
[/QUOTE]
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxIb8oGdV7U&feature=youtu.be&t=2460[/media]
[quote]So like Dota 2 is an incredibly character-rich [game]. There are how many? 110 characters? So if you have a problem that involves wanting to work on the aspect of having lots and lots of strongly realized characteristics, then Dota 2 is the right place to do it.[/quote]
41:00
[QUOTE=NixNax123;49694724][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxIb8oGdV7U&feature=youtu.be&t=2460[/media]
41:00[/QUOTE]
That quote has wildly different implications than the other one.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49694734]That quote has wildly different implications than the other one.[/QUOTE]
I'm just saying that the quote isn't entirely unfounded. Not arguing its relevance to the topic.
[QUOTE=NixNax123;49694724][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxIb8oGdV7U&feature=youtu.be&t=2460[/media]
41:00[/QUOTE]
thats a pretty far cry from "People want to work on story-centric things, they'll work on Dota characters"
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49693951]Honestly I feel like the shift of Valve from high-quality singleplayer games to micotransaction-fest multiplayer games is because a lot of the old guard are now leaving and being replaced with people who either don't want to do anything other then the multiplayer games or don't speak up against it.[/QUOTE]exactly this, i honestly doubt the old crew were the ones making the recent poor choices with their games
i've seen many, many more younger people at valve and it makes me wonder whether or not it's a lack of business experience or just what they think is the right thing to do...?
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;49694649]And you followed through the fallacy fallacy, that just because you can point out supposed fallacies in his argument, you've defeated it. But that assumes that first of all those fallacies actually apply and second that pointing them out somehow actually compromises his argument. You didn't actually win anything, his points still stand, and you misrepresented it in at least one case (That's not how the genetic fallacy works, yo). And you hardly addressed his points, hoping that going "That's a fallacy!" instead would work. You're not in high-school debate, so don't act like it. Its not going to net you a win, and its not impressive. His point about how long the development takes is valid, because that's actually the issue, the length of development. We can actually reference other game developers and their work schedules: Bethesda for instance released Fallout 4 this year, their last game was Skyrim in 2012. Open world RPGs tend to take longer to develop, but Bethesda had an advantage in that they were already working from an existing engine they've been using since 2002 (even earlier for the actual development, but we'll leave it at that). Valve has been in the process of building an entirely new engine, one that only in about the last six months has really entered anything like a finished state, and even that is debatable. Activision has actually given the Call of Duty studios each an extra year to develop their titles, no longer having to have a finished game every other year. The first Firaxis XCOM game was released in 2012, and only just a few days ago did they release XCOM 2.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't trying to defeat his arguments, and I wasn't trying to make him look dumb or anything (and I guess I kind of look dumb because I didn't use the genetic fallacy right, shit), but I was trying to set up the basis for actual argumentation beyond accusations and emotional angst. As it stands, every single argument in this thread is speculation, so like I said before, if posts are just riddled with easy to point out fallacies, is that really going to persuade anyone? My intent wasn't to directly address and argue each point, I just saw low hanging fruit and went for it.
As for the actual argument about HL3, personally I pretty much agree with both of you, but I wanted to play devil's advocate, because there's too much sloppy debate going on here to even recognize most of the points.
(so basically, my point wasn't the argument. It was that this entire thread is pointless, sloppy and redundant because there's nothing but speculation and fallacies)
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49687808]there are many signs that point to valve having something big up their sleeve, [...][/QUOTE]
Such as
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49692851]
Or because it only came out in 2012 and Valve titles with a focus on story take longer than the ones that dont?
[/QUOTE]
because tf2 had a quick development time compared to everything valve has ever done
except it didn't
[QUOTE=Bragdras;49695401]Such as[/QUOTE]
Most of the steam hardware projects wrapping up in development, increased amounts of news regarding a new engine from them (Source 2), and other "leaks" of information that have been handed out over time through accidentally referring to features inside of Source 2 with updates to games and programs like DOTA 2, primarily.
I'm not here to say im being an optimist or anything like that, but i do think that like, 95% of the people in this thread are not looking at the big picture here and are instead commenting on what they see in the surface and making snarky, pessimistic remarks about topics that they likely dont know about in their entirety. If anything, i' d say im thinking logically about the whole situation instead of jumping to a conclusion and assuming the worst.
Valve are wrapping up projects they've been working on for awhile and have considered "big", such as the brunt of the development for the Vive, Steam Machines, and other things. Im pretty sure they will be returning to software, such as games, proper soon.
[QUOTE=MacD11;49695860]Most of the steam hardware projects wrapping up in development, increased amounts of news regarding a new engine from them (Source 2), and other "leaks" of information that have been handed out over time through accidentally referring to features inside of Source 2 with updates to games and programs like DOTA 2, primarily.
I'm not here to say im being an optimist or anything like that, but i do think that like, 95% of the people in this thread are not looking at the big picture here and are instead commenting on what they see in the surface and making snarky, pessimistic remarks about topics that they likely dont know about in their entirety. If anything, i' d say im thinking logically about the whole situation instead of jumping to a conclusion and assuming the worst.
Valve are wrapping up projects they've been working on for awhile and have considered "big", such as the brunt of the development for the Vive, Steam Machines, and other things. Im pretty sure they will be returning to software, such as games, proper soon.[/QUOTE]
it just seems logical to me to see both the vive.and source 2 dropping soon and guess they have [i]something[/i] game-related attached to them. it doesn't even have to be hl3 but that just makes the most sense to me (especially since we know they've had some level of work on it since at least 2012 if not before)
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49695984]it just seems logical to me to see both the vive.and source 2 dropping soon and guess they have [i]something[/i] game-related attached to them. it doesn't even have to be hl3 but that just makes the most sense to me (especially since we know they've had some level of work on it since at least 2012 if not before)[/QUOTE]
I've called it before and I'm gonna call it again:
I sincerely believe that if they're going to release a half-life game, they're going to do it with the vive because valve REALLY wants VR to take off, and if they released their brand new game with their brand new engine on their brand(ed) new VR headset they'd sell like fucking hotcakes
[QUOTE=phygon;49696715]I've called it before and I'm gonna call it again:
I sincerely believe that if they're going to release a half-life game, they're going to do it with the vive because valve REALLY wants VR to take off, and if they released their brand new game with their brand new engine on their brand(ed) new VR headset they'd sell like fucking hotcakes[/QUOTE]
Valve wants VR to take off, that's why they're sending so many devkits out to people, it's not a single experience that is going to sell VR (Half-Life) it's going to be the breadth of experience.
If Half-Life 3 is released, it's not going to have any more VR support than HL2 currently has, they've done interviews and this is the consistent response.
The bar of entry for VR right now is the cost and performance, and will be for the foreseeable future.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
