[QUOTE=Spazzo965;37639698]That'd be great, but would never happen.[/QUOTE]
Why do you think it wouldn't happen?
[QUOTE=madmanmad;37639727]Yeah valve don't care about mods at all i mean that's why they have the SDK modding tools, and a load of helpful tutorials to get people started and recently started greenlight so mods can get a chance to be on steam and get more recognition.
Yeah they don't care about the community.[/QUOTE]
Greenlight isn't about recognition. Greenlight is about getting titles that will sell and earn them money on Steam.
Actually, Greenlight isn't even about access to Steam, it's about denial of access to Steam. It lukes out games people don't think they will buy even if it's on Steam.
They gave us SDK modding tools. But it ain't the best tools out there, far from user friendly, and we have yet to see any major changes to the SDK tools. If they REALLY cared that much, then they would be updating it to be easier to use and understand as well as making it more efficient.
Oh no. The engine we don't use any more. What ever shall we do? We're ruined.
[QUOTE=Midas22;37640014]Oh no. The engine we don't use any more. What ever shall we do? We're ruined.[/QUOTE]
>engine we don't use anymore
>engine that TF2 still runs on
I can't tell if this is a good thing or a bad thing...
[QUOTE=Nick Nack;37640031]>engine we don't use anymore
>engine that TF2 still runs on[/QUOTE]
Team Fortress 2 runs on Source (MP) 2009 which is a bit different.
[QUOTE=dgg;37639970]Greenlight isn't about recognition. Greenlight is about getting titles that will sell and earn them money on Steam.
Actually, Greenlight isn't about access to Steam, it's about denial of access to Steam. It lukes out games people don't think they will buy even if it's on Steam.
They gave us SDK modding tools. But it ain't the best tools out there, far from user friendly, and we have yet to see any major changes to the SDK tools. If they REALLY cared that much, then they would be updating it to be easier to use and understand as well as making it more efficient.[/QUOTE]
They gave you the modding tools, that's friendly enough.
Most companies like EA would just tell you to go fuck yourself.
Valve and steam have done more than enough for their community, just because they aren't giving you absolutely everything doesn't make them assholes.
[QUOTE=madmanmad;37640049]They gave you the modding tools, that's friendly enough.
Most companies like EA would just tell you to go fuck yourself.
Valve and steam have done more than enough for their community, just because they aren't giving you absolutely everything doesn't make them assholes.[/QUOTE]
Nobody said it wasn't friendly. The argument here is that their bragging, selling and marketing point is that they strive to always have the user in mind and support innovation through the community. Leaving their SDK pretty much the same way it was many many years ago does not prove that point, especially with this information MaxOfS2D has found in their 5 year old source files which has still not been publically documented and promoted to the public despite being a much better alternative.
What the devil would do has nothing to do with anything. Picking the lows to promote the highs is a shitty way of argumenting. EA is going against what we expect anyone to do, Valve is doing what we want companies to do. Also Valve is far from the only company that supports modding and innovation through the community.
There is no such thing as "having done enough" in an evergrowing everchanging business. Hell, there is never such a thing as "having done enough". Valve has done many a great things, but they can still be oh so way much fucking better.
Nobody called them assholes, are you trying to bring up a fight?
It should be obvious that this is something fucking big.
This is literally one of the biggest things to be leaked, next to any EP3/HL3 whatever stuff.
This contains way more than just the Source Engine code. SO YEAH, VALVE WILL GO NUTS
[QUOTE=Talishmar;37639623]What kind of negative impact can this cause to Valve?[/QUOTE]
I'm told there are some of the private Microsoft APIs used to deploy to the xbox in there, so that part might be troublesome
[QUOTE=dgg;37640087]Nobody said it wasn't friendly. The argument here is that their bragging, selling and marketing point is that they strive to always have the user in mind and support innovation through the community. Leaving their SDK pretty much the same way it was many many years ago does not prove that point, especially with this information MaxOfS2D has found in their 5 year old source files which has still not been publically documented and promoted to the public despite being a much better alternative.[/QUOTE]
I didn't really "find" anything in the source files. The thing is just, all the DMX facial anim stuff we know so far had to be reverse-engineered (format-wise, etc.) due to the lack of docs. It's with SFM's release, which included dmxconvert and a bunch of other DMX scripts, that programmers got the last boost needed. Imagine if we had access to just stuff like that files 5 years ago. I might be grossly exaggerating but we would see a lot of better models.
As for the SDK,
[img]http://i.imgur.com/b1g5z.png[/img]
Last update is almost a year ago. I think that speaks for itself.
IMHO the Source SDK is cool and all, it's just so unintuitive and forces you to jump through so many hoops just because of glitches that could be fixed extremely easily if Valve even bothered to fix them.
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;37640129]I'm told there are some of the private Microsoft APIs used to deploy to the xbox in there, so that part might be troublesome[/QUOTE]
Those could be scrubbed out, just like what Carmack did with the Doom 3 engine before he released the source code.
[QUOTE=Splarg!;37638740]Unfortunately this opens things up a bit for hackers on games that still use this.[/QUOTE]
rofl no the game has already been fucked by hackers
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DgtENR2oDM&feature=g-user-u[/url]
cant wait for multiplayer portal
So do we have any idea where the leak came from? Want to make sure it wasn't me in some way!
yeah it was probably you
[QUOTE=garry;37640194]So do we have any idea where the leak came from? Want to make sure it wasn't me in some way![/QUOTE]
WHat have you been doing?
[QUOTE=Van-man;37640206]WHat have you been doing?[/QUOTE]
Burning in Egypt
[QUOTE=garry;37640194]So do we have any idea where the leak came from? Want to make sure it wasn't me in some way![/QUOTE]
Apparently the "hackers" found a shell on their servers and started downloading stuff off it - it's nothing related to the licensees.
[QUOTE=garry;37640194]So do we have any idea where the leak came from? Want to make sure it wasn't me in some way![/QUOTE]
wtf how drunk do you have to be to release the source code
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;37640232]Burning in Egypt[/QUOTE]
Hot.
[QUOTE=Gran PC;37640239]Apparently the "hackers" found a shell on their servers and started downloading stuff off it - it's nothing related to the licensees.[/QUOTE]
Not on their site, on thief's site.
[QUOTE=garry;37640194]So do we have any idea where the leak came from? Want to make sure it wasn't me in some way![/QUOTE]
Don't you remember garry? You got hammered off of vintage rum and emailed the files to russian sexy girls for nudes
[QUOTE=dgg;37639970]Greenlight isn't about recognition. Greenlight is about getting titles that will sell and earn them money on Steam.
Actually, Greenlight isn't even about access to Steam, it's about denial of access to Steam. It lukes out games people don't think they will buy even if it's on Steam.[/QUOTE]This is the most idiotic representation of Greenlight yet. First of all, there is no requirement that any game sent through Greenlight have a cost. Hence why things like NMRiH and Cry of Fear can be on there, despite being free. So the idea that its just about making money is just fucking stupid. Second, the entire point of Greenlight was to make Steam more accessible for Indie developers while simultaneously helping to offload much of the work in favor of community driven effort. They said themselves that they can't tell what the community might want and what a good indie game might be, so they gave control over that to the community so they can pick what games they'd like. That's the whole fucking point of the system.
So what does this mean exactly?
[QUOTE=dafour;37640321]So what does this mean exactly?[/QUOTE] Deeper insight in the Orange Box engine
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37640298]This is the most idiotic representation of Greenlight yet. First of all, there is no requirement that any game sent through Greenlight have a cost. Hence why things like NMRiH and Cry of Fear can be on there, despite being free. So the idea that its just about making money is just fucking stupid. Second, the entire point of Greenlight was to make Steam more accessible for Indie developers while simultaneously helping to offload much of the work in favor of community driven effort. They said themselves that they can't tell what the community might want and what a good indie game might be, so they gave control over that to the community so they can pick what games they'd like. That's the whole fucking point of the system.[/QUOTE]
Just because they allow free games it's not about making money? I understand why you use that as an argument, but I don't really see how allowing that small minority of 1% of all games to get on greenlight (if you have 100$ to spend to be allowed to submit your completley free games to greenlight).
Steam wants games that are popular and well liked so they can get on Steam so they can get a cut off the price the game is sold for, knowing people will want to buy it and hopefully make it even more popular through sales and shit, sinking in more money. If the game isn't popular enough, Steam generally doesn't want it, because hey, it won't really sell by these statistics, meaning we will host content on our server and deliver patches without raking in money on the side.
The entire point of Greenlight was to outsource the process of accepting games from those 4 people that works with that, and out to the public. Less work for them, more fun for us, more money because the community wants it.
It is all about the money, but there is nothing inherently wrong with that. It's more money in a way that can be benefitial for the consumers. Steam gets richer, public gets more games on their favourite DRM solution.
Someone should upload this linux distro somewhere else :wink:
[QUOTE=_Chewgum;37640388]Someone should upload this linux distro somewhere else :wink:[/QUOTE]
What?
[QUOTE=dgg;37640367]Just because they allow free games it's not about making money? I understand why you use that as an argument, but I don't really see how allowing that small minority of 1% of all games to get on greenlight (if you have 100$ to spend to be allowed to submit your completley free games to greenlight).[/QUOTE]First, the idea of releasing something for free inherently negates the idea that it is for profit. I can't even see how you could argue otherwise. Second, the $100 fee was because Greenlight was being absolutely flooded with troll submissions and stupid requests for major titles like Battlefield 3 to be added. (I'd also love to see how you determined what percentage of games that get on will be completely free but I suspect you won't be able to provide that proof.)
[QUOTE]Steam wants games that are popular and well liked so they can get on Steam so they can get a cut off the price the game is sold for, knowing people will want to buy it and hopefully make it even more popular through sales and shit, sinking in more money. If the game isn't popular enough, Steam generally doesn't want it, because hey, it won't really sell by these statistics, meaning we will host content on our server and deliver patches without raking in money on the side.[/QUOTE]If this were the case, they would require that developers apply some form of cost to their games, not allowing any free titles.
[QUOTE]The entire point of Greenlight was to outsource the process of accepting games from those 4 people that works with that, and out to the public. Less work for them, more fun for us, more money because the community wants it.[/QUOTE]You mostly restated exactly what I said, so I don't see what you're trying to say with this.
[QUOTE]It is all about the money, but there is nothing inherently wrong with that. It's more money in a way that can be benefitial for the consumers. Steam gets richer, public gets more games on their favourite DRM solution.[/QUOTE]You keep saying its all about the money, but that has little to do with anything in the end really, and more to the point isn't really correct as I've stated.
They found a remote access shell on Valve's licensee server?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
