Artifact is released (Also Valve acknowledges Half-Life exists) - Sensationalist Headlines

Post TF2-MANNCOMONY Not to mention Alien Swarm was more of an experiment with no post-launch content and was pretty quickly forgotten by Valve. Think it was to advertise their open source dev kit or something? You can't just decide that Valve would never make a single player game when they've only released 3 games since portal 2. And of those two, Dota and CS:GO were around the time of portal 2. I'm sure Valve is going to make a singleplayer game in some form eventually even though portal 2 had a failed dumb mtx store. My point is that people still viewed Valve positively around this time (mainly because of TF2). Even going as far as having GabeN memes about the store sales or about hats. Have whatever opinion you have of Valve but shitting on Artifact and calling it a non-game as if it's fact, review bombing Dota, salivating over Artifact potentially failing and being hostile and holding grudge towards users or friends that either like the game or defend it is what is bothering me.

Some russian guy decided to check if you can buy packs and sell cards while staying profitable. Well... no. He spent 50k RUB (750$) on packs and got 42k (630$) from selling the cards. https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/111296/85215ddb-7a00-4599-8fca-86ea66106f9d/изображение.png https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/111296/32cd0f37-98d8-4ab8-b5ae-d9d4df410ce3/изображение.png

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jsaqnMVgUw

yeah, the next big release after mannconomy dropped in 2010 was Portal 2. Do I need to explain why this isn't helping your case? next? no one said it's a non-game. The review bomb happened years after DOTA 2's playerbase was already established, all they did was make a meaningless metric dip enough to show that there's significant discontent amongst Valve's fans. Even setting aside the shitty monetization that is already worth condemning the game over, Artifact is the perfect representation of everything wrong with new-Valve. It's not simply that Valve didn't make a game, or didn't make it because they were making something else. They're a large enough company, they could have released at least one other game and still made Artifact. The reason they didn't make those other games and the reason this specific game got made are one in the same: microtransactions. That is why people want it to fail, and they are completely justified. And finally, you're both misrepresenting what that person said and ignoring what I've already said on the subject. If you support Artifact, you're supporting anti-consumer business practices. There is nothing else to say.

You literally told me I was wrong about every game post TF2-Mannconomy (2010) by giving me examples of games released between 2008-10? Every game has had mtx since TF2-Mannconomy. Alien Swarm came out before Mannconomy too. There are no Valve game that doesn't have MTX post that era. They changed their attitude towards Valve after Dota and Epistle 3. There weren't enough cases of good faith mistakes because a lot of people loved the TF2 mtxs and the only thing controversial after that was Portal 2 mtx. https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/1760/05dc9709-937d-4027-842f-98cefa594a47/image.png The review bombing happened because of Epistle 3 which points to people blaming Dota for its death. Which is immature by the way. Setting aside the monetization or changing it for the better loses much of its worth condemning over. How is it that Artifact is the representation of everything wrong with "new-Valve"? Valve have always released what they finish and that shouldn't mean they are supposed to hold back the release of it before they release a "REAL" game! Valve are always developing something and sometimes even scrapping things that they get a good momentum of. You can know this from even HL1 and 2. Portal 2 as well as TF2. TF2 took 9 years remember? They're going to make other games. IF you mean 1/4's tantrum post then there is no other context I can take from it other than he is removing friends from his list because of them playing the game past a refund time. Only other context I got was from another user that ISN'T 1/4 saying that Hes mad that people who originally bitch about microtransactions are now sucking valve off for doing the same but somehow worse. ?? And still doesn't justify holding grudges towards those that do

How is it that Artifact is the representation of everything wrong with "new-Valve"? ...because it is

Because it's microtransactions: the game. It has very little to do with it not being "a real game" and everything to do with it being a cashgrab.

That isn't an answer I asked how is the game, if monetiziation is set aside, everything wrong with "new-Valve" That would mean looking at the game outside of the bad monetization.

It'd be a bit less disappointing, but it doesn't matter much since you can't set the monetization aside in the real world

So you're asking weather or not there's a problem with the game besides the problem with the game?

Misguided said that even with the monetization aside from the game. It would still be worth condemning. So I replied to it and asked why and you seem to have taken the question differently than what I asked.

Portal 2's monitization was an easily ignorable bit of sludge in an otherwise good singleplayer experience. It wasn't forgiven or anything like that, just tolerated, in the same way people rationalized both Peter Molyneux and Todd Howard lying to their faces until the problem became too big and obvious to not be angry at. Another way to look at it: It has been seven years since Portal 2. Almost a decade. Almost half of Duke Nukem Forever's entire development cycle. Eleven year olds when Portal 2 came out can now legally bang each other and start a family. Sixteen Marvel movies and the entirety of the Dark Souls series (+ Bloodborne) have come out between here and then, and Minecraft came out as a full release that exact year. There is a movie called Boyhood which main gimmick was that they filmed the boy who stars in it in real time, meaning each timeskip is real and the child actor has actually grown older. Because of this, the story which spans from age six to age eighteen took 11 years to make. Valve is over halfway there. I will not fault anyone who states they believe Valve have abandoned singleplayer games at this point. Or, as a compromise, that they believe they personally will never see another singleplayer Valve game before something happens which makes the concept impossible.

this point doesn't really matter, but you edited the word "mannconomy" into your post after the fact. You said post-TF2, and I interpreted the statement as meaning post-TF2. Saying that Portal 2's microtransactions are ignorable is a massive understatement. They're so lowkey, that I'm sure people played the game without ever realizing you even could buy hats for coop. I say it's a joke because the idea that people would even want to buy hats to show the one or two other people you would play coop with is absurd. They care about DOTA 2 for the same reasons they care about Artifact. That game got made (and other games didn't get made) due to what they learned from Portal 2. Does any of this sound familiar? I've said essentially the exact same thing several times. In the seven years preceding 2011, they released HL2 and the episodes, both Portal games, both L4D games, and Alien swarm. That's like, 10 games focused around the kind of linear gameplay Valve was previously known for. If you want to include the lab (which is debatable), then in the 7 years since 2011 they've only released one. You tell me, why is it that the projects that aren't easily monetized get scrapped, and the ones based on microtransactions make it through? If you think it just comes down to "quality" then I have a bridge to sell you.

No I did not and I even said TF2 mannconomy again in bold after you misread my post. I looked at the original post where I stated so and it didn't even have an edit text at the bottom right. Both posts were not edited in any way after posting so you're still wrong. Dota 2 came into beta with no monetiziation initially which you said was okay on TF2 in one of your first replies to me Dota also got gradual monetization over time, first with loot boxes and some cosmetics to eventually having these 'arcanas' and terrain packs. Dota is also free, like TF2. What makes Dota worse exactly? HL2 got remade at least once which was during the time the game got leaked. EP1+2 were initially a single expansion and were built upon a ready foundation of HL2. There were no new weapons and 2 new enemies introduced in each episodes respectively. L4D was being developed by turtle rock studios which was then acquired by Valve. Valve made changes and then in less than a year were already churning out a rushed sequel. Alien Swarm was a free game which had only one campaign and no further support apart from bug fixes (rip endless flares) Portal was a very small and minimalist niche game that only got real attention post-release with Portal 2.

Ok, you didn't edit it in. I guess I skipped over the word "mannconomy" when I read the first post, but it still doesn't change anything about my overarching argument from the second response onward. Portal 2 is the reason they don't make singleplayer games anymore, the new era that exists after that is what everyone's complaining about. This is something that can only be understood looking back, so I'm not sure what your point is. none of that has anything to do with what I said. Try rereading the post? again, none of that has anything to do with how many releases they've had. There's no reason they couldn't have conducted themselves the exact same way for the last 7 years, but they didn't. Why? Why is it only games based on microtransactions that get released?

So dota would have to be mtx free for 3 years until they can monetize it? Dota doesn't sell gameplay but TF2 does. Compare the quality of everything to Portal 2 against all the games before it. Portal 2 was very beautiful and polished game and the visuals were way better than any of Valve's games before. Dota 2 looks great and took 3 years to be completed and get out of beta and is still being developed on. The newer CS:GO maps have so many models and a lot less brushes and are absolutely stunning to look at and think it's on the source engine. These maps have taken a long time to make too. Games are going to take longer to make as games start to have better visuals. TO say this again, the episodes were built on an already established foundation with gameplay and visuals and was practically identical. Portal wasn't a focus developed and was quite short too with minimal amount of new assets. L4D was made by another studio until Valve brought them in. Imagine trying to create all of these games with Valve's visual quality standards today. It's not going to be done in such a short time like before.

so there's no difference between a beta test and a released game in your world? yeah, sure, ok, they just shut down every project not based on microtransactions because it's not up to quality. Anyways, in completely unrelated news I just came into acquisition of a very nice bridge that I'm looking to part ways with. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f0/Brooklyn_Bridge_Postdlf.jpg/330px-Brooklyn_Bridge_Postdlf.jpg Very spacious, with a view of the East River. Really good shape. I'll let you have it for only $5000.

??? You have some weird conspiracy theories dude. What projects have been "shut down" because it isn't based on microtransactions?? I think you're starting to become a bit delusional.

I'm delusional? Valve only releases games that have microtransactions in them, and because I can recognize a basic pattern in which games make it through their supposedly impossible quality standards to release, I'm the delusional one? Games that use microtransactions just happen to come out so impeccably perfect that Valve can't possibly resist releasing them, and all of their other projects end up cancelled, and there's nothing fishy about that at all?

Yes I am starting to think you are. You are even now saying that Valve just happens to cancel all of their projects and that it's all fishy. You sound like a conspiracy lunatic at this point. Games being scrapped/cancelled/delayed happens all the fucking time and even big companies can go through these too. You know what game was supposed to come out after HL2:EP2? And that was around 2 years before Valve ever monetized anything? Take a guess

so now that it's inconvenient for you, you're going to ignore the pattern that you were rabidly defending just a couple posts ago?

What does that do with games being cancelled?? Since 2011 there have only been 4 games. And each game has had a much bigger jump in visual quality. (a better detailed game is going to take longer to make!) If you couldn't take a guess before. EP3 was planned to be released way before tf2 got that mannconomy update.

where are you getting this claim that the problem is visual quality? Where has anyone at Valve even implied that everything landed in development hell specifically because they were having trouble making current gen graphics assets? Why would that be a problem for games not based on microtransactions, but not for the games that they've released?

Problem with visual quality? I'm just saying games today are harder to make and that visuals keep on improving meaning churning out games isn't going to happen anymore. Valve never stated that everything landed in development hell.

Most AAA games take 1-3 years to develop. Valve has standards™ though, so it takes them 7+ years to make any game at all if it doesn't have microtransactions.

Most AAA games do not take 1 year to develop anymore. Even Call of Duty has a 3 year dev cycle and they've got hundreds of developers. Portal 2 took them 4 years. Dota 2 took 3 years to finish. CS:GO is the only game that didn't take long to develop however because it was initially a console port as well as already being built upon an existing foundation. Artifact took about 4 years to develop as well. Valve takes their time with their games and some of their projects are bound to get reset/scrapped in the middle of a development. That doesn't mean they should hold back a game that is actually going well through development.

I didn't say most took one year, I said most take 1-3. Activision has been doing what Valve had promised to do: have multiple dev teams leapfrogging each other to get content out on a regular basis. As a result, they still release games on an annual basis. Even if you extend the maximum number out and assume that Valve will always take as long as possible to make a game (which are not reasonable assumptions), then by your own numbers, you would still expect that during the last 7 years they would've released 2 games of the kind that they used to make. Again, why is it that games based on microtransactions are the only kind to make it out? did someone else post something and get it deleted, or who exactly are you talking to here? Because I never said that they should be holding back games. I have only asked why is it that only games based on microtransactions get made, and all of your reasons as to why traditional games can't make it to release also apply to games based on microtransactions.

Each CoD team has about 200-300+ employees apart from Infinity Wards 120~. All purely focusing on making one game with some DLC creation. Considering Valve's employees have different things to do. Developing Steam Hardware, updating CS:GO, Dota 2 and now Artifact, maintaining/updating Steam. The slow rate doesn't seem surprising with their 350~ employees. They're also continuing working on those games, that along with CS:GO, steam, steam hardware. Team sizes don't even look that big either. The general vibe I am getting from this thread. If Valve had released any other games that appealed to you then you would not have cared much about this game.