Poll: Am I the only one who thinks the way Valve is run is kind of stupid?

[monkey_man]

Valve does things it own way. Why force a man to do work he's not 100% behind if he can do just that on a different project? Why rush games with timelimits if they aren't valve-approved?

They have no one to answer to, But still answer to everyone in their company and all of their customers. So they are organized, perhaps in a different way, but Valve still manages to be a powerhouse in today's gaming industry.

About Mr Freeman. He's just awesome, you get it, or you don't. I personally enjoy(ed) all the current half-lifes for being very good games, with focus on gameplay, story and graphics. Oh sure it doesn't look like Battlefield, but that's not what's necessary. It plays great, the atmosphere is great, story is good and the characters are well-written and memorable. Think Gordon, Gman, Alyx, Kleiner, Barned etc.

They may be slow, but that's because they push their games to the limit. Perfection, testing, research, lounging. All necessities for a good company, with great product

 

[Vigormortis]

You are wrong there. The guys didn't come to Valve, Valve came to them after their success.

Before Valve came to them

-L4D was in production
-Team Fortress was a popular mod
-CS was a popular mod
-Alien Swarm was a mildly popular mod
-Day of Defeat was a popular mod

Valve said "hey, this is popular and free, let's monetise it". There was no goodwill involved.

Actually, you're wrong. I never said the mod teams came to Valve. Valve went to the mod teams because they recognized the talent therein.

Jesus learn to bloody read, I just said that. You tried to be witty and it failed horribly.

I'm not even going to read your post due to such an immense fail.

I said:

You are wrong there. The guys didn't come to Valve, Valve came to them after their success.

You said:

Actually, you're wrong. I never said the mod teams came to Valve. Valve went to the mod teams

That's the same fucking thing.

I need to learn to read? Ha! Sure thing buddy. Once you learn to read your own posts.

You said that I implied that the mod teams went to Valve. I was saying that's not what I said. Repeating the "Valve went to them" part was simply me reinforcing the fact that I knew that already and that it was rather pointless for you to tell me.

Also, way to be dismissive. I'm guessing you don't actually have a valid point or argument to lay against my point, thus your only recourse was to just imply I'm an idiot.

Not really sure how you got that I was trying to be witty. I think you really need a few lessons in the meaning of "context". You seem to be seeing things that aren't actually there.

 

[Blazing Steel]

Ok now that's out of the way...

Yes it seems weird, but Valve keep putting out spectacular games whereas other companies use convential methods and end up pumping out crap games. I actually believe that this is only possible because it's Valve.

 

[poiuppx]

Hmm. A game company with immense profits, massive inroads into every significant gamer market, the kind of goodwill dictators wish they could force onto their people, and overall just an amazing track record.

...yeah, gonna have to say it ain't broke and don't need fixing. Not even close. Hell, there's a fair few of the AAA-developers who could probably learn a few lessons by watching Valve a little closer, especially if they don't just assume Steam is the only reason people like them.

And Gordon Freeman, likely, is enjoyed chiefly because he is the vehicle through which Half Life is played and enjoyed. And the Half Life series kicks endless ass. It's like how a ton of gamers identified with Chell, in spite of her not really being a character per-say. They were sucked in by the games themselves, and as a result had more invested in her trials and successes.

It helps that now and then, the games make you/Freeman feel like a legit badass because of how others react TO you. It's something a lot of games don't sell well... the feeling that as time wears on, both allies and enemies start to realize you are that f'ing good, someone to fear and respect. All conveyed without the character himself saying a single word.

 

[Vigormortis]

Responses in your spoilers.

Ok, well I still offer this up as to why I DO care.

Spoiler: Grievous

Your absolutely right, I DO take this seriously. The reason is? I have to because there's more people perpetuating this garbage of a business model that is destroying not only the gaming industry but all commerce than there are people railing against it. People are now willingly giving up their rights of ownership and giving away their money in exchange for absolutely NOTHING other valves good graces

I get up in arms about it because the people doing this are forcing this model as the only viable model on everyone and yes I take grievous offense at that because I do not want my right and freedom to choose HOW I wish to purchase my entertainment away. I get up in arms because of the many people who had to suffer for rights of ownership do not see those rights willingly given away. I am tired of those who hold no value of ownership to force their ideology on me with their wallet. I get pissed because it is this exact model that is killing the used market and thus will end up crippling the industry as a whole. And I call bullshit when people do not think of the consequences of their actions on the others around them.

If people do not call bullshit when they see it, nothing ever gets done about the problem.

"Discontent is the first step of progress of any man or nation"

So When valve relinquishes their "you own nothing" stance I will kindly shut the fuck up and offer apologies to valve for my vile and venom over the years.

Spoiler: Response.

I'm not saying I don't agree, however with the transition to the purely digital age, things like this are inevitably going to happen. And no amount of bitching on our part is going to change that. It's sad but true. I wish it weren't; God knows I really, really do; but it's how it's going to be. (and that's not me being jaded or submissive. that's me being a pragmatist.) Valve, unlike almost any other service provider, provides a far greater level of control and "ownership" to it's customers. They're the only DD service I'm aware of that has contingency plans in place to grant full access to everyone's purchased titles should Steam "go under", so-to-speak. I'm fairly certain Battle.net, Origin, and others don't.

In this case, the only real difference between a Steam purchase and a disc-media purchase is...well...the disc. (something that can easily be remedied with a disc burner)

Spoiler: Water

Now pray-tell how exactly does my "rhetoric" not hold water?

Does valve grant ownership rights?
Does valve charge less at base MSRP given that a license is worth substantially less than a re-sellable copy?

Does not every single media company based in digital distribution not look at Valve and conversely steam in order to try to emulate their success in offering digital only products that compete with physical counterparts?

Spoiler: Response.

Actually, more often than not, almost every other media company utilizing digital distribution does NOT try to emulate Valve's model. They simply want to emulate their profit margins. Most tend to emulate the more draconian model present in, say, iTunes or Games For Windows Live. This is because those other models give them a far greater level of control over their customers.

Most of the prices on Steam are not set by Valve but rather the publishers and other 3rd parties who are attempting to sell their products on the service. So, in this case, doesn't it make more sense to complain about those companies wanting to charge too much for digital copies instead of blaming Valve for it? Either way, I actually agree with you that digital prices are too high. But then, with the increasing use of premium DLC, I think most game prices are too high in general, regardless of format.

Spoiler: Another thing.

Suggesting that I have ever insulted any one is an out and out complete fabrication. If all I have ever done is insult people and call them names I think it stands to reason I would have had many more incursions with moderators over that type of behavior. I am not above mod wrath. I think its safe to say I am likely one of the most reported people on this site, but at the same time I know I do not singled one person out and insult them for their choice. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, just like I should not be subject to this sort of personal and focused attack for expressing my opinion on the matter because I speak in dissent on a subject people take too personally and with entirely too much offense at the mere mention of the obvious and well known negatives. The only people I insult is Valve as a corporation for perpetuating this model. Every individual is entitled to their opinion and it is my sincere hope when I re post in essence the same thing that maybe people will actually look and see what is wrong with this model of DD, how it is done right, what valve is doing and how their actions are indirectly screwing not only themselves but every single gamer. My intention has never been or never will be to insult people for their choices. Just to point out where they need to look to see the problems with those choices.

Spoiler: Response.

It's certainly not the only thing you've ever done, but I have seen you quite often throw a few insulting names or terms into your posts on the topic. Many of them not directly pointed at Valve but rather at the fans. This is the only reason I actually responded to your first post. I don't really mind anyone complaining, I only take umbrage when they start insulting others for their opinions. When you imply that anyone who likes Valve is some kind of 'fool' or 'sheeple' (paraphrasing), it's not only insulting but also just plain rude. There's no need for that.

Quite honestly, I relish the opportunity to debate the topic as I think a lot of what's discussed goes way beyond Valve and Steam. I just don't like seeing people being insulted for their opinions. It removes any chance for tempered debate.

Spoiler: The way they are ran

The point of the thread is on valves developmental structure. Yet one of the biggest complaints from valve fans right now is that Episode 3 does not yet exist, nor does half life 3. Thats what I call attention to because the whole "work on what ever you feel would be productive" as a developmental model has to play a part in why there is no Ep3 or HL3. Instead choosing to ignore what fans have been asking for and working on building a 5 hour long expansion pack to portal. History has long shown how these ideological commune type organizations almost always fall flat when it comes to longevity with very few notable exceptions.

So if you have fans making claims that your single viable in house property has become vaporware, does it really make a lot of sense for your core in house development team to divvy up their resources to work on everyone elses side project rather than the corporate flagship?

Spoiler: Response.

I've addressed this point several times in the past week or two, but I shall do it again out of respect so that you don't have to go through the trouble of looking up what I said.

Half-Life 3 does exist. It is presently in development and has been since the Orange Box was released. If you need proof, here you go - http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/04/23/gabe-on-ricochet-2-delay-but-he-doesnt-mean-ricochet/

As you can see, the only reason we've not heard hide-nor-hair of the project is because they simply don't want to mislead the fans. As it stands, they are quite far into the project but, as has happened before (say, with Half-Life 1), things may take a drastic turn near the final stretch. After all, the first Half-Life went through a complete overhaul; from scratch; just a year before release. This could, or could not, happen with Half-Life 3. Gabe said they don't want to promise one thing, and then have the final product be something else. Half-Life 3 has in no way become 'vaporware'. I really do wish we could all put that whole petty debate to rest.

As for Portal 2, I hardly see it as a "5 hour addon". It's far more than that and; opinions though they may be; I think it's in bad taste to imply it was made with little effort or as an after-thought. Twenty eight people collectively 'busted their asses' for three years to craft that product. I don't think they'd appreciate being told they didn't put any effort into it.

And yes, time will tell how long their business model will hold out. However, them remaining privately owned is something most other "ideological commune type organizations", as you put it, didn't do. This has worked to their advantage exceptionally well.

This, of course, does not mean they can't fail. Far from it. But then, the same can be said for any business model. Plenty of traditional organizations have failed, so it's hardly mutually exclusive to the "commune type".

As a side note, I don't see how anyone can claim Half-Life is their only viable franchise. That literally makes no sense to me. And if it has something to do with them hiring those mod teams, I have a lot I can say on the matter but this response is long enough for now.

Spoiler: Apology

You know I am sorry you have read what is in essence the same ideology multiple times. I honestly do not want to annoy anyone. But the fact is, If it did not still exist, If there were not attempts like the PSPgo pushing the DD only model, If there were not rampant rumors of which developers publicly supporting of anti used consoles, If I did not come on here and see unmitigated and unjustified love for a developer who has developed all of 2 franchises and has not released anything from in house development in a half a decade get propelled to winning developer of the year, If I did not see bullshit regarding valve, I would not call it. So sorry if your offended by it. Its not my intent to do so, but I call it as it is.

Spoiler: Response.

Except....that's not at ALL how it is. Every game they've ever released was developed in house. Why do people think otherwise?

What fascinates me more is this idea that Valve "buys up" franchises. They don't. They give jobs to talented programmers, artists, and designers. They approach mod teams because they see the talent in the team members. Sure, they do so when they see a mod becoming popular but it's not just because it's popular. They look at the people behind the mod. Not the mod itself.

Likewise, they don't go in saying, "We like this game idea. Sell it to us and we'll give you jobs." They meet with the mod team and say, "You have some real talent. How would you like to come work at Valve? Where you have free reign to work on whatever project you want."

This is how games like Team Fortress, Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat, Portal, and Dota 2 came into being. It wasn't because Valve swooped in and bought up the franchises, it's because they gave the original mod teams the tools and resources to craft the game the mod team had dreamed of making. Because of this, it confounds me why people STILL say Valve is some how the 'bad guy' for doing this.

Also, this is often how many game series are created. Other developers look for talented designers and programmers to not only help craft their games but to come up with new IPs. So my question is, how is that any different from what Valve does?

Except for..you know...Valve actually supporting the modding community; whereas most other developers/publishers are dead-set against it.

It baffles me how people can one minute look at Valve as the "communal organization" when looking for reasons why their game design is bad but then look at them as a standard "corporate organization" when they consider who actually makes the games. The people at Valve make the games...and Valve is those people. People need to stop flip-flopping on the type of organization they consider Valve to be.

Spoiler: Supporty

And another thing. Despite how much I might speak out against valve, you do fully realize I am not actually against valve or steam for that matter? I have over 100 games in my steam library (predominantly valve titles and indie titles ive gotten from indie bundles) With the exception of Bethesda titles (of which I liceense all of 1 and I own a physical copy of it too)I rarely if ever buy main stream titles through Steam. I try whenever I can to buy physical copies, and thats why my game library dwarfs my steam library 5 times over. Steam has its place in the gaming world, but its not the place it is in as it stands.

Spoiler: Response.

If I may be frank, the fervor you usually bring to the table when you explain your disgust and ire for Valve makes it seem as if you are nothing but against Valve and Steam.

I get (at least now, if what you say is true) that you say you're not, but can you understand why it is so hard to believe that?

Spoiler: Fiery uncool

Though please understand, No, bitching about valve/steam does not make me cool. I am NOT cool. I do not concern myself with what others think of me. There is no dictating other peoples perceptions because people make their own minds up on whatever criteria the choose regardless of if it is accurate or even relevant. I see no point to waste my time with other peoples perceptions.

Spoiler: Response.

Fair enough. But frankly it seems that, in-so-far-as this forum is concerned, people seem to be hopping on the "Valve sucks" band-wagon simply because they think it's the "cool, new thing to do", not because they actually think that. They're just in it to troll or stir up controversy.

These people rarely if ever offer any legitimate complaints or points of conjecture, except for the same tired rhetoric that, more often than not, has been shot down time and time again. This is why we see no less than two "Valve/Half-Life sucks" threads a week on this forum. I've been here since 2007 and I don't think a month's gone by where there wasn't at least a few threads like that.

And more often than not, the only people that become hostile or insulting in those threads are the people attacking Valve and the fans. It's also, more disturbingly, rare for these same people to receive any kind of reprimand or warning from the mods. If the same things were said about other fans in other threads about other games/companies, warnings would be passed out like candy on Halloween. It worries me that I've seen this happen often.

Now you can take my words to heart and see that I do want what I feel and history suggests what is best for gamers, Or you can simply add it to the pile of things you do not like hearing me say. Its your prerogative what you choose to do with the information I put forth, just like it is for those who have NOT heard it, and those who dont even understand that with steam all they hold is a license that can be revoked at any time and for any reason valve chooses to do so. If valve would do so is irrelevant. It is the fact people willingly turn over their money into that inequitable of an arrangement. Honestly I dont like expressing the opinion either, I wish I didnt have to. However the simple fact is this needs to be pointed out every time it comes up until people do something about it because this is most certainly not one of those problems that if you ignore it long enough it will go away. If you ignore this long enough it grows to be an uncontrollable monstrosity.

I think you and I agree on more points than you realize. I just think it's no where near as 'apocalyptic' as you seem to think it is. At least, not in Steams case.

Do I think the industry as a whole is going in a very bad direction? Absolutely. The kinds of things Blizzard, Activision, EA, and Ubisoft are doing honestly frighten and infuriate me. But do I think it's because of Valve? Hell no. If anything, they're one of the only companies I've seen that have shown that a transition into a purely digital distribution age of gaming can be done without ripping customers off and without draconian control measures.

Is their system perfect? Dear God no. I still think there's plenty of things that could be changed about it, and there are things I distinctly don't like, but who's to say what I (or you) think is right? Or even good for the industry? We each have our own ideas as to what we want the industry to be, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's what the industry should be.

 

[funcooker11811]

I found these two sentences contradictory, if it's happened in the past why get all up in arms now? Also you're renting it "indefinitely" unless you break TOS. Though I agree the whole cutting off access to what you paid for is pretty bullshit. Though I was under the impression breaking Valve TOS only cut you off from the multiplayer parts of these games?

Found the article:http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/02/01/thought-do-we-own-our-steam-games/
Of course you think they're contradictory, anyone with any sense would think that buying a product would imply ownership of said product. I'm up in arms about it today, because it was A: bullshit then, (and bullshit now), and B: It's creeping into places that make me VERY uncomfortable. Unfortunately, businesses figured out that they don't have to actually sell you that with software, because, well, people just don't seem to care, and it's more profitable to them. It's gotten far worse as of late, because now we're starting to get devices that you don't technically own. This is why jailbreaking iphones, messing with ps3 firmware, and just general console modifications and their legality are such a hot button issue, because its starting to seem that we don't actually own those devices that we purchased.

I was talking about how they don't have to find a publishers anymore. They simply license their product so people can download it online, cut out the middle man as it were. This way the only costs the developers face are from actually making the game, not turning it into hard copies, artists for cover art and plastic for the cases. So basically making games just got a lot less scary thus urging more people into the industry.

Digital distribution != licensing. It is completely and totally within their ability to allow you to download a game without the licensing bullshit, but nobody does it, because the companies that actually control those services that distribute those services don't want to. Unfortunately, most games that get published, get published under those companies, hence the current standard of licensing.