VALVe no longer doing single player only games?

[Mr Snuffles]

Steal personal information such as track number, not the recent attacks joy or satellite, you my son, but whether to us all has been added, all they group they come back Satan, they dare not admit the idea.

 

[Space Spoons]

Everyone asking for a source, OP is probably referring to this [http://kotaku.com/#!5795355/valve-probably-done-with-single+player-games].

Personally, I can't help but think this is going to be taken the wrong way by a lot of people. I interpreted it as meaning all future Valve titles will include multiplayer in some way, shape or form. As Portal 2 showed us, multiplayer doesn't always come to the detriment of the single player game. If anyone can make sure both modes get a fair shake, it's Valve.

 

[Hybridwolf]

To be fair, TF2 is making them bloody rich at this point, and adding co-op to portal 2 in my opinion was the only way they could validate releasing portal 2 at full retail price. Even then, eight hours of singleplayer and from what I hear a fairly short mutiplayer isn't worth full retail price, again, in my opinion. Still, no point complaining as at the end of the day, more content for the buyer = good stuff.

Did you play portal 2? Because even at 8ish hours long, the single player alone was nearly worth the price of admission, it was extremely good (well story wise, it lacked in challenging puzzles but hopefully community maps will make up for that).

Personal opinion, Boyo. I think Portal 2 simply wasn't worth full retail price for a game full of jokes you'd see on an episode or two of Have I Got News For You and yet another open ending which left me feeling guilty thanks to the after credit's cutscene. Differing tastes. It was fun, and I did enjoy it, but I want valve to just finsh episode 3 and then go back to making more hats for TF2. That way, I can stop waiting to finsh my damn half life experience rather then get teased with more filler.

 

[inFAMOUSCowZ]

Why is this a problem? Valve will put more time and energy into their games now, if not more. I'd love it if Half-Life 3 would have multiplayer.

 

[ryai458]

What about L4d, and L4D2 those don't count?

 

[Crudler]

Wow, where the hell were you when:
Deathmatch,
Every iteration of CS ever,
TF Classic,
Day of Defeat
and more came out?

 

[Tzekelkan]

Erm, Valve hasn't been doing single player only games since they released the original Half-Life deathmatch... or, if you really want to be be strict about the definition of multiplayer, since Counter-Strike. That's still pretty late of you to realize that Valve doesn't just do Half-Life.

 

[Agayek]

To be fair, TF2 is making them bloody rich at this point, and adding co-op to portal 2 in my opinion was the only way they could validate releasing portal 2 at full retail price. Even then, eight hours of singleplayer and from what I hear a fairly short mutiplayer isn't worth full retail price, again, in my opinion. Still, no point complaining as at the end of the day, more content for the buyer = good stuff.

I've played both, and there's roughly 15 hours of gametime for a single run-through of them.

There's also a bunch of achievements for both campaigns that can substantially add to your playtime. I have not done them myself, but I've been told a lot of them are quite challenging and can (and do) take up a lot of time.

Edit: On topic, I don't see that as a bad thing. They are clearly able to provide high quality single and multi-player experiences. That's no reason to get bent out of shape over it.

Now the delays on Episode 3 are worth getting bent out of shape over.

 

[BoredDragon]

Oh right, because I forgot how much Left 4 Dead, Team Fortress 2, and Alien Swarm sucked

 

[BanthaFodder]

well, Valve can totally do multiplayer (TF2, L4D, Portal 2, etc.)

but I highly doubt they'd spit in the faces of Half Life fans... you know, MORESO than usual.

Valve knows that Half Life is one of it's greatest strengths, getting rid of single player would mean getting rid of Half Life (or making it multiplayer, Valve'd find a way and it'd kick ass), and Valve is too smart to do that.

I call bullshit of the highest order.

 

[Chainsaw_Chuck]

Since when did Valve never make a multiplayer mode for their games?

The only one I can think of that is completely 100% single player is Portal 1, and maybe the two episodes if you don't count them as Half-Life 2.

This was also my reaction upon just reading the title.

All of Vlave's games have had multiplayer, save Portal, but that was just an experiment so it doesn't count really.

 

[Hybridwolf]

To be fair, TF2 is making them bloody rich at this point, and adding co-op to portal 2 in my opinion was the only way they could validate releasing portal 2 at full retail price. Even then, eight hours of singleplayer and from what I hear a fairly short mutiplayer isn't worth full retail price, again, in my opinion. Still, no point complaining as at the end of the day, more content for the buyer = good stuff.

I've played both, and there's roughly 15 hours of gametime for a single run-through of them.

There's also a bunch of achievements for both campaigns that can substantially add to your playtime. I have not done them myself, but I've been told a lot of them are quite challenging and can (and do) take up a lot of time.

Edit: On topic, I don't see that as a bad thing. They are clearly able to provide high quality single and multi-player experiences. That's no reason to get bent out of shape over it.

Now the delays on Episode 3 are worth getting bent out of shape over.

Whoa. I'm not getting "bent out of shape" over Portal 2. I liked the damn game, I'm just glad I didn't have to pay £40 for it. I already have all the single player achivements, and the only mutiplayer one I can see being an issue is the one requiring you to run a friend through the tutioral after you've beaten the game. Thats only tricky because you effectively need three friends, one of whom will be screwed out of an achivement. And I'm more annoyed that valve are making more and more plotlines to connect into Episode 3, and yet there is nothing about the damned game. Hopefully now, with portal over and done with valve can finsh the story that made their company famous...

 

[Agayek]

Whoa. I'm not getting "bent out of shape" over Portal 2. I liked the damn game, I'm just glad I didn't have to pay £40 for it. I already have all the single player achivements, and the only mutiplayer one I can see being an issue is the one requiring you to run a friend through the tutioral after you've beaten the game. Thats only tricky because you effectively need three friends, one of whom will be screwed out of an achivement. And I'm more annoyed that valve are making more and more plotlines to connect into Episode 3, and yet there is nothing about the damned game. Hopefully now, with portal over and done with valve can finsh the story that made their company famous...

My edit was more aimed at the OP and the thread in general. But yes, I agree. They really do need to just release HL3 (or at least some details about it).

 

[Trolldor]

Yep, this has been true for years. Not since what, Half Life 2? have they made a full single player game.

Damn you Valve.

Deathmatch says otherwise.

Deathmatch? What are you talking about? I thought I was talking about single player games...

You failed it.

Half-life 1 and 2 both came with a death match for their respective titles.

Oh, I see what you're saying now. It doesn't change the fact that Half Life 2 was the last full single player game, even if it had multiplayer content.

Portal 2 was a full single-player game.
So was Portal.
And episode 1.
And episode 2.

 

[Trolldor]

Yep, this has been true for years. Not since what, Half Life 2? have they made a full single player game.

Damn you Valve.

Deathmatch says otherwise.

Deathmatch? What are you talking about? I thought I was talking about single player games...

You failed it.

Half-life 1 and 2 both came with a death match for their respective titles.

Oh, I see what you're saying now. It doesn't change the fact that Half Life 2 was the last full single player game, even if it had multiplayer content.

Portal 2 was a full single-player game.
So was Portal.
And episode 1.
And episode 2.

Our ideas of a 'full' game are just different. I don't think of CoD MW as having a full single player game either. Like I said in another post, if you can beat it in one sitting, it isn't 'full' enough for me.

I can beat Fable 1 in a single-sitting. Five and a half hours to be exact. Shorter than even some Modern shooter games.
Obviously not a full single-player game then.
Your definition is arbitrarily retarded. If the experience is complete then length doesn't matter.
Modern shooters have disappointing campaigns not simply because the length is short, but because they completely fail to do anything with it.