Yeah, you probably should have asked "When will Valve make the game?" instead. I was all set to flame the thread when I saw the title, and only upon reading your edit did I decide not to.Soviet Heavy said:
When will Valve actually make THE game?
- Thread starter Soviet Heavy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Wow, your thread title sounded like you were one of the many, many brain dead preteens on this forum, but your actual thread is a well-thought out commentary on Valve. I don't think you need to work on clarifying yourself, I think you need to make thread titles that actually represent what you're trying to say. (Though it did get me to click on it 
)
How about Portal 2? They pretty explicitly stated that their goal was to make an actual full game out of something that was just a programming experiment (meaning they even understand that about themselves). Sure theres a bunch of new game elements and the game itself is about "testing experiments", but that's still just new game mechanics, not experiments in game programming
)How about Portal 2? They pretty explicitly stated that their goal was to make an actual full game out of something that was just a programming experiment (meaning they even understand that about themselves). Sure theres a bunch of new game elements and the game itself is about "testing experiments", but that's still just new game mechanics, not experiments in game programming
Man, that is a poorly worded thread-title. Posted a couple of days after valve actually have released a game, it reads as if you're going to massively slag-off Portal 2 and, well, my flame-throwers were just winding up to flame the fuck out of this thread. Until I actually read your OP of course
But I get your point - valve have plainly said that eps1 & 2 have been 'tests' for their various ideas.
I suppose that these will be implemented in a Half-Life 3, after which there will be much rejoicing.
But I get your point - valve have plainly said that eps1 & 2 have been 'tests' for their various ideas.
I suppose that these will be implemented in a Half-Life 3, after which there will be much rejoicing.
I for one think their "snippet" ideas work for them. Besides Steam, Valve have been incredably successful with the projects they pump out and I am quite happy they havnt tried to force themselves to make "the game" as they would inveitably pump out something that would be sub par to the high expectations that most have for valve, due to them playing around with ideas and angles of approach.
Yes I know there is typos but its 1:20am so cut me some slack
**note the "by besides steam part" is the fact it isnt a game, its a platform. it was not intended as a knock at them which it could be inteprated as such***
Yes I know there is typos but its 1:20am so cut me some slack
**note the "by besides steam part" is the fact it isnt a game, its a platform. it was not intended as a knock at them which it could be inteprated as such***
What about Deus Ex?Casual Shinji said:
Onto the main topic now, Valve at least innovate, which is much more than I can say for Infinity Ward and a lot of other studios. If there are developers I like, they would be Double Fine, Valve and Media Molecule. Well, I like their games.
Interesting thoughts there...
My hope... is that they will use all of their knowledge to make Half-life 3, or Episode 3, to be an excellent game that takes the best from each of Valve's games and makes something I will enjoy playing as much as Half-Life 2 or the original. :3
My hope... is that they will use all of their knowledge to make Half-life 3, or Episode 3, to be an excellent game that takes the best from each of Valve's games and makes something I will enjoy playing as much as Half-Life 2 or the original. :3
Even from a 'Different angle' I still don't understand what your saying. So you mean in order to release a pure game the developer simply has to make a game using no new game mechanics or any kind of innovation?....okay let me rethink that a bit.
So what your looking for is the day that Gabe Newell stands up and says "Ok people, we have ALL of the data we need to make the perfect game, lets get to work on Half Life 3 using everything we've learned up to this point." which honestly isn't a terrible thing.
If there's one thing Valve has proven in the game world, it's that you can always do better, there is no perfect game. If Valve does make said game and it's so great that nothing needs to be added on, they'll just make the same type of game over and over again using that perfect formula, and soon after other companies will recognize this formula and do the same creating this stagnant pool of perfection. Valve doesn't make perfect games, they make better games. They push their own boundaries which each new experiment and mechanic, and thats why I love em.
So what your looking for is the day that Gabe Newell stands up and says "Ok people, we have ALL of the data we need to make the perfect game, lets get to work on Half Life 3 using everything we've learned up to this point." which honestly isn't a terrible thing.
If there's one thing Valve has proven in the game world, it's that you can always do better, there is no perfect game. If Valve does make said game and it's so great that nothing needs to be added on, they'll just make the same type of game over and over again using that perfect formula, and soon after other companies will recognize this formula and do the same creating this stagnant pool of perfection. Valve doesn't make perfect games, they make better games. They push their own boundaries which each new experiment and mechanic, and thats why I love em.
It's pretty much impossible to make a game that isn't innovative in some way:
- Making an exact copy with a different name is pretty much either a re-release or a useless port, and therefore counts as the same game.
- Remastering the game in some way (eg. Half-Life HD Pack, improved ports, The Sly Collection [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sly_Cooper#The_Sly_Collection], etc.) is technically innovative compared to the original game.
- Any game made that introduces relatively original characters, locations, or gameplay are innovative in their own way, even if it's not as innovative as the jump between Portal 1 and 2.
- Legacy/port-type mods like L4D-Mod [http://www.moddb.com/mods/l4d-mod] and Goldeneye: Source are technically innovative in their own way because many of them improve on the engine they run with, and they let people either play a game for the first time, or play it in a different way than they used to.
Making a lower-tech sequel to a game purposely made to be worse than the previous installment (and contains nothing new or improved) is utterly stupid and, in some cases, suicide to the dev's bottom line, especially if they run on profit.
Of course, this doesn't mean that it's not possible. Some indie developer might experiment on seeing if they can make a completely non-original game with simpler tech than the original one.
But humans are instinctively drawn to new and better things to use. It's natural to want better games, and want to make them even better. The industry and its games have constantly improved over the years, especially with the rise of portable devices and yearning for cross-platform play.
And Valve is no exception. They want nothing more than to make their games better for them and their community. If you've noticed what they've been doing, they've been implementing more and more features into their games, from matchmaking and cross-platform play to flow maps and upcoming cloth simulation.
- Making an exact copy with a different name is pretty much either a re-release or a useless port, and therefore counts as the same game.
- Remastering the game in some way (eg. Half-Life HD Pack, improved ports, The Sly Collection [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sly_Cooper#The_Sly_Collection], etc.) is technically innovative compared to the original game.
- Any game made that introduces relatively original characters, locations, or gameplay are innovative in their own way, even if it's not as innovative as the jump between Portal 1 and 2.
- Legacy/port-type mods like L4D-Mod [http://www.moddb.com/mods/l4d-mod] and Goldeneye: Source are technically innovative in their own way because many of them improve on the engine they run with, and they let people either play a game for the first time, or play it in a different way than they used to.
Making a lower-tech sequel to a game purposely made to be worse than the previous installment (and contains nothing new or improved) is utterly stupid and, in some cases, suicide to the dev's bottom line, especially if they run on profit.
Of course, this doesn't mean that it's not possible. Some indie developer might experiment on seeing if they can make a completely non-original game with simpler tech than the original one.
But humans are instinctively drawn to new and better things to use. It's natural to want better games, and want to make them even better. The industry and its games have constantly improved over the years, especially with the rise of portable devices and yearning for cross-platform play.
And Valve is no exception. They want nothing more than to make their games better for them and their community. If you've noticed what they've been doing, they've been implementing more and more features into their games, from matchmaking and cross-platform play to flow maps and upcoming cloth simulation.
Valve's "The" game? Alright...
CHECKLIST FOR "THE GAME"
1. Multiplayer Versus/deathmatch.
2. Multiplayer Co-Op.
3. Advanced physics engine. (2.0)
4. HDR (2.0)
5. Epic original story, told without cutscenes.
6. Mod tools available for the community.
Now when you think about it, Valve's already adding all these new features into their games. They're just adding them and then making a whole new feature on top of that.
When Valve makes their "The" game, I hope they make a "The" Game 2 and introduce new features, just like HL2 did for HL1.
CHECKLIST FOR "THE GAME"
1. Multiplayer Versus/deathmatch.
2. Multiplayer Co-Op.
3. Advanced physics engine. (2.0)
4. HDR (2.0)
5. Epic original story, told without cutscenes.
6. Mod tools available for the community.
Now when you think about it, Valve's already adding all these new features into their games. They're just adding them and then making a whole new feature on top of that.
When Valve makes their "The" game, I hope they make a "The" Game 2 and introduce new features, just like HL2 did for HL1.
No, I do not want an end to innovation, I am merely speculating on what a Valve game would look like with a culmination of all their advances up to that point.Caliostro said:
he never said that they couldn't add something else innovated into it perhaps that why ep3 is taking so long they had to find something in the FPS genre that needed innovating and combine it with their legacy.Scabadus said:
I can't accept that L4D2 is a "full game." Sure, they can sell it in a separate box, just like Microsoft does every 3 years - whether their product works or not... uh ... OK, bad analogy. VALVe products are polished, reliable, and properly tested, unlike that company. Portal is alleged to be the MormonTabernacle Drop team (sp?) as assimilated by VALVe, and I have no reason to doubt this. Merely creating the visual innovation that is looking through recursive portals was a staggering accomplishment (from the coding side). If that is the caliber of talent that they recruited, it was a wise addition. In all of your examples, the graphic tweaks, coding innovation, gameplay design, and overall polish are much more complex than "experiments."Soviet Heavy said:
Yet you do have a point. VALVe has released a variety of games, each time pushing at least one envelope. My reply to your question is: "I hope they never do."
I haven't played Darksiders, so perhaps I am ill qualified to say so. However, in my experience of cars, its not a good idea to add something cool just because you have the technology lying around. I owned a car that had a brushed aluminum (or at least it was generally silver, hell, maybe it was stainless steel) dashboard. All the way across from the drivers left to the passenger's right. I thought that was pretty damn cool. Right until I had the sun behind me. And reflecting from the dash to get smack in my eyes the whole time I had sun coming through any window. Yep, it sure looked cool, but ultimately a bad idea.
VALVe have done a great job in innovating, polishing, and delivering new user content (TF2). I'll even add to that list something else; showing restraint in adding features to new games. My problem is that I try to take on too much of a project, or too grand of a project. Then I can't finish the darn thing because I'm stuck researching some obscure BS that shouldn't have mattered if I had kept the project manageable. Oh, I'm still with you in wanting HL2EP3 (Manchester 1) released very soon, but so long as they deliver the same tested, polished, quality product, I won't complain very loudly.