Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community - Reply to Topic

Thread: [Ars] Richard Garfield leaves Valve, puts Artifact’s future in question Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
03-18-2019 02:33 PM
WindInSummer
Quote: Originally Posted by UltraMega View Post
Is it really such a big argument that I am disappointed in Valve for resting on their Steam money and ditching all of their gaming franchises? Like really? I dont feel like I'm coming out of left field here. Stop brown nosing Valve.
I get you also say a lot of stuff in jest or for effect.
Well I actually dont have any idea about actualities. That inside knowledge about HL3 were news to me. For me it just makes sense if you have a small (compared to games nowadays) studio and at the same time some of the leading people start up a huge digital distribution service, maybe the studio and game development is put on the backburner or becomes secondary or would even be abolished. And it is easy to say "just outsource" or create a big studio (I could be wrong but I am guessing they had competent people but nothing scalewise like big current studios, as time ticked away and the landscape changed). Do you know the economy and risks involved? I dont, there is no saying they might need to open a lot of doors to "not rest on their Steam money" as you say.

To me Valve have done a lot of things very well and I think it has a lot to do with management and leadership in the company. CS:GO (which I know intimately, every patch note up to 3-4 years ago, it is managed by very thoughtful people), DOTA 2, minor but important L4D, Garrys mod, and TF2. If I had kids I would be happy those games existed (in addition to Minecraft and in fact Fortnite, which reminds me a lot of TF2 in many ways). I dont care for any of those latter games at the same time, personally. But I like that they are polar opposites of low brow tude culture like CoD and such crap, and colorful and creative, or good co-op (in L4D).

So you can dwell on what they have done wrong or consider they have governed many things very well, and that's precious.

Look at 2K and Rockstar Games and how they have handled GTA Online (which is the governing side of things and how you respect your playerbase how you directly handle things), and I think objectively RDR2 is kinda ****e in a lot of ways and not reaching its potential. It is not easy to make games.

I have a hunch people that actually know, would agree, but maybe as in what you are adressing, there is stagnation and some careful reviewing and renewal might be in order without throwing out the baby with the bathwater. And some opining here is making the case that everything is cynical and they made big catastrophy, or what it sounds like. I dont think they ditched all of their gaming franchises in the first place. Following up singleplayer games is a bit different as well.

And I mean also with this cardgame. They involve the frickin' creator of MTG. They are mainly governing games and times have changed so they dont churn out those main titles anymore. It really makes sense for them to try something like that, there is potential for mobile use (I dont like "mobile gaming" but lets face it, everyone is using mobile devices today, tablets and phones. No more no less.).
03-18-2019 01:11 PM
tpi2007 Video recap:

03-18-2019 09:33 AM
tpi2007
Quote: Originally Posted by white owl View Post
Has Valve ever made a 3rd anything? Portal, Half Life, Left4Dead,Team Fortress...probably missing some but they all stop at 2.

Ricochet, Day of Defeat and Alien Swarm stopped at 1.
03-18-2019 08:59 AM
UltraMega
Quote: Originally Posted by white owl View Post
Has Valve ever made a 3rd anything? Portal, Half Life, Left4Dead,Team Fortress...probably missing some but they all stop at 2.
Is this an argument?
03-18-2019 04:06 AM
white owl Has Valve ever made a 3rd anything? Portal, Half Life, Left4Dead,Team Fortress...probably missing some but they all stop at 2.
03-18-2019 03:41 AM
UltraMega
Quote: Originally Posted by WindInSummer View Post
I just dont get why you spin everything as that Valve is supposed to do x or y and that anything is a failure.
They were this dev. They made a game, it got popular. They followed up. Games got bigger in that time. They did Portal which was sorta kewl. And that is that. Meanwhile Steam had happened. To me it seems natural this is how it went.

If you look at Halflife and Valve it is a lot of happy accidents (CS and mods etc.). And to me Half-life has always been overhyped. It is like Quake 2 with some crappy voice lines from scientists and grunts with a really anticlimactic ending (I can also admit I did not finish the game and used cheat codes to experience parts of it that is how unhooked I was on HL but I have always been like that with games expecting what we are only starting to get now, back then as far this type of game is concerned).

It is not super easy to follow up on, for any dev. For all we know they have bided their time to do the hype justice as games grew past them. I am pretty sure they could have done something passable quickly on top of HL2 but for a lot of people it'd most likely been underwhelming. Same if they rushed it in the period after that, then they'd bomb for sure. I feel like you are jumping the gun a bit if you think about it a bit more. They need to do some kinda That-Lost-Guy-Whatever his name is Abrams ? treatment on Half-life and reinvent it. It is not easy and maybe they dont wanna piss on it in the first place, and would rather not do anything at all.
I have a really hard time understanding how a dev who had the actual halo killer in their pocket decided to just give up on their intellectual properties. It is, perhaps, the biggest missed opportunity in gaming history. I blame Valve for all the sales they missed out on for not producing a game that would have sold like hot cakes if only the plot had carried it forward. If you guys want to keep pretending HL3 was just a small miss on Valves part, fine. Yes it's never going to be the make or break point for them but it does signify their descension into microtransaction greed. They gave up on the best gaming IPs available to become the company that rests on their loreals.


Is it really such a big argument that I am disappointed in Valve for resting on their Steam money and ditching all of their gaming franchises? Like really? I dont feel like I'm coming out of left field here. Stop brown nosing Valve.
03-18-2019 02:42 AM
WindInSummer
Quote: Originally Posted by UltraMega View Post
Oh it's you again.
Portal 2 was their last big game and it came out in 2011.

Valve is like a good friend that fell off the wagon and is just looking for the next fix in the form of hats and skins for gambling, while keeping people distracted from their addiction with random side projects.
I just dont get why you spin everything as that Valve is supposed to do x or y and that anything is a failure.
They were this dev. They made a game, it got popular. They followed up. Games got bigger in that time. They did Portal which was sorta kewl. And that is that. Meanwhile Steam had happened. To me it seems natural this is how it went.

If you look at Halflife and Valve it is a lot of happy accidents (CS and mods etc.). And to me Half-life has always been overhyped. It is like Quake 2 with some crappy voice lines from scientists and grunts with a really anticlimactic ending (I can also admit I did not finish the game and used cheat codes to experience parts of it that is how unhooked I was on HL but I have always been like that with games expecting what we are only starting to get now, back then as far this type of game is concerned).

It is not super easy to follow up on, for any dev. For all we know they have bided their time to do the hype justice as games grew past them. I am pretty sure they could have done something passable quickly on top of HL2 but for a lot of people it'd most likely been underwhelming. Same if they rushed it in the period after that, then they'd bomb for sure. I feel like you are jumping the gun a bit if you think about it a bit more. They need to do some kinda That-Lost-Guy-Whatever his name is Abrams ? treatment on Half-life and reinvent it. It is not easy and maybe they dont wanna piss on it in the first place, and would rather not do anything at all.
03-18-2019 12:48 AM
Laysson They need to go F2P now or die forever.
03-18-2019 12:29 AM
UltraMega
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
Well, I still think your analogies are really bad, but, sure, fair point. I don't stop and think much of what HL3 could have been or how I used to love Valve so much, so I'm not sure I can relate very much. They're a company to me; if they don't want to bring closure to one of the most well reviewed franchises, so be it. I have other games to play.
I've never been a big fan of Valve, but I've certainly seen them in a much more positive light just thinking of them as a company. I don't get into the fan faire of it, and if you were actually hearing what I'm saying you might get that.


What I have said repeatedly, its that it's shameful for a company to abandon the popular projects that made them successful just to focus on easy money, despite their fans. yea Steam is more profitable than any one game would have been, but its not like they couldn't do both. Half Life 3, Portal 3, Team Fortress 3... any of the projects that mode them popular being continued would be a sign that they care about more than easy money. I see no such signs from them and therefore, to me, they are a lazy company that stopped doing anything hard as soon as they didn't have to, even though any games they did would have added to their profits.


If/when a digital store that competes with steam even starts to reach the same level of acceptance as Steam, Valve will have very little to fall back on. No business should put all their eggs in one basket.
03-15-2019 09:08 PM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by UltraMega View Post
They tied a digital store to their game before anyone else did, and made it mandatory for all their games. I would not call that "pioneering", but credit where it's due. Steam is a good program, not saying it's not, but it's only so widely used because it was first. You want to give Valve a ton of credit as if they cured cancer or something, thats your purgative. They made a good business more some 15 years or so ago and have not been able to do much with all their money and IPs since. It's sad to see a once well liked game dev turn into nothing more than the maintenance team for a digital store.


And too your weak counter about my metaphone "Valve is like a good friend that feel off the wagon and is looking for a fix", since the metaphore clearly went way over your heard, I'll restate it more literally.


Valve is (literally) a game former game developer that used to be highly acclaimed and beloved by fans. Valve build 2-3 very strong story based IP's that fan's were very happy about and eagerly awaited the next promised entried for. Once Valve got exuberently rich off steam, they were no longer able to produce any games despite seemingly having everything going well for them. This can mean only one thing, poor leadership.


Now back to metaphors; it's like hearing a female super model that's rich and famous complain that it's hard to find guys to date. It's not a valid complaint considering the context of reality, and thus we roll our eyes at Valve.


It's not a mystery what happened with Half Life 3, there is a lot of info about what happened now. It saw at least 3 highly ambitious revisions that all got canned because GabeN could not realisitically hone in the ambitions for the game, and he burned out his development team. Many of them left Valve after the third Half Life 3 revision got canned, and there was likely never a 4th because of that.



Oh but Valve made Steam and Steam is the only digital store (that stuck up PC gamer will ever accept) so praise be to Valve and glory unto GabeN!
Well, I still think your analogies are really bad, but, sure, fair point. I don't stop and think much of what HL3 could have been or how I used to love Valve so much, so I'm not sure I can relate very much. They're a company to me; if they don't want to bring closure to one of the most well reviewed franchises, so be it. I have other games to play.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off