Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community (https://www.overclock.net/forum/)
-   Video Game News (https://www.overclock.net/forum/227-video-game-news/)
-   -   [Ars] Richard Garfield leaves Valve, puts Artifact’s future in question (https://www.overclock.net/forum/227-video-game-news/1722384-ars-richard-garfield-leaves-valve-puts-artifacta-s-future-question.html)

JackCY 03-12-2019 03:16 PM

It's not a game people want to play.

Magic: The Gathering... they made sort of a one off rubbish I wouldn't play either and that saturated that market. Making more and more variants under different name won't magically bring more customers.

Valve had Half-Life and then Steam, the rest... what rest... not worth mentioning really. It was either a mod or bought from elsewhere.
Valve will sit on Steam until they keel over. All their explorations into AR, VR, ... some games no one wants to play... just a money dump.
HL3 that people want they do not want to make because they would need a damn good writer and team to build it, neither of which they have anymore.

Omega X 03-12-2019 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ku4eto (Post 27888700)
Maybe if it was free to play game, it wouldnt have such outcome.


^^^This.


The game had a load of defenders claiming that the game would do fine with a pay to play model. Now we have proof that it didn't.

skupples 03-13-2019 10:42 AM

better off playing OG MTG with their newest release than any other card game, Gwent included ;)

oxidized 03-13-2019 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EniGma1987 (Post 27888614)
Really seems like these card games had a momentary blip in popularity that quickly died. No surprise to me that the game is doing bad, Valve was pretty late to the party.

Hearthstone is very popular even now, it's actually in the top 10 even right now. It's the game that matters, and what is its target audience, TCGs in general were never that popular, in videogames, old magic the gathering games did very poorly, because they required much time and patience to get to actually know the game, hearthstone is much different from that, it's a very simple, basic game, and that's why people play it much much more than magic the gathering arena, or artifact or anything else.

ku4eto 03-14-2019 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oxidized (Post 27890140)
Hearthstone is very popular even now, it's actually in the top 10 even right now. It's the game that matters, and what is its target audience, TCGs in general were never that popular, in videogames, old magic the gathering games did very poorly, because they required much time and patience to get to actually know the game, hearthstone is much different from that, it's a very simple, basic game, and that's why people play it much much more than magic the gathering arena, or artifact or anything else.

Because, unlike WoW, Blizzard listens the Hearthstone community.

UltraMega 03-14-2019 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackCY (Post 27889006)
It's not a game people want to play.

Magic: The Gathering... they made sort of a one off rubbish I wouldn't play either and that saturated that market. Making more and more variants under different name won't magically bring more customers.

Valve had Half-Life and then Steam, the rest... what rest... not worth mentioning really. It was either a mod or bought from elsewhere.
Valve will sit on Steam until they keel over. All their explorations into AR, VR, ... some games no one wants to play... just a money dump.
HL3 that people want they do not want to make because they would need a damn good writer and team to build it, neither of which they have anymore.

Your logic is sound but you're overlooking one thing. Valve has outsourced Half Life games to other devs several times before, and they could definitely do it again with Half Life 3 if they wanted to.

I honestly believe the only reason we have not and probably will not get Half Life 3 is because GabeN is a terrible CEO. Valve got lucky with Steam. People hated it when it became tied to Half Life 2 and Counter Strike but that hate slowly morphed into appriciation for no longer having to deal with a pile of CDs and DVDs to play games, and has since enjoyed the profits that come with being the first widely used digital store for PC games. People have come to love steam so much that Valve gets this totally undeserved reputation as the holy grail of PC gaming when infact all they really are is a game dev that couldn't adapt to stay relavent in an age where loading screens every couple of hallways is no longer acceptable, when they had one of the biggest IP franchises available to them, and could not even figure out how to capitalize on it. GabeN probably could not tie down his ambitions for Hlaf Life 3 into a realistic development plan and burned out all of Valve's actual talent.


I wish Valve would just admit all they are is a digital store going forward, or license out they're IPs to devs that can actually manage to make games. GabeN to me is a salty old fart who got mad at the gaming community for saying he can't count to 3 too many times, and now he feels no commitment to the community and fans that made him and his company rich. None of the other big names in gaming have completely aboadon their projects when fans universally wanted it and finances were not an issue, at least as far as I know. Just thinking about that scenario seems crazy. The fact that Valve could not even get Half Life 3 off the ground with all the resources they have avilable to them is a testiment to just how terribly a company can be managed. Everything going for them and they still failed due to their own arrogance, and the complete lack of any pressure to deliver with Steam paying all of the bills.

ToTheSun! 03-14-2019 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraMega (Post 27891114)
GabeN to me is a salty old fart who got mad at the gaming community

You seem pretty salty yourself about the popularity, that you view as unmerited, of someone of which you hold such a passionately negative view.

The GabeN meme, that alludes to his celebrity, is based mostly on his work on Steam, rather than his contribution to the HL franchise; though, the latter is also worthy of praise, I believe, for bringing a successful template of storytelling and gameplay mechanics to the industry.

It seems to me his validity as a player in the market, and also as a representative of the company Valve, can be backed solely by his work on the most successful online game library (among other things that it is, something that a lot of people like to ignore when criticizing it).

To use Valve's failure to bring closure to the Freeman epopee, one of their many works, as the basis of smearing his professional persona is a little weird.

I don't think they'd ever "outsource" one of the chapters in the main story, especially the last one. They've only done that for spin-offs, whose canonical status is largely unimportant to the main plot. And it's not like they'd relinquish narration control altogether.

I see the absence of HL3 as a mystery, more so than the result of the direction from an arrogant, failing, salty old fart.

They don't have to admit anything; their actions speak for themselves. They're Steam first, developer second, because that's what can easily and unmistakably be seen. People simply romanticized the whole thing and got frustrated when the result was different. Whether they're trying to appease themselves or the shareholders is a more relevant question.

oxidized 03-14-2019 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ku4eto (Post 27891104)
Because, unlike WoW, Blizzard listens the Hearthstone community.

It's not that, it's only that hearthstone was the first and it's much more accessible to the average player and to the casual player.

UltraMega 03-15-2019 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToTheSun! (Post 27891194)
You seem pretty salty yourself about the popularity, that you view as unmerited, of someone of which you hold such a passionately negative view.

The GabeN meme, that alludes to his celebrity, is based mostly on his work on Steam, rather than his contribution to the HL franchise; though, the latter is also worthy of praise, I believe, for bringing a successful template of storytelling and gameplay mechanics to the industry.

It seems to me his validity as a player in the market, and also as a representative of the company Valve, can be backed solely by his work on the most successful online game library (among other things that it is, something that a lot of people like to ignore when criticizing it).

To use Valve's failure to bring closure to the Freeman epopee, one of their many works, as the basis of smearing his professional persona is a little weird.

I don't think they'd ever "outsource" one of the chapters in the main story, especially the last one. They've only done that for spin-offs, whose canonical status is largely unimportant to the main plot. And it's not like they'd relinquish narration control altogether.

I see the absence of HL3 as a mystery, more so than the result of the direction from an arrogant, failing, salty old fart.

They don't have to admit anything; their actions speak for themselves. They're Steam first, developer second, because that's what can easily and unmistakably be seen. People simply romanticized the whole thing and got frustrated when the result was different. Whether they're trying to appease themselves or the shareholders is a more relevant question.

Oh it's you again.

Obviously my comment was highly sarcastic but the sentiment of it really isn't. There's nothing salty about being dissappointed in Valve for ditching game development completely, aside from a few very simple games that are riddle with micro transactions and gambling. Valve got lucky with the timing of steam, that they're only real claim to fame. Without steam, they would likely not even be in business today. If a different digital store had beat steam to the punch, steam would be the annoying extra program everyone hates on. I'm not going to pretend a company that made a few smart decision and got lucky on top of that, but has otherwise spent most of its life doing very little (especially considering their massive resources) is a good business. Valve survives because of steam. Steam exist because it was first. It's that simple.


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.

ToTheSun! 03-15-2019 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraMega (Post 27892466)
Oh it's you again.

Hello.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraMega (Post 27892466)
Valve got lucky with the timing of steam, that they're only real claim to fame.

So, they're just like every single company in every single industry that pioneered something because of their ingenuity and sense of opportunity? Cool. I guess you really do make your own luck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraMega (Post 27892466)
Valve is like a good friend that fell off the wagon

And that's EXACTLY the problem, one that I described in my previous post. They've never been anyone's friend. You romanticized the whole thing and now you're frustrated.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.