• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Valve soft launches Source 2 with Dota 2 port, Dota 2 Xbox reticule found, L4D3 refs

Sothpaw

Member
So what you do then is like what Blizzard did with Diablo 3: remove point-targeted spells and all the interesting gameplay possibilities they open up :p

Even if they simplified the game to that level, it still doesn't solve the minimap problem. There is no minimap manupilation in D3, whereas it is a core mechanic in DOTA.
 

Sentenza

Member
How do I do this?
Download the mod tool (from "tools" under your library menu). It will download the DOTA 2 client from zero once again (annoying, I know).

Then you need to go in:
X:\Steam\SteamApps\common\dota 2 beta\dota_ugc\game\bin\win64
and launch the DOTA2.exe you'll find there.
 

Rebel Leader

THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Download the mod tool (from "tools" under your library menu). It will download the DOTA 2 client from zero once again (annoying, I know).

Then you need to go in:
X:\Steam\SteamApps\common\dota 2 beta\dota_ugc\game\bin\win64
and launch the DOTA2.exe you'll find there.

Download the toolset (Library -> Tools -> Dota 2 Workshop Tools Alpha) and run steamapps\common\dota 2 beta\dota_ugc\game\bin\win64\dota2.exe.

Edit: b10.


ok

Holy fuck at that load in the video. SHIT.

All steam games need to be ported over now
 
Still haven't seen anyone detail the L4D3 references. Might be way too much and scattered to list, or nothing that substantial.

Download the toolset (Library -> Tools -> Dota 2 Workshop Tools Alpha) and run steamapps\common\dota 2 beta\dota_ugc\game\bin\win64\dota2.exe.

Edit: b10.

What did you say about preview post again? :p
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
What did you say about preview post again? :p

Haha, I did! I'm on my laptop and Waterfox tends to bog it down to the point where everything is excruciatingly slow (granted, I do have 40 tabs open, but most of them aren't loaded into memory).

What's the load time difference? Can't watch the video.

Source 2 + 64-bit executable = ~3-second load times.
 

Sentenza

Member
What's the load time difference? Can't watch the video.
On an i5 4670k and a GTX 770, on an ordinary HDD, loading a game went from roughly 30 seconds to 4-5 seconds at your first load from the startup.
Subsequent loading times went from 15-20 seconds to 1-3.
It's a massive difference.

I wonder if it's all about improvements and better optimization or if it's somehow related to some glitches and missing stuff which are noticeable in this version of the client (i.e. some effects aren't in).
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
on an i5 4670k and a GTX 770 loading a game went from roughly 30 seconds to 4-5 seconds at your first load from the startup.
Subsequent loading times went from 15-20 seconds to 1-3.
It's a massive difference.

I wonder if it's all about improvements and better optimization or if it's somehow related to some glitches and missing stuff which are noticeable in this version of the client (i.e. some effects aren't in).
I imagine most of that is file packaging given similar games can load very quickly.
 

Mr.Fox

Member
Then explain how this guy does it on a system that he basically had to make up. He said he can't play 3-4 heroes out the shit ton they have. I doubt that valve would be limited to the basics of xpadder to make every hero work.

You may not want to play Dota 2 with a controller, hell, I don't think anyone here would willingly do that to themselves, but it's definitely feasible to implement controller support to Dota 2.

But like I said, this is prolly for Left 4 Dead 3 and Half Life 3, which are most likely going to be on consoles. since they generally do not have a huge influx of patches and fixes like Dota 2, CS GO, and TF2 have.

I just finished watching the VOD and... the guy did nothing really significant in the entire video, his team was basically doing all the work for him. He was losing too much time between trying to aim the cursor on the enemies or creeps and trying to re position himself, his early game farm was extremely hindered because of that. And later on he mostly contributed with non-aimed skills, like the missiles and march of the machines, he clearly had trouble using the laser and itens, only pulled them off sometimes in teamfights when he was not being focused by the enemy team.

To make Dota 2 really work in a gamepad, I think Valve would need to enable direct movement input to the characters, and this probably would be a BIG change to the game. And to be very honest, I think they should have done it since the beginning, movement through path-finding is buggy and unnecessary, everyone knows it, we merely got used to it.

Edit: What I mean is, letting movement be directional, free from needing to use the cursor, so the player could focus on only aiming his attacks and item usage.
 

aeolist

Banned
I just finished watching the VOD and... the guy did nothing really significant in the entire video, his team was basically doing all the work for him. He was losing too much time between trying to aim the cursor on the enemies or creeps and trying to re position himself, his early game farm was extremely hindered because of that. And later on he mostly contributed with non-aimed skills, like the missiles and march of the machines, he clearly had trouble using the laser and itens, only pulled them off sometimes in teamfights when he was not being focused by the enemy team.

To make Dota 2 really work in a gamepad, I think Valve would need to enable direct movement input to the characters, and this probably would be a BIG change to the game. And to be very honest, I think they should have done it since the beginning, movement through path-finding is buggy and unnecessary, everyone knows it, we merely got used to it.

Edit: What I mean is, letting movement be directional, free from needing to use the cursor, so the player could focus on only aiming his attacks and item usage.

that would make it impossible to queue, micro, and pay attention to the rest of the map while your hero unit is moving

you could remove those features but then you're left with a simpler and entirely different game
 

Volodja

Member
I just finished watching the VOD and... the guy did nothing really significant in the entire video, his team was basically doing all the work for him. He was losing too much time between trying to aim the cursor on the enemies or creeps and trying to re position himself, his early game farm was extremely hindered because of that. And later on he mostly contributed with non-aimed skills, like the missiles and march of the machines, he clearly had trouble using the laser and itens, only pulled them off sometimes in teamfights when he was not being focused by the enemy team.

To make Dota 2 really work in a gamepad, I think Valve would need to enable direct movement input to the characters, and this probably would be a BIG change to the game. And to be very honest, I think they should have done it since the beginning, movement through path-finding is buggy and unnecessary, everyone knows it, we merely got used to it.

Edit: What I mean is, letting movement be directional, free from needing to use the cursor, so the player could focus on only aiming his attacks and item usage.
I don't particularly care for wasd control in isometric (or whatever Dota 2 is) games and I like pointing and clicking to move.
Aside from the fact that it would pretty much break Dota because of the need for the camera to be centered because you can't take your eyes off of your character when you have to control him directly, otherwise you are gonna get stuck in a ledge.
Dota is like RTS in the sense that you need to look everywhere but where your character/base is for a large chunk of the time.
 

batteryLeakage

Neo Member
For those interested, I checked to see if this is available in Linux and its not, or at least cannot be accessed in the same way. Tried to install Dota 2 Workshop Tools Alpha and a small download was queued up for Dota 2 right after, but no dota_ugc subdirectory was created. It would have been cool to see how the current Source 2 is operating in a non-Windows non-D3D environment.
 
For those interested, I checked to see if this is available in Linux and its not, or at least cannot be accessed in the same way. Tried to install Dota 2 Workshop Tools Alpha and a small download was queued up for Dota 2 right after, but no dota_ugc subdirectory was created. It would have been cool to see how the current Source 2 is operating in a non-Windows non-D3D environment.

Of course not.

At the moment the tools require a 64-bit version of Windows and a Direct3D 11 compatible GPU. We are working on expanding the number of PC configurations (including 32-bit OSes like Windows XP) that will be able to run this but wanted to get the tools out there so developers could start working on their Custom Games.

It's in the first link of the OP :p
 

Sibylus

Banned
For those interested, I checked to see if this is available in Linux and its not, or at least cannot be accessed in the same way. Tried to install Dota 2 Workshop Tools Alpha and a small download was queued up for Dota 2 right after, but no dota_ugc subdirectory was created. It would have been cool to see how the current Source 2 is operating in a non-Windows non-D3D environment.
The alpha is currently only working for 64-bit, DX11+ windows, but for those on that configuration, don't make the same mistake I did: the dota_ugc directory is under dota 2 beta, and not dota.
 
You didn't answer the question. You said that Valve will:



But since the Early Access initiative launched, Valve's done nothing but stress the point that the games aren't fit for general consumption, to the extent that Early Access games no longer show up on the New Releases list and developers can no longer write what they want but rather have to fill out a template that codifies in no uncertain terms what the game's current state is, what the future plans are, and if there are any differences between the early and final releases that users should be aware of. You're not the first person to have grievances about the Early Access system, but the notion that it hasn't changed for the better and, worse still, has or will be exploited is incongruous with reality.

Edit: For the record, Valve, like GOG, takes 30% (Phil Fish confirmed this last year), and it does have offer refunds on pre-orders (as well as unused gifts, eventually, and I do think that Early Access titles should also be brought into the fold considering their state and potentially uncertain future).

The "... in no uncertain terms what the game's current state is, what the future plans are..." portion is new to me. Has Valve ever held a developer accountable for it? That is, has Valve ever removed a game from their Early Access program for lying in the form? Also, does Valve require that the developers have a time frame for this, or can they just keep the game in Early Access for the rest of eternity, periodically making claims that they're working on the game while having very little or nothing to show for it (not unlike Valve's approach to Half Life 2: Episode 3/Half Life 3, minus the "early access" part) to always keep the game criticism-free in the eyes of some by being able to say that the game is not yet (ever) meant for general consumption?

Wait, are you seriously taking issue with Steam taking a cut of sales? They're providing developers and publishers with an extremely useful service, why shouldn't they get paid for that?

I have no problem with them making money as a store, but they're taking in a far larger cut of the profit than most physical stores do, and they're not even doing as much as those retail stores do.

In particular, Valve doesn't in any way curate the software on Steam, nor do they posses any noteworthy level of quality assurance. There are multiple non-early access games on there that will flat out crash over the course of normal play. Air Control even tells you that the game will crash during normal play in its instructions!

In terms of making far more than most stores do, it's been said by one of Jim Sterling's sources that a physical store might make about 2 dollars out of a $60 game's price tag, which works out to be around 3%. 15% or 30% cuts, by comparison, are far more than Valve should probably deserve, especially when physical stores have more expenses (shipping, clerks, etc.) and do more work (Notable QA, shipping, etc.).
 

Instro

Member
In terms of making far more than most stores do, it's been said by one of Jim Sterling's sources that a physical store might make about 2 dollars out of a $60 game's price tag, which works out to be around 3%. 15% or 30% cuts, by comparison, are far more than Valve should probably deserve, especially when physical stores have more expenses (shipping, clerks, etc.) and do more work (Notable QA, shipping, etc.).

I don't understand, are you implying that Valve has no costs of their own? Regardless physical stores probably do end up with a small profit on games out of the 20%-30% cut that they get, however its somewhat irrelevant since physical stores are able to sell the consumer numerous other items while they are in the building.
 

Armaros

Member
I don't understand, are you implying that Valve has no costs of their own? Regardless physical stores probably do end up with a small profit on games out of the 20%-30% cut that they get, however its somewhat irrelevant since physical stores are able to sell the consumer numerous other items while they are in the building.

Also Used Games revenue.
 

HariKari

Member
I have no problem with them making money as a store, but they're taking in a far larger cut of the profit than most physical stores do, and they're not even doing as much as those retail stores do.

I'm not sure how you can be serious. A physical store's contribution consists of putting it on a shelf and then collecting money when someone buys it. Steam does a hell of a lot more than that to get titles working on their system, updates, community hubs, sales etc...

In terms of making far more than most stores do, it's been said by one of Jim Sterling's sources that a physical store might make about 2 dollars out of a $60 game's price tag, which works out to be around 3%. 15% or 30% cuts, by comparison, are far more than Valve should probably deserve, especially when physical stores have more expenses (shipping, clerks, etc.) and do more work (Notable QA, shipping, etc.).

Stores take so little because that's all the meat that is left on the bone after a traditional retail product hits store shelves. Are you aware of the average profit margin at your local grocery store? The stores handle things other than games, and those costs are just a part of their operations. What you should really be focusing on is how much it costs in terms of profit to have a game published in physical form. Getting published in the first place often comes with massive tradeoffs, like no longer owning or controlling your own IP. Steam does away with all that.
 

Orayn

Member
Developers have almost nothing but good things to say about releasing games on Steam, Steam improving profit margins, Steam sales reviving interest in titles that would otherwise make no money, etc.

But Valve is clearly in the wrong because some Early Access games are bad and RMS Gigantic thinks their cut is too big.
 
I'm not sure how you can be serious. A physical store's contribution consists of putting it on a shelf and then collecting money when someone buys it. Steam does a hell of a lot more than that to get titles working on their system, updates, community hubs, sales etc...
You do a wonderful job of ignoring the several more employees stores hire, even for stores that specifically sell games (In-store assistants, cashiers, managers, inventory checkers; if we go for companies that sell to a nationwide market like Valve does, there's also the issue of how they require branches with their own employees, etc.), which, combined with the operation and upkeep of the several buildings that house the stores (again, viewing a nation-wide chain as comparable to Valve's worldwide electronic store), result in far greater costs that need to be covered by 1/5 or 1/10 of what Valve makes per purchase.



Stores take so little because that's all the meat that is left on the bone after a traditional retail product hits store shelves. Are you aware of the average profit margin at your local grocery store? The stores handle things other than games, and those costs are just a part of their operations. What you should really be focusing on is how much it costs in terms of profit to have a game published in physical form. Getting published in the first place often comes with massive tradeoffs, like no longer owning or controlling your own IP. Steam does away with all that.

The bolded portion strikes me as an admittance that Valve takes an excessive amount of money per game sale compared to physical retailers. They could lower the price of the game if they felt as though enough was enough as far as pricing goes. Sure they have their frequent sales, but those are often on relatively old games, and there's so many games in Steam's library that any given game doesn't go on sale all that often. Furthermore, what would the difference be between Steam sales and retailer sales/bargain bins?

Additionally, your point about not having the cost of publishing is rather moot for the several cases where there's a publisher and Valve involved, such as with Activision or Paradox Interactive. What's more, if a person doesn't want to get involved with publishers at all, there's also the option of true self-distribution, where they can simply put the game somewhere online for people to buy and download, without Valve taking 15-30% of the sale.


But Valve is clearly in the wrong because some Early Access games are bad and RMS Gigantic thinks their cut is too big.

You underestimate the scope of the problem. Major new releases, or even the indie games that, as you said, want and need exposure, often get pushed off of the New Releases page in favor of 1990's PC games that simply got dumped as part of a publisher's back catalog. Not just Early Access games are bad, either, but also a notable number of Greenlight games, games that have a publisher that cleared the system before, or, heck, just somehow get onto the store via their own merits. Several people have compared Steam's store to the pre-1983 North American video game market. There's also a perpetual problem with games being mis-categorized because Valve can't be bothered to even label a game themselves, but rather let the community do it, which leaves labeling the genre of a game up to people who don't take the task seriously, think they're pulling a joke with a select group of other people, or simply don't know what a specific genre is ("open world" versus "sandbox" is one such instance of confusion, if I remember correctly).

These factors all combine to where even if someone is actively looking for a game that might interest them, that person won't be able to find it, even if their perfect game is somewhere on Steam.
 

aeolist

Banned
You do a wonderful job of ignoring the several more employees stores hire, even for stores that specifically sell games (In-store assistants, cashiers, managers, inventory checkers; if we go for companies that sell to a nationwide market like Valve does, there's also the issue of how they require branches with their own employees, etc.), which, combined with the operation and upkeep of the several buildings that house the stores (again, viewing a nation-wide chain as comparable to Valve's worldwide electronic store), result in far greater costs that need to be covered by 1/5 or 1/10 of what Valve makes per purchase.





The bolded portion strikes me as an admittance that Valve takes an excessive amount of money per game sale compared to physical retailers. They could lower the price of the game if they felt as though enough was enough as far as pricing goes. Sure they have their frequent sales, but those are often on relatively old games, and there's so many games in Steam's library that any given game doesn't go on sale all that often. Furthermore, what would the difference be between Steam sales and retailer sales/bargain bins?

Additionally, your point about not having the cost of publishing is rather moot for the several cases where there's a publisher and Valve involved, such as with Activision or Paradox Interactive. What's more, if a person doesn't want to get involved with publishers at all, there's also the option of true self-distribution, where they can simply put the game somewhere online for people to buy and download, without Valve taking 15-30% of the sale.




You underestimate the scope of the problem. Major new releases, or even the indie games that, as you said, want and need exposure, often get pushed off of the New Releases page in favor of 1990's PC games that simply got dumped as part of a publisher's back catalog. Not just Early Access games are bad, either, but also a notable number of Greenlight games, games that have a publisher that cleared the system before, or, heck, just somehow get onto the store via their own merits. Several people have compared Steam's store to the pre-1983 North American video game market. There's also a perpetual problem with games being mis-categorized because Valve can't be bothered to even label a game themselves, but rather let the community do it, which leaves labeling the genre of a game up to people who don't take the task seriously, think they're pulling a joke with a lot of other people, or simply don't know what a specific genre is ("open world" versus "sandbox" ends up being a big one, if I remember correctly).

this is a completely insane line of discussion to the point where i don't think it's at all worth responding to you

also it's entirely irrelevant to the thread and could probably get you at least a warning from a mod about thread-shitting. the only reason i'm not PMing a mod right now instead of making this post is because the forum is being fucking stupid and won't show me who's online at the moment so i'll just ask you to please stop.
 
this is a completely insane line of discussion to the point where i don't think it's at all worth responding to you

also it's entirely irrelevant to the thread and could probably get you at least a warning from a mod about thread-shitting. the only reason i'm not PMing a mod right now instead of making this post is because the forum is being fucking stupid and won't show me who's online at the moment so i'll just ask you to please stop.

Roger that. I used to be a major fan of Valve, but it was those little irksome things piling up that led me to completely invert my opinion of them.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
The "... in no uncertain terms what the game's current state is, what the future plans are..." portion is new to me. Has Valve ever held a developer accountable for it? That is, has Valve ever removed a game from their Early Access program for lying in the form?

Yes.

Also, does Valve require that the developers have a time frame for this, or can they just keep the game in Early Access for the rest of eternity, periodically making claims that they're working on the game while having very little or nothing to show for it (not unlike Valve's approach to Half Life 2: Episode 3/Half Life 3, minus the "early access" part) to always keep the game criticism-free in the eyes of some by being able to say that the game is not yet (ever) meant for general consumption?

There's no time limit, but again developers need to be communicative and honest about future plans.
 

Mohasus

Member
Even if they simplified the game to that level, it still doesn't solve the minimap problem. There is no minimap manupilation in D3, whereas it is a core mechanic in DOTA.

You'd be surprised about how many casuals prefer the following camera in LoL and how they think that controlling it is awful.
 
How can I do that?

Download the mod tool (from "tools" under your library menu). It will download the DOTA 2 client from zero once again (annoying, I know).

Then you need to go in:
X:\Steam\SteamApps\common\dota 2 beta\dota_ugc\game\bin\win64
and launch the DOTA2.exe you'll find there.

Download the toolset (Library -> Tools -> Dota 2 Workshop Tools Alpha) and run steamapps\common\dota 2 beta\dota_ugc\game\bin\win64\dota2.exe.

.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
I have no idea of what is that supposed to mean...

It ostensibly means that:

- CS2 is a thing and is being built with Source 2
- HL3 was being developed on Source but has since moved to Source 2
- L4D2 will receive the same treatment Dota 2 has
- L4D3 is a thing and is being built with Source 2 (this has been clear for some time now, though), and
- TF(2?) will receive the same treatment as Dota 2 has

Is Dota2 64 executable fully playable or its full of bugs?

It's playable... ish.
 

Instro

Member
It ostensibly means that:

- CS2 is a thing and is being built with Source 2
- HL3 was being developed on Source but has since moved to Source 2
- L4D2 will receive the same treatment Dota 2 has, and
- L4D3 is a thing and is being built with Source 2 (this has been clear for some time now, though.

Looks like TF2 as well.
 
Top Bottom