ashecitism
Member
Yes, they're close.
This was yesterday lol
https://twitter.com/kungfusquirrel/status/624639397711884288
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rumor: Half Life 3 still not in full development
- Thread starter iNvid02
- Start date
Yes, they're close.
This was yesterday lol
https://twitter.com/kungfusquirrel/status/624639397711884288
There in a position that allows them exploring new and unknown. Just like Blizzard.
That's the best position you can be as a game developer. As much as I would like to see new Half-Life I kinda understand them not wanting to bother with it.
On another note. Valve seems to me like a company that has shit loads of ideas and experiment projects that end up not finished because there's always something new to experiment with. They lack of focus like teenager who changes his hobby all the time. One day it's playing on guitar another it's skateboarding.
Maybe when VR will truly come we will see some cool stuff from Valve...
That's the best position you can be as a game developer. As much as I would like to see new Half-Life I kinda understand them not wanting to bother with it.
On another note. Valve seems to me like a company that has shit loads of ideas and experiment projects that end up not finished because there's always something new to experiment with. They lack of focus like teenager who changes his hobby all the time. One day it's playing on guitar another it's skateboarding.
Maybe when VR will truly come we will see some cool stuff from Valve...
What are you talking about? The Simpsons didn't have 16 seasons. Season 16 would mean something like 2004, which is of course impossible considering the show ended long before the turn of the century.
SolVanderlyn
Thanos acquires the fully powered Infinity Gauntlet in The Avengers: Infinity War, but loses when all the superheroes team up together to stop him.
Sounds real. Too real.
BossDarkseid
Member
Yeah but Blizzard don't (to my knowledge) totally abandon some franchises that made them famous. Sure they haven't made Warcraft 4 but they've kept WoW running with what feels like half a dozen expansions and they've almost finished the SC2 trilogy...if Valve are a company without focus then Blizz maybe the same but it feels like they carry through with things.
That said Blizz could hurry up and make og Starcraft and Warcraft 3 etc downloadable via the battle.net client.
Sure, I get where you are coming from, but i still feel there's a sense of entitlement amongst gamers that is not apparent with readers of books, and viewers of films and tv series.
If a good movie has a shitty ending, you deal with it. You go to IMDB, give it a 6, because the rest of the film was okay, but don't recommend it to your friends.
Some books, like Game of Thrones, probably have a bit more investment in them and fans probably will cry more. But when a character dies in a way you disagree with, you fucking deal with it.
So how come the shitty ending in ME3 is not something fans can deal with? How come they demand change? And developers actually listen? Is it because, simply, a creative difference between the developers and the entire gaming community? OR was the critique warranted, and the ending of ME3 lazy writing?
And even if it was lazy writing towards the end, do gamers have the right to demand creative changes to a creative product that is not theirs? I don't agree with this. Go vote with your wallet. Don't pre-order next time. Return the game. Give it a bad rating. And if the developers listen to critique, and understand, and on their own bring out an 'directors cut' of the game, then fuck, why not? But creative teams should never, ever, bring out an 'audience cut' of a film, series, book or game, IMO.
And by this I don't mean fixes of things obviously broken. I mean subjective differences; like things where characters get to live or die, a world gets destroyed or doesn't, etc.
ClivePwned
Member
no real surprises about no major development on HL3.
Fuck you, Valve.
Fuck you, Valve.
Diprosalic
Banned
i don't know why anybody thinks their making HL3.
that's not a good project for Valve anymore.
that's not a good project for Valve anymore.
A couple of years ago definitely, now? I'm not so sure. If I were a game developer and had two applicants who had the same years but CV's were-
A- Part of 3 released games, a DLC pack and experience with the modern community.
vs.
B- Part of 1 released game, did a few bit things was mostly paid by a company that makes it's money selling other peoples games, spent the last 5 years in a insular and out of perspective environment.
I'm going with A.
eot
Banned
People get outraged about endings to stories in other mediums as well. They can 'demand' whatever they want, it's the creator's choice to listen to it or not. No one was holding a knife to BioWare's throat, they were literally sending cupcakes. How's that for 'demand'?
ashecitism
Member
Robottiimu2000
Member
NeoGaf - The Thread
I've said it before. They have one out, and that's making HL3 one of the first major VR shooters. That would deflect many of the direct comparisons to its predecessor, and though it might not be a 'better' game it would still be an impactful release.
Releasing a straight up sequel can only disappoint now. And Valve is running out of time with the VR option.
Releasing a straight up sequel can only disappoint now. And Valve is running out of time with the VR option.
fluffydelusions
Member
The main difference here is that best Blizzard franchises are exceptional multiplayer games (with of course great single player). Half-life is only exceptional in SP. Multi was fun but nothing ground braking. And both companies like to milk customers by offering pixels for money. Long term income from one title. Half-Life doesn't offer that long term income.
Maybe I'm wrong but I think that's why Valve and Blizz are focusing on MP games.
fluffydelusions
Member
Watch one day Gaben is just going to hit the button and HL3 will just pop up on Steam like some random indie title...no marketing no nothing...BELIEVE!
Gabe has specifically denied holding back any projects just for VR.
TheVoidDragon
Member
This doesn't fit in with what Gabe said about it back in 2012. He said "everybody who has worked on Ricochet 2 continues to work on Ricochet 2" where he used Richochet 2 to refer to the next Half life game. If it had a large team in 2009 who then got moved onto other things, Gabe saying the team is the same in 2012 does not make sense. They've said several times over the past years why it's taking so long, and nothing that suggested they aren't interested in making another Half life game.
ashecitism
Member
People should stop with this "HL3 VR!" nonsense. You know what that would accomplish? Alienating the majority of the existing fanbase. Valve aren't that stupid to do that.
I believe this. The "anonymous source" didn't say anything different than what everyone else saying "HL3 will never happen" have said.
That's not to say HL3 is coming out any time soon, but I seriously doubt any of what this "anonymous source" said, especially considering what Gabe has said about Ricochet 2 in more recent years.
The thing is, not releasing the game or talking about it ever, pretending it doesn't exist, is just as toxic if not moreso than just releasing the damn game. There's only so long people will be excited for it, there will inevitably come a point where if it is revealed, people will no longer care.
Valve really don't feel like a game company anymore.
Valve really don't feel like a game company anymore.
TheVoidDragon
Member
They have not pretended it doesn't exist. Several times over the past few years they've mentioned it, and even said at least twice why it's taking so long.
I can't tell if you're being serious right now. Valve has a notoriously tough hiring process, regardless of their output being hired by Valve and passing their evaluation process is an insane achievement for anybody within the industry. They literally track the careers of the industries best and brightest in order to acquire new talent. Internally they develop game engines, work with state of the art VR technology, have countless internal projects and R&D as well as two of the most popular games on earth. They are absolutely among the top end of the industry.
Also how could they be insular and out of perspective considering the success of CS:Go, TF2 and Dota 2? Their incarnations as they stand now were internally developed, are the most well supported games on the market and each have communities that absolutely love the product. They are the opposite of insular, their games target audiences far greater than any Half Life game and have business models that are among the most cutting edge in the current market. In the current market, you could easily argue that making a AAA singleplayer shooter would be insular and out of perspective for a company like Valve.
I'm new be nice
Member
I'm sorry but how is it toxic exactly? There's a reason every game company works under the guise of discretion.
How many times have developers shot themselves in the foot for revealing too much before release (Fable being the most notorious)?
Look how big this thread is, over literally nothing, there is no news here, it's baseless rumors at the end of the day, over a game that's been 8 years idle.
I don't blame Valve for one second in treating HL3 the way they have.
Came here to post this... Was beaten obviously.
PandaPedinte
Member
Let's create a kickstarter to gather money and buy the HL i.p. from Valve, then we can make HL3 and shame Valve for not caring about their most important franchise. I can already see it selling millions and Gabe Newell apologizing publicy about not being an expert and for shooting Valve in the foot.
As amazing as that would be it probably wouldn't happen since there would probably be console versions of Half Life 3 and they couldn't do that because of the console versions.
Dangansona
Member
Beat me to it. There is something to the entitlement when you go from "The ending sucks, now I don't like this any more and speak of it to others positively" to "how dare they?! Change your [admittedly lackluster] creative decision!"
Don't think you are using the word broken right, and I think the problem is labeling it as a product and not a creative work. I also don't understand the repeated mentions of "anti consumerist."
LegendOfGood
Member
I understand that Valve is a business - they exist to turn a profit.
But they're also artists.
Speaking strictly from the perspective of Half-Life as a work of art, wouldn't Valve feel some sort of self-obligation to wrap up the story they created? Especially when it was left on such a cliff-hanger. If not for themselves, then for the fans who have enjoyed and been moved by the Half-Life experience.
But they're also artists.
Speaking strictly from the perspective of Half-Life as a work of art, wouldn't Valve feel some sort of self-obligation to wrap up the story they created? Especially when it was left on such a cliff-hanger. If not for themselves, then for the fans who have enjoyed and been moved by the Half-Life experience.
iNvid02
Member
put marc's emails in the OP, they're vague but the only response available from someone at valve.
its worth mentioning the video actually says that the script, story and game events are complete, so in that case they could have enough to know where a combat section will play out, or where a puzzle will be inserted etc and how it affects the overall pacing, instead of just the script.
still, the lofty expectations that have built up for this game, the lack of financial/shareholder pressure on valve to focus on the project, and the way in which valve employees supposedly earn their salaries make for strong arguments about the current status of this game.
its worth mentioning the video actually says that the script, story and game events are complete, so in that case they could have enough to know where a combat section will play out, or where a puzzle will be inserted etc and how it affects the overall pacing, instead of just the script.
still, the lofty expectations that have built up for this game, the lack of financial/shareholder pressure on valve to focus on the project, and the way in which valve employees supposedly earn their salaries make for strong arguments about the current status of this game.
Majukun
Member
well,they did hint that multiple times,but fans just refused to listen
at valve they have a strictly business-like mind..just look at how they manage steam...half life is just not worth the effort for them.
Fox Mulder
Member
retardedrockstar
Member
ashecitism
Member
the full transcript of that part
"Super classic"? Are they basically saying no more single player content? I mean, for my money, that was precisely what I loved about Valve's best games. The Half-Life titles and Portal. Everything else? Completely uninteresting to me.
I was hoping with their success that they could continue to support multiple fronts. Give those who just want MP and F2P their games while also working on single player narrative driven stuff.
It fundamentally makes no sense to me why no one internally would want to make HL3 if the vast majority of their fans want it. I just don't get it. The hunger for the game is ridiculous, to the point where anything they release that isn't HL3 will be met with a lot of frustration.
Marc Laidlaw makes a fair bit more sense than "the know" peddling the most simplistic answer possible. The gameslice podcast with Gabe Newell also alludes to similar notions in being comfortable with being uncomfortable and using each IP as tools, as well as specifically mentioning reasoning for HL3 not simply being plopped out without taking on board the work from Portal 2 and their multiplayer updates.
TheVoidDragon
Member
No, he does not say that. He is not saying they would not go back to Half life. You're taking that quote completely out of context.
That whole part of the interview is about their method of approaching games and what they do with them. Specifically Gabe talks about how they like to use games to test new ideas, and that some people don't really like how they do that.
When he says "a super classic kind of product" he's referring to a game done in the way they used to make them. That would be a product that isn't developed with everything they've learned from TF2, Portal 2, dota 2 etc and all the other things they've done over the years. That's why he says this:
He says this shortly after saying that, specifically mentioning developing a game that ignores all they've learned not being something they'd likely do:
He is talking about how they develop their games, not if they're going to go back and do a specific game or not. It's all about them approaching their games differently now to how they used to, that's why he says classic kind of product, not a classic product. The interview is talking about how they use games to overcome challenges and test new ideas now, he's saying they probably won't go back and develop a game where they don't do that unless lots of people at Valve want to and have a good reason. He says this part after mentioning not going back to the previous way because people are concerned about that:
He is not talking about not going back to any of their old games, just the way they used to develop them and what they include. If take look at it without reading the rest of the interview, that's what it seems like, but that's not what he's saying at all.
He specifically mentions Portal 2 as something a future HL would learn from - that's hardly an indication of "no single player content". All he is alluding to is that a future HL is not going to be the same progression as other HL games. I'd bet it will involve some way of having it be a "service" and be extendable as well as usable with user created content. How you get a single player experience in there as well as likely being multiplayer in some way, I have no idea - but they won't fundamentally change the core of HL and it's narrative
fluffydelusions
Member
It could always just come to console later on.