Why HL3 will never come out. Serious speculation

[Road to A+]

So I recently started to replay the series so I could finish HL2 at least once (still havent finished it) and one thing struck me while playing HL1: HL3 will NEVER come out! Why?

I think the biggest reason why HL3 wont come out is that Valve extremely worried about its reputation. If you think about it right now, they are legendary devs for making HL1-2. They fear that if HL3 does not live up to the hype (which is MASSIVE) there will be a monstruous bandwagon of haters that will trash their rep and make them lose A LOT of money (review bombing, boycott, etc...) so making HL3 is a huge risk.

Keep in mind that as long as HL3 is a possibility there is hope among the fans, which is good for their rep. Think of the last E3 where gaben pulled that lil trick with the fading 'E'. HL3 is nothing but the illusion of a carrot on a stick to keep people interested in Valve. They are probably making more money by NOT released HL3 than they would if they did.

Next there is the profit question. Making a game is an investment, a big one. Right now they are already milking CS, Dota 2, TF 2 which requires minimal investment on their part but a massive income-to-investment ratio. Why bother risking money in a big project when you can milk existing work?

Finally the harder to accept reality, they simply dont know what to do with HL3. Clearly when they created HL2 they thought 'Lets make a half-life game' without truely knowing what makes a half-life game. In the end it looked like a HL game but didnt have the spirit of the original. If HL2 didnt live up to the 1 what makes people think that HL3 would be good seriously?

EVEN THE PLAYERS ignore what makes a good HL game. Ask people how HL3 should be and you'll get a bunch of different answers

The reason why HL was so good to me was all the 'hype' and 'mystery' sourrounding the events of black mesa, the game had you expecting it to be greater than it was, and it succeeded. It fell flat around the end (for me). It also combined different genres together. HL1 was no simple FPS, it could have had so many tags ''Survival horror'' ''Puzzle'' ''Atmospheric'' ''Platformer'' while HL2 is simply ''FPS'' ''Action''.

In this regard, if HL success is based on players expectations, the conclusion to the series can NOT possibly rely on having the player expecting something greater while also satisfying those expectations by closing it up.

For HL3 to be good it would need to do the same as HL1, leaving us with a mysterious ending that leaves us with more questions than answers, thus also leaving room for a sequel HL4, putting the pressure back on the devs.


Thoughts?

Personally I think HL3 could be good if it goes back to its roots. Have Gordon captured by the enemy into their own super science complex and recreate the claustrophobic underground survival atmosphere.

[.:gANEš:.]

i think someone could create another half-life game instead of valve.
people dont understand that half-life 2 is just a supplement to the Half-Life 1,
its not complementing it and there is no idea of something greater than half-life 1,
thats why the whole game failed at the end,
in other words half-life 2 is just a spinoff which has serious differences with the original
so the question is what is that we want.

[Road to A+]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από bass:

i think someone could create another half-life game instead of valve.
people dont understand that half-life 2 is just a supplement to the Half-Life 1,
its not complementing it and there is no idea of something greater than half-life 1,
thats why the whole game failed at the end,
in other words half-life 2 is just a spinoff which has serious differences with the original
so the question is what is that we want.

Yeah I forgot to say: I feel like they never really planned a sequel, HL1 was meant to be a standalone game. The mystery was not meant to be explained ever, as the strenght of the game lies in the unexplained.

They made HL2 as a response to the success 1 got, without putting too much thought into it.

[.:gANEš:.]

half-life 1 is raw serios stuff and half-life 2 is only built on top of that with no equal power so thats why they failed to get somewhere with the whole series. valve managed to lie to us that they were doing something real with the next installment of the game because we are all just stupid for new games. i will always differ half-life 1 from half-life 2.

[Sovereign]

Marc Laidlaw has said the plot of the HL2 Episode 3 was already mostly planned out and would have wrapped up the HL2 arc but would have left things open for more games under a new writing team that would have gone in another direction.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Road to A+:

The reason why HL was so good to me was all the 'hype' and 'mystery' sourrounding the events of black mesa, the game had you expecting it to be greater than it was, and it succeeded. It fell flat around the end (for me). It also combined different genres together. HL1 was no simple FPS, it could have had so many tags ''Survival horror'' ''Puzzle'' ''Atmospheric'' ''Platformer'' while HL2 is simply ''FPS'' ''Action''.

Have ever actually played HL2? It's got survival horror, puzzles, driving, atmosphere and action, the only thing it doesn't have is platforming which was the worst aspect of HL1.

[.:gANEš:.]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sovereign:

Marc Laidlaw has said the plot of the HL2 Episode 3 was already mostly planned out and would have wrapped up the HL2 arc but would have left things open for more games under a new writing team that would have gone in another direction.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Road to A+:

The reason why HL was so good to me was all the 'hype' and 'mystery' sourrounding the events of black mesa, the game had you expecting it to be greater than it was, and it succeeded. It fell flat around the end (for me). It also combined different genres together. HL1 was no simple FPS, it could have had so many tags ''Survival horror'' ''Puzzle'' ''Atmospheric'' ''Platformer'' while HL2 is simply ''FPS'' ''Action''.

Have ever actually played HL2? It's got survival horror, puzzles, driving, atmosphere and action, the only thing it doesn't have platforming which was the worst aspect of HL1.

he is right that the hl2 is more action than other things and that it deviates alot from the original.

[Road to A+]

Yes Im currently playing HL2, I have 2-3 chapters left. The game started great but is getting worse as I progress.

Puzzles are dumber and dont even feel like puzzles.

It has scary moments, but zero survival or horror. Its feels like a james bond movie. Always in a rush to move forward.

It puts emphasis on story but explains it pretty poorly.

Exploration value shrinked, its more linear overall.

Too many ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ gunship fights. The first one was fun, the 2nd was annoying, the 3rd encouter (2 gunships) was frustrating, the rest were a chore.

The driving sections are stretched for no reason and arent that fun.

It does have platforming but its very poorly done. Too many the-floor-is-lava type of levels.

Gunplay is arguably better. But gun variety is limited.

Oh and I almost forgot, the worst part of HL2..... Freeman = Jesus.
''Heres some ammo Dr Freeman!'' ''Dr. Freeman you have a scratch! Take this medkit.'' ''Can I suck your ♥♥♥♥ Mr. Freeman?''''Erhmagerd its Freemhun!'' '' Iss mistah freeemunn!!'' '''Follow Fremhon hurr dhurr'

[Sovereign]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από bass:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sovereign:

Marc Laidlaw has said the plot of the HL2 Episode 3 was already mostly planned out and would have wrapped up the HL2 arc but would have left things open for more games under a new writing team that would have gone in another direction.


Have ever actually played HL2? It's got survival horror, puzzles, driving, atmosphere and action, the only thing it doesn't have platforming which was the worst aspect of HL1.

he is right that the hl2 is more action than other things and that it deviates alot from the original.

Well it is a shooter and being different to the original is not a bad thing.

A great man once said: "A good video game sequel like Half-Life 2 or Silent Hill 2 use their predecessors as a jumping off point to explore new ideas, stories and technology while a bad video game sequel merely wallows in the original."

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Road to A+:

Yes Im currently playing HL2, I have 2-3 chapters left. The game started great but is getting worse as I progress.

Puzzles are dumber and dont even feel like puzzles.

It has scary moments, but zero survival or horror. Its feels like a james bond movie. Always in a rush to move forward.

Exploration value shrinked, its more linear overall.

Too many ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ gunship fights. The first one was fun, the 2nd was annoying, the 3rd encouter (2 gunships) was frustrating, the rest were a chore.

The driving sections are stretched for no reason and arent that fun.

It does have platforming but its very poorly done. Too many the-floor-is-lava type of levels.

Gunplay is arguably better. But gun variety is limited.

We all have our tastes and opinions, while I like HL1 a lot I could never see it as better then HL2. I replayed both for the 200th time the other day and I just find HL1 level design to be too janky and crappy and the story, atmosphere and enviroments are just too bland in comparison. That, and most of the guns lack any sense of impact which makes the shooting a bit unsatifying.

Just remember the difference between "objective" and "subjective" and we'll have no problem.

[.:gANEš:.]

half-life 1 wins for me because of how it tells the story through reality and mystery and half-life 2 has a little story and a lot of action and technical moments because its a sequel, half-life 2 always feels like its beyond reality and as if it is a movie set it completely dilutes whole half-life idea.

[Sovereign]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από bass:

half-life 1 wins for me because of how it tells the story through reality and mystery and half-life 2 has a little story and a lot of action and technical moments because its a sequel, half-life 2 always feels like its beyond reality and as if it is a movie set it completely dilutes whole half-life idea.

I like the way both games leave a lot of their story in the background for people who are actually paying attention to the details. Though I still prefer HL2's deeper orwellian setting and character focus over HL1's minimalism.

Also, no offense but don't think it's a bit arrogent to assume you know more about "the idea of HL" then it's actual creators? Or do you subscibe to "death of the author" concept?

[Road to A+]

''Well it is a shooter''

Half-Life 1 is more than a shooter, hence why I and others prefer it. I think you are attributing too much merit to HL2 for the technical superiority

''use their predecessors as a jumping off point to explore new ideas, stories and technology''

Except HL2 didnt really explore new areas, if anything it shut the doors leading to other areas by focusing on the action. HL2 added the gravity gun and vehicles, not much else.

''you know more about "the idea of HL" then it's actual creators?''

Not all the creators of HL1 had the same vision, pretty sure most were just workers. The construction worker does not necessarily think of the final outcome as he hammers the nails on a plank.

Too many people saw HL1 as simply a shooter, so they created HL2 to meet those expectations.

The ''idea'' or ''spirit'' of half-life, to me, is cramming multiple genres into a single game.

[.:gANEš:.]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sovereign:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από bass:

half-life 1 wins for me because of how it tells the story through reality and mystery and half-life 2 has a little story and a lot of action and technical moments because its a sequel, half-life 2 always feels like its beyond reality and as if it is a movie set it completely dilutes whole half-life idea.

I like the way both games leave a lot of their story in the background for people who are actually paying attention to the details. Though I still prefer HL2's deeper orwellian setting and character focus over HL1's minimalism.

Also, no offense but don't think it's a bit arrogent to assume you know more about "the idea of HL" then it's actual creators?

not offended,
dont you think that half-life 2 is a movie set if you dont die from one energy ball and gunship is killed by only two, thats my point, so the half-life 1 is about the story and half-life 2 is about the gameplay and gameplay means a little story and more experience so that is what it makes a thing for you but not for me, i dont need endless gaming experiences that revolve on the gameplay, i play few games mostly old skool and i know that there were games before games.

[Sovereign]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από bass:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sovereign:

I like the way both games leave a lot of their story in the background for people who are actually paying attention to the details. Though I still prefer HL2's deeper orwellian setting and character focus over HL1's minimalism.

Also, no offense but don't think it's a bit arrogent to assume you know more about "the idea of HL" then it's actual creators?

not offended,
dont you think that half-life 2 is a movie set if you dont die from one energy ball and gunship is killed by only two, thats my point, so the half-life 1 is about the story and half-life 2 is about the gameplay and gameplay means a little story and more experience so that is what it makes a thing for you but not for me, i dont need endless gaming experiences that revolve on the gameplay, i play few games mostly old skool and i know that there were games before games.

I don't get your point with the energy balls (also a gunship dies in 5 energy balls). HL2 is very story focused to the point of having whole chapters dedicated to it just like in HL1, in fact I'd say HL2 is far more story focused as HL1's story was rather simplistic with almost no characters and could be completely ignored. If you don't like gameplay in a videogame then I suggest movies or books, there all story and no gameplay.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Road to A+:

''Well it is a shooter''

Half-Life 1 is more than a shooter, hence why I and others prefer it. I think you are attributing too much merit to HL2 for the technical superiority

''use their predecessors as a jumping off point to explore new ideas, stories and technology''

Except HL2 didnt really explore new areas, if anything it shut the doors leading to other areas by focusing on the action. HL2 added the gravity gun and vehicles, not much else.

''you know more about "the idea of HL" then it's actual creators?''

Not all the creators of HL1 had the same vision, pretty sure most were just workers. The construction worker does not necessarily think of the final outcome as he hammers the nails on a plank.

Too many people saw HL1 as simply a shooter, so they created HL2 to meet those expectations.

The ''idea'' or ''spirit'' of half-life, to me, is cramming multiple genres into a single game.

Yes your right HL1 is more then a shooter, it's also a crappy platformer as well. I like HL2 for it's story and gameplay superiority (imo), the better graphics are just a nice bonus. Though I will say since the HL series as always had a major focus on new tech I wouldn't scoff at HL2 technical innovation.

You don't consider the Combine, an interdemsional war, good aliens, a post-apocalyptic dystopian earth and actual characters to be new ideas?

No offence but that's a pretty bad metaphor. When I said "creators" I was referring to people like Gabe Newell, Ted Backman and Marc Laidlaw, not some random interns.

Overall mate, I think this is just a standard case of "different therefore wrong" thinking on your part.

[Unc]

I like turtles

[.:gANEš:.]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sovereign:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από bass:

not offended,
dont you think that half-life 2 is a movie set if you dont die from one energy ball and gunship is killed by only two, thats my point, so the half-life 1 is about the story and half-life 2 is about the gameplay and gameplay means a little story and more experience so that is what it makes a thing for you but not for me, i dont need endless gaming experiences that revolve on the gameplay, i play few games mostly old skool and i know that there were games before games.

I don't get your point with the energy balls (also a gunship dies in 5 energy balls). HL2 is very story focused to the point of having whole chapters dedicated to it just like in HL1, in fact I'd say HL2 is far more story focused as HL1 story was rather simplistic with almost no character and could be completely ignored. If you don't gameplay in a videogame then I suggest movies or books, there all story and no gameplay.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Road to A+:

''Well it is a shooter''

Half-Life 1 is more than a shooter, hence why I and others prefer it. I think you are attributing too much merit to HL2 for the technical superiority

''use their predecessors as a jumping off point to explore new ideas, stories and technology''

Except HL2 didnt really explore new areas, if anything it shut the doors leading to other areas by focusing on the action. HL2 added the gravity gun and vehicles, not much else.

''you know more about "the idea of HL" then it's actual creators?''

Not all the creators of HL1 had the same vision, pretty sure most were just workers. The construction worker does not necessarily think of the final outcome as he hammers the nails on a plank.

Too many people saw HL1 as simply a shooter, so they created HL2 to meet those expectations.

The ''idea'' or ''spirit'' of half-life, to me, is cramming multiple genres into a single game.

Yes your right HL1 is more then a shooter, it's also a crappy platformer as well. I like HL2 for it's story and gameplay superiority (imo), the better graphics are just a nice bonus. Though I will say since the HL series as always had a major focus on new tech I wouldn't scoff at HL2 technical innovation.

You don't consider the Combine, an interdemsional war, good aliens, a post-apocalyptic dystopian earth and actual characters to be new ideas?

No offence but that's a pretty bad metaphor. When I said "creators" I was referring to people like Gabe Newell, Ted Backman and Marc Laidlaw, not some random interns.

Overall mate, I think this is just a standard case of "different therefore wrong" thinking on your part.

count the balls 9m57s
https://youtu.be/nHl9Hs1DisE?t=9m57s

[Road to A+]

Sure as a shooter alone HL2 > HL1 but overall the 1 is best.

What you listed are just fictionnal ideas, not technology. These ideas revolve around 'conflict' which has already been done by HL1, ever better I would say because you have 3 parties (science team, HECU, Black Ops).

The platforming parts were decent and better than the 2. Just having them felt refreshing to change the gameplay. In HL2 you rarely get these 'refreshing' moments that change your playstyle.

Also this makes me think of where I currently am, where the dictator is asking me to surrender. And from a role-playing perspective I am considering it. I have been told by the 'good' guys that I must kill those 'bad' people but I dont know why. Maybe he actually has a legit reason for his dictatorship. Overall the story is more complex yet its weaker