Make Valve A Great Developer Again.

[FOXDUDE69]

I don't think I'm alone when I say I sorely miss Valve's golden days as game developer.

Imagine the games we could be playing if Valve decided to refocus on game development.
I'm not even talking about just the obvious stuff like Half-Life 3, a new Portal or Left 4 Dead, I'm talking about new innovative IPs featuring that top notch writing that Valve games were loved for.

It feels like there's this hole now, in videogame history, that in a parallel universe is filled by some crazy stuff that we'll never be able to enjoy here on Earth 616.

The Steam Deck looks cool I guess, and I'm sure there's at least 5 people out there who genuinely love their Steam controller but I think gamers would be better served If Valve remembered why they were so revered to begin with.

And Alyx was made to sell VR gear, it doesn't count.

[Nx Machina]

引用自 Tito Shivan：

And there's also loads of people who joined in way after the HL franchise released and their gaming milestones are all more modern titles.

Exactly. Playing from release gives you perspective and why Half Life 3 will never live up to "player" hype.

[FOXDUDE69]

引用自 Nx Machina：

Exactly. Playing from release gives you perspective and why Half Life 3 will never live up to "player" hype.

There's no way of knowing how well Half-Life 3 would be received by the gaming masses without Valve making it first, but there's also no reason to assume that it wouldn't be a colossal hit.

We can safely assume it would benefit greatly from the name recognition alone and the free marketing it would get, so unless Valve is utterly incapable of delivering a good single player game anymore, it's extremely hard to imagine it would flop.

[Tito Shivan]

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

There's no way of knowing how well Half-Life 3 would be received by the gaming masses without Valve making it first, but there's also no reason to assume that it wouldn't be a colossal hit.

Businesses are very risk averse. And 'making it first' takes a lot of time and money.
And let's not forget Valve right now comes from two consecutive flops (Artifact & Dota Underlords) and a niche success (Alyx, only for VR)

[FOXDUDE69]

引用自 Tito Shivan：

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

There's no way of knowing how well Half-Life 3 would be received by the gaming masses without Valve making it first, but there's also no reason to assume that it wouldn't be a colossal hit.

Businesses are very risk averse. And 'making it first' takes a lot of time and money.
And let's not forget Valve right now comes from two consecutive flops (Artifact & Dota Underlords) and a niche success (Alyx, only for VR)

Okay, lemme break this apart and address each point separately.

A sequel to an already established and well loved IP is probably one of the lowest risks you can take in the gaming industry. Evidenced by the sea of high budget AAA sequels that make a stupid amount of profit even when they preform "bellow expectations".

I dunno the details to why Artifact and Dota Underlords flopped but the esports market is like that, you are either a colossal hit or you completely fade into obscurity. Smite and Heroes of the Storm seem to be the exception to that rule.

Alyx was only a niche success because VR itself is a niche. Safe to say that it would have sold more if it was available for "regular" PC.

[Start_Running]

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

This reminds me of a passage from the Good Book.

You cannot separate fools from their foolishness, even though you grind them like grain with mortar and pestle. - Proverbs 27:22

True. But we refuse to give up on you Foxdude. :-)

引用自 Nx Machina：

引用自 Tito Shivan：

For a darned lot of Steam users the Half Life doesn't have the significance than it had almost two decades ago.

I bought Half Life on release and also Half Life 2 and i have zero interest in Half Life 3 simply because it is so overhyped.

Half Life 2 was actaull a step back I think. HL 1 had some nice level design in the early third of the game. Basically up until waste disposal.

For the second third the map design was okay but it felt 'video gamey'.
And the entire xen section was just ...yargh
HL2 Felt like a vdeo game all the way through in terms of its maps, challenges, and gameplay. So bassically hl2 was the mediocre part of Hl1

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

引用自 Nx Machina：

Exactly. Playing from release gives you perspective and why Half Life 3 will never live up to "player" hype.

There's no way of knowing how well Half-Life 3 would be received by the gaming masses without Valve making it first, but there's also no reason to assume that it wouldn't be a colossal hit.

Wrong. We know exactly how well it'd be received because we've seen similar thiongs happen in music, in, literature, in film, and in televsiion. Heck even from other games. How much were people anticipating the fourth(fifth) duke nukem game. And look how that turned out.

And the fact that as shown, a lot of the hype is based around a mythical constuct that never existed. Like HL and HL2 were some spectacular ground breaking innovators of game design. Which they really weren't.

WIll there be other games set in the HL Multiverse? More than likely. I mean we have ALyx. We have the Portal Games. And there will likely be others.

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

We can safely assume it would benefit greatly from the name recognition alone and the free marketing it would get, so unless Valve is utterly incapable of delivering a good single player game anymore, it's extremely hard to imagine it would flop.

Would it sell well, yes. But likely diminish the name in the priocess. I mean look at the recent starwars entries...

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

引用自 Tito Shivan：

Businesses are very risk averse. And 'making it first' takes a lot of time and money.
And let's not forget Valve right now comes from two consecutive flops (Artifact & Dota Underlords) and a niche success (Alyx, only for VR)

Okay, lemme break this apart and address each point separately.

A sequel to an already established and well loved IP is probably one of the lowest risks you can take in the gaming industry

Incorrect It's one of the biggest risks and challenges in gaming and any creative industry. There's a thing called the Sequel Curse that was pretty strongly considered back in the day (before studios tried to stretch even the thinnest concept into a trilogy).

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

Evidenced by the sea of high budget AAA sequels that make a stupid amount of profit even when they preform "bellow expectations".

It's not a sea. The sea would be the corpses of all those game franchaises that died with their second entry.

YOu don't hear about them because well. the industry tends to forget its dead quickly.

Also I wouldn't cakll Underlords a flop so much as the fad around auto battlers died down.

A good sequel will be what makes a franchaise. a mediocre or bad sequel will bury it in a shallow grave.



I dunno the details to why Artifact and Dota Underlords flopped but the esports market is like that, you are either a colossal hit or you completely fade into obscurity. Smite and Heroes of the Storm seem to be the exception to that rule.

Alyx was only a niche success because VR itself is a niche. Safe to say that it would have sold more if it was available for "regular" PC. [/quote]

[FOXDUDE69]

引用自 Start_Running：

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

We can safely assume it would benefit greatly from the name recognition alone and the free marketing it would get, so unless Valve is utterly incapable of delivering a good single player game anymore, it's extremely hard to imagine it would flop.

Would it sell well, yes. But likely diminish the name in the priocess. I mean look at the recent starwars entries...

Look at the success of the recent Resident Evil entries. The recent DOOM entries.
For every example of a bad sequel, I could match it with the example of a well received, profitable sequel that strengthened the value of the IP. It's very hard to screw up a sequel to a beloved IP if you have money, respect the history of the IP and take your time to deliver a good, fun, polished game.

[Start_Running]

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

引用自 Start_Running：

Would it sell well, yes. But likely diminish the name in the priocess. I mean look at the recent starwars entries...

Look at the success of the recent Resident Evil entries. The recent DOOM entries.

Yeah but it took a few years of downtime fior both those series to recover from their respective bad entries.

As said, Valve likely won't be doing HL3 until they have Source Engine 3. SImple as that. Though I do like how you've stopped ♥♥♥♥♥ footing around that all you want is games with 3 in the name as opposed to Valve making games. The honesty is refreshing.

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

For every example of a bad sequel, I could match it with the example of a well received, profitable sequel that strengthened the value of the IP.

ANd you'd run out of games before I did.
Because you're basically focusing on big tent pole franchaises , And surprise Valve hjas already done a recent sequel entry in the HL franchaise. Its the one you keep dismissing. Alyx.

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

It's very hard to screw up a sequel to a beloved IP

Tell that to invisible war. IN fact again it's incredibly easy. You only remember the games that managed to go past 2 , not the games that died at 2 or 3.

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

if you have money, respect the history of the IP and take your time to deliver a good, fun, polished game.

And even that sometimes isn't enough. And respect the History? HL doesn't have much of a history to respect, I mean ironically HL is one of the few series where its own lore allows for the disregard of History :p

[FOXDUDE69]

Love it when people break my sentence in half to be able to argue against the first part without the context provided in the second.

[Start_Running]

引用自 FOXDUDE69：

Love it when people break my sentence in half to be able to argue against the first part without the context provided in the second.

Well your statements do tend tio be dense with innacuracies. Maybe if you limited yourself to one per sentence.

[Black Blade]

I will comment to all of it.. but

And Alyx was made to sell VR gear, it doesn't count.

How dose that work? its a full game, and was made more likely as Valve guys wanted to do something with there new system (VR)
The Lab, I can understand, same with Apacher Hands Lab
But Alyx is a full game it shuld count, I mean will we not count a game if it dose not fit a gender of game you like or where dose it count or not?
Also what about Artifact?

On any case Valve always been a slow slow relaser of games, and without them anoncing stuff before they really get close to the end, they may be working on a bunch of games and scrapping them

I dont think Valve stop making games, they just talk about it as much
to point they said we get 3 VR games, we got Alyx... and thats it? so they may have more games going or maybe they scrap them, so or so they are working I belive

[Start_Running]

引用自 Black Blade：

On any case Valve always been a slow slow relaser of games, and without them anoncing stuff before they really get close to the end, they may be working on a bunch of games and scrapping them

Yeah he seems to miss that VAlve typically doesn't announce games before they're like 75% done. Abnd most ideas for games tend to die before the 50% mark.. You can have an idea that *sounds* fun on paper, but in practice...not so fun.

This is kinda the norm for game development. Which is why studios tend to die out. Because quite simply, every successful game has to pay for itself and the failed projects they put time and money into, and the completed games that did do well.

[Engineer]

We're locking this thread as it has devolved into non-productive argument. Thanks for your understanding.