Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Source
Funny thing is, like Titanfall and Titanfall 2, Apex Legends also used the heavily modified version of the Source engine under the Titanfall engine.
And that's what Valve has available.
Why should Valve make a engine according to your values exactly? Why don't you make a non-proprietary engine. I heard there's no better time, and that means there's no better time to learn first hand how most armchair ideas aren't well thought out or reasonable.
Not every time you think someone slips on a banana peel is Valve's role to swoop in and capitalize on that. Most of the time it's just wild-eyed fantasy from people who can do nothing but have reactionary ideas.
I mean lets not forget it'll take years to develop a competitive engine. And do you really think Unity is dead, or that their PR mess won't be resolved in a couple of months? Don't kid yourself. If it's something Valve wants to do they will, and Valve ain't going to do it on a timeline of trying to capitalize on hoping Unity completely implodes or something else harebrained.
It seems this was the original intent of Source and its relation to Steam. I wish it would have received enough attention to be on par with other modern engines.