HL3

[Tom]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=688589

 

[Moriath]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=688589

Congratulations you broke it! Please wait while we work on.

 

[Raven]

/sexwee

 

[chipper]

i just cried tears of joy

 

[Zenith.UK]

For those of use who can't see it, what is it?
Please?

Just got it to load.
I feel so much better about the world.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I guess one can finally truly say;

Half-life 3 confirmed.

 

[pikeh]

nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnghhhhh

 

[Scouse]

Meh.

When they release game details I'll get excited.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Had to make it

 

[TdC]

Meh.

When they release game details I'll get excited.

omg I am turning in to Scouse 0o

 

[caLLous]

It's exciting because it's finally confirmation that it exists or is about to exist. It's not an indication of how far along it is so it could be years away still. When I see gameplay videos and/or a set-in-stone release date, then the fapping shall commence.

 

[Scouse]

Did anyone really doubt that it would exist at some point?

Does anyone think that Valve wouldn't capitalise on one of the most lucrative franchises in videogame history?

Meh. Show me the vids

 

[old.Tohtori]

It's also the riskiest game since...well...i'd say ever. The expectations from people are higher then a motherf*cker.

 

[Scouse]

It's also the riskiest game since...well...i'd say ever. The expectations from people are higher then a motherf*cker.

Should they just not bother because they're too scared?

Risk of disappointing people vs Risk of no cash whatsoever


...no risk at all

 

[Raven]

Have valve ever made a bad game though?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Should they just not bother because they're too scared?

Risk of disappointing people vs Risk of no cash whatsoever

...no risk at all

Valve don't need HL3 in any shape or form and they've proven they're not in it just for* the money, there's a lot of risk for them as it could cripple the franchise, or even lose them a good chunk of their fans. Risky doesn't mean shouldn't do, but you saying "did anyone doubt it would exist" then yes. I sure as hell wouldn't want to design HL3.

Even in business terms a sucky HL3 would cost them more cash then no HL3 at all.

*had to add "just" in there before you go "lol all companies do it for moneys!"

Have valve ever made a bad game though?

Kind of my point. I don't think they have, but HL3 can chance those kind of views faster then EA went from cool games to sucky mc suckerson.

 

[Scouse]

cripple the franchise

Not releasing a game, pretty damn soon, is going to cripple the franchise. There is no franchise unless they release.

lose them a good chunk of their fans.

It's bound to lose them a good chunk of fanbois. There's no way HL3 can live up to some people's expectations - but that's just tough. When you've done so well previously then this is to be totally expected.

Even in business terms a sucky HL3 would cost them more cash then no HL3 at all

How? They'll definitiely make enough through presales alone to cover dev costs. I can't think of anyone who's going to "wait for the reviews". We're all going to buy it.

Only fucking idiots would boycott valve if they turn out a shit HL3. Or even a shit L4D3. And they've still got the best part of the online distribution market sewn up either way - so they're hardly going to go down the pan.

Reputation can go down - but something amazing would have to happen to the distribution side of the market if valve were to be financially threatened.

EA went from cool games to sucky mc suckerson.

Not because of shit games - but because of shit business practices. Valve is doing the exact opposite of EA. And they get kudos for that.

EA could have (and has) released a load of shit games - and people don't care that much. Fuck your customers over in other ways tho? I won't buy an EA game again. But it's not because I've bought a few pups off them in my time...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Missing the point there a bit, which is that it's never risk free to develop a game and this particular title has added risk due to expectations.

A company lives and dies by it's last title, just a fact.

 

[Scouse]

A company lives and dies by it's last title, just a fact.

Rubbish.

Small companies, yep. Not behemoths like Valve.

 

[DaGaffer]

...and they've proven they're not in it just for* the money

LOL! WTF?

 

[Gwadien]

A company lives and dies by it's last title, just a fact.

Hahaha, why haven't EA melted into the ground then?

 

[Poag]

I read on reddit, that the patent has to be completed within 6 months, as in released. Or they have to extend it.


6 months from date of issue?

April 1st 2014.


Still, hopefull

 

[old.Tohtori]

LOL! WTF?

I think the sentence was in english.

Hahaha, why haven't EA melted into the ground then?

Which EA title would you be referring to that was a failure? Battlefield perhaps?

Rubbish.

Small companies, yep. Not behemoths like Valve.

So you're claiming that if, for example, GTA V was a mediocre game at best, it wouldn't affect their future in any meaningful way? If you thought GTA V was sh*t, you'd still buy GTA 6 with a smile?

 

[Tom]

It won't be shit. This is Valve, who regularly delay games they're making because they don't like them. Valve, who patch and support games years after they're released, and regularly, too.

HL3 has taken this long because Valve are working on Source 2. HL3 will be another excellent release by a company with a proven track record of supporting the PC gaming industry. I mean, shit, look at Portal 2. It's fucking brilliant.

 

[Raven]

so you're claiming that if, for example, GTA V was a mediocre game at best, it wouldn't affect their future in any meaningful way? If you thought GTA V was sh*t, you'd still buy GTA 6 with a smile?

A lot of people would, yes. and FYI GTA5 creamed its development costs in pre-review pre-orders alone.

As for Valve not being in it for the money, rubbish. OFC they are in it for the money. They are just better at getting that money by giving the consumer what they want...or at least making the consumer think they are getting what they want.

Personally they provide me with exactly what I want, yes I may pay a bit more over the odds than say Amazon or whatever but I pay that premium for the game management side of things, more so now with cloud saves. Install and uninstall at my leisure. Games auto updating etc. I have no doubt that they really like my money and would prefer me to wang more their way..

 

[old.Tohtori]

It won't be shit. This is Valve, who regularly delay games they're making because they don't like them. Valve, who patch and support games years after they're released, and regularly, too.

HL3 has taken this long because Valve are working on Source 2. HL3 will be another excellent release by a company with a proven track record of supporting the PC gaming industry. I mean, shit, look at Portal 2. It's fucking brilliant.

Yeah i personally have no doubts about it.

A lot of people would, yes. and FYI GTA5 creamed its development costs in pre-review pre-orders alone.

Yes it did, but if GTA 5 was sh*t, number 6 wouldn't do nearly as well. I'm just telling Scouse that a bad product will do harm in the long run and it's not a case of no risk.

 

[Scouse]

I echo Tom's assessment.

So you're claiming that if, for example, GTA V was a mediocre game at best, it wouldn't affect their future in any meaningful way? If you thought GTA V was sh*t, you'd still buy GTA 6 with a smile?

Surprise surprise. You're changing your argument there Toht. You said:

A company lives and dies by it's last title, just a fact.

So, no. If GTA V was mediocre at best Rockstar wouldn't die because they're now too rich to die from one failure and have built up too much of a reputation to lose all their paying customers because of one fail.

People would still buy GTA6. With a little trepidation - but they've bought all the other games with the ups and downs. Just like people who buy FIFA or PES knowing that some of them are going to be shit.

If HL3 was fail people would still buy HL4 and L4D3. Valve would carry on. Consumers aren't stupid enough to think that "amazing" is something that can be production-lined.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Not changing my argument, you just take everything way too literally and with that i'm done, no interest in making it a 3 page argument with you.

 

[Scouse]

Not changing my argument, you just take everything way too literally

Or you just keep on stating things very innacurately, changing the bulk of your meaning later on, and people react to that?

But yep. Done

 

[TdC]

lame. I just settled down with some poppy corns