MFer will probably die before Half-Life 3 is made.
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
82 points (93.6% liked)
Games
16750 readers
639 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 38 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
"It was easy to think about VR being a vehicle for Half-Life because that was a big technological innovation and kind of a core reason for that product's existence," said Valve engineer Brian Jacobson. "And I think one of the things we have internally tended to attach to the Half-Life IP is innovation. Gameplay innovation is often enabled by technological innovation. Clearly there was a ton in Half-Life 1 and 2.
"It's an interesting challenge moving forward to think about what that means for future Half-Life stuff, for sure," Jacobson added.
Fuck. That.
If your 'innovation' requires nonstandard and expensive hardware, create a new franchise for it.
Don't fucking lock out people who played previous games on run-of-the-mill computer.
They made a pretty big promise in Alyx, which he acknowledged in the documentary. It's also been about 5 years since Alyx was announced and released around the Game Awards, so given that promise that they made 5 years ago, maybe this year is the year.
When is this guy going to start wearing a turtle neck? Yeah, he's been capitalizing alright, enough to own 1 billion dollars worth of mega yatchs.
How about he promises to stop raping the industry with his buddies at Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.
Nuclear waste, bury in the desert for 10,000 years level take.
"Simp squad, UNITE!
Hurry guys, we have to protect daddy Gaben. This heretic must know how shit his opinion is. Be sure to be clever! We know its actually impossible to defend billionaires with logic so just insult the comment itself!"
Imagine defending a man that spends 100 million a year on yatch maintenance.
30% of all the money you spend on games goes directly to Gabens Greed Fund, and you clap. Gross.
Bold move, saying Valve isn't the only company in the whole world that actually loves their customers! ~~Reddit~~ Lemmy hive mind is incapable of accepting such a thought.
Would you ever say the same thing if I was being critical of Bezos or Musk.
The fact is Steam is the only company that benefits from an army of simps ready to defend Gaben at the slightest hint of negativity.
This article is literally a puff piece.
Are you sure I'm the one part of the hive mind, with my 36 downvotes? Your comment is very ironic.
The fact is Steam is the only company that benefits from an army of simps ready to defend Gaben at the slightest hint of negativity.
Well yeah it'd be weird to defend gaben against allegations at a different company.
Oh, did you mean that gaben is the only person who has a weirdly parasocial fan base? That's demonstrably not true.
Eh, I guess you misunderstood. I was calling out the downvoters, not you.
Ahhhhh, I get it, sorry I misunderstood. It's very rare I get comments actually agreeing with me on the subject.
What would we do without them? Use FUCKING Epic?! Lmao
With Valve and Steam? You would be paying for online multiplayer.
Atleast there would be a offline option with that. If online multiplayer was paid.
Steam itself has an offline mode, even if they sell online-only games. I use it pretty often.
You can pay for online multiplayer and not have an offline option on consoles. There's no reason to believe that paying for it would make more games playable offline.
without them you would probably still own the games you paid for
Steam is pretty much the only thing that stopped the Microsoft Store.
If that had happened, you probably couldn't even run games anymore on windows unless they were installed through the Microsoft store. Mods would be dead, and we would be in the same, but worse situation.
Hell, maybe you couldn't even buy games, but had to buy "game subscriptions" like game pass on xbox
Microsoft now installs games in an unprotected directory because people were so annoyed they couldn't use the mods made for other storefronts.
You don't remember pre-Steam then, because it was already headed down this path. Piracy and used copies have been the boogieman for a long time, and doing anything they can to prevent both was always the natural destination of the industry, unless more people start shopping on GOG.
You don’t remember pre-Steam
Do you? pre-steam you would install games and play them outside steam
Everyone was experimenting with their own lousy DRM, including those that had activation limits and would require a phone call to reset them.
Yea, right. It would've been another platform to capitalize on the internet becoming more available and digital distribution becoming viable.
You don't need any third party proprietary launcher to run software
Don't be naïve. As long as greed is enabled in our society this or worse would've always been the outcome. Or do you think other companies would've slept on the opportunity?
Are you using lemmy through a third party proprietary launcher?
"Daddy Gaben can do the bad thing because he was first to do it, heehee"
The fact is we need new regulations and laws but the government will never act if bootlickers like you are the majority.
Stop defending billionaires that are actively robbing you.
Nice strawmen you got there. Where the fuck did you see me defend a billionaire?!
I am just being realistic here. Our current society enables greed and greed would've always led to this situation or worse. We need to change the system fundamentally to change that.
You are not being realistic you are being stupid. You are indeed defending a evil corporation and a billionare with a fleet of mega yachts by stating that their work is necessary. They are needed for what? For a long time before they rolled in and started misleading kids tossing money in marketing you didn't need a third party proprietary launcher to run software and you still don't need it now.
Where did I say they are necessary? Where did I say you need a proprietary third party launcher?
What other statements do you want to put in my mouth?
The original comment was that without them you would probably still own the games you paid for and you argued that if not them someone else would have do the same thus giving the idea like others have expressed here that steam is somewhat fine where it is.
Well you are wrong. I am not saying that this situation is fine. I am saying that it is not the individual company that is the main problem but the system that enables them to begin with.
Just dismantling valve is not a long term solution. It's short sighted. Without them there would be others in their footsteps. One needs to change the system to change that. Give companies opportunities and they will exploit them. I actually agree with the above comment that legislation / regulation is a solution to this problem.
That is why I am pissed off that I am called stupid and bootlicker. That is not a good way to discuss things and especially not a good way to get to an understanding.
And yes I do think that there is a high chance other big tech companies would've done worse than valve. Which is not a great endorsement for them to be clear.
I am saying that it is not the individual company that is the main problem but the system that enables them to begin with.
They are the company who pioneered this shit, back in the day they had almost 0 competitors. There's no law forcing you to use steam. What you are saying is something among the lines that without microsoft some one else would be in charge of a proprietary os.