• erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      That’s the thing, Valve is in this position because they have the Steam cash cow. Other video games company can’t do the same.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        MS still turned over $40 billion in profit last year. They just need to turn over more apparently this year. Fucking capitalism.

        • GoodbyeBlueMonday@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Alyx was incredible though! Way more than a tech demo (though I get the argument that it was a test to see if folks would pick up a VR Half-life 3). I played it on a cheap, used WMR headset and an old PC that could barely keep up, and it still stays in my top five videogaming experiences.

          It’s a great example to bring up though, because I’d bet it wouldn’t have been made if the studio was only chasing money instead of trying to innovate.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            It was absolutely a tech demo. All Valve games were tech demos of one sort or another. The problem with that model is, if Valve doesn’t have some new tech to show off, there’s no Half-Life sequel. I actually predicted the we would only get another Half-Life game when Valve finally decided to get into VR about two years before they did. What I didn’t predict was that it would be VR Only or that it would be a prequel that reconned the timeline.

            Valve has a fuck around with money that they could just let the devs make games on their own schedule, but instead Marc Laidlaw left the company and the fans have had to pick up the story lines and world. Honestly, Entropy Zero is a better game then Half-Life 2. Really take a moment to think about the weapons and combat in HL2. The maps weren’t designed with the enemy AI in mind, so many encounters just have you and them shooting at each other in empty rooms and hallways. So much focus was on the Gravity Gun, so all the other weapons save the Crossbow and Rocket Launcher were boring. Hell, why did they get rid of the mode switch on the Rocket Launcher? You have to take fire to your face if you want to hit anything with it.

            • TopRamenBinLaden
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Considering that Entropy Zero came out about 13 years after Half Life 2, I would hope it was better. It doesn’t really seem fair to compare the two. They were developed in different times, with different tech, and different games to draw inspiration from. That’s not to mention that Entropy Zero is a mod built on top of Half Life 2, and requires HL2s code to even run in the first place.

              • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Entropy Zero uses the same engine as HL2, which is why I used it as an example. I think HL1 is a better game then HL2 for the same reasons EZ is better then HL2. Better weapons and better enemy engagements. Whenever I do a franchise replay, the HL2 stuff is always a drag and I end up skipping the HL2 stuff eventually. Seriously, episode 2 has terrible driving in it. Other games had that figured out by then.

                • TopRamenBinLaden
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I see, I forgot it was a mod. Those are fair points for sure. I kind of like the pacing better in Half Life 1, myself.