8 ms·

It's ridiculous how this article is displaying Valve's strength as a failure. Valve is exactly the poster boy of a successful agile organic company that is run

It's ridiculous how this article is displaying Valve's strength as a failure. Valve is exactly the poster boy of a successful agile organic company that is run by software engineers. A company able to reinvent itself to meet demands. They have been pioneering the concepts of the app store and micro-purchases making it the most profitable company per employee. Things that Apple and Google get applauded for. What's amazing is that those profits didn't come from the demands of profit seeking shareholders. It came from the demands of the people, the software engineers, themselves who work at the company. So they stopped producing games. So what? Valve is probably in the most optimal position to quickly reinvent itself yet again if new demands and opportunities arise. This article is an attack on software engineers. Where non-engineers try to swoop in and take their power positions because they "know" better what a company should be doing. This is where engineers get pushed down in the power chain. It's exactly how great products get killed.

sametmax 7y ago
I'll also add, as a regular dota player, that they don't just "get rent" out of it. First, the game is free to play and very deep as-is. There is no missing feature or add-on to pay for in order to have the full game experience, and the experience is amazing. Second, they update it every month and managed to keep it interesting through the years. It's an incredible feat. In the end, it's one of the few places where I'm more than happy to pay micro transactions for virtual hats and idiotic gimmics. Because they do a hell of a job. Of course I would love a portal 3. But I'm not disapointed of what they are doing right now. They still rock.
- Kelteseth 7y ago
  I can second this. The Dota team at Valve managed to continuously deliver great content in form of updates and tournaments.
- wocram 7y ago
  I mostly agree with you, but DotA plus is a shift towards subtly pay-to-win features. It's always surprising when a subscription lapses and I find out something is a DotA plus feature and not just part of the game.
  - sametmax 7y ago
    I have dota plus. It doesn't give you any advantage on the current game. It merely lets you learn more about the current meta on the long run, faster than keeping up with all youtubers. Even pick stats and suggestions will not make you win more. It just teaches you. Teaching is not unfair in my book, and worth money so I find it a very well balanced paid feature. I played LOL before, and their rune and pick system is definitely pay to win. All in all, given the size of dota, I'm actually amazed that so much of it is free. I played it years before spending a cent, and wondered how they could be sustainable.
    - de_watcher 7y ago
      > I have dota plus. It doesn't give you any advantage on the current game. ranked roles
  - crsv 7y ago
    Also a dota player, D+ doesn't give you any advantage. I saw someone down thread claiming ranked roles is P2Win which is just absolutely ridiculous.
- butteroverflow 7y ago
  Hell, they still seem to support the original Half-Life. According to the file metadata, the hl binary on my machine has been rebuilt about a month ago. That makes it 20 years; better than Windows.
  - cprecioso 7y ago
    IIRC, Steam's DRM modifies binaries on disk to inextricably link them to the user account. That might be the reason for the recent modified timestamp if you installed it recently, not an update to the original binary.
    - theoctopus 7y ago
      There was a security fix update in April: https://steamcommunity.com/games/70/announcements/detail/3751970741595192232 https://steamcommunity.com/games/70/announcements/detail/375...
- de_watcher 7y ago
  > There is no missing feature or add-on to pay for in order to have the full game experience Don't start me about the ranked roles in DotaPlus.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - sametmax 7y ago
    TIL, I learned that the RR queue is the same as the normal ranked one. Ouch...
- bliblah 7y ago
  To be fair, Dota hasn't changed that much since W3 Mod days in terms of overall gameplay, yes there are talents and the map has changed but it's still 5 v 5 , 3 lanes, and you need to destroy the ancient. The only thing that has radically changed since Icefrog joined Valve is how it was monetized by using the Marketplace and cosmetics to rake in huge profits. I would argue that the "gameplay" part is due largely to Icefrog's influence and philosophy regarding hero designs and reccurring patches. IMO the game has never been more enjoyable and while I haven't gotten a battle pass since 2016 due to the fact that they have gotten too expensive with little value, this year's is actually really tempting with the new map skin, arcanas, persona, and announcer pack.
dave7 7y ago
This article is a fairly standard hit-piece, of which there are many that follow the basic form: Valve Bad; Epic good! There has been an incredible quantity of these PR efforts over the last 6 months as Epic has tried to push that narrative in to the public conscious (and has managed to do so, I would expect this article is a result of those efforts rather than directly paid spin). However, it's still the same regurgitated untrue nonsense points from Epic PR we see everywhere else: Steam lazy, makes no games. Not Epic! Massive hit Fortnite! Steam does nothing to validate quality, noble indie developers "drowned in a sea of dreck" - not like Epic's hand-curated marketplace! Standard "child with parent's credit card" bogeyman evoked regarding Valve, with it's "abusive capitalist mindset" Valve is a "monopolist platform" (it is not). Valve's take is a "substantial cut" - not like Epic, which offers "a generous split". And so on. Of all these, the one that riles me up the most is the doublespeak rewriting of the meaning of the work "monopoly". Valve is not in any way shape or form a monopoly. Epic is literally purchasing exclusive monopoly distribution rights for numerous games, and then raising prices of them. I suppose this won't be the last "Steam Bad; Epic Good" nonsense I see as E3 fast approaches. I am looking forward to the Epic Games sponsored PC Gaming Show!
SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
> So they stopped producing games. So what? As someone who has closely followed the Half-Life series since the very first game way back in 1998, I have to say that I found this throwaway comment pretty depressing. But of course you're right, it's their company to run as they please and they don't owe us anything. That said, it would be nice to wrap up the story for those of us who are (were?) so heavily invested in it. I imagine they'd make a huge amount of money out of it, too.
- bartimus 7y ago
  With an agile company nothing is definitive. It's just that at this point in time it's not the thing they're working on.
user17843 7y ago
You think the decision to make a fail game like Artifact with the main goal of getting as much money as possible was a software engineer decision?
- pawelmurias 7y ago
  Yes, the engineers their seems to be responsible for picking something that makes as much money as possible to work on.
  - user17843 7y ago
    If that's the case they would be extremely short-sighted, as their strategy failed and the game is dead now. But we all know that financial decisions aren't being made by engineers.
atc 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Pournelle#Pournelle's_iron_law_of_bureaucracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Pournelle#Pournelle's_ir...
yoshibb 7y ago
The engineers have a pretty bad creative track record, and really have no idea what's in right now. Like for example the decision to pick up in the valley of the gods. Why? Women/lgbt are playing hero shooters, we don't need some bs exploration game. Fact is: engineers refuse to believe that creatives spent the same staggering amount of time honing their skills - it's just inconvenient because that means engineers possess about as much creativity as we do oop skills. That is a deep chasm. And it shows, pick a metric. They have had a near 0% success rate in creating new games outside the Orange box era. Which is incredibly unfortunate, because these guys think because they can build engines/hw they can make good art because it doesn't involve math, so easy. I see Activision valve in the decade if they don't make some pretty radical changes in the near future.
- bartimus 7y ago
  It's a common misconception the amount of creativity that is required to engineer a product. Engineers are the creatives! All the greatest game titles were designed by people with an engineering background. It was only later that some games got designed by artists using already existing game engines. The reason Valve isn't producing great games is not because they can't. It's because they don't want to.
  - yoshibb 7y ago
    All the greatest titles of the early 70s-2000s and were products of their times. The hardware and systems were limited, and the basic level writing and direction matched the limited graphics. Fact is: engineers refuse to believe that creatives spent the same staggering amount of time honing their skills - it's just inconvenient because that means engineers possess about as much creativity as we do oop skills. That is a deep chasm. And it shows, pick a metric. They have had a near 0% success rate in creating new games outside the Orange box era. Valve hasn't made any games 100% because their engineers aren't creatives. It's kinda like the one hit wonder phenomenon. It's common in creative fields, like when an artist accidentally stumbles on a style and finds success, only to never be able to 'create something as good as the original' because they never had the skills in the first place--while the skills they actually need to create consistently take a lifetime to hone--so as creatives, they fade to obscurity.

sametmax 7y ago

I'll also add, as a regular dota player, that they don't just "get rent" out of it. First, the game is free to play and very deep as-is. There is no missing feature or add-on to pay for in order to have the full game experience, and the experience is amazing. Second, they update it every month and managed to keep it interesting through the years. It's an incredible feat. In the end, it's one of the few places where I'm more than happy to pay micro transactions for virtual hats and idiotic gimmics. Because they do a hell of a job. Of course I would love a portal 3. But I'm not disapointed of what they are doing right now. They still rock.

Kelteseth 7y ago
I can second this. The Dota team at Valve managed to continuously deliver great content in form of updates and tournaments.
wocram 7y ago
I mostly agree with you, but DotA plus is a shift towards subtly pay-to-win features. It's always surprising when a subscription lapses and I find out something is a DotA plus feature and not just part of the game.
- sametmax 7y ago
  I have dota plus. It doesn't give you any advantage on the current game. It merely lets you learn more about the current meta on the long run, faster than keeping up with all youtubers. Even pick stats and suggestions will not make you win more. It just teaches you. Teaching is not unfair in my book, and worth money so I find it a very well balanced paid feature. I played LOL before, and their rune and pick system is definitely pay to win. All in all, given the size of dota, I'm actually amazed that so much of it is free. I played it years before spending a cent, and wondered how they could be sustainable.
  - de_watcher 7y ago
    > I have dota plus. It doesn't give you any advantage on the current game. ranked roles
- crsv 7y ago
  Also a dota player, D+ doesn't give you any advantage. I saw someone down thread claiming ranked roles is P2Win which is just absolutely ridiculous.
butteroverflow 7y ago
Hell, they still seem to support the original Half-Life. According to the file metadata, the hl binary on my machine has been rebuilt about a month ago. That makes it 20 years; better than Windows.
- cprecioso 7y ago
  IIRC, Steam's DRM modifies binaries on disk to inextricably link them to the user account. That might be the reason for the recent modified timestamp if you installed it recently, not an update to the original binary.
  - theoctopus 7y ago
    There was a security fix update in April: https://steamcommunity.com/games/70/announcements/detail/3751970741595192232 https://steamcommunity.com/games/70/announcements/detail/375...
de_watcher 7y ago
> There is no missing feature or add-on to pay for in order to have the full game experience Don't start me about the ranked roles in DotaPlus.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- sametmax 7y ago
  TIL, I learned that the RR queue is the same as the normal ranked one. Ouch...
bliblah 7y ago
To be fair, Dota hasn't changed that much since W3 Mod days in terms of overall gameplay, yes there are talents and the map has changed but it's still 5 v 5 , 3 lanes, and you need to destroy the ancient. The only thing that has radically changed since Icefrog joined Valve is how it was monetized by using the Marketplace and cosmetics to rake in huge profits. I would argue that the "gameplay" part is due largely to Icefrog's influence and philosophy regarding hero designs and reccurring patches. IMO the game has never been more enjoyable and while I haven't gotten a battle pass since 2016 due to the fact that they have gotten too expensive with little value, this year's is actually really tempting with the new map skin, arcanas, persona, and announcer pack.

dave7 7y ago

This article is a fairly standard hit-piece, of which there are many that follow the basic form: Valve Bad; Epic good! There has been an incredible quantity of these PR efforts over the last 6 months as Epic has tried to push that narrative in to the public conscious (and has managed to do so, I would expect this article is a result of those efforts rather than directly paid spin). However, it's still the same regurgitated untrue nonsense points from Epic PR we see everywhere else: Steam lazy, makes no games. Not Epic! Massive hit Fortnite! Steam does nothing to validate quality, noble indie developers "drowned in a sea of dreck" - not like Epic's hand-curated marketplace! Standard "child with parent's credit card" bogeyman evoked regarding Valve, with it's "abusive capitalist mindset" Valve is a "monopolist platform" (it is not). Valve's take is a "substantial cut" - not like Epic, which offers "a generous split". And so on. Of all these, the one that riles me up the most is the doublespeak rewriting of the meaning of the work "monopoly". Valve is not in any way shape or form a monopoly. Epic is literally purchasing exclusive monopoly distribution rights for numerous games, and then raising prices of them. I suppose this won't be the last "Steam Bad; Epic Good" nonsense I see as E3 fast approaches. I am looking forward to the Epic Games sponsored PC Gaming Show!

SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago

> So they stopped producing games. So what? As someone who has closely followed the Half-Life series since the very first game way back in 1998, I have to say that I found this throwaway comment pretty depressing. But of course you're right, it's their company to run as they please and they don't owe us anything. That said, it would be nice to wrap up the story for those of us who are (were?) so heavily invested in it. I imagine they'd make a huge amount of money out of it, too.

bartimus 7y ago
With an agile company nothing is definitive. It's just that at this point in time it's not the thing they're working on.

user17843 7y ago

You think the decision to make a fail game like Artifact with the main goal of getting as much money as possible was a software engineer decision?

pawelmurias 7y ago
Yes, the engineers their seems to be responsible for picking something that makes as much money as possible to work on.
- user17843 7y ago
  If that's the case they would be extremely short-sighted, as their strategy failed and the game is dead now. But we all know that financial decisions aren't being made by engineers.

atc 7y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Pournelle#Pournelle's_iron_law_of_bureaucracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Pournelle#Pournelle's_ir...

yoshibb 7y ago

The engineers have a pretty bad creative track record, and really have no idea what's in right now. Like for example the decision to pick up in the valley of the gods. Why? Women/lgbt are playing hero shooters, we don't need some bs exploration game. Fact is: engineers refuse to believe that creatives spent the same staggering amount of time honing their skills - it's just inconvenient because that means engineers possess about as much creativity as we do oop skills. That is a deep chasm. And it shows, pick a metric. They have had a near 0% success rate in creating new games outside the Orange box era. Which is incredibly unfortunate, because these guys think because they can build engines/hw they can make good art because it doesn't involve math, so easy. I see Activision valve in the decade if they don't make some pretty radical changes in the near future.

bartimus 7y ago
It's a common misconception the amount of creativity that is required to engineer a product. Engineers are the creatives! All the greatest game titles were designed by people with an engineering background. It was only later that some games got designed by artists using already existing game engines. The reason Valve isn't producing great games is not because they can't. It's because they don't want to.
- yoshibb 7y ago
  All the greatest titles of the early 70s-2000s and were products of their times. The hardware and systems were limited, and the basic level writing and direction matched the limited graphics. Fact is: engineers refuse to believe that creatives spent the same staggering amount of time honing their skills - it's just inconvenient because that means engineers possess about as much creativity as we do oop skills. That is a deep chasm. And it shows, pick a metric. They have had a near 0% success rate in creating new games outside the Orange box era. Valve hasn't made any games 100% because their engineers aren't creatives. It's kinda like the one hit wonder phenomenon. It's common in creative fields, like when an artist accidentally stumbles on a style and finds success, only to never be able to 'create something as good as the original' because they never had the skills in the first place--while the skills they actually need to create consistently take a lifetime to hone--so as creatives, they fade to obscurity.