Something the author didn't address in the article is opportunity cost. It might be that the employee supply at Valve is limited, and that as a for profit compa

Something the author didn't address in the article is opportunity cost. It might be that the employee supply at Valve is limited, and that as a for profit company, it has to allocate this limited resource the most profitable way. Making 50 employees work on HL3 might get you $100M in profit, but why would you do that if you can make $150M more on hats with the very same team?