3 ms·

Writing is re-writing, nobody was arguing against that. It's pretty common to go through twelve or more drafts, with the exception of King, whose wild ass gets

Writing is re-writing, nobody was arguing against that. It's pretty common to go through twelve or more drafts, with the exception of King, whose wild ass gets it done in two drafts. It's the scale of GoT that's remarkable, and the reason it's taking so long. It's not just some stupid epic wizard quest - it's 150 character weaving into eachother, and it's well done. Since Source was released, GRRM actually released like 16 books, three of those were GoT, and he also did a bunch of TV stuff. And now a game, too. Nobody was arguing that half-life wasn't cool, I was arguing that the source guys can't ship games. They acquired everything post orangebox.

ryacko 7y ago
I am just arguing that Valve is more interested in making games than releasing them. I don't disagree with you, but the closest historical parallel is Howard Hughes' Hell's Angels.
- yoshibb 7y ago
  While we study and mine cinema for launching off points - we do so knowing why we do so. The threads are timeless, but the execution was a thing of the time, much like HL. Let's compare Hughes to Valve for some reason. Hughes released at least 11 films - none of which were acquired. If he had only Scarface under his belt, he would be just another in a long line of shameful one hit wonders--those who accidentally stumble upon a hit without the skills to back it up--who consequently are unable to create anything else of substance. It's been fifteen years, everything post-orangebox was acquired.
  - ryacko 7y ago
    To put this in another way, Valve likely has spent millions developing the next Half Life game, and they will spent millions more. They are paying employee salaries, after all. I wouldn't be too surprised if Valve will have spent $50 million on Half Life 3 at the point of release.
    - yoshibb 7y ago
      Fanboying is how we're going to get Disney-Activision-Valve. They acquired titles and they automated profits. So pretty much the private version of a public company. Nothing at all to be proud of--especially after this horrible decade of PC gaming where indie teams had to pick up the slack with asset flips and low budget shitters. Console sales are now at an all time high. We ran out of comparisons and only have their own mediocrity to examine at this point, but we could go the route of comparing them to failed companies who refused to adapt, like "NAH WE'RE GOOD" Blockbuster. WePlay, Epic, Microsoft, Blizzard, Uplay. Less than a 1/4 of the 100 million PC gamers are on steam during peak western hours. The monopoly platform model is out with WePlay entering the arena, everyone else realized this and is prepared to hit hard with the 2020 releases. Valve doesn't have much time to turn it around, and with how frugal they've been with development, I'd have a hard time believing that they will float the company once the steam money is compromised. They have no current catalog, so they are already starting miles behind--coupled with the fact that their s2 guys wont play well with others--nothing short of a purge and a return to top down will save them.

ryacko 7y ago

I am just arguing that Valve is more interested in making games than releasing them. I don't disagree with you, but the closest historical parallel is Howard Hughes' Hell's Angels.

yoshibb 7y ago
While we study and mine cinema for launching off points - we do so knowing why we do so. The threads are timeless, but the execution was a thing of the time, much like HL. Let's compare Hughes to Valve for some reason. Hughes released at least 11 films - none of which were acquired. If he had only Scarface under his belt, he would be just another in a long line of shameful one hit wonders--those who accidentally stumble upon a hit without the skills to back it up--who consequently are unable to create anything else of substance. It's been fifteen years, everything post-orangebox was acquired.
- ryacko 7y ago
  To put this in another way, Valve likely has spent millions developing the next Half Life game, and they will spent millions more. They are paying employee salaries, after all. I wouldn't be too surprised if Valve will have spent $50 million on Half Life 3 at the point of release.
  - yoshibb 7y ago
    Fanboying is how we're going to get Disney-Activision-Valve. They acquired titles and they automated profits. So pretty much the private version of a public company. Nothing at all to be proud of--especially after this horrible decade of PC gaming where indie teams had to pick up the slack with asset flips and low budget shitters. Console sales are now at an all time high. We ran out of comparisons and only have their own mediocrity to examine at this point, but we could go the route of comparing them to failed companies who refused to adapt, like "NAH WE'RE GOOD" Blockbuster. WePlay, Epic, Microsoft, Blizzard, Uplay. Less than a 1/4 of the 100 million PC gamers are on steam during peak western hours. The monopoly platform model is out with WePlay entering the arena, everyone else realized this and is prepared to hit hard with the 2020 releases. Valve doesn't have much time to turn it around, and with how frugal they've been with development, I'd have a hard time believing that they will float the company once the steam money is compromised. They have no current catalog, so they are already starting miles behind--coupled with the fact that their s2 guys wont play well with others--nothing short of a purge and a return to top down will save them.