7 ms·

I heard lack of effective management structure was a far worse consequence of Valve's unusual structure. Heard influence became based on connections and favors,

I heard lack of effective management structure was a far worse consequence of Valve's unusual structure. Heard influence became based on connections and favors, not good results or ideas. Heard many good projects died, even ones that would make sense to a third grader (HL3 L4D3). Hearsay but its all over internet if you're curious

denkmoon 6y ago
People talk a lot of shit about Valve without having a clue, a consequence of their secrecy and their position as a premier game developer. I wouldn't trust anything that is said about Valve that didn't come from someone who has worked there. Tyler McVicker/Valve "News" Network is a major component of this. His interviews with Valve are great. His speculation is trash.
- akhilcacharya 6y ago
  Wasn’t his Alyx speculation on point?
  - ehsankia 6y ago
    To be fair every broken clock will be right twice a day. He throws out a lot of stuff, so of course some will be right sometimes.
- bllguo 6y ago
  a lot of these comments about valve stem from the somewhat infamous tweets of a former valve dev, though here's the first link i found https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless-industry-politics/ https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless...
  - neuronic 6y ago
    Yea but thats still ONE guy who might be bitter for one reason or another. It's hard to get an objective look at Valve like this. What we get is utterly filtered.
- britmob 6y ago
  He has been getting better recently. But he absolutely still needs to realize how much weight his words have.
Trasmatta 6y ago
> Heard many good projects died Part of me will never fully forgive them for just letting Half-Life 2: Episode 3 die, never officially cancelling it (even to this day), and refusing to communicate with their fans about it. People meme about HL3, but most of us Half-Life fans just wanted Episode 3. Episode 2 ends on the most heartbreaking cliffhanger, and we just wanted some sort of conclusion to that story.
- phinnaeus 6y ago
  I was one of these people until I played Half-Life: Alyx. They've earned back some of the trust that was previously squandered.
  - Trasmatta 6y ago
    I've been playing it as well, but I'm not too far in. It hasn't grabbed me much yet. Part of that might just be that 2020 has me in a bad headspace, so it's hard to enjoy things as much.
    - whatch 6y ago
      Felt just like you a few chapters back (I'm on 6th now). But now I wish it doesn't end too soon.
  - ACS_Solver 6y ago
    Could you share a few spoiler-free thoughts about HL:A as a dedicated series fan? I'm in the same boat. Loved HL1, then HL2 even more, it's one of the very rare games I regard as perfect. Then both Episode 1 and Episode 2 surpassed my expectations, and I was very disappointed with Valve's refusal to say anything at all for years. The HL:A announcement took me by surprise, as I had given up on more HL. Do you find HL:A to be a good Half-Life game first and foremost? Do you feel it has the top-notch environmental storytelling and attention to detail that the series is known for? Does it make good use of VR's potential? I'm considering upgrading my PC this year, largely for HL:A and Cyberpunk 2077. The last time I tried VR was with the Oculus Rift in 2016, and it felt underwhelming to me. Very cool for an evening, but then the novelty wore off and the actual gaming felt less satisfying than traditional non-VR.
ekianjo 6y ago
hL3 and L4D3 make no sense anymore commercially. Valve is a lot more profitable as a market and store than as a developer.
- Guest0918231 6y ago
  1. Steam became a success because of the games Valve developed. 2. Epic created Fortnite, which you likely know is a popular release. That game is leading to the Epic store getting off the ground and gaining traction. This is causing a rather large loss in revenue for Valve. That's why games are important. If you control the top games, you control the users, and you control the platform.
  - philliphaydon 6y ago
    Probably a large loss for epic too with how much they give away to con people into their terrible service.
  - drKarl 6y ago
    Epic Store is light years behind Steam. It is very barebones and primitive. In Steam when you go to the games in your library you see a lot of content, you see your DLCS, achievements, community content, etc. In Epic Store you don't even have a page for each game in your library, just a small cover to launch the game. Steam has Play on TV, Play on phone/table and Remote Play together which are great features. Also Epic catalog is so much smaller than Steam's. Also, it is interesting to have some context of Epic Games. I remember when it was Epic MegaGames and they released the original Unreal games, THAT was the hit that defined the company as they also started to license their Unreal Engine (which they still do today). Long story short, around 2012 the massive chinese giant Tencent acquired a big portion of Epic Games (40%) that allows Tencent to nominate directors, and the company shifted towards GaaS (Game as a Service). Many long time Epic Game employees left the company around that time. Epic Games used one of their games, Fortnite: Save the World, to develop Fortnite Battle Royale, which was a huge success. It's very important to note that Fortnite's biggest competitor, PlayerUnkown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), is owned and developed by Tencent. Also note that Tencent owns 100% of Riot Games, as well as having various stakes at different gaming studios.
raxxorrax 6y ago
They are extremely successful compared to more classical approaches to management.
- neuronic 6y ago
  Especially since the more classical approaches to management have insane weaknesses that everyone constantly complains about even on this site.
krageon 6y ago
> influence became based on connections and favors Just like every other corporation, in other words.
- dx87 6y ago
  No, it's worse at flat management companies like Valve. Since you don't have anyone in charge, and everybody works on what they want, there is no objective measure of whether or not you're doing well. Everything comes down to politics, from bonuses, to who gets laid off during downsizing, being very good at your job isn't enough. That's how it's been at the flat management company I worked at, and how it seems everyone who's worked at one describes it.
  - krageon 6y ago
    > no objective measure Any "objective measure" that a regular company uses is mostly a way for management to pose and bluster about what they actually want. Corporations are fundamentally all the same.
  - trowawee 6y ago
    Yeah, I think the complaint was that Valve is/was theoretically flat, in that people could self-manage, but in practice, it had an implicit hierarchy that was obscured by the officially "flat" structure (which, let's be honest, was always kind of a lie, because I guarantee you there's someone there who can fire other people, which means it's not actually flat). And an implicit hierarchy means that there's no way to say "I had these goals and objectively achieved them"; you aren't making your case to a defined supervisor, you're making a case to the informal supervisor. That'll almost always wind up with favoritism without any potential escape. Some of these problems exist in any company, but at least in a standard hierarchy, if your boss is sabotaging you or ignoring you, there are routes you can take (go to their boss, go to HR) to (imperfectly) route around that. In a flat structure, you're grasping at ghosts - after all, no one's your manager, so it shouldn't matter if one person has it out for you, but of course, if they're politically entrenched, it absolutely does matter. And there's no one in the company to complain to, because the company's official position is "this is impossible, we're a flat company", and your complaints are minimized if you complain externally, through some combination of "sour grapes" + "but it's a flat system!". Honestly, it's a great trick on management's part - everybody has the responsibilities of management, but no one is an official manager, and there's an easy playbook to run on anyone who complains.

denkmoon 6y ago

People talk a lot of shit about Valve without having a clue, a consequence of their secrecy and their position as a premier game developer. I wouldn't trust anything that is said about Valve that didn't come from someone who has worked there. Tyler McVicker/Valve "News" Network is a major component of this. His interviews with Valve are great. His speculation is trash.

akhilcacharya 6y ago
Wasn’t his Alyx speculation on point?
- ehsankia 6y ago
  To be fair every broken clock will be right twice a day. He throws out a lot of stuff, so of course some will be right sometimes.
bllguo 6y ago
a lot of these comments about valve stem from the somewhat infamous tweets of a former valve dev, though here's the first link i found https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless-industry-politics/ https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless...
- neuronic 6y ago
  Yea but thats still ONE guy who might be bitter for one reason or another. It's hard to get an objective look at Valve like this. What we get is utterly filtered.
britmob 6y ago
He has been getting better recently. But he absolutely still needs to realize how much weight his words have.

Trasmatta 6y ago

> Heard many good projects died Part of me will never fully forgive them for just letting Half-Life 2: Episode 3 die, never officially cancelling it (even to this day), and refusing to communicate with their fans about it. People meme about HL3, but most of us Half-Life fans just wanted Episode 3. Episode 2 ends on the most heartbreaking cliffhanger, and we just wanted some sort of conclusion to that story.

phinnaeus 6y ago
I was one of these people until I played Half-Life: Alyx. They've earned back some of the trust that was previously squandered.
- Trasmatta 6y ago
  I've been playing it as well, but I'm not too far in. It hasn't grabbed me much yet. Part of that might just be that 2020 has me in a bad headspace, so it's hard to enjoy things as much.
  - whatch 6y ago
    Felt just like you a few chapters back (I'm on 6th now). But now I wish it doesn't end too soon.
- ACS_Solver 6y ago
  Could you share a few spoiler-free thoughts about HL:A as a dedicated series fan? I'm in the same boat. Loved HL1, then HL2 even more, it's one of the very rare games I regard as perfect. Then both Episode 1 and Episode 2 surpassed my expectations, and I was very disappointed with Valve's refusal to say anything at all for years. The HL:A announcement took me by surprise, as I had given up on more HL. Do you find HL:A to be a good Half-Life game first and foremost? Do you feel it has the top-notch environmental storytelling and attention to detail that the series is known for? Does it make good use of VR's potential? I'm considering upgrading my PC this year, largely for HL:A and Cyberpunk 2077. The last time I tried VR was with the Oculus Rift in 2016, and it felt underwhelming to me. Very cool for an evening, but then the novelty wore off and the actual gaming felt less satisfying than traditional non-VR.

ekianjo 6y ago

hL3 and L4D3 make no sense anymore commercially. Valve is a lot more profitable as a market and store than as a developer.

Guest0918231 6y ago
1. Steam became a success because of the games Valve developed. 2. Epic created Fortnite, which you likely know is a popular release. That game is leading to the Epic store getting off the ground and gaining traction. This is causing a rather large loss in revenue for Valve. That's why games are important. If you control the top games, you control the users, and you control the platform.
- philliphaydon 6y ago
  Probably a large loss for epic too with how much they give away to con people into their terrible service.
- drKarl 6y ago
  Epic Store is light years behind Steam. It is very barebones and primitive. In Steam when you go to the games in your library you see a lot of content, you see your DLCS, achievements, community content, etc. In Epic Store you don't even have a page for each game in your library, just a small cover to launch the game. Steam has Play on TV, Play on phone/table and Remote Play together which are great features. Also Epic catalog is so much smaller than Steam's. Also, it is interesting to have some context of Epic Games. I remember when it was Epic MegaGames and they released the original Unreal games, THAT was the hit that defined the company as they also started to license their Unreal Engine (which they still do today). Long story short, around 2012 the massive chinese giant Tencent acquired a big portion of Epic Games (40%) that allows Tencent to nominate directors, and the company shifted towards GaaS (Game as a Service). Many long time Epic Game employees left the company around that time. Epic Games used one of their games, Fortnite: Save the World, to develop Fortnite Battle Royale, which was a huge success. It's very important to note that Fortnite's biggest competitor, PlayerUnkown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), is owned and developed by Tencent. Also note that Tencent owns 100% of Riot Games, as well as having various stakes at different gaming studios.

raxxorrax 6y ago

They are extremely successful compared to more classical approaches to management.

neuronic 6y ago
Especially since the more classical approaches to management have insane weaknesses that everyone constantly complains about even on this site.

krageon 6y ago

> influence became based on connections and favors Just like every other corporation, in other words.

dx87 6y ago
No, it's worse at flat management companies like Valve. Since you don't have anyone in charge, and everybody works on what they want, there is no objective measure of whether or not you're doing well. Everything comes down to politics, from bonuses, to who gets laid off during downsizing, being very good at your job isn't enough. That's how it's been at the flat management company I worked at, and how it seems everyone who's worked at one describes it.
- krageon 6y ago
  > no objective measure Any "objective measure" that a regular company uses is mostly a way for management to pose and bluster about what they actually want. Corporations are fundamentally all the same.
- trowawee 6y ago
  Yeah, I think the complaint was that Valve is/was theoretically flat, in that people could self-manage, but in practice, it had an implicit hierarchy that was obscured by the officially "flat" structure (which, let's be honest, was always kind of a lie, because I guarantee you there's someone there who can fire other people, which means it's not actually flat). And an implicit hierarchy means that there's no way to say "I had these goals and objectively achieved them"; you aren't making your case to a defined supervisor, you're making a case to the informal supervisor. That'll almost always wind up with favoritism without any potential escape. Some of these problems exist in any company, but at least in a standard hierarchy, if your boss is sabotaging you or ignoring you, there are routes you can take (go to their boss, go to HR) to (imperfectly) route around that. In a flat structure, you're grasping at ghosts - after all, no one's your manager, so it shouldn't matter if one person has it out for you, but of course, if they're politically entrenched, it absolutely does matter. And there's no one in the company to complain to, because the company's official position is "this is impossible, we're a flat company", and your complaints are minimized if you complain externally, through some combination of "sour grapes" + "but it's a flat system!". Honestly, it's a great trick on management's part - everybody has the responsibilities of management, but no one is an official manager, and there's an easy playbook to run on anyone who complains.