5 ms·

It's kind of more than just the 'flat structure' making it a challenge. The article goes on to stat that Valve is a small company with some very important produ

It's kind of more than just the 'flat structure' making it a challenge. The article goes on to stat that Valve is a small company with some very important products that take dedicated focus. Basically, there are other priorities at Valve. I am not sure if there wasn't a flat structure that getting Portal 3 off the ground would be any less difficult?

MattGaiser 4y ago
Perhaps with a leader structure Valve might grow more to accommodate such projects? Seems like a remarkably valuable piece of IP to not regularly exploit.
- bluefirebrand 4y ago
  I kind of respect that valve isn't just a sequel farm pumping out Portal games. I would like a new Left 4 Dead though...
  - seba_dos1 4y ago
    A huge number of clues point to L4D3 being developed at Valve for many years now. The question is whether that effort is actually still progressing and whether there's a chance to have it finished anytime soon.
    - rekoil 4y ago
      Please let this be true! L4D is such an amazing party game!
pathartl 4y ago
I might be an outlier, but I'm extremely attached to the Half-Life series and while it's difficult to not get HL3, I'm also not currently disappointed in any game in the series. If the only thing I have to be disappointed in is the release cadence, then I'm probably okay with that? Someone in a Reddit thread pointed how Valve's structure reduces the fragility of a product by not basing it on one vision and that their games are based on a pretty pure collaborative effort. A writer becomes inherently less influential on the final product, but their individual contribution is more passionate and worked. One could argue for hours about the approach, but I think the results speak for themselves.
- 23B1 4y ago
  There's plenty of other counterexamples of that though – visionaries with a singular vision being able to get a team to help them create something amazing. Not saying one is better than the other, but it'd be a damn shame if amazing stories like Portal don't get more airtime because of collective lethargy. It's too good to let flounder!
  - pathartl 4y ago
    I'd suggest checking out "Half-Life 2: Raising the Bar" to learn about their design process. It's fascinating. There can absolutely be visionaries out there... Miyazaki, Kojima, Miyamoto are probably the top three right now. But there's a ton that are kinda went out with a whimper such as Molyneux, Wright, Carmack, Romero, the Housers, Schafer, Sweeney. I think abstraction is key. There's gotta be a happy medium between absolute control or almost a sense of worship and not allowing a singular person to guide the ship.
    - dolni 4y ago
      The key is not about how many people are guiding the ship, it is about their overall abilities. A BDFL is great if the dictator is competent. A committee is also great if the committee is competent (overall). Most people don't have what it takes to be a BDFL. But a few do. And for those people, the answer is to take good notes and get the hell out of their way.
WeylandYutani 4y ago
Isn't that the whole point? How do you get priority at a company changed to do what you want without ordering or paying your coworkers? This isn't 1997 were you could make videogames with 20 people.
- Dracophoenix 4y ago
  > This isn't 1997 were you could make videogames with 20 people With recent advancements in design and tooling, this could be a possibility again.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  You most certainly can make videogames with 20 people or less. You cannot make AAA videogames with 20 people or less. The current best example of this small team methodology is Stardew Valley.
  - burnished 4y ago
    I think stardew was made by a sole person, not a team.
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      It had one main developer with outsourcing of some asset creation. He may have added help as time went on. But 1 < 20.
yarg 4y ago
The flat structure is probably a double edged sword when it comes to getting traction. You're ideas are less likely to be vetoed, but good like finding a champion other than yourself. But I think that it's probably exaggerated - there are always hierarchies, but in this case no attempt has been made to define or force the structure. I think that the bigger issue is this: Valve is a platform and distribution company, not a games company. As the platform became the primary product, broad artistic creativity took a backseat. I don't see it coming back, which is a pity - The Orange Box was exquisite.
nonbirithm 4y ago
Only anecdotal, but there may be cultural problems stemming from the flat structure at Valve that make organizing around products difficult. This video came out 4 years ago so I don't know if anything's changed since then, but it's one ex-employee's experience of their work culture at the time. Basically he claims that even though there's a flat corporate structure within Valve, in practice an implicit management structure arose in which those with the most political clout controlled others without it. Plus they used stack ranking at the time. https://youtu.be/41XgkLKYuic https://youtu.be/41XgkLKYuic
- thecopy 4y ago
  This happened at a place i used to worked at as well, a supposedly "flat company" without hierarchies. The implicit hidden hierarchies - based partly on charisma and friendship - increased the effort to do anything, and especially the mental stress of having to keep the double-think alive. I think for less socially adept people these companies are a nightmare. The entire direction of the company was decided by a cliquie implicit power holders with no accountability, as these could always play on the "flat structure and we all share responsibility and accountability"

MattGaiser 4y ago

Perhaps with a leader structure Valve might grow more to accommodate such projects? Seems like a remarkably valuable piece of IP to not regularly exploit.

bluefirebrand 4y ago
I kind of respect that valve isn't just a sequel farm pumping out Portal games. I would like a new Left 4 Dead though...
- seba_dos1 4y ago
  A huge number of clues point to L4D3 being developed at Valve for many years now. The question is whether that effort is actually still progressing and whether there's a chance to have it finished anytime soon.
  - rekoil 4y ago
    Please let this be true! L4D is such an amazing party game!

pathartl 4y ago

I might be an outlier, but I'm extremely attached to the Half-Life series and while it's difficult to not get HL3, I'm also not currently disappointed in any game in the series. If the only thing I have to be disappointed in is the release cadence, then I'm probably okay with that? Someone in a Reddit thread pointed how Valve's structure reduces the fragility of a product by not basing it on one vision and that their games are based on a pretty pure collaborative effort. A writer becomes inherently less influential on the final product, but their individual contribution is more passionate and worked. One could argue for hours about the approach, but I think the results speak for themselves.

23B1 4y ago
There's plenty of other counterexamples of that though – visionaries with a singular vision being able to get a team to help them create something amazing. Not saying one is better than the other, but it'd be a damn shame if amazing stories like Portal don't get more airtime because of collective lethargy. It's too good to let flounder!
- pathartl 4y ago
  I'd suggest checking out "Half-Life 2: Raising the Bar" to learn about their design process. It's fascinating. There can absolutely be visionaries out there... Miyazaki, Kojima, Miyamoto are probably the top three right now. But there's a ton that are kinda went out with a whimper such as Molyneux, Wright, Carmack, Romero, the Housers, Schafer, Sweeney. I think abstraction is key. There's gotta be a happy medium between absolute control or almost a sense of worship and not allowing a singular person to guide the ship.
  - dolni 4y ago
    The key is not about how many people are guiding the ship, it is about their overall abilities. A BDFL is great if the dictator is competent. A committee is also great if the committee is competent (overall). Most people don't have what it takes to be a BDFL. But a few do. And for those people, the answer is to take good notes and get the hell out of their way.

WeylandYutani 4y ago

Isn't that the whole point? How do you get priority at a company changed to do what you want without ordering or paying your coworkers? This isn't 1997 were you could make videogames with 20 people.

Dracophoenix 4y ago
> This isn't 1997 were you could make videogames with 20 people With recent advancements in design and tooling, this could be a possibility again.
HWR_14 4y ago
You most certainly can make videogames with 20 people or less. You cannot make AAA videogames with 20 people or less. The current best example of this small team methodology is Stardew Valley.
- burnished 4y ago
  I think stardew was made by a sole person, not a team.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    It had one main developer with outsourcing of some asset creation. He may have added help as time went on. But 1 < 20.

yarg 4y ago

The flat structure is probably a double edged sword when it comes to getting traction. You're ideas are less likely to be vetoed, but good like finding a champion other than yourself. But I think that it's probably exaggerated - there are always hierarchies, but in this case no attempt has been made to define or force the structure. I think that the bigger issue is this: Valve is a platform and distribution company, not a games company. As the platform became the primary product, broad artistic creativity took a backseat. I don't see it coming back, which is a pity - The Orange Box was exquisite.

nonbirithm 4y ago

Only anecdotal, but there may be cultural problems stemming from the flat structure at Valve that make organizing around products difficult. This video came out 4 years ago so I don't know if anything's changed since then, but it's one ex-employee's experience of their work culture at the time. Basically he claims that even though there's a flat corporate structure within Valve, in practice an implicit management structure arose in which those with the most political clout controlled others without it. Plus they used stack ranking at the time. https://youtu.be/41XgkLKYuic https://youtu.be/41XgkLKYuic

thecopy 4y ago
This happened at a place i used to worked at as well, a supposedly "flat company" without hierarchies. The implicit hidden hierarchies - based partly on charisma and friendship - increased the effort to do anything, and especially the mental stress of having to keep the double-think alive. I think for less socially adept people these companies are a nightmare. The entire direction of the company was decided by a cliquie implicit power holders with no accountability, as these could always play on the "flat structure and we all share responsibility and accountability"