3 ms·

I think Erik Wolpaw is being kind with his words and Gabe Newell isn't pushing the organization to deliver games because he doesn't see much value in working on

I think Erik Wolpaw is being kind with his words and Gabe Newell isn't pushing the organization to deliver games because he doesn't see much value in working on single-player games anymore. It also just doesn't do anything to their bottom line whatsoever. This goes for Half-Life, Portal, and really anything else that isn't a potentially large multi-player IP that could seemingly become its own platform, like Counter-Strike or Dota. There's of course also the problem that you have to rally people to you to work on something, and people suck, frankly. Just because those people work at Valve doesn't mean they suck less in terms of human nature. It just means they also have technical chops. From everything you can read about Valve in the media to what you can observe from their own releases, they seem to be a victim of their own success and being an individual contributor at Valve seems like you have organization-level and individual-level issues keeping you from being productive. Primarily around compensation. There will never be a conclusion to the Half-Life series outside of what Marc Laidlaw gave fans. I doubt Erik Wolpaw will make a dent, not because I don't want him to, but because there are probably egos at Valve and pay incentives preventing him and others from delivering sequels that fans want.

interstice 4y ago
I wonder if there is a potential here for a parallel to what we see with flagship cars from major automakers. What I mean by that is that producing flagship cars is not always driven purely by sales. Often it is driven by something else, like producing a homologation special, competing with another manufacturer, or just sheer excessiveness. Maybe the economics don't add up, but I would like to see the big players mindset shift from 'make the most money' to 'show up our competitors and have fun'. Movies too, if I'm honest.
- OkayPhysicist 4y ago
  I think the comparison to movies is quite apt, actually. There are a few mega brands that pump out mega-budget, mass appeal content, but suffer from the competing pressures to appeal to as many people as possible to maximize profits, versus having a cogent artistic vision appealing greatly to any one group. Meanwhile, you have smaller, lower-budget productions for whom the only chance of market success is making art that appeals greatly enough to some people that the game or movie expands by word of mouth and critical acclaim. For specific examples, I'd point out Devolver Digital's catalog in games, and A24's portfolio of films.

interstice 4y ago

I wonder if there is a potential here for a parallel to what we see with flagship cars from major automakers. What I mean by that is that producing flagship cars is not always driven purely by sales. Often it is driven by something else, like producing a homologation special, competing with another manufacturer, or just sheer excessiveness. Maybe the economics don't add up, but I would like to see the big players mindset shift from 'make the most money' to 'show up our competitors and have fun'. Movies too, if I'm honest.

OkayPhysicist 4y ago
I think the comparison to movies is quite apt, actually. There are a few mega brands that pump out mega-budget, mass appeal content, but suffer from the competing pressures to appeal to as many people as possible to maximize profits, versus having a cogent artistic vision appealing greatly to any one group. Meanwhile, you have smaller, lower-budget productions for whom the only chance of market success is making art that appeals greatly enough to some people that the game or movie expands by word of mouth and critical acclaim. For specific examples, I'd point out Devolver Digital's catalog in games, and A24's portfolio of films.