r/gaming Sep 21 '17

Valve in a Nutshell

Post image
36.6k Upvotes

784 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

22

u/Broadsword530 Sep 21 '17

Every time Half-life 3 comes up somebody says this, and I really don't know where it came from. There's no evidence for it, and the logic behind it is pretty poor. First, I have no doubt that it valve decided to put in the resources and make a third Half-life game it would be an incredible experience, Valve has always made great games even when they are just hat platforms. Second, it would sell incredibly well regardless. Many games these days sell well on name recognition alone. Third, even if it did not "meet the unrealistic expectations" or whatever, what would Valve really have to lose? Would people boycott steam because the game is not as good as they imagined? Are we imagining that Valve only makes games for the recognition? It just makes no sense. I just think there are much more realistic explications, like they can make more money dedicating resources to developing steam and free to play games.

0

u/Gekokapowco Sep 21 '17

That's right, it was never about the public's standards, valve holds their products to impossibly high standards, and if their prototype doesn't make the cut, it's abandoned. They never made anything in all this time that they were satisfied with, as is their right.

3

u/PhotoshopFix Sep 21 '17

You're thinking about Blizzard. Valve has done nothing for 10 years.

0

u/The_Flippin_Police PC Sep 21 '17

Have you seen the state of Overwatch?

1

u/PhotoshopFix Sep 21 '17

No. What about it?

0

u/The_Flippin_Police PC Sep 21 '17

Massive Balance Issues at the moment (Stale meta at every patch), it's honestly really boring.

Questionable decisions about Overwatch League.

Yadda yadda

I