I got mad at gaming

[Druid]

All I'm making an argument about is what is played more. I have never played either of those games, and I'm not going to start now when they are so old. I'll definitely pick up the next cs game they make even though it'll probably be at least 5 years till that happens cause first they have to make hl3, and they haven't even started doing that.

 

[stb1swat]

I think I worry too much...
By that I mean, I have so many GREAT games. CS, CSS, TF2, HL2+eps, Dawn of war 40ks, CoH, SC, and it can go on.
I just worry that new games, that I have hidden hopes for, will suck...and with games like Mercs 2, and the Crysis franchise my hopes were not met....Not to say they "suck", I just like saying they do, because they weren't as good as I was hoping.

 

[zmatt]

Somebody is a valve fanboy!

 

[stb1swat]

Well, I could have said the same about Quake 3 or the first Unreal Tournament when they were out and popular. Its just VALVe happens to be making some darn good online games.
But yeah, I am.

 

[zmatt]

I would disagree. CSS is one of those games that is infested with cheaters and 12 year old's. Everyone, and I mean everyone has that game so everyone (the good and the bad) will play it. Now its mostly the bad. Most of the mature players who started playing CSS when it came out have moved on. Most fps games only have a healthy online life for about 4 years or so.

For me Left 4 Dead is a solution asking for a problem. There are multiple zombie mods out for HL2. This is another case of valve taking something that was once free and trying to turn a profit. Counter strike used to be a free mod, same with Gary's mod. But now you have to pay for them.


My biggest beef with Valve is them using a half decade old engine and making games that still command top dollar with it. I will not pay the same for left 4 Dead as I would Stalker Clear Sky or Crysis. The game doesn't do anything innovative and "game play" has to be balanced with a justified cost. I can understand the price on the other games. They took a lot of money to develop. But Valve cheaps out on the consumer. Source has already payed for itself. The hard work is done. They just get some artists to make new characters. In terms of R&D Left 4 Dead was practically free to make. So why doesn't it cost $10?

 

[Druid]

$50 for a game with an ancient engine that only has four levels screams "Pirate me please!!!"

Coop in that game is four players and versus is like 8? It's not hard to use an internet lan program like hamachi or garena to play a game like that online to its full potential. When you get games that are actually full sized games like call of duty or Battlefield, doing something like that isn't as convenient.

I don't think we're going to get a decent game out of valve again till hl3.

 

[stb1swat]

I think you guys are missing the point here. Umm...Games are about fun. If that's "pwning n00bs with your uber micro" then so be it. If its gaming with the latest and greatest graphics fine.

Anyway, back to zmatt. Source is pretty sucky compared to 1.6, i agree but its not infested with 12 year olds as long as you care enough to find good servers.
Source Engine is old...but show me a better engine that gives out SDKs and offer massive modding options. Show me a better engine period. Valve just takes what's popular and does its best to perfect it.
Online FPS.
Zombies.
Team based FPS.
Puzzles.
Story based single player.
And so on. They charge the money because they are, debatably, the best of their kind. Again, the evidence is in the awards they win and the sales they make. I really feel like defending Valve's name is really pointless when release after release they just keep making games that are played by countless audiences.
If you think Zombie Panic or any other HL2 zombie mod compares to left 4 dead then yeah...valve wouldn't be the greatest.
Plus left4dead incorporates the AID which is really an innovative idea.

And what's wrong with an "ancient" engine? What do you want that source isn't/can't do?

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Anyway, back to zmatt. Source is pretty sucky compared to 1.6, i agree but its not infested with 12 year olds as long as you care enough to find good servers.
Source Engine is old...but show me a better engine that gives out SDKs and offer massive modding options. Show me a better engine period.

CryEngine 2 has a great sandbox editor and is very mod friendly.

 

[ricanflow]

And what's wrong with an "ancient" engine? What do you want that source isn't/can't do?

Go play Far Cry 2 maxed out and youll see what source cant do.

 

[zmatt]

And what's wrong with an "ancient" engine? What do you want that source isn't/can't do?

Well for starters, DX10. Source lacks motion blur. It lacks very large multiplayer, at least in all the games they have made so far. Its net code is outdated. It lacks per pixel lighting. It's not multithreaded.

There is a reason developers move on to new engines every 2 or 3 years. Apparently Valve has forgotten that. I bought HL2 and CSS back when they came out. I haven't played either of them in 2 years and I don't feel a need to go back any time soon. Steam is obnoxious and the games just don't satisfy anymore.