Half-life 2 going gold!

Sir Spankspeople · Post by **Sir Spankspeople** » Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:28 pm

Because then people would whine and bitch about the game not having multiplayer, and they'd get rained on for releasing an incomplete game.

Think of it as giving the blueprints to a major government facility, along with access codes, keys, etc. to everybody who wants it. Now, would you up security, change the codes, recut all of the keys, or just put the facility into operation and fix things as they become a problem?

If you chose the second solution, I am SO glad that you're not in charge of anything at all important.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:06 pm

The second solution isn't what I was proposing, Spanky.

What I was proposing was more like ... hm. Adding something in to the access code computer after the details of the access code were completed that would only properly recognize keys made to address the modified access code - and maybe shock the keyholders who used the old designs.

But what you offer is a false dichotomy - "fix things as people abuse their knowledge" or "rework the whole thing" is a rather scant choice of solutions, it seems. I had thought a program, to run properly, was a delicate thing... and so as such all it would take is some changes here and there and an inventive, devious programmer to rework a couple things that blow the whole old version up someway or another.

(As for the "incomplete game" argument - I understood that already. Though personally I think it's bull, and anyone who thinks a certain type of game needs multiplayer to be complete can and should go fornicate themselves with a steel pineapple ... that, and personally, I'm not going to be a fan of multiplayer that much until multiplayer games start: A- doing something NEW (note to any developers: Counterstrike and Day of Defeat and Team Fortress were not NEW), and B- delivering the depth of experience in a game that a well-crafted single player game can. /rant off)

Amanalphion · Post by **Amanalphion** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:25 am

So by "Multiplayer isn't necessary" you mean "I have no friends", right?

Dark Nexus · Post by **Dark Nexus** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:41 am

[quote="Killer-Rabbit";p="390996"]Spanks, does your argument tactic work well for you? I do find it fairly clever how you make up your own version of what people say in order to portray them as the bad guy.
All I am saying is that if you have deadlines (especially ones set by yourself) you should reach them. Not sure on how long it will take? Dont set a deadline. Have somewhat of an idea but not sure exactly? Dont set a precise release date. If they set the year, I'd give em plus or minus a year. Set the month, give em a month or two. Set the day, a few weeks. If I recall correctly, Valve had at least the month set over a year ago.

Now just go off an think about the shiney objects. I'll be of doing something...you know...productive.[/quote]

You obviously have no concept of industry. That Dilbert strip somebody mentioned is pretty accurate - deadlines are set by people that have no idea of how long it will actually take to do.

Most of the Half-Life 2 "deadlines" I've heard are from stores, or Vivaldi, or Sierra. None of which are sources you should EVER trust.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:38 am

So by "Multiplayer isn't necessary" you mean "I have no friends", right?

And here, class, we have a perfect example of the kind of gamer I was talking about...

Calus · Post by **Calus** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:48 am

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="391077"]

So by "Multiplayer isn't necessary" you mean "I have no friends", right?

And here, class, we have a perfect example of the kind of gamer I was talking about...[/quote]

Can we say crybaby.

Seraphim · Post by **Seraphim** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:03 am

It's my understanding that the source code theft caused more of a delay, not just because they had to change it around, and beef up security so more of the same doesn't happen. But that morale took a huge hit. As soon as they became aware of the theft, a lot of the people at Valve started working on other projects for a while, and it was a chore to get everyone back into it. Same way, when they announced the delay all the customers got disappointed and wandered off so to speak.

As for: should they have taken time to fix the source code leak? They already put all kinds of effort into the multiplayer facet, (Counterstrike 2 releases about the same time as HL-2 if memory serves correct) It would be just plain silly to piss it all away. Maybe the next game doesn't need multiplayer, but they already made multiplayer for this one. Scraping a years worth of work, just to save a few months work, is just plain stupid, and would probably cause a bigger hit to morale then they already had.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:17 am

Of course we can. But why should we be saying that, Calus?

Posted Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:19 pm:

It's my understanding that the source code theft caused more of a delay, not just because they had to change it around, and beef up security so more of the same doesn't happen. But that morale took a huge hit. As soon as they became aware of the theft, a lot of the people at Valve started working on other projects for a while, and it was a chore to get everyone back into it.

So if you're correct, the delay comes not from the fact of the source code itself, but because the team was a bunch of fucktards?

Sir Spankspeople · Post by **Sir Spankspeople** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:39 am

Ah, yes, accept the first thing you hear that makes your argument stronger, even though it has less evidence than anything else that has previously been said.

Why am I even bothering, again?

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:51 am

If you're referring to me, Spanky, I didn't accept what Seraphim said.

Seraphim · Post by **Seraphim** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 6:56 pm

So if you're correct, the delay comes not from the fact of the source code itself, but because the team was a bunch of fucktards?

Not because they're smacktards. But after any kind of robbery, especially of something you had been working on for a few years, you're bound do get a bit angry and disillusioned. If they could just shrug off the source code theft like it was nothing I would be amazed.

I didn't accept what Seraphim said.

If my first paragraph was incorrect then please correct me. That's what Gabe Newell Said in one of his interviews. If he lied to the reporter then by all means contradict him and me with evidence (or point out my faulty memory).

Also there was a second paragraph. They had developed multiplayer (the game has been done for a while by the way, they're in the testing phase), and not fixing the source code, would have made the multiplayer (already developed) a waste.

Any way you look at it, I don't see how source code theft couldn't negatively affect a reasonable human being.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:13 pm

Not because they're smacktards. But after any kind of robbery, especially of something you had been working on for a few years, you're bound do get a bit angry and disillusioned. If they could just shrug off the source code theft like it was nothing I would be amazed.

It was copied, wasn't it? It wasn't like they LOST their source code, or had it deleted. Someone made a copy of it and saw it when they shouldn't have. Why is it that this should devestate them?

And you just said "that's what you heard", not "read it in an interview with someone on the project". That makes a bit of a difference, you know.

Rembrandt Q. Einstein · Post by **Rembrandt Q. Einstein** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:36 pm

All of this bug testing and fixing is just lies anyways

A piece of software that's buggier than all Hell now is much better than having to wait for something good.

I don't care if I have to wait forever to get a game. The longer I wait, the more polished the game will be

like sticking to your argumanet spanks?

Seraphim · Post by **Seraphim** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:40 pm

Why is it that this should devestate them?

The fact that someone was able to break in, the fact that the code has been distrusted all around the internet, the fact that it means extra work, any kind of psychological blow could come from the mere fact of a break in.

And you just said "that's what you heard", not "read it in an interview with someone on the project". That makes a bit of a difference, you know.

Yes, that’s what I heard from a video interview with Gabe Newell (sp?) without captions. So since he was talking, I guess I heard from the head of the project, as opposed to read from someone on the project. That does make a bit of difference.

That's what Gabe Newell Said in one of his interviews. If he lied to the reporter then by all means contradict him and me with evidence (or point out my faulty memory).

After reading that, you could have assumed one of two things. It was a video interview, or I used the phrase "heard" in a non-literal sense. Such as reading the newspaper, and saying "I heard..." It's an expression (in the hypothetical situation), stop trying to be an ass.

Rembrandt Q. Einstein · Post by **Rembrandt Q. Einstein** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:59 pm

picture working on a term paper, then finding out the day before it's due taht your partner handed it in, and now you have to rewrite it in order to pass since you'd otherwise be accused of cheating.

That would be pretty devastating.

Real Life Forums

Half-life 2 going gold!

Who is online