Half Life 3 soon ?

[cinemaware]

I feel the opposite, "excellent storytelling" ie writing is what modern games lack. Destructible environments and next gen AI means nothing if there's no point to it, and there is where writing comes in. The second game remains one of the best written games ever made.

Huh? Modern games fall over themselves trying to build "narratives", at the expense of expanding or innovating gameplay. GTA V, RDRs, CP2077, and the likes of Alan Wake are the most egregious examples of this.

Meanwhile, the point of stuff such as AI, emergence, true sandboxes, interactive/destructible environs, etc, is that they are all elements which enhance the gameplay. Y'know, the ingredient games (and gamers) should perhaps care about the most. Once you have nice systems in place, the stories write themselves, without the need for hollywoodization of the medium. And even with all the moolah spent and superstars starring, the vast majority of stories (HL2 included) are still at best on par with middle-of-the-road releases in the world of movies or books. That's why if I want a great writing or story, I'll seek it out in a media dedicated to it.

Old games got that, which is why they are mostly still superior.

 

[DarkDreams]

Considering that Episode 3 has been scrapped and stuff they made for it was shown in the HL2 20th Anniversary video (highly recommend watching it if you haven't yet), I think it's unlikely we will see more Half Life. Especially since we know they are working on Deadlock. The stuff they made for Episode 3 looked amazing though and I would love to play with that:

 

[Darkholm]

I'm in the sceptics corner...

Me three.

 

[neatfeatguy]

*Soon* is always relative when it comes to Valve. They won’t hesitate to delay the project (if they will even reveal it) by whatever timespan they consider necessary to get it where they want it.

RSN (Real Soon Now) is a coined phrase used in a MUD I still play. There have been some updates in the works for a new profession for several decades now. We're expecting it RSN.... In other words, until the update is pushed out, it doesn't exist.

Until HL3 actually comes out, it doesn't exist and I don't know why people are still clamoring for it. I though the episodic games, where Valve failed to even get out all 3 of them, the two that did come out were pretty bland.

 

[Chaitanya]

HL3 and GTA-6(rock* just released 2nd trailer) are the games which are going to take a long time for release.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Considering that Episode 3 has been scrapped and stuff they made for it was shown in the HL2 20th Anniversary video (highly recommend watching it if you haven't yet), I think it's unlikely we will see more Half Life. Especially since we know they are working on Deadlock. The stuff they made for Episode 3 looked amazing though and I would love to play with that:

Didn't really care for the blob and ice gun stuff. It just seemed like they were continuing to go down the physics hype rabbit hole, only to wind up much worse off than the gravity gun.

 

[AusWolf]

Can you imagine how good they could make them these days with the compute power each and every PC has now? I would love to see that kind of thing...

Imagine using our NPUs/AI/Tensor cores for something useful for once!

 

[rv8000]

Huh? Modern games fall over themselves trying to build "narratives", at the expense of expanding or innovating gameplay. GTA V, RDRs, CP2077, and the likes of Alan Wake are the most egregious examples of this.

Meanwhile, the point of stuff such as AI, emergence, true sandboxes, interactive/destructible environs, etc, is that they are all elements which enhance the gameplay. Y'know, the ingredient games (and gamers) should perhaps care about the most. Once you have nice systems in place, the stories write themselves, without the need for hollywoodization of the medium. And even with all the moolah spent and superstars starring, the vast majority of stories (HL2 included) are still at best on par with middle-of-the-road releases in the world of movies or books. That's why if I want a great writing or story, I'll seek it out in a media dedicated to it.

Old games got that, which is why they are mostly still superior.

The majority of modern games are a failure because all they focus on are these “systems” you talk of. I’d rather have a well written story than “go kill 3 boars, skin them, and craft this sock” 80 million times over. Followed by the skins, loot boxes, upgrade this, dlc that, unlock these 100 slightly varied skills for +1% dex… and so on.

That and the majority are now just “Insert Game Title” 6/7/8/9/12048289.

But sure, the stories write themselves once the “systems” are established

 

[AusWolf]

I've said for a long time that a H-L3 should be VR exclusive. Killer app ... unless it's been too long.

VR exclusives don't sell as long as VR headsets cost an arm and a leg.

I feel the opposite, "excellent storytelling" ie writing is what modern games lack. Destructible environments and next gen AI means nothing if there's no point to it, and there is where writing comes in. The second game remains one of the best written games ever made.

That I agree with completely.

Huh? Modern games fall over themselves trying to build "narratives", at the expense of expanding or innovating gameplay. GTA V, RDRs, CP2077, and the likes of Alan Wake are the most egregious examples of this.

Meanwhile, the point of stuff such as AI, emergence, true sandboxes, interactive/destructible environs, etc, is that they are all elements which enhance the gameplay. Y'know, the ingredient games (and gamers) should perhaps care about the most. Once you have nice systems in place, the stories write themselves, without the need for hollywoodization of the medium. And even with all the moolah spent and superstars starring, the vast majority of stories (HL2 included) are still at best on par with middle-of-the-road releases in the world of movies or books. That's why if I want a great writing or story, I'll seek it out in a media dedicated to it.

Old games got that, which is why they are mostly still superior.

Everybody wants something else from a game, and that's fine.

My main selling point is atmosphere. Give me a medieval walking simulator with beautiful scenery, like Kingdom Come Deliverance, or a space explorer, like Freelancer, and you won't see me stand up from my PC for months.

But when it comes to shooters, they don't mean anything to me without a good story.

 

[cinemaware]

I’d rather have a well written story than

Go read a book then. You might be surprised

And talking about the "go kill 3 boars, skin them, and craft this sock” trope both a) proves my point - we need evolution, not being stuck with the same thing that we had since the 80s, and b) that you either don't really know what good systems are or have missed out on games that deploy them well.

 

[AusWolf]

Go read a book then. You might be surprised

And talking about the "go kill 3 boars, skin them, and craft this sock” trope both a) proves my point - we need evolution, not being stuck with the same thing that we had since the 80s, and b) that you either don't really know what good systems are or have missed out on games that deploy them well.

I'm not trying to argue because as I said, we all have our different preferences, which is fine, but the thing is, we still have the same genres as we did in the '90s. There's shooters, there's strategy games, there's RPGs, there's platformers, there's driving games, and mixtures of these. It's very rare that games innovate, or can innovate on gameplay. Kingdom Come Deliverance medievalised the fighting system. They introduced crafting and hunger into survival games. These are nice, but don't serve a purpose if the story and general feel can't engage the player long-term. I'm not saying that good gameplay isn't important, it definitely is, but even the best shooter you can imagine won't pin me in front of my monitor for more than half an hour if there's nothing else to it. Doom: Eternal is a great example. It's a decent shooter, the mechanics are good (albeit a bit convoluted), but the story is so dull, and the general feel is so childish and cartoony that there is no chance in hell (pun intended) for me to ever replay it. Doom '16 on the other hand... See what I mean?

Of course, if you disagree, that's fine. Each to their own.

 

[cinemaware]

It's very rare that games innovate, or can innovate on gameplay

It’s not even so much about innovation but expanding the concepts we already have. When games such as Deux Ex, Halo or GTA: SA dropped, they were paradigm-shifters based on older concepts. All we had to do is continue expanding, but instead we had regression. For example GTA V's city is an astounding achievement, but what actually can you do there? Nothing much, bar some simple cop chases, which were in place already in the 2D original, and a handful of scripted events. It's a massively wasted opportunity, but I’m sure it's deliberate too - if R* made a game that could be played over and over, less people would jump into the MP cash cow. Same with RDR games, which on surface have a lot of systems, but also borked economy and some mechanics (like abundant Dead Eye) which make everything redundant and funnel you into just following the story.

The beauty of KD:C is not in its okay-ish story but the fact that they insisted on expanding the simplified systems from other games. So, for example you have to actually search an area and figure things out on your own in some quests, pay attention to your inventory because systems, have to actually (shock horror) learn how to fight - or know when to run away. These are all gameplay elements. And also it makes me feel like I'm living in this world, not just following waypoints to trigger cutscenes.

Ideally, they'd take it even further and introduce more "living world" elements such as owning property, more random missions, better economy, so you can truly live a life. This is what Bethesda's games do, and the reason why for me Skyrim or FO:4 are so, so much ahead of The Witcher 3, and even CP2077.

Doom, well, it’s supposed to be a skill-based FPS. If you don't dig this gameplay style then it's fine but perhaps expecting some super narrative is a bit misplaced.

Also, when you look at indies such as Noita, with its destructible environs resulting in endless gameplay possibilities, or Shadows Of Doubt where one guy managed to simulate a city block...can you imagine what could happen if an AAA studio and budget applied to these concepts?

So, yes I do disagree , But I get what you mean, and it's fine. I don't mind at all if a game has well developed story, but it shouldn't come at the cost of the gameplay progress and innovation, and that’s what's been happening for more than a decade.

 

[AusWolf]

It’s not even so much about innovation but expanding the concepts we already have. When games such as Deux Ex, Halo or GTA: SA dropped, they were paradigm-shifters based on older concepts. All we had to do is continue expanding, but instead we had regression. For example GTA V's city is an astounding achievement, but what actually can you do there? Nothing much, bar some simple cop chases, which were in place already in the 2D original, and a handful of scripted events. It's a massively wasted opportunity, but I’m sure it's deliberate too - if R* made a game that could be played over and over, less people would jump into the MP cash cow. Same with RDR games, which on surface have a lot of systems, but also borked economy and some mechanics (like abundant Dead Eye) which make everything redundant and funnel you into just following the story.

The beauty of KD:C is not in its okay-ish story but the fact that they insisted on expanding the simplified systems from other games. So, for example you have to actually search an area and figure things out on your own in some quests, pay attention to your inventory because systems, have to actually (shock horror) learn how to fight - or know when to run away. These are all gameplay elements. And also it makes me feel like I'm living in this world, not just following waypoints to trigger cutscenes.

I can't say much about R* games because I've never really played any of them, but it seems we found a common ground in KCD. I agree that the story is simply okay, and the gameplay elements carry the game on their back. But like I said, it's rare that a game can actually do that. Most of them don't have much room to expand, shooters especially (since that's the topic here). I mean, if Genetic Shooter 5674 comes out, what will you do in it? Shoot enemies? Wow! No, there's got to be something more to it, like a good story for example.

Ideally, they'd take it even further and introduce more "living world" elements such as owning property, more random missions, better economy, so you can truly live a life. This is what Bethesda's games do, and the reason why for me Skyrim or FO:4 are so, so much ahead of The Witcher 3, and even CP2077.

Bethesda games are nice, but they're empty, imo. Oblivion is the only one that I can play for longer than an hour without scratching my head trying to think what on earth should I do next. The Witcher 3 is a game full of things to do, full of characters and stories, full of things to lose yourself in, like a good book. But if you're not into that sort of thing, that's fine.

Doom, well, it’s supposed to be a skill-based FPS. If you don't dig this gameplay style then it's fine but perhaps expecting some super narrative is a bit misplaced.

I dig Doom ('16), but I don't dig Doom: Eternal. This is what I meant earlier. They've got basically the same gameplay style (with tweaks), but I still think one is a masterpiece, while the other is a mediocre generic shooter that I'll never replay.

Also, when you look at indies such as Noita, with its destructible environs resulting in endless gameplay possibilities, or Shadows Of Doubt where one guy managed to simulate a city block...can you imagine what could happen if an AAA studio and budget applied to these concepts?

I get what you mean. You can also look at Stray, which while being an indie, has such a masterful storytelling technique combined with nice gameplay that keeps you engaged throughout the game.

And this is my key: to stay engaged. Pure gameplay alone can't do that with me - not in a shooter at least.

 

[Frick]

VR exclusives don't sell as long as VR headsets cost an arm and a leg.

The majority of us don't have VR, so the sales of this mythical game wouldn't be exactly stratospheric.

Valve is probably the only company on earth who might not care about that.

 

[AleXXX666]

*Soon* is always relative when it comes to Valve. They won’t hesitate to delay the project (if they will even reveal it) by whatever timespan they consider necessary to get it where they want it.

RockStar: hold my beer

 

[Splinterdog]

*Soon* is always relative when it comes to Valve. They won’t hesitate to delay the project (if they will even reveal it) by whatever timespan they consider necessary to get it where they want it.

Valve Time.

 

[Sithaer]

The majority of us don't have VR, so the sales of this mythical game wouldn't be exactly stratospheric.

Exactly, on top of that VR makes some of us feel kind of sick like me so if HL 3 was VR exclusive then I would be beyond pissed. 'I already was cause of Alyx..'

 

[Splinterdog]

Exactly, on top of that VR makes some of us feel kind of sick like me so if HL 3 was VR exclusive then I would be beyond pissed. 'I already was cause of Alyx..'

Me too!
I tried Alyx VR at a friend's house and it left me feeling queasy, even though I could see how clever it was. Added to which, the VR headset was very uncomfortable and I could only manage 15 minutes.

 

[fec32a4de]

I dont believe that HL3 is coming anytime soon. Valve stated again and again that they'll release it IF employee want to work on it, IF they get enough of them on a project
AND when there is new, exciting tech. In regards to the first part about employees, I think unlike say Rockstar or other companies, Valve lets employees pick and chose projects to work on.

In regards to new tech, one of the stated reasons was physics in HL2, gravity gun, Ravenholm blades, etc.

HL: Alyx was released because of VR. Theres commentary mode in the game as you play it, and Gaben explains what I said in regards to new, exciting tech.

And perhaps the MOST important reason as to why they wont release HL3 soon is, in Valve's mind they already have a HL game done recently:

HL1 (1998)
HL2 and its episodes (HL2 2004)
HL: Alyx (2020)

HL: Alyx requires a VR headset to fully enjoy and appreciate. But it does have mods to play it with mouse and keyboard. If you're sharing the screen, the viewer gets a regular HUD to show whats happening.
To the VR users Alyx tells them how many bullets are left and they can check their gloves to see health status.

But probably more importantly, because Alyx was released relatively recently, it continues the story (despite the fact that its set BEFORE HL2) of HL that a lot missed out on because its VR-exclusive*
*Unless u use mods.

Spoiler: Serious story spoiler

HALF LIFE: ALYX CHANGES AND RETCONS THE ENDING OF HALF LIFE 2 EP. 2 - DESPITE BEING SET BEFORE EVENTS OF HL2 IT CONTINUES THE STORY AFTERWARD.

Spoiler: Even more serious spoiler

Alyx's father is alive, G-man kidnaps Alyx, because the current "subject" (Gordon) is "unwilling or unable" to help him with his plans

I watched my brother play it in VR via screen sharing, which works great. He played it to hell and back. And because I was the one who bough the Valve Index for him, Valve added a copy of HL:Alyx to my library. I told them it was gift. They told me to keep the game. Upon connecting the VR headset HL: Alyx was added to his account.

I did not play it myself, shits scary, more horror. Especially in VR. So I had my bro play it on my account for the achievements.

 

[Degreco]

Ah, the profitable privately owned company that has under 400 employees has the occasional triennial press release stating that they are still a gaming company

 

[Onasi]

@fec32a4de
…they are literally testing a Half-Life related project right now, have been for a while now. It says so in the article linked in the OP even. HLX has been known to exist for years now and is obviously in active development, so there ARE people working on it. Whether or not it will come out “soon” is another question, but the project DOES exist. It may not end up being called Half-Life 3, but that’s semantics at this point.

 

[Vya Domus]

Soon if you measure time in millennia.

 

[AusWolf]

Valve Time.

Do you mean that Valve has become such a large entity that it has its own gravitational field with some fierce time dilation? So when they develop a game, it actually takes months, only we feel like it's been decades?
That would make sense.

 

[rv8000]

Go read a book then. You might be surprised

And talking about the "go kill 3 boars, skin them, and craft this sock” trope both a) proves my point - we need evolution, not being stuck with the same thing that we had since the 80s, and b) that you either don't really know what good systems are or have missed out on games that deploy them well.

I’ve read plenty, that just completely misses the obvious point. A game is much, much more than a singular system or systems within that exist as part (key word here) of a world and story. A game being defined solely by a repetitive system can be good (or is it just dopamine/addiction?), but then we just end up with a million clones & remakes like we have now, to the point where the only interesting games I’ve bought or played in the last 10 years are nearly exclusively story driven.

 

[AusWolf]

I’ve read plenty, that just completely misses the obvious point. A game is much, much more than a singular system or systems within that exist as part (key word here) of a world and story. A game being defined solely by a repetitive system can be good (or is it just dopamine/addiction?), but then we just end up with a million clones & remakes like we have now, to the point where the only interesting games I’ve bought or played in the last 10 years are nearly exclusively story driven.

Some people only play games for the dopamine hit. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it, but personally, I could never understand why. To me, the novelty of doing the same thing again and again, regardless of how satisfying it is, wears off quickly unless there's something else to it. A good story helps you stay engaged. When you want to know what happens next, it gives you purpose. Gameplay elements alone can't give me that. Maybe I've got spoilt by choice, but I think it's not the 1990s anymore. One needs more than just shooting heads these days.

With that said, my most important aspect of a game is still the atmosphere. When I look at the sunrise in The Witcher, or Kingdom Come Deliverance, and can almost smell the fresh morning air, or when my bones shiver upon discovering a new space anomaly in Freelancer, or a new mysterious region in Homeworld, that's when I feel like I'm really playing the game.

And then there's W40k: Space Marine, which is a great shooter, imo, but also has a fairly decent story, the two aspects which help the player get pinned in front of the screen. One needs that, imo. You need to enjoy what you're doing, but you also need a purpose. You need to wonder what's next.