Lost all of it obviously. Not a single company has my loyalty anymore.
Except if valve were to release a mystery black box with faint lambda symbol on it. I’d pay whatever they asked for it.
Which I imagine doesn't lend itself to doing hard things like making Half Life 3...
Why would any game dev choose to go through a death march to perfection, if they had other project choices?
The entire media industry on almost every format is chasing nostalgia because they refuse to recreate the environment that made endearing stories and experiences in the first place.
which means they have no obligation to ship. And so it is with the valve-time, they never shipped.
Some pressure (monetary usually) is required. Not to mention that "strive to make art" is not a commercially viable objective - the owners of steam will basically be operating a charity for these artists.
If that's what it takes to make something worth playing, then so be it.
Was Bungie in its day a charity? Or did they just get it? 20 years later the magic is gone and Microsoft is desperately trying to figure out how to make the goose lay an egg. As long as they're optimizing quarterly reports they'll never get there.
They might have had enough original ideas for HL2 (and then Alyx, driven by a new medium), but still not HL3...
Roberts was the lead on Digital Anvil's "Freelancer", until the publisher (Microsoft), frustrated at the scope creep and protracted dev cycle, bought out the studio, demoted Roberts, and cut features so they could ship the thing.
Which also shows yet another one of Valve's problems with making games, they treat their games like they're "tech demos", so unfortunately they're not as interested in actually moving the stories in their games forward or bringing them to a conclusion. They do a "tech demo", they move on from that tech, leaving the game and it's world and community behind. Plot? What plot? Perhaps they're also stalling on making continuations or even new releases in search of some "gimmick technology" to pair a game with, instead of just telling a story through their games. For those people that do like the narratives and the worlds in their games, it sure is tough luck. There's more to a game than just 'tech', but alas.
Sure single person self-funded passion projects exist. They always have and they always will. And sure what one person can do is more than they ever could in the past. It's still not the same as something that's forged by a team of visionaries each with unique backgrounds and skillsets.
Frost makes the point more well spoken and stylish than me often.
At Cannes and your local 'art' cinema ? To be fair, I don't watch movies much, but I do still go to these sometimes.
> Where are the games publishers on low budget games?
Who said anything about publishers ? (And Valve dumped theirs as soon as they could.)
> Sure single person self-funded passion projects exist. They always have and they always will. And sure what one person can do is more than they ever could in the past. It's still not the same as something that's forged by a team of visionaries each with unique backgrounds and skillsets.
Ok, I have no idea what you're talking about, are you "no-true-scotsmanning" here ?
We have a great recent example : "Factorio (: Space Age)", which started as a one-person idea, took form as a 3-person company, got after release a 20k€ Indiegogo funding, then blazed a trail of success over the next 12 years, now with something like 5 million sales for the base game and a 30 person company.
How is that not "a team of visionaries each with unique backgrounds and skillset" ?!
Or the amateurs at Spring-Recoil / Zero-K / BAR, which show how you can do that even better than the professional, commercial RTS.
Or indeed one person projects like Shadow Empire (with some publisher support), which show how you can make a brilliant 4X/Wargame on what I assume is a tiny budget...
And there are probably many other examples here...
I get that you're trying to discredit the argument by claiming fallacies, but these aren't just my views. Industry insiders (Frost in games and RedLetterMedia in movies) have been talking about this for nearly a decade.
"Industry" insiders' opinions are irrelevant, they are just too bogged in the day to day details, they tend to forget that 99% of everything is crap and that's fine (and they do that because they have to make a living there, their incentives are different).
And you cannot predict greatness (you are the one that talked about 'visionaries', remember ?) - specifically of new teams you've never heard about before (of course once they did something great it's another thing, even with reversion to the mean they can have a lot of other successes).
It could be a decent environment for making great games if Gabe wantet it to be. It isn't one right now, Gabe is still a businessman first.