Valve employee handbook

[Kadayi]

http://cdn.flamehaus.com/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.pdf

From here: -

http://www.flamehaus.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=163319&start=240

For your delectation

(Could be fake but whatever).

[squirrelfanatic]

Fake or not, this looks pretty interesting.

[karthink]

I'm about 50% through, and this is fascinating. Even if it's fake.

EDIT: Finished it. This document is gold. I now yearn deeply to work at Valve, even though I have no relevant skills.

From the Glossary, all entries of which are hilarious:

Manager: The kind of people we don’t have any of. So if you see one, tell somebody, because it’s probably the ghost of whoever was in this building before us. Whatever you do, don’t let him give you a presentation on paradigms in spectral proactivity.

[Mistabashi]

It ties in with what Michael Abrash (http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/valve-how-i-got-here-what-its-like-and-what-im-doing-2/) wrote on his blog recently. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if this 'leaking' wasn't an accident, it seems like Valve are in the market for new recruits and this handbook is great advertising for them.

[Unaco]

Just to note, it's dated March 2012 for being first published, and the Flamehaus forum posts seem to imply that it has only recently been written. If it is true, it's awesome, Valve are awesome, and I wish I had the skills and whatnot to work for them. Do you think they need Theoretical Neuroscientists?

[frenz0rz]

Please tell me Valve are looking for someone with an Archaeology degree.

[Blackcompany]

I have a 2 year degree in Psych. Enough to understand that:

A. People really do want Halflife 3. And
B. If it says "RPG" on the cover it should, in fact, be an RPG. Either one that flies and blows stuff up, or one that features choices and consequences and big lizards that both fly and blow stuff up.

See, I can do this. :)

[Unaco]

See, I can do this. :)

What? Work in a dig against Bethesda/Skyrim in every thread you comment in? Yes, we know you can do it. Also, I'm looking at my Skyrim box, and it doesn't say RPG anywhere on it.

[NathanH]

At this point he may as well just put the dig in his sig and save himself time.

[squirrelfanatic]

Yo dawg, we heard you like posting Valve-bash, so we put a dig in your sig so you can spam while you spam.

Am I doing this right?

[SirKicksalot]

http://www.abload.de/img/ir2hmgbuhphsah3jiy.png
http://www.abload.de/img/1653282-i_ain_t_even_zrulq.jpg

[Nalano]

I thought it was funny. And if it is fake, maybe Valve will hire the guy who made it and co-opt it into their fold. :P

[icupnimpn2]

Just to note, it's dated March 2012 for being first published, and the Flamehaus forum posts seem to imply that it has only recently been written. If it is true, it's awesome, Valve are awesome, and I wish I had the skills and whatnot to work for them. Do you think they need Theoretical Neuroscientists?

Theoretically.

[Kadayi]

http://www.abload.de/img/1653282-i_ain_t_even_zrulq.jpg

Indeed. I'm kind of past caring now. Valve sounds like a fascinating place to work, but them trolling the fan base of the very game that made them for lulz is kind of 'meh'.

Also wtf has Will Smith got on his feet.

[Nalano]

Indeed. I'm kind of past caring now. Valve sounds like a fascinating place to work, but them trolling the fan base of the very game that made them for lulz is kind of 'meh'.

Also wtf has Will Smith got on his feet.

Air Jordans.

And how are they trolling their fanbase? By not releasing HL3? Dude. Considering Bioware and Blizzards' predicaments, stonewalling probably was the best bet.

[Kester]

I am even mad. Talking to people in the bathroom? That's a serious breach of urinal etiquette.

[Keep]

"Strong projects are ones in which people can see demonstrated value; they staff up easily. This means there are any number of internal recruiting efforts constantly under way."

In other words: "Boy I'm NOT having fun working on this HL3 thing. What's that? You want my help on this different project? Yeah, alright!"

Do you really think anyone wants to work on HL3? Would you, in that environment, and knowing what the outside world is expecting?

Interesting handbook. Sound attitudez.

[Althea]

And how are they trolling their fanbase? By not releasing HL3? Dude. Considering Bioware and Blizzards' predicaments, stonewalling probably was the best bet.
See... I kinda agree with this, but I also don't. It's a bit like what Blizzard have done with Diablo 3. So much teasing, so many honeyed words - it's just going to result in disappointment, kinda like Duke Nukem Forever did. When it came out, it sold, then was promptly forgotten about.

But at least if HL2:E3/HL3 comes out, people may finally move on from it. It's really the biggest thing that people care about with regards to Valve, more so than Valve's inability to deliver anything on time or even within a reasonable time frame (anyone else only just remember about the Portal 2 level creator?), their lack of ability to really talk to their fans or anything.

All anyone really cares about is E3/HL3. Until that comes out, it will overshadow them continuously. Even if it came out at the end of the year, they will still have it hanging over them because some fans will see it as a betrayal of their trust. Rightly so? I won't say, but I think those attacking Valve for not talking about it or anything do have a foot to stand on in some regard.

Valve, in my eyes at least, have a lot of improving to do.

[BobbyFizz]

HL3 end of the year, christ I'd be happy with just that. I'd wager it's on a new engine for the new consoles, not till late 2013

[Nalano]

But at least if HL2:E3/HL3 comes out, people may finally move on from it. It's really the biggest thing that people care about with regards to Valve, more so than Valve's inability to deliver anything on time or even within a reasonable time frame (anyone else only just remember about the Portal 2 level creator?), their lack of ability to really talk to their fans or anything.

Not only is "just cobble together some shit and get it over with" not a particularly compelling reason to spend time and resources on something, but whose time frame are we talking about now? Do you actually think imposing strict timetables for development - and allowing fans of all people to dictate release schedules - will result in games anybody wants to play?

It's always the same. Two months before release the fans are all "I want it now, can't they just release it already, the closed beta whose NDA I'm currently breaking seems polished enough" and two months after release the fans are all "they probably could have stood to work on it another couple of months."

The problem is, these rabid fanbases need to take a collective chill pill. Forcing faster releases is not going to make anything better. Would DNF have been better if it was released five years ago? No, it would still have been a half-formed monster. Cornering a company with unrealistic expectations, no matter the schedule, is not going to result in anything pleasant, and forcing companies to churn out mediocre dross fast enough that fans can't get themselves worked up about the next new thing is nowhere near a solution.

[Kadayi]

And how are they trolling their fanbase? By not releasing HL3? Dude. Considering Bioware and Blizzards' predicaments, stonewalling probably was the best bet.

More the HL3 T-shirt inclusion.


I am even mad. Talking to people in the bathroom? That's a serious breach of urinal etiquette.

Indeed. I guess the exasperated lines coming from the listeners head


Not only is "just cobble together some shit and get it over with" not a particularly compelling reason to spend time and resources on something, but whose time frame are we talking about now? Do you actually think imposing strict timetables for development - and allowing fans of all people to dictate release schedules - will result in games anybody wants to play?"

TBH Nalano the whole 'episodic' trilogy was supposed to be wrapped up by the end of 2007 according to Valve themselves. They sold the HL player base on the idea of episodic in the first place (which people bought into on the basis of 'shorter games, faster turnaround'). Sure, it's Valve and they're terrible at deadlines...but given we're 5 years past when the series was supposed to have concluded, the joke of 'Valve time' has run a little bit thin.

Personally my view is that there's an expiry date on certain game types, and that there's every possibility that the longer Valve leave the HL story unfinished the more likely it is that what they ultimately deliver underwhelms. The irony is that Gabe's advice to modders is to ship and ship often, but it's not advice that Valve themselves follow. Without Steam and the associated money it generates is debatable as to how much credence would be given to them as developers any more.

Still this has been done to death elsewhere with the big 'Devs owe you nothing' discussion.

[Nalano]

TBH Nalano

TBH Kadayi I don't give a flying fuck about what the schedule was because nobody that assiduously keeps to schedule makes games I think are worth playing (and usually whip their employees through so much overtime that even Vietnamese sweatshop managers look on in admiration) and my motto is "it doesn't exist until it's released," anyway.

As for the t-shirt, we have everything third-hand (http://kotaku.com/5864573/half+life-3-t+shirt-confirmed-but-that-is-all) that a non-affiliated developer saw what he thought was a Valve employee, and that somehow nobody knows anybody's name anymore. So the idea that Valve is drip-feeding this information just rings hollow - whether that guy was a plant, whether that guy even worked for Valve, whether Valve gave permission to wear that shirt, it's all pi in the sky bullshit that only rabid fans care about, and like I said, their rabidness is kinda the problem.

[soldant]

TBH Kadayi I don't give a flying fuck about what the schedule was because nobody that assiduously keeps to schedule makes games I think are worth playing (and usually whip their employees through so much overtime that even Vietnamese sweatshop managers look on in admiration) and my motto is "it doesn't exist until it's released," anyway.
Fair enough, but again a 5 year complete blackout when Episode 2 ended with a clear bridging mechanic is a bit ridiculous. It's clear Valve either got bored with it and decided to go do something else (we've had two bouts of L4D, Portal 2, and DOTA2 is on its way along with another Counter Strike) or they've buggered something up and decided to change their story.

It's perfectly fine to take the stance you're taking but at the same time I think it's becoming harder and harder to be entirely dismissive of the attitudes of fans who were invested in the game storyline.

[frenz0rz]

It's perfectly fine to take the stance you're taking but at the same time I think it's becoming harder and harder to be entirely dismissive of the attitudes of fans who were invested in the game storyline.

Theres some good discussion going on here, and I'm overjoyed that nobody has yet mentioned the word 'entitled' (which I'm hoping will soon fade out of the gaming lexicon altogether). Its a topic that has been discussed ten thousand times on a thousand different forums, but for what its worth, I agree with soldant. While Valve are free to work on whatever they want - and indeed, this document (if legitimate) proves the relative success of their unique work ethic - it IS getting more difficult to dismiss the arguments of those who complain that Valve has abandoned their flagship series and cut short a popular storyline at its very climax.

[Nalano]

and indeed, this document (if legitimate) proves the relative success of their unique work ethic

Their financial success proves their ethic, which is why these arguments as to the power of their fans don't ring true. If they were, Valve would have felt it three years ago. They're doing fine. They're awash in a sea of money. Why would they fuck it up with a property that is guaranteed to be an albatross?

[soldant]

Why would they fuck it up with a property that is guaranteed to be an albatross?
Didn't stop them from making Half Life 2, and it was in development hell which was directly caused by Valve's inability to effectively manage their own project.

[Nalano]

Didn't stop them from making Half Life 2, and it was in development hell which was directly caused by Valve's inability to effectively manage their own project.

You call it "development hell." I call it "a design mistake that Valve scrapped when they discovered it didn't work," which is what 3D Realms abjectly refused to do until they died.

[archonsod]

The irony is that Gabe's advice to modders is to ship and ship often, but it's not advice that Valve themselves follow.

They've released several games since, simply none of them were HL3. Money is kinda the key thing there too; if you can shift twice as many copies of say Portal than you can Half Life, it's plain common sense that you ditch the lame duck.

[Kadayi]

TBH Kadayi I don't give a flying fuck...

Engaging with you is a waste of time. Welcome to the list.


They've released several games since, simply none of them were HL3. Money is kinda the key thing there too;[if you can shift twice as many copies of say Portal than you can Half Life, it's plain common sense that you ditch the lame duck.

Money is the problem, but it's not a lack of that's the issue (Valve are minted because of Steam).Also Half-Life is a much bigger franchise that Portal in terms of sales.

[Mistabashi]

Kadayi, I have to say this: Ignoring someone doesn't involve telling them you're ignoring them, and it certainly doesn't involve listing their names in your forum signature.

[Keep]

Kadayi, I have to say this: Ignoring someone doesn't involve telling them you're ignoring them, and it certainly doesn't involve listing their names in your forum signature.

No but it does make things more entertaining from over here *popcorn popcorn*.

[Ernesto]

Fair enough, but again a 5 year complete blackout when Episode 2 ended with a clear bridging mechanic is a bit ridiculous.
Just because the fate of the main character(s) is unclear at the end, it doesn't mean that there will be another episode imho. Never heard of open endings? Sometimes I like open endings, but I don't like endless continuations.
Also a great part of a game is the work of artists. I bet nobody said to Da Vinci: 'You have 6 months to complete the Mona Lisa. So get on it!'.

[deano2099]

Just because the fate of the main character(s) is unclear at the end, it doesn't mean that there will be another episode imho. Never heard of open endings? Sometimes I like open endings, but I don't like endless continuations.

Which is fine, but Valve said there would be a third episode out by the end of 2007. And they've never issued a statement on it since then. Which is also fine, but when you do that you lose any moral high-ground when it comes to talking about 'respecting the fans' or anything like that, and you should expect to take any of the flack you get over the internet. But Valve tend to get a bit of a pass for it.

Some how I can't help but think that if it were 2015 and we were still waiting on Mass Effect 3, and Bioware hadn't spoken about it since 2010, people would be rightly annoyed. Even if they'd bought out Dragon Age 3 and Jade Empire 2 in the meantime and they were both amazing.

[Kadayi]

Just because the fate of the main character(s) is unclear at the end, it doesn't mean that there will be another episode imho. Never heard of open endings? Sometimes I like open endings, but I don't like endless continuations.
Also a great part of a game is the work of artists. I bet nobody said to Da Vinci: 'You have 6 months to complete the Mona Lisa. So get on it!'.

Valve talked about the entire episodes series being a Trilogy

Also Da Vinci very much worked by commission (some one paid him to paint the Mona Lisa). This idea that 'artists' are somehow creative maestros beholden to no one but themselves is pretty much a fiction outside the moneyed elite and modern art circle, and even then a lot of modern artists still do work through commission.

[Althea]

Some how I can't help but think that if it were 2015 and we were still waiting on Mass Effect 3, and Bioware hadn't spoken about it since 2010, people would be rightly annoyed. Even if they'd bought out Dragon Age 3 and Jade Empire 2 in the meantime and they were both amazing.
Hook, line, sinker. This a thousand times. Any other company who did this would be torn apart by the masses. Valve are among the few developers (I'd say CDProjekt RED are one of the others) who seem to get a free pass on things. Never mind L4D2 coming out too quickly (IN MY OPINION before anyone jumps on me for it), never mind Valve's bigger successes being the work of others (L4D was Turtle Rock, CS/CS:S is all based on mods, Portal is by the Narbacular Drop team, etc.) - they could hit baby seals with 2x4s and people would still give them a free pass, saying it's "research" or something.

[ado]

I became a fan of Valve primarily because of Half-Life, but seeing how people act over Ep.3 makes me wish that it never gets actually released and that Valve continues trolling the masses with HL3 related shit.

The very fact that people can get so worked up over something like this makes me unreasonably happy.

[Oof]

It is pretty annoying that people are acting like Valve's company model is something new and innovative... (Hint: it's not.)

[Nalano]

Even if they'd bought out Dragon Age 3 and Jade Empire 2 in the meantime and they were both amazing.

I, for one, would very much like Jade Empire 2. Plus, since Jade Empire is still relatively under-appreciated, there'd have been no rabid fanbase forcing Bioware to do crazy stupid over-the-top shit.


It is pretty annoying that people are acting like Valve's company model is something new and innovative... (Hint: it's not.)

I'd argue it isn't new so much as far too rare.

[Chaz]

Also Da Vinci very much worked by commission (some one paid him to paint the Mona Lisa). This idea that 'artists' are somehow creative maestros beholden to no one but themselves is pretty much a fiction outside the moneyed elite and modern art circle, and even then a lot of modern artists still do work through commission.

That is true, but most of the artists wouldn't have been paid fully until they'd completed the commision, and several of the great artists were major procrastinators, sometimes not delivering on commsions for years and some times never at all, despite having taken part payment up front.

[Kadayi]

That is true, but most of the artists wouldn't have been paid fully until they'd completed the commision, and several of the great artists were major procrastinators, sometimes not delivering on commsions for years and some times never at all, despite having taken part payment up front.

And?

10 char

[ado]

It is pretty annoying that people are acting like Valve's company model is something new and innovative... (Hint: it's not.)

Out of curiosity, I'd like to know what other companies work with this model? Not trying to argue anything here, just curious...

[Althea]

Out of curiosity, I'd like to know what other companies work with this model? Not trying to argue anything here, just curious...
Probably not many outside of the indie community, because most devs would die quickly.

[neema_t]

Maybe he was referring to a social structure. I know nothing about this stuff so I'm sure someone will pull me up for this and mention something far more appropriate and make me look stupid, but maybe he was referring to communism, or marxism, or whatever you'd call a social structure that's about equality but without the massive oppression stuff that communism seems to enjoy. I don't know.

But yes, I too seriously, really actually want to work for Valve now. I don't think it's entirely unrealistic, either, given that I have a degree in graphic communication and I'm angling for another in electronic engineering (since my graphics degree was absolutely useless in making me less poor), meaning I'm doing a BTEC now and could have a degree (if I do choose to go that far) by 2016. I also have an interest in software design and programming but don't know it too well... Maybe I'll take up learning the Source SDK as a hobby. Then find that they've moved on to something different and I'll be obsolete.

I did notice they're hiring electronic engineer(s), but it's quite far over my head at the moment. I can do transistors, I can just about handle 8-bit microprocessors, but ARM is maybe going a bit far. Who knows. A guy can dream.

[ado]

Maybe he was referring to a social structure. I know nothing about this stuff so I'm sure someone will pull me up for this and mention something far more appropriate and make me look stupid, but maybe he was referring to communism, or marxism, or whatever you'd call a social structure that's about equality but without the massive oppression stuff that communism seems to enjoy. I don't know.

You mean me?

No, this is closer to anarchy as a political system I'd say. But that's not what I'm asking for. I'm actually asking for company names, past or present, that have worked/work on the same model.

I know Google has some of these structural ideas implemented, but very loosely and nowhere to the point of Valve.

[Inverselaw]

the academic field isint very different from that model, your research is a combination of what you find interesting and what interests other people, you eventually teach the classes you want to teach and the academic boss "the chair" is an elected temporary position, mostly composed of someone who volunteered for the post because there is this one thing thing that never gets done so he became chair to get that thing done, at some point hes either successful or tired of being chair and so he declares victory and someone else mentions that thers this one thing that never gets done and he wants to be chair to get it done and so the cycle continues.

this however exists as a pocket with individual profs being bosses of their grad students, and more literally then you would think since they have the power to effectively fire you and they control your salary. plus there's the whole corporate side of the university which is very much a standard business.

[soldant]

Probably not many outside of the indie community, because most devs would die quickly.
Exactly, Valve aren't accountable to anybody except themselves. They are their own publisher and by this point can attach their name to something and have a legion of fans support it for no reason other than it's Valve (which is how glaring flaws in Steam are glossed over). The indie community is in a similar position except that people are reluctant to hold them accountable for anything for some reason. There's a general lack of criticism and tendency to overstate positive elements.

When you're not accountable to anybody and incredibly unlikely to fail, you can do whatever you want like Valve might be doing in this case. Valve can tick along wasting time with poor management because Steam is away and running. Indie devs either work a regular job, or apparently just put up a Kickstarter or ask for donations and acquire funds before they've even released anything.

Different story for most devs, who are reporting to a publisher (who reports to shareholders or their internal structure with long-term plans) or who are held accountable for screw-ups and can't afford to not release products or make bad decisions. Introversion learned that the hard way after releasing Darwinia (which wasn't exceptionally good) and then doing absolutely nothing of value until DEFCON.

[Keep]

poor management


Steam is away and running.

Something's not adding up.

[soldant]

Something's not adding up.
I was referring to how their approach game development clearly, since we're talking about devs. Half Life itself spent ages in development because Valve lost control, and then the same thing happened with Half Life 2, and Team Fortress 2, and now the same thing has clearly happened with Ep3. If they didn't have Steam and one of those turned out to be pretty bad, the poor management doesn't pay off.

[Nalano]

Something's not adding up.

http://aird-tools.co.uk/shop/images/910081_l.jpg

[Althea]

I was referring to how their approach game development clearly, since we're talking about devs. Half Life itself spent ages in development because Valve lost control, and then the same thing happened with Half Life 2, and Team Fortress 2, and now the same thing has clearly happened with Ep3. If they didn't have Steam and one of those turned out to be pretty bad, the poor management doesn't pay off.
If nothing else, those situations and the constant delay of DLC means this:

Valve have absolutely piss-poor communication skills, and poor time management. They don't report delays, they don't get word out quick enough (remember last year's hack?) and they just keep people hanging. L4D2, around the time of the last DLC, had its forum filled with "when's it coming out?" topics because Valve had overshot the time they'd given and said absolutely sweet F.A. about it.

[soldant]

If nothing else, those situations and the constant delay of DLC means this:

Valve have absolutely piss-poor communication skills, and poor time management. They don't report delays, they don't get word out quick enough (remember last year's hack?) and they just keep people hanging. L4D2, around the time of the last DLC, had its forum filled with "when's it coming out?" topics because Valve had overshot the time they'd given and said absolutely sweet F.A. about it.
They did the same thing with the HL2 September 2003 release, to the point where they contradicted the publisher's statement that it wouldn't be out despite knowing at the start of the year that it wasn't going to be ready. They lied to everyone deliberately for some ridiculous reason. Reading their book on HL/HL2's development it's blatantly obvious that Valve have no idea how to effectively manage a project.

Luckily for them, the product they release ends up being particularly good, but it seems to me that it only really takes shape and actually ends up being a decent product at the end of its lengthy development time. I can't help but think they'd get more done with less screwing around. Oh, but wait, we're wrong and I have an axe to grind.

[Vexing Vision]

Reading their book on HL/HL2's development it's blatantly obvious that Valve have no idea how to effectively manage a project.

Luckily for them, the product they release ends up being particularly good, but it seems to me that it only really takes shape and actually ends up being a decent product at the end of its lengthy development time. I can't help but think they'd get more done with less screwing around. Oh, but wait, we're wrong and I have an axe to grind.

I found this management-style (or lack thereof) to be utterly fascinating - and I think it shows in the quality of the games. There is an amazing lot of details in Valve-games, and this process explains it - motivation is a huge factor between a shoddy product and a great one, and Valve-titles tend to be "great" in production value.

I would much, much rather work in that environment than in our current hierarchical structure. Indeed, after reading that handbook, I filed in an open application. :)

[Drayk]

I found this management-style (or lack thereof) to be utterly fascinating - and I think it shows in the quality of the games. There is an amazing lot of details in Valve-games, and this process explains it - motivation is a huge factor between a shoddy product and a great one, and Valve-titles tend to be "great" in production value.

I would much, much rather work in that environment than in our current hierarchical structure. Indeed, after reading that handbook, I filed in an open application. :)

I wholhearthedly agree. If I wasn't a philosophy major (useless) with poor english skills and no programing experience I would also apply ! Maybe they're in need of a new janitor !

[soldant]

I found this management-style (or lack thereof) to be utterly fascinating - and I think it shows in the quality of the games.
The thing is Valve can afford it. They have the Steam platform (which is strictly managed, I highly doubt the people looking after Steam live in the designer's utopia) which keeps ticking, and they can afford to spend time screwing around as a result of that and their name in the community. Should Valve ever screw it up though the party will be over. As a cautionary tale the "When it's done" approach ultimately led to Duke Nukem Forever. Valve is quite a way off that but it is a cautionary tale for devs.

I can point to a really unsafe structure for example and say "Hey, no deaths yet, it's working fine now so it's never going to happen!" but it's flawed thinking. A no management utopia works only so long as it puts out a very high level of quality. So far it is, but if it slips, the fall will be mighty.

See also: ION Storm, though that's also a pretty extreme case and hilarious.

[Vexing Vision]

T

See also: ION Storm, though that's also a pretty extreme case and hilarious.

But ION Storm was repeatedly pushed to deadlines it couldn't meet, and had to cut out content or quality - yes, Valve is safe and has produced plenty of high-quality titles. I never liked Left 4 Dead 1 or 2, mind you, but they're still high-quality game. CONSISTENTLY high-quality games.

So something MUST work for them. It somewhat boggles my mind that it does, as I've never worked in anything but a more or less strict hierarchical structure, but I can definitely see how my personal working-style would fit in there.

[Althea]

Valve kinda rest on their laurels a bit. Steam allows them to go by their own schedule, because they don't have anyone breathing down their backs. No publishers, no stores, nothing. Just them. Indie devs have a lot of pressure - real or otherwise - to get things out. Even Larian, one of the other big independent devs, have pressures to get things out. They have the flexibility and the freedom to do things like Dragon Knight Saga, but they still need to get things released and answer to their community in order to stay in business.

Valve, don't, though. They have so much in the bank, so much guaranteed income that they can take the time. Blizzard are very much the same. But whereas Blizzard have a publisher breathing down their back (i.e. Bobby NoDick and co), Valve don't. Blizzard get things done, Valve don't. Blizzard don't give dates unless absolutely sure, Valve do. Blizzard constantly give feedback, Valve don't. See?

[Snakejuice]

Blizzard get things done, Valve don't. Blizzard don't give dates unless absolutely sure, Valve do. Blizzard constantly give feedback, Valve don't. See?

All those things are ultimately not very important (to me) compared to getting good games. Who cares about releasedates etc except publishers? We got THOUSANDS of games to play while waiting for HL3! What's the hurry?

[Althea]

All those things are ultimately not very important (to me) compared to getting good games. Who cares about releasedates etc except publishers? We got THOUSANDS of games to play while waiting for HL3! What's the hurry?
It's not about having other things to play. It's about the principle.

Valve have spoken about a product, they have strung us along for a number of years via marketing, interviews, in-game references (Portal 2 in particular) and so forth. They have not stuck to the original time frame, and have not spoken about another one. Do they owe us an explanation? In a way they don't, but I think they do. The radio silence just happened, and Valve haven't been forthcoming about it.

We're all invested in Valve, whether it's buying through Steam, buying Portal 2 on release day or otherwise. For that reason alone, Valve at least owe us a straight answer.

[Snakejuice]

We're all invested in Valve, whether it's buying through Steam, buying Portal 2 on release day or otherwise. For that reason alone, Valve at least owe us a straight answer.

Well I'm not really sure what to say here.. You feel they owe you an answer and I'm sure lots of others feel the same way. As for myself? Maybe I'm getting too old to care all that much about games before they are released unless I get into the beta. And yes I also got lots of (most) games on Steam and bought Portal 2 at release.

I do however wonder WHY they are so quiet about these things as I'm sure they know lots of people get mad at them for it. Maybe they are afraid to give any ideas to competitors? Maybe it's just company culture?

[Kadayi]

Something's not adding up.

Not really. Steam is a roaring success, however Valve as a games developer not so much these days when you get into the math. Portal 2 didn't do anywhere near MW3, BF3 or Skyrim numbers in terms of sales and Valve are still suffering from Gabe bad mouthing both the 360 & PS3 when it comes to the consoles to the extent that market penetration is pretty nominal. Valve just haven't crossed over to the bigger market unlike Bethesda, Bioware, DICE, etc, etc, they are still seen as a PC developer.

Remove the Steam money from the equation and it's questionable whether their present design approach is sustainable or even profitable. With the amount they spend on marketing I'm not even sure if Portal 2 really made money at the end of the day. To the rest of the industry making games is a business, I'm not so sure that's the case with Valve now.

[soldant]

But ION Storm was repeatedly pushed to deadlines it couldn't meet, and had to cut out content or quality - yes, Valve is safe and has produced plenty of high-quality titles. I never liked Left 4 Dead 1 or 2, mind you, but they're still high-quality game. CONSISTENTLY high-quality games.
ION Storm was a good example of wasting time and cash. They had deadlines to meet and didn't meet them because they screwed around with ridiculous nonsense dressed up as their maxim of "Design is Law." On top of that they never released anything that was commercially successful in any meaningful way. Unfortunately some studios need publishers breathing down their neck to get anything out of them (although it still didn't work for 3D Realms, which is the better example of where blatantly ignoring a public release goal led to failure).

Valve almost totally screwed up Half Life when it was in development; take a look at its development history and see how much time they spent just making "something" before realising they didn't actually have a game. If Valve hadn't put out a good title, it's likely they would have fallen flat on their face and you'd never have heard of them. They came close to it.

The point I'm raising is that Valve's dev cycle is a bit of a mess for what appear to be fairly pointless reasons. The success of Valve games are mostly from presentation and scripting. It remains to be seen how well received DOTA2 will ultimately be, which is something radically different from anything else they've done thus far. Again, while they push quality their work cycle is fine, but when it stops (I doubt they can keep raising the bar forever) it'll trigger a period of introspection and changes.

Note that I'm not advocating a battery farm for artists and so on because strict hierarchical control in a creative industry is moronic (just like trying to implement an anarchic system in a hospital would be dangerous) but the balance is fragile. As Althea said Valve are too big to fail just at the moment thanks primarily to Steam, so they can afford to take their time while for other studios it'd be suicide unless they only worked part time or as a hobby. The same goes for Blizzard. But even then they're going to have to set deadlines and finalise things if they ever hope to have a final release, so it's not like there's a total lack of accountability in either group.

[Snakejuice]

Valve just haven't crossed over to the bigger market unlike Bethesda, Bioware, DICE, etc, etc, they are still seen as a PC developer.

This is a good thing! If they started to make shit console games and port them to PC (like everyone else) they would practically abandon their core audience and would lose so much good will I'm not even sure they'd manage to keep Steam the market leader.

[Kadayi]

This is a good thing! If they started to make shit console games and port them to PC (like everyone else) they would practically abandon their core audience and would lose so much good will I'm not even sure they'd manage to keep Steam the market leader.

They've been making multi-platform games since the Orange Box. Also where's their core audience going to go exactly? Also I'm not sure whether the whole 'console games = shit' really has that much traction around here.

[Nalano]

Remove the Steam money from the equation and it's questionable whether their present design approach is sustainable or even profitable.

Remove Steam and Valve isn't a self-publisher any more. So, yes, obviously their model would change. But what does that prove? Current developers who don't self-publish get eaten. Current publishers who develop also make money off of other developers. It's not a 1:1.

[ado]

Valve developed their "cabal" system of work while working on Half-Life. So yeah, the company managed to sustain itself for quite a while despite not relying on income from Steam. Besides, since '06 they've been releasing a game per year ('07 we actually got 3 with the orange box).

I really don't see what so inefficient about their system, considering that other developers often take years between two games.

[Althea]

I really don't see what so inefficient about their system, considering that other developers often take years between two games.
Left 4 Dead was by an outside studio (Turtle Rock) who were absorbed by Valve and then split off.
Portal was partially by the team behind Narbacular Drop
Team Fortress 2 is Team Fortress 2.
HL2:E1/E2 were more akin to expansions - a few new assets here and there, not much else.

[Snakejuice]

They've been making multi-platform games since the Orange Box. Also where's their core audience going to go exactly?

Yes, but they have been making PC-games and porting them to console, not the other (wrong) way around.

edit: Would you LIKE Valve being like every other company out there? If so, why?

[ado]

Left 4 Dead was by an outside studio (Turtle Rock) who were absorbed by Valve and then split off.
Portal was partially by the team behind Narbacular Drop
Team Fortress 2 is Team Fortress 2.
HL2:E1/E2 were more akin to expansions - a few new assets here and there, not much else.

These are all games developed within Valve itself. Poratl and Narbacular Drop have nothing in common apart from the portal mechanic. All the assets, textures, story etc. in Portal was made by Valve, and same goes for L4D. I find it quite hilarious how nonchalantly people mention these games in such context; like Valve bought them already finished from someone else and released them under their own label.

Furthermore, the episodes are each about 6 hours long. That's your average singleplayer FPS length these days. If they where released by anyone else but Valve they'd get their own big boy release, with a shitty MP option to boot.

[Althea]

edit: Would you LIKE Valve being like every other company out there? If so, why?
No-one is arguing for that. The position I take, at least, is simply that Valve need to get a grip and stop dicking about before it causes them issues.


These are all games developed within Valve itself. Poratl and Narbacular Drop have nothing in common apart from the portal mechanic. All the assets, textures, story etc. in Portal was made by Valve, and same goes for L4D. I find it quite hilarious how nonchalantly people mention these games in such context; like Valve bought them already finished from someone else and released them under their own label.
Um... Left 4 Dead wasn't. You missed the bit where it was developed by Turtle Rock, who were owned by Valve at the time. But they were still a separate studio. Valve would have assisted in the development, yes, but it wasn't a "purely" Valve game. Portal incorporated staff recruited specifically for it (same with the upcoming DotA2).


Furthermore, the episodes are each about 6 hours long. That's your average singleplayer FPS length these days. If they where released by anyone else but Valve they'd get their own big boy release, with a shitty MP option to boot.
I would quite confidently assume that more work goes into your standard 6hr FPS than the two episodic games.

[Mistabashi]

Valve don't seem all that inefficient to me, given that they only employ about 300 people and also operate a digital distribution platform with over 40 million users. In fact I'd say the exact opposite were true.

[Althea]

Valve don't seem all that inefficient to me, given that they only employ about 300 people and also operate a digital distribution platform with over 40 million users. In fact I'd say the exact opposite were true.
200 employees is the figure that goes around, and Steam is basically self-propelling.

But they can still be inefficient regardless of that. And funnily enough, that's what they are.

[Mistabashi]

200 employees is the figure that goes around, and Steam is basically self-propelling.

But they can still be inefficient regardless of that. And funnily enough, that's what they are.

According to Wikipedia, Bioware employ ~800 people.

[ado]

So THIS is what a hater looks like. Nice to meet you sir!

[Nalano]

200 employees is the figure that goes around, and Steam is basically self-propelling.

But they can still be inefficient regardless of that. And funnily enough, that's what they are.

You keep using that word "inefficient."

Yet, you've just handed proof that Valve have a very high profit-to-employee ratio. As a company, they are very efficient.

[Althea]

So THIS is what a hater looks like. Nice to meet you sir!
Sir? And I'm not a hater. I criticise Valve, but I don't hate them.


According to Wikipedia, Bioware employ ~800 people.
BioWare is not one studio. BioWare is, off the top of my head, about six or seven studios of varying sizes, from the MMO teams in Austin and Mythic to the smaller what-was EA2D, and back to the multi-teamed Edmonton.


You keep using that word "inefficient."

Yet, you've just handed proof that Valve have a very high profit-to-employee ratio. As a company, they are very efficient.
In that regard, yes. They get high profits for a moderate number of employees. But how? By taking a cut of every purchase, and Steam processes a lot of purchases a day, especially in sale periods. But in terms of their actual output? No, I don't think they are.

[ado]

Mam then? Well maybe hater is a strong word, but there's definitely some irrational criteria employed here when it comes to Valve and their output.



I would quite confidently assume that more work goes into your standard 6hr FPS than the two episodic games.

However it was this line that made me go with the "hater" route.

[Timofee]

Luckily for them, the product they release ends up being particularly good, but it seems to me that it only really takes shape and actually ends up being a decent product at the end of its lengthy development time.

I'm not sure if you're just being facetious here, I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I'm unconvinced, so I will state the blindingly obvious:

The time before it comes together is not wasted time, they use that time finding out 100s of ways not to do it, which is equally as valuable as finding out ways how to do it.




200 employees is the figure that goes around, and Steam is basically self-propelling.

But they can still be inefficient regardless of that. And funnily enough, that's what they are.

I guess its just a poor choice of words but inefficiency is one word you simply cannot use to describe them. Could they be more efficient, probably. However per head they are more profitable than the likes of google and microsoft, they release about a game a year which is good by most studios standards (not necessarily the game people WANT but that's their prerogative). To say they are inefficient is baffling.

[kyrieee]

Valve's strategy isn't to shit out games every 2 years so the efficiency metric is pointless.
They want to be innovators, not a game factory.

[Nalano]

In that regard, yes. They get high profits for a moderate number of employees. But how? By taking a cut of every purchase, and Steam processes a lot of purchases a day, especially in sale periods. But in terms of their actual output? No, I don't think they are.

Just because you keep saying "this or that doesn't count" doesn't mean they don't produce anything.

[Timofee]

Valve's strategy isn't to shit out games every 2 years so the efficiency metric is pointless.
They want to be innovators, not a game factory.

Actually the efficiency metric isn't completely pointless, however judging creative output by volume is. A better metric would surely be critical acclaim which by most definitions valve would be at or near the top of.

[soldant]

I would quite confidently assume that more work goes into your standard 6hr FPS than the two episodic games.
That said the Episodes do have a significant amount of dialogue and scripting, so I'm not 100% sure that the comparisons hold true. But I agree in general that they do require less work (and have very short gameplay time as a result) than a full game. Which Valve apparently can't manage. That's the more ironic thing here; Valve decided to swap to episodic content, managed to get it right ONCE, and promptly screwed it up/forgot about it or whatever.

Those of you who disagree with Althea that Valve don't end up "dicking around" ought to read Raising the Bar. They effectively made the same mistakes with HL2's development as they did with HL before it... and to an extent, they did the same thing with TF2. If they were swapping the engine every so often, it might sound like the DNF saga.


Valve's strategy isn't to shit out games every 2 years so the efficiency metric is pointless.
They want to be innovators, not a game factory.
Thing is they're not innovating these days. Their last innovation was Portal... the mechanics for which were originally from a third party that Valve absorbed. Their innovation is mostly in Team Fortress 2 (introducing strong characterisation into a multiplayer game) and Half Life (importance of scripted sequences which people apparently hate these days), with HL2 extending that (better facial animation, and gravity puzzles to an extent). Ep1 and Ep2 are straight expansions without any innovation on their own. Portal 2 is just Portal with a longer game attached. L4D is a standard co-op shooter.

Valve aren't the great innovators in gaming people claim. Not every release is a revolution. But they're the darling of the PC gaming sector, so nobody bothers to point that out.

[Heister]

Valve's strategy isn't to shit out games every 2 years so the efficiency metric is pointless.
They want to be innovators, not a game factory.

They just shit out a load of dlc thats put the paying customers off their game. But yeah, they do make good games. Saying that, I haven't played L4D 1 or 2 for ages/years. I haven't even played Portal 2 coop. I really don't know why they didn't have an option to buy Portal 2 coop separately. The Half-Life games and episodes though are really brilliant innovative games.

My biggest complaint with Valve is this;




















.

[alset85]

They just shit out a load of dlc thats put the paying customers off their game.

Do you mean paid game-affecting DLC? When was that? Because if it's just hats then cry me a river.

[Nalano]

Saying that, I haven't played L4D 1 or 2 for ages/years.

L4D was made four years ago. L4D2 three years ago. "Ages" is a bit of an overstatement, don'cha think?

[Heister]

L4D was made four years ago. L4D2 three years ago. "Ages" is a bit of an overstatement, don'cha think?

Not really. I've bought the games. I've played the games. I've not played the games in ages though.

[Fede]

@soldant: L4D's Director was a rather new thing, maybe not a first, but I would call it trying to innovate.

I think that most of us can agree about Valve usually making pretty good stuff* and usually taking a while to complete the projects; also their games don't seem to sell that much, and I doubt that they could support themselves without Steam.

Their no-managers culture seems to work well for quality, but also might not be as money efficient as hoped (if you just look at the development part of the company). But don't we usually complain about publishers just looking at their immediate profit? So while disliking things like selling keys for crates (TF2) and Steam's slow support, I do support spending more money and time to make a better (even if less efficient) product.

* full disclosure: I prefer different kind of games so I havent played many of them, but I do enjoy let's plays/aars, and so I do think that their games' quality is on the good side.

[Kaira-]

Valve's strategy isn't to shit out games every 2 years

Yeah, they make about a game a year. Latest year when they didn't bring out a game was 2002.

[Althea]

Yeah, they make about a game a year. Latest year when they didn't bring out a game was 2002.
That's not making a game a year. That's releasing a game a year. Completely different thing.

[Kaira-]

That's not making a game a year. That's releasing a game a year. Completely different thing.
Well, true. My brains = off.

[Jarts]

If the main criticism is that Valve hasn't released or effectively communicated the status of HL3, that is absolutely correct. There seem to be people who care, and those that don't. So why keep restating the same things over and over (on both sides of that point, really)?

I am a lurker here and am genuinely perplexed by tangents that happen when Valve or HL3 are invoked.