Owned.

1) The source engine is obviously very powerful, is there any Half Life code in it?

Rick Ellis: All of the code in the Source engine is new.

http://www.bluewolf72.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=3799#post3799

We?ve added the torus as one of the basic building blocks. This makes it easy to build smooth pipes, tunnels etc.

MmmmMMmm... :smile:

Donuts...mmmm

Wonder if maps will still take 5 years to compile...

Thankfully the devkit comes with a version of XSI, which really the only reason I'd get HL2, just to get experience with that program.

Edge Damodred said:
which really the only reason I'd get HL2, just to get experience with that program.

Um, you won't get HL2 to play it? :razz:

Torus?

Campaignjunkie said:

Edge Damodred said:
which really the only reason I'd get HL2, just to get experience with that program.

Um, you won't get HL2 to play it? :razz:

nope, not really

Cassius said:
Torus?

It's basically a 3d-ring.

Cassius said:
Torus?

It's latin for a plain, bland-tasting donut.

Basically- take a sheet of paper- much like this graphical representation below:

<!--code-->Code:<TABLE width="95%" align=center><TR><TD>
a-----b
| |
| |
c-----d
</td></tr></table><!--/code-->

edit weak- the pipes don't line up. Use your imagination.
note Code chunks get fugly when you quote/edit them.

Wonderful.

Now, bend the paper into a cylinder such that a touches b and c touches d. Now, bend it AGAIN (into a donut shapey thing) so that all points touch one another.

And that is a simplistic torus.

They're neat because they only have one side, much like a sphere- but they have a hole in them! I would assume that this would "excite" math "people" in some "way" and cause them to go party or something. I guess. Still kinda neat-o though.

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Rick Ellis: Of course this depends on the complexity of their mods, however in most cases it will be very easy to port a mod to Half-Life 2.

[/quote]
Yet it has no HL1 source code...? Riiigggghhttt...

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Rick Ellis: Maps are ?roughed out? with world brushes, blocks, cylinders, toruses, etc. The detailed parts of the map are created with models built in XSI. In general, models are more detailed than brushes but since they don?t provide visibility blocking, you can?t use models everywhere.

[/quote]
Wow that sounds JUST LIKE UT2K3! Get ready to learn modeling my little Snarkpitters!

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Rick Ellis: Three of the biggest things that Source has to expand the FPS genre are facial expressions/animations, advanced AI and real world physics.

[/quote]
Someone was talking about how DOOM3 wasn't 'optimized' for multiplayer. HL2 sounds the same, (and we've seen NO multi for it yet). Seriously, AI and facial expressions aren't important for multi. Are you really going to notice that your teammate is lipsyncing what he says or not? Does that really effect gameplay? And as for whether the physics stuff really works online.. well we'll see. But even then, it's mostly a gimmick that wouldn't effect gameplay unless you were doing a very unrealistic mod. Wow, CS with realistic tossable mattresses and crates, I'm soooo excited!

Look, HL2 is not gonna ship without a decent multiplayer. The rampant success of HL1 is firmly entrenched in its multiplayer aspects. There's just no way it makes good business sense for it to ship without a multiplayer. (Highlight for tasteless joke) That'd be like the WNBA refusing ticket sales to lesbians.

my tasteless comeback: or the NRA refusing membership to Texans & white trash.

well it isn't good business sense either to say a game will be out, get it on the cover of every game magazine out there, and not follow through. not only did they irritate a lot of fans, I'm sure the press was a little miffed since they were misled as well.

(insert random insult about Valve's 'good business sense' here.)

I disagree, though, about HL1's 'rampant success'. It was modding that ultimately gave HL1 it's longetivity, but HL's generic DM isn't exactly brilliant stuff man. I mean, I like it, but it's nothing special and I don't think it was a major selling point for the game initially- we bought it for the brilliant one-player adventure. (once they added TFC, though...). If HL1 hadn't had a great one-player game, it never would have gotten to the critical mass it needed for multiplayer modding to take off.

[edit] The playing field may be different, now, though, in terms of what people expect from games in general and HL2 in particular.

Jinx said:
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Rick Ellis: Of course this depends on the complexity of their mods, however in most cases it will be very easy to port a mod to Half-Life 2.

Yet it has no HL1 source code...? Riiigggghhttt...

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Rick Ellis: Maps are ?roughed out? with world brushes, blocks, cylinders, toruses, etc. The detailed parts of the map are created with models built in XSI. In general, models are more detailed than brushes but since they don?t provide visibility blocking, you can?t use models everywhere.

[/quote]
Wow that sounds JUST LIKE UT2K3! Get ready to learn modeling my little Snarkpitters!

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Rick Ellis: Three of the biggest things that Source has to expand the FPS genre are facial expressions/animations, advanced AI and real world physics.

[/quote]
Someone was talking about how DOOM3 wasn't 'optimized' for multiplayer. HL2 sounds the same, (and we've seen NO multi for it yet). Seriously, AI and facial expressions aren't important for multi. Are you really going to notice that your teammate is lipsyncing what he says or not? Does that really effect gameplay? And as for whether the physics stuff really works online.. well we'll see. But even then, it's mostly a gimmick that wouldn't effect gameplay unless you were doing a very unrealistic mod. Wow, CS with realistic tossable mattresses and crates, I'm soooo excited!

[/quote]

First off, I'd like you to explain why it is that you believe your theories upon the Source engine, based on (assuming you did not download the code) complete speculation about screenshots and videos, should hold ANY water at all - much less authority over a Valve employee.

Second, I'd like you to explain your disposition to launch barrages of vague, uber-cynical tyrades in our direction every time somebody even mentions HL2.

I'm not convinced in the least that Valve would be predisposed, at least out of some malicious intent, to lie about their product. However, the publisher always has the big-name developers by the balls, and they have stretched the truth or beat around the bush about their game, but I'm convinced that would not be their intent under any other circumstances.

However, it seems half the internet has taken off about how they faked the hacking of their own source code (because every game company likes to announce potential complete failure rather than simply push back a f**king release date), whining about how the version they stole is subpar and (GASP) is unfinished, and that the HL2 engine is cardboard held together with duct tape. Not that you do (all of) those, Jinx, but such as it is, you stand on their side when you try to piss on an unreleased game that you, quite frankly, don't know s**t about.

Can you honestly make any factual case for HL2 multiplayer being trashy? When was the last time you played it? The fact that they haven't shown it means nothing - they didn't show the game itself for five years, but it was still there. Though to believe in HL2's existence a year or so ago would be a tremendous leap of faith, to suggest that Vivendi would allow them to ship without a functional multiplayer system is ridiculous.

As Jinx said about TFC improving HL's multiplayer side, I reckon they'll do a TF2 on us...

I thought they said they were keeping the multiplayer aspect a secret, like they are doing with the plot of the single player game? If there is no multiplayer they would never say 'the multiplayer is a supprise'. I suppose Jinx you think that they will just turn around when the game comes out and say "ha! the supprise is there is no multiplayer! Suckers!!"

i hope they're going to turn around and say that steam is an april fools

no but steam was made by a bunch of fools.

Yet it has no HL1 source code...? Riiigggghhttt...

Even with from-scratch source code, there's no way Valve would be stupid enough to not make certain components similar enough to what is already there to make it compatible with what they already know - this has nothing to do with mod teams, even, but everything to do with their own in-house team. Learning new tech is a long and expensive progress. You make your new tech to fit the mold of your old tech while still making significant leaps and bounds, you can get your existing team to work right away with little turnover time. This is why, for example, Source engine uses an updated version of Hammer. Rather than training all their level designers in something new like Radiant or UnrealEd, they jump in immediately with their familiar tech and now just need to learn how to use the new features and upgrades instead of re-learning everything.

Wow that sounds JUST LIKE UT2K3! Get ready to learn modeling my little Snarkpitters!

Wow, that sounds JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER GAME IN EXISTENCE THAT IS NOW COMING OUT. UT2K3 is only unique in that it is pretty much the only game with the heavy reliance on modeled detail that it has. Doom 3, HL2, and any other major new game that will be out or has come out recently is going to use this sort of workflow. It's the smart way to do it. There is no convenient way to make a CSG editor as powerful as a modeling package, especially when Max, Maya, Lightwave, etc. are all very well established already. So it becomes convenient to, for a time, start bringing the two together. Knock out the basic geometry

Someone was talking about how DOOM3 wasn't 'optimized' for multiplayer. HL2 sounds the same, (and we've seen NO multi for it yet). Seriously, AI and facial expressions aren't important for multi. Are you really going to notice that your teammate is lipsyncing what he says or not? Does that really effect gameplay? And as for whether the physics stuff really works online.. well we'll see. But even then, it's mostly a gimmick that wouldn't effect gameplay unless you were doing a very unrealistic mod. Wow, CS with realistic tossable mattresses and crates, I'm soooo excited!

Depending on how simple the facial expression bit may be, it may or may not feature in multiplayer. As for physics, all the really complicated stuff can only be effectively calculated client-side - it was stated long ago that for MP, the physics would be handled entirely differently (as every computer doing client-side calculations on where an object is... well, you can imagine the problem).

As far as gameplay additions as such, there isn't any. But there's an addition to the gameplay experience. Rather than making the game more fun to play, this sort of thing (the facial expressions and whatever physics may work in MP) makes the experience itself more interesting. If you see your teammates' faces moving as they speak and, possibly, displaying emotion, you'll be better brought into the experience. If your teammate bumps into a small box and knocks it off a shelf leaving a clattering noise in its wake, even if the other team doesn't even know that it happened, the two of you will freeze in panic hoping that you haven't been noticed. You're more involved in the game itself, regardless of what gameplay is present.

However, notice that of the three things listed in the quote you quoted, one of them is AI. Your reply to that quote is solely in the context of MP, but he's not even talking about MP! These are things that are huge for the single player game alone. But even then, it's expanding the FPS experience, not the game itself. Most things that can be done at the core of an FPS have been done and can easily be done well. Now the challenge is not necessarily to re-invent that (you still have to make it somewhat unique and enjoyable within the scope of each game, of course) but instead to add to it, to make the scope even larger... to "expand the genre."

How about ya'll bitch when the game is released or you actually have the game in your hands instead of extrapolating way beyond every little thing that's said? That seems like a good plan... then again, common sense never reigned supreme in the HL community...

Yak_Fighter said:
How about ya'll bitch when the game is released or you actually have the game in your hands instead of extrapolating way beyond every little thing that's said? That seems like a good plan... then again, common sense never reigned supreme in the HL community...

yes and?

:razz:

Yak_Fighter said:
How about ya'll bitch when the game is released or you actually have the game in your hands instead of extrapolating way beyond every little thing that's said? That seems like a good plan... then again, common sense never reigned supreme in the HL community...

Well spoken.

I dont get how sense can be common, because, really, its not a common thing.

Regarding my skepticism toward Valve, a lot of it comes from that they f**ked up my two favorite mods- TFC and Action Half-Life.

I was in a TFC clan and Valve's "TF 1.5" patch really changed the mod into something we didn't like that much. The new game modes were lame and they ruined concing in favor of increasing how spammy the mod was. I still play it sometimes, but it's just not the same.

As for AHL, the patch that changed the engine and broke all the (non-Valve) mods really f**ked up AHL beta 3 big time by screwing up the dive/stunt code. It took forever to get that totally fixed and put the mod's development way behind. Way to support the mod community, Valve!

All that aside, though, how can you not be skeptical about the game after all this delaying, leaking, etc. that's been going on. I really hope it's good, I'll definitely get it for the 1-player if it is, but I've been let down too many times by games that looked great but then never came out or simply sucked. Duke Forever? Daikatana? The way these delays and whatnot are going I'm worried HL2 will end up in the same boat.

I'm not a huge Unreal fan, I just get the impression that Epic is better to deal with from the modders I know. But I'm too jaded to be a fanboy for any game at this point :rolleyes: . I'll probably get my 1player fixes this year with HL2 and DOOM3, and my multiplayer fix with UT2k4 and it's sweet vehicle stuff.

But in any case, at least that Vampire game on the HL2 engine looks really cool :biggrin:

Bah, the only thing Valve changed on TFC that ruined it was limiting the demo's mirv grenades to placate whiny losers who couldn't handle a little spam. Dealing with spam will make you a man.

And its not like you have to play Avanti or Dustbowl, they didn't delete 2fort :rolleyes:

oh, and lest we forget, HL was delayed for two whole years. I think that the change from glorified Quake 1 mod to kickass was worth the wait.

All that aside, though, how can you not be skeptical about the game after all this delaying, leaking, etc. that's been going on

Because if we believe valve (and why shouldn't we? Even if they were nasty to some of the mod community, they didn't lie about it), the delay is due to the leak, and the leak was totally out of their hands. Perhaps if it was some valve employee who had deliberately leaked the code, then this arguement wouldn't hold, but people seem to forget time and again that in this case, valve is the victim, not us.

Bah, no-one has any right to whine about HL2. In so far as gaming communities have anything to whine about, it's when the developers ruin existing games or make them unnecessarily difficult to use. Complaining about Steam at least has some justification, as does complaining about patches that break mods.

Honestly, why can't everyone learn a little patience? Already there are swathes of putative mods and maps for HL2 in development. If there is any one aspect of the gaming and mapping community that shows how stupid we can collectively be, this has got to be it.

It's very simple: the game isn't out yet, so we don't know how to map or mod for it. But still people try to get a head start on mapping or modding for HL2. They make weapon models, despite not knowing how many polygons to use. When some crappy mapper finds that his misconceived map has 10,000 wpolys, instead of junking it like he should, he claims "This map is now being made for HL2, so that I can take advantage of the higher polygon limits". Newsflash: HL2 is not HL1 with more wpolys. If you have some s**tty HL1 map, don't expect to just throw it into HL2 and solve all your problems.

I'm excited about the creative mapping possibilities of this game as much as anyone. But I have plenty of other things to do while I wait. People ought to realise that they're wasting their time creating HL2 content before the game is even out.

And stop bitching about the game, dammit! So what if it never gets released? Go do something else - play some sport, watch a movie, go exploring, learn a new skill, spend time with your family or your friends or your girlfriend. Anything but complain about a game that doesn't exist yet, from a company that owes you nothing!

/rant

Gollum said:
Bah, no-one has any right to whine about HL2.

Yes we do. We pay their bills, so why can't we?

No, their publisher pays their bills.

Andrew, you are forgetting that by buying a copy of Half-Life, we all became shareholders of Valve Software :rolleyes:

...touche''' Squirrel-san....

gollum, you are a man among.....boulders... :heee: ....but i fear that patience is a learned trait, concieved of ageless waiting....and, ...........born from......age. :wink:

Doc Brasso... :dodgy:

You think Valve will be fixed fee or royalties, or perhaps a combination of the two? Unless they are on one hell of a fixed fee, I know which I'd rather be getting :wink:

I don't think they'd be stupid enough to agree to a fixed fee. I wonder how much they made out of hl1 altogether...

Well, just remember, publishers are the ones that take the big bucks from game sales. Why do you think Valve is pushing Steam for direct developer --> customer sales and cutting out the middle man, so to speak?

Indeed, although Valve did state that the money earnt from HL1 was a huge source of funds for HL2, so I presume they also made a bundle. Of course maybe what they MEANT was the popularity of HL1 meant they could make demands for silly amounts of cash for HL2 from publishers...

Regardless, although in most cases it is the publisher who makes the money but the developer who gets the praise, I believe some cases are exceptions. My flatmate tells me the bods at ID earn silly amounts of cash for their games, with their talented leader Mr.Carmack being a collector of Ferraris :biggrin:

Well, different companies handle their relations with publishers differently. Many are 'contracted' by the publishers and many are actually owned by publishers, which gives a hell of a lot more revenue and a bit more job security.

I of course don't know the specifics on Valve's finances, but for a game that has sold as many copies as HL, even $1 per copy translates to millions of dollars :razz: However, relative to the total revenue brought in by the game, that's still a small share going back to the developer. This is one huge prospect to something like Steam - if it can be brought to work at full efficiency and as a sales and distribution platform, companies can rake in huge amounts of money while still charging much less for the product. While you could argue that some developers may milk this for even more money, the economically savvy of the developers will realize that lower prices mean greater availability to customers, particularly the young target demographic, and therefore you see more sales.

id also rakes in 500k+ per copy of the Quake 3 engine licensed, and there's no telling how much the couple copies of licensed Doom3 engine are running. Add that on top of super-strong sales over the years and (I assume) continued publisher funding and divide by a small number of people on the team... Mmm, ferraris. :smile:

While I see your point about lower games prices reaching a lower age bracket, I don't see steam as a viable sales medium for this demographic. Online shopping is huge and steam is essentially just that taken further, but the fact remains that credit cards are needed for such things and kids just don't have those. Hell, I'm 19 and I daren't touch my credit card, I've enough financial difficulty without getting more bills each month :smile:

just a curiosity question reno....whats the interest rate like for you folks in the UK on cards....its absolutely crappy here....ranging from 12 to 25 percent monthly

Doc Brass.. :dodgy:

To be honest, I haven't the slightest idea :biggrin: As soon as the thing came out the envelope it got thrown in a drawer under a pile of game receipts.

EDIT: At a quick look at the Bank of Scotland's website, it appears to be between 12% and 17%, depending on your account.

i surely wish i could do that...

Doc Brass... :dodgy:

Well, Reno, as internet commerce expands I wouldn't be surprised to see more younger people taking part in it, though it'll be a tricky subject at first. Check cards are also hugely important in this, as they are much easier for a younger person to manage than a credit card (I use one and will never touch a true credit card).

The "lower age bracket" I referred to, though, isn't so much 12 and 13 year olds as is is 16-20 year olds who still are an active part of the demographic but typically do not make as much money and are going to school and the like and can't afford to buy games as often as they'd like. These are people who would have access to credit cards or check cards.

Also, before I had my own check card, my parents were helpful in my online purchases by loaning me their credit card for the purchase and then I immediately transferred the money back to them in return. Keeps parents involved in their kids' lives, at least in some way :smile: hehe

LOL, fair point, I did the same, and indeed still do on occasion for larger purchases. For smaller online stuff like games or whatever I use my debit card, which I assume is the same thing as a check card by just transferring money from your account to something, rather than having credit that you get billed each month?

Yeah, check/debit cards are essentially the same thing.

Two good reasons for using credit rather than debit cards:

• Purchase protection, especially online
• Builds up a credit rating

But if you don't pay bills on time you're screwed. I have them set up on direct debit, and I never spend more than I can afford.

Debit cards useful for withdrawing cash.

Purchase protection is one of the reasons why I make big purchases through my Mum's credit cards, like my PC for example. That and because I normally don't have enough cash in my bank :biggrin: