Is DM dead?

Wow, I opened up The server browser for HLDM yesterday and was dismayed to find less than 80 player online(I have a few filters set, ping minimum, etc) but it's a friggin ghost town out there. I hear rumors that TF2 will be THE mp aspect of HL2, but thats very depressing. With DM interest dwindling so much in the HL community, whats going to motivate valve to even include standard DM in HL2???? Any thoughts on this?

Sad as it seems, standard HLDM was just another victim of lack of popularity, suffering at the hands of other mods - TFC, CS, DoD.

I used to play HLDM and Op4CTF (as did a few others on here, brits and americans alike) - but now it's just not possible because everyone plays the polished and "cool" mods :sad:

It's just natural progression I guess, because of the active mod scene - I hope that Valve will make another solid DM game for HL2. Original HLDM wasn't anything flash, but it played well and was great fun at the same time, but as I said before - it just doesn't have the counterstrike/DoD "x factor".

I hope they do include a good DM mode myself, and possibly even some remakes.. :razz: Team DM of a larger boot camp :biggrin: Mmm!

Gwil said:
but now it's just not possible because everyone plays the polished and "cool" mods :sad:

Death to The Specialists!

<---- TS

Just checked, picked up 120 servers, 80 of which have players. Name another 5 year old game with as many servers running plain DM (or weapon mods). I think having this 'few' people playing just means everybody has moved onto something different, not that nobody likes DM. Most DM freaks will have moved onto UT2003 or whatever.

Counter Strike Source is the multiplayer for HL2.

Naw, I think it's been pretty much debunked that CS source is the multiplayer for HL2. Valve's going to rerelease CS, DoD, TFC, and HL on the source engine as a seperate thing.

As for DM, I don't see why they wouldn't make a DM mode for HL2. Other new games have deathmatch, so it's not like no one wants it. Plus, DM is a much easier thing to create than a team game or even a single player game, so I don't see how it would take too much time or resources to do.

Yes it is a shame that no one wants to play a good old round on "stalk Yard" or "bounce" anymore, now everyone is off playing CS, which is a shame to me because I think HLDM is more funner to play than CS.

Whether Valve makes remakes of HLDM maps or not, I'm sure we will still see them from other people :smile:

I wonder if anyone will remake the single player HL1..... That would be a project worth while. Revisiting black mesa under the source engine would be better :biggrin: .

I wonder if anyone will remake the single player HL1..... That would be a project worth while. Revisiting black mesa under the source engine would be better:D.

Um, Valve are doing that and are releasing it soon after HL2. :razz:

They are I didnt know that :eek:

I reccomend you read up on E3 again. :smile:

CS source is going to be downloadable through steam, along with all the other 'source' games/mods.

TFC2 will cost extra money (as far as Valve has said) and will be released after the release of HL2.

I'm pretty sure they have a normal deathmatch mode. Since it goes along with the HL2 game.
They might include the sources as well, but I doubt that they'll take something like CS and just replace multiplayer; that would be amazingly stupid, since most maps and mods are built off the HL1DM mode. I mean, saying that cs2 or cs source is the multiplayer doesn't make much sense, since: I'm relatively sure cs2 will cost money (at first at least) and cs source is not HL2 material.
They're probably not showing the DM mode, since it is the most unpopular mode for HL1 at the moment.

saying that cs2 or cs source is the multiplayer doesn't make much sense, since: I'm relatively sure cs2 will cost money (at first at least) and cs source is not HL2 material. They're probably not showing the DM mode, since it is the most unpopular mode for HL1 at the moment.

It's not that CS:Source as multiplayer doesn't make sense, it's that valve said this sin't the case. They aren't showing the actual multiplayer mode because it's a secret. It has been kept a secret the whole time. I read an interview with Gabe the other day (THG, I think), where the guy asked "what about the multiplayer in HL2? Will there be a DM mode?", the reply being a smile and "I cannot comment on that at this time".

Some people will think he can't comment because it doesn't exist, but that would be very very stupid of Valve. I mean, to keep multiplayer a secret, saying "it's being kept secret", then at the time of release say "hah! The secret was there's no multiplayer mwahaha", wouldn't exactly be good PR, would it :smile:

Kage_Prototype said:
I reccomend you read up on E3 again. :smile:

good idea

The new multiplayers mods are fun (CS, TFC, etc) but after lots of intense rounds of sneaking around and waiting to get shot in the head...rounding around like a maniac, trapping those campers in tripmine fortresses, sure kicks ass.

ahhh....AFK users and tripmines....brings a smile to your face!

Valve are going to announce their multiplayer details in full in a few weeks, to clarify on things. Just so everyone who's confused knows.

If they don't make it, then I for one will help and will be there with my HL2 map decompiler in hand :wink: snark_pit 2 anyone?!

It's not even a question to me. What reason could there be for NOT having a simple deathmatch multiplayer mode? It seems to me that deathmatch goes hand in hand with the singleplayer, as a package. Valve has just as much reason to exclude their "VALVe" logo from the splash screens as they do the deathmatch mode from the game. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but it would be somewhat silly to kill off DM.

On the VERY RARE off chance that valve wont make a DM mode, then you know someone will, like gearbox maybe. Just to clarify what valve is saying, about when is "mid-summer"? Cause that is the long awaited release date.

Gearbox would be highly unlikely to, they have their own projects now and I believe their relations with Valve aren't quite what they used to be. I very much doubt we would see a multiplayer mode made by a different company, more likely by a mod team.

But to be honest I'm sure Valve will have DM in it.

/me is sleepy, so if i err again.. screw it.

the taboo has DM capabilities, why would they include it if it were not going to be an option?

What happened between Gearbox and Valve? I knew GB weren't too happy about patches, but apart from that...

I think they were removed from the CSCZ project rather unceremoniously.Could be the tension referred to.

Hey guys, remember the origional pitcrew map? Well how cool would it be if we all worked to spiffy it up to HL2 standards, with models and custom textures and high detail, and then released it the day HL2 gets released on the HL2 engine.

We could name it Snarkpit2, and it would get some righteous playtime. Remember, when new games/mods come out, if you can get a good map played enough at the beginning it will become a de-facto "official" map - note gasworks, etc.

IMO Gearbox got fed up with valve just like pretty much every other mod team appart from CS and DoD. They kept releasing patches that broke old mod code for no good reason, and wouldn't help people fix their stuff unless they were DoD or CS.

Look all this talk about if DM is going to be included or not, is simply un needed. What if there won't be HLDM included? So what? Once the SDK is released, how hard can it be to make DM out of that?

When you compile the SDK we've got right now, you get HLDM. Why would it be so much different with HL2?

Bruce said:
When you compile the SDK we've got right now, you get HLDM. Why would it be so much different with HL2?

seems to me, if the game does not support it, you will have no code to locate members online who want to frag.. thats a major concern IMO.

sure you can create a DM map, but you couldn't frag it.

Orph, it'll have mutliplayer ... so you will most definatly be able to find people and make games and such.

I'm relativly sure the multiplayer will have DM amongst other things. (DM is one of the easiest modes to make for multiplay ... not that it's easy, it's just easier then other modes since there is less data to keep track of).

However, another thought might be that, they're transfering HL1 to the HL2 engine, which means that IS a deathmatch mode.

I don't know what they're planning, but I don't think they'll let people down with the final product.

Crono said:
Orph, it'll have mutliplayer ... so you will most definatly be able to find people and make games and such.

looks around to see if ball is still bouncing

crono, follow the topic, i agree, i was answering the question the quote pertained to...rhetorically since i have the taboo

anyways.. i think since HLDM kept the game going 5 years and NOT the single player shipped game, its pretty much a given how it will be sent out :biggrin:

Orpheus said:

Bruce said:
When you compile the SDK we've got right now, you get HLDM. Why would it be so much different with HL2?

seems to me, if the game does not support it, you will have no code to locate members online who want to frag.. thats a major concern IMO.

sure you can create a DM map, but you couldn't frag it.

What are you talking about? "No code to locate members online"? That makes no sense at all. Do you mean search for them? See how many are online?

If you compile the SDK you've got right now, it'll compile all the source code it's got and build it's dll's. That source code consists out of a client and a server side, both contain all kinds of different classes ranging from monsters and "physics" to viewport drawing functions.

The liblist defines the name of the mod etc. The liblist also makes people able to locate people running servers, once a server for a certain mod is up, you can search for it by defining a value for the mod name in your searcher. Be it HLSW or the WON/Steam tool.

[edit]
Like crono said, there's already going to be a multiplayer side coded in. So all the classes will be available.

Bruce said:
What are you talking about? "No code to locate members online"? That makes no sense at all. Do you mean search for them? See how many are online?

/me reminds bruce, i am ignorant of certain things so be patient with me.

1^st off, when you want to frag online, you load HL, then click on the multi-player option..

if valve removes the link, you might find it difficult to play your map.

still as i said, i agree it will be available, so its moot, but i do see that it could be easy for them to disable the HLDM option in the startup menu.

mazemaster said:
Hey guys, remember the origional pitcrew map? Well how cool would it be if we all worked to spiffy it up to HL2 standards, with models and custom textures and high detail, and then released it the day HL2 gets released on the HL2 engine.

We could name it Snarkpit2, and it would get some righteous playtime. Remember, when new games/mods come out, if you can get a good map played enough at the beginning it will become a de-facto "official" map - note gasworks, etc.

The option is certainly there. I'd be up for it.

As for Gearbox, perhaps they got fed up with Valve, but I'd see it the other way around as Valve got fed up with Gearbox's crap. I think it's rather obvious that they are rather incompetent given all the high profile stuff they've dropped the ball on.

And DM'll be there, one way or another. I'd fully support a DM mod if it came to that.

I must say, TF1.5 on Source would be pretty awesome, especially if it was of the same quality that CS Source looked in that video.

**edit**6 snark marks? i had 20 the otherday, whats going on there?

They had souped up Aztec in that shot, with the pyramid and all that. I doubt they would do the same for TFC or HLDM ports.

As for Gearbox, perhaps they got fed up with Valve, but I'd see it the other way around as Valve got fed up with Gearbox's crap. I think it's rather obvious that they are rather incompetent given all the high profile stuff they've dropped the ball on.

Like...?

Opposing Force was fantastic. Blue Shift was intended as an extra console episode, but instead was tossed back to the PC. For what it was supposed to be, it was stellar, but it probably shouldn't have been marketed full-price as a standalone - that's a publisher issue, not Gearbox. Nightfire was absolutely ugly - EA couldn't have cared less for the PC version and that is reflected in what little Gearbox was able to do with it. Condition Zero was stripped away by Valve, yes, but in the same decisionmaking process that later stripped Ritual of the same rights to hand it off to some no-name "Turtle Rock" to add some bots and destroy everything else worked on in the course of that game. I'd say Valve gets more blame for that one than anyone else. The recent CE release of Halo shows a high level of unwillingness by Bungie and Microsoft to aid in any way with Halo, but aside of the performance issues (which, as demonstrated with the CE edition, Microsoft/Bungie wouldn't even allow included in a regular patch, which is hardly Gearbox's fault), I have no complaints of their port, this after playing -both- versions. (I agree the Xbox version is better, but the PC version being verbally raped as it has been is annoyingly reminiscent of the tolkein nuts freaking out about Peter Jackson's trilogy or George Lucas gutting the original Star Wars trilogy, though I do agree with many points of the latter. :wink: )

Brothers in Arms is the first time we'll get to see Gearbox go wild with no leash attached. The closest we've seen to them working like this? Opposing Force, arguably their best work to date. So far, they seem to be doing well. I'll pass final judgment the day I pick that game off the shelf.

I wouldn't put the blame for the Halo port on Microsoft/Bungie, as I read somewhere that Gearbox decided to recode the graphics using DirectX 9 when it was originally done in 8, which wasted time and resources and ran like s**t anyways. I don't rip on the port because they changed aspects of the game or because I'm some ardent defender of Halo, I rip it because it ran and looked like s**t and was unplayable over the internet with a T1 connection that gave pings in the teens for CS and NS. I liked the extra additions they threw in for multiplayer such as the Banshees and the fuel rod gun, but it didn't make up for the rest.

I played Nightfire on the Gamecube, not the PC, so I don't know anything about that, but it blew hard on the Gamecube. I doubt that was entirely EA's fault. Obviously both the developer and the publisher are responsible for the quality of the game, and if a crappy one is released than they both share the guilt.

Well, also remember Gearbox only made the PC version of Nightfire, not the console versions. Just looked up on developer for the console versions and it was "Eurocom" or something.

It's definitely Gearbox's choice (or fault) that they used the DX9 stuff, and I won't blame Microsoft or Bungie for that, either, but when Gearbox -did- take the time to fix it, it'd have been nice for them to allow the full product to be patched up (SP included).

Gearbox did do very well with the Tony Hawk 3 port, for whatever that's worth.

Anyway. Topic. :smile:

I find DM to be something that I think will live for a while, though not without evolving (just as it has since it came to being). There's a certain thrill of just all-out mayhem, and it'll be a long time before games abandon that, if they ever do. If anything, the success of UT2K3/4 should be an argument for DM still being quite alive, even if our familiar HLDM is struggling :smile: With the possible exception of Assault, the modes of UT (even Onslaught) are either straight-up DM or team DM, and I'd say they're done quite well. Doom3 promises nothing but DM for MP, though the player limits may hinder things, but it should be a welcome MP style regardless.

They've got enough success to their credit that I think Brothers in Arms will do well, though I won't argue that things haven't gone the smoothest for them. :smile:

I think there is a valuable lesson to be learnt here. EA sucks :smile:

I think there is a valuable lesson to be learnt here. EA sucks :smile:

Battlefield? SimCity 4? C&C Generals?

A guy from EA called me earlier today. That was neat.

Did he try to buy out Nightwatch?

I think it was just a security guy warning Andrew not to come near their offices again.

[size=13][color=white]I think there is a valuable lesson to be learnt here. EA sucks :smile:

Battlefield? SimCity 4? C&C Generals?
[/color][/size]

Medal of Honor, Freedom Fighters, The NEW bond isn't half bad either (Everything Or Nothing, crappy name, fun game).

mmm, I can't wait for Pacific Assult ... maybe I'm just a WWII FPS junkie

.. the old nfs games...

EA didn't actually make those games though did it?

In the same sense you can say UbiSoft hasn't made one Tom Clancy game to date since they're just a production company and don't physically make the games

All the games that we listed have been released under EA or Westwood (which was bought by EA years ago, Westwood just did some of the C&C stuff, however they also did Nox, which kicks ass).

I don't know about the other games, but EA own half of Dice (Digital Illusions) and also have a hand in part of the development process of the Battlefield Series.

EA and UbiSoft both have solid internal development houses as well as external licenses to other developers. Freedom Fighters, for example, was developed by Io (a European company), where the Medal of Honor series (post-allied assault) is developed in EA's California studio. Same with Ubisoft - Far Cry is external, games like Prince of Persia are internal. So they're both publishers and developers. :smile: Both I'm assuming also own other studios in addition to signing individual contracts - much like Raven is owned by Activision, for example.

Or Rare being owned by Microsoft.

I'm not bitter.