Google Buying Valve?

You're giving Charlie too much credit if you think he fabricated this. Wasn't the idea of Google buying someone like Valve thought up in a Forbes article last week???

Of course, in that article, they said "(Google) could just as easily acquire a top- or mid-tier developer (like Valve, also mentioned in the article)." Not that they WERE going to acquire a developer, like Valve.
 
cliche said:
Been on cs for 10 years now ....this would really make me upset. :(
Click to expand...
I agree, I've been playing CS since beta 6....

Wenglish said:
If Valve is going to be bought out by someone--and that's a big if, this is the The Inq we're talking about--then who do you want to do the buying? EA? MS?
Click to expand...
That what I was thinking. Feels like voting in the US, you basically pick the lesser of two evils.

typezero303 said:
But I'd still rather see Valve as a standalone company.
Click to expand...
Exactly, I'd rather watch Valve grow into a monster company then be swallowed by one.

jstnomega said:
I'm one of those that did not see AMD buying ATI either, so this purchase would not surprise.
Click to expand...
That's what makes me scared that it could be true but AMD buying ATi was a big mistake? so I'm hoping I don't get surprised.

Martyr said:
i would rather ms than google. do you really want your steam games in beta forever?
Click to expand...
LOL, you are a real comedian.
 
That breeze that you felt was my sigh of relief. I don't think Valve, its employees, or us customers have anything to gain by seeing Valve bought by Google.

Valve is, I believe, a privately held company. They don't even have to worry about shareholders bugging them, let alone some suit in a major corporation. Result? Their games are *always* polished.

If Valve got bought by some major corporation, be it MS, Google, EA, whomever -- there would be deadlines, buggy products, clashes about what should be included, what demographic should be aimed at, and on and on. Valve would almost certainly lose the sort of atmosphere which has been conducive to making outstanding games over the years.

I, for one, would rather wait for a finished product from Valve than some rushed product from some other gaming company. I hope Valve stays on its own for the foreseeable future.
 
XamediX said:
LOL, you are a real comedian.
Click to expand...

I don't think he was trying to be funny. Other than maybe search (although I think i have seen search listed as beta) every google product is a beta.

froogle.com - beta
google earth - beta
chrome - beta
google talk - beta
gmail - beta
google docs - beta
google calender - beta
google toolbar - beta
google video - beta

I don't think they ever move anything out of beta. That way every problem can be "excused" as it is in beta.
 
As a long time reader of [H]ardOCP, I am disappointed to see the continued posting of "News Articles" from The Inq. on the front page. [H]ardOCP has always prided itself in only delivering the facts. But, with the recent relaying of Inquirer articles by this site, I am left to wonder if this is no longer the case.

As many of you know, The Inq once held a high place in the hearts and minds of those of us that follow the tech industry. This was largely do to the fact that they really did seem to have a firm grasp on the "pulse" of the industry and could truly predict, with a high degree of certainty, where the industry would head next. Unfortunately, those days have long since past, and The Inq has devolved into nothing more than a rabid group of primates who's only pleasure in life is picking up their own feces and trowing it at a wall to see what sticks. The problem is that very little of it does stick these days, and in the end it all smells like crap. Which leaves me wondering... Why would the editors of [H]ardOCP want their hard work to smell like crap?
 
cHr0nIc said:
As a long time reader of [H]ardOCP, I am disappointed to see the continued posting of "News Articles" from The Inq. on the front page. [H]ardOCP has always prided itself in only delivering the facts. But, with the recent relaying of Inquirer articles by this site, I am left to wonder if this is no longer the case.

As many of you know, The Inq once held a high place in the hearts and minds of those of us that follow the tech industry. This was largely do to the fact that they really did seem to have a firm grasp on the "pulse" of the industry and could truly predict, with a high degree of certainty, where the industry would head next. Unfortunately, those days have long since past, and The Inq has devolved into nothing more than a rabid group of primates who's only pleasure in life is picking up their own feces and trowing it at a wall to see what sticks. The problem is that very little of it does stick these days, and in the end it all smells like crap. Which leaves me wondering... Why would the editors of [H]ardOCP want their hard work to smell like crap?
Click to expand...

Call me crazy, but something about the '?' in the thread title (I think) hinted at the news not being absolute, or guaranteed.
 
I was pretty sure that this was bs. Gabe would not sell his baby like this to someone like Google. Valve has no reason to sell to anyone let alone Google. They are making money hand over fist with STEAM. If anything companies would be coming to Valve in order to launch any and all software apps.
 
And your right about that, but that's not really my point, either. My point is that, by continuing to repost "news" (Note the Quotes) from The Inq., [H]ardOCP is doing 2 thing.... 1) They're helping to spread The Inqs' crap, which just makes averything smell bad. And 2) They're just lowering the (usually) high standards of this site.
 
I keep forgetting that you can't just edit posts regarding Front Page Articles... Sorry about this. I'm only doing this for clarities' sake.

rflcptr said:
Call me crazy, but something about the '?' in the thread title (I think) hinted at the news not being absolute, or guaranteed.
Click to expand...

And your right about that, rflcptr, but that's not really my point, either. My point is that, by continuing to repost "news" (Note the Quotes) from The Inq., [H]ardOCP is doing 2 thing.... 1) They're helping to spread The Inqs' crap, which just makes averything smell bad. And 2) They're just lowering the (usually) high standards of this site.
 
It's just my opinion, but the discussion that follows usually makes it worth the time.
 
For example:

-What does it mean for a PC gamer when a major developer and digital distributor is acquired?
-How does the above affect other developers or distributors?
-Would this contribute to a stagnant gaming market?
 
Don't get me wrong, rflcptr, I see that. I know it's fun as hell to rip apart a "story" from The Inq. Truth be told.... It wouldn't seem so bad if they made something like "Crap that's worth a sniff... Presented by The Inq.". Something, anything, that, at least, made it seem like it wasn't being taken seriously by the [H]'s editorial staff... But, currently, that just doesn't seem to be the case. And, that is disappointing to me.
 
Now how would [H]'s own reliability be interpreted, if say, "Crap that's worth a sniff... Presented by The Inq." (in the case of Valve/Google) ended up being true? By sharing it the way they did, it remained neutral; not confirming, nor denying.
 
Ok..... Tell me one time in the last 6 months.... No, make the the last year, where The Inquirer actually had one of it's turds stick to the wall?

I'm betting you'll be hard pressed to come up with an answer.... We both now that what I said about the devolution of The Inq., is true.... I really just don't see a point in posting anything they say up on the front page before it's been thoroughly double checked to see if there's even the slightest bit of validity to the story.... Once again something that [H]ardOCP (Or Kyle, at the very least) used to pride itself on.
 
[H] hasn't done any less; the topic of discussion has rather large ramifications, which merit it being a news item, so long as [H] doesn't swing one way or another (which they clearly did not). It, by the nature of the content and title, was simply a heads-up.
Google Buying Valve?

Charlie Demerjian over at TheInq claims that Google is going to buy Valve “any second now.” Since it isn’t even 6am on the west coast yet, we’ll probably have to wait more than a few seconds to find out if this rumor is true or not.
Click to expand...
If the '?' was tossed or the title changed to something remotely near this:
"Crap that's worth a sniff... Presented by The Inq."
Click to expand...
I could see where [H] would have stopped being neutral, which is the key.
 
And I'm saying that in the case of The Inquirer, it's better off to not post the news until it actually happens... That would be far more neutral. Sure, if one of they're, supposed, stories actually proved to be true, give them the credit for it, that would only be fair. But don't sit there and fan the smoke when there is no fire to be had in the first place.....
 
It doesn't matter if it turned out to be true or false (or even the likelihood thereof), what matters in this discussion is how [H] handled it; and it did so just fine. Their neutrality wasn't voided by opening up discussion on potential happenings and the only party guilty of starting any fire, or fanning any, is The Inquirer itself. Tell them to clean up their act, not [H].
 
No, [H]ardOCP's neutrality was just voided when they decided it would be ok for them to post FUD from a website that is renowned for it. Stop trying to make this into an "it ok they posted it for discussions sake" argument. The Inq is a site of fear-mongers, nothing more. Nothing by The Inquirer should be considered "newsworthy" by [H]ardOCP editors, or tolerated by it's community. Plain and simple, end of story.
 
cHr0nIc said:
No, [H]ardOCP's neutrality was just voided when they decided it would be ok for them to post FUD from a website that is renowned for it. Stop trying to make this into an "it ok they posted it for discussions sake" argument. The Inq is a site of fear-mongers, nothing more. Nothing by The Inquirer should be considered "newsworthy" by [H]ardOCP editors, or tolerated by it's community. Plain and simple, end of story.
Click to expand...
It was qualified by potentially large ramifications for several parties and the only thing [H] did was give the heads-up that big news could be coming. They didn't say "Yes, Valve is being bought," or "No, Valve definitely won't be," but rather said, "Hey, keep an eye on this [rumor] as it develops." That's neutral and it's the only thing I can pull, without assumption, from the original post. Nothing more.

I'm afraid I really can't see where your complaint stems from. If you have a problem with the "FUD" from a certain site, it's up to you to approach them about it. It isn't [H]'s fault.
 
Supplementing that, [H] did, in fact, label it a rumor anyway:
Since it isn’t even 6am on the west coast yet, we’ll probably have to wait more than a few seconds to find out if this rumor is true or not.
Click to expand...
 
cHr0nIc said:
No, [H]ardOCP's neutrality was just voided when they decided it would be ok for them to post FUD from a website that is renowned for it. Stop trying to make this into an "it ok they posted it for discussions sake" argument. The Inq is a site of fear-mongers, nothing more. Nothing by The Inquirer should be considered "newsworthy" by [H]ardOCP editors, or tolerated by it's community. Plain and simple, end of story.
Click to expand...

...we know they're full of shit. you also notice the "rumor" part of the article? :rolleyes:
 
rflcptr said:
It was qualified by potentially large ramifications for several parties and the only thing [H] did was give the heads-up that big news could be coming. They didn't say "Yes, Valve is being bought," or "No, Valve definitely won't be," but rather said, "Hey, keep an eye on this [rumor] as it develops." That's neutral and it's the only thing I can pull, without assumption, from the original post. Nothing more..
Click to expand...
So, basically what your telling me is.....It's ok for news outlets, like CNN, to report on a rumor some guy heard from a homeless drunkard that the world's tomato crops were going to be destroyed by a plague of killer zombie turtles.... Because "it's just a rumor that's going to impact a lot of people"

If you can't figure it out, I liken The Inquirer to the homeless drunkard in the above example. And, as we both know that CNN would never report on anything where the source was a drunken idiot, so, too, should [H]ardOCP not relay anything from The Inquirer

rflcptr said:
I'm afraid I really can't see where your complaint stems from. If you have a problem with the "FUD" from a certain site, it's up to you to approach them about it. It isn't [H]'s fault.
Click to expand...
If you can't see that [H]ardOCP shouldn't post articles from certain sources, because it makes tham seem like Fox News, then your a blind man.
 
You know what though... it's becoming clear to me that I, for whatever reason, am not getting my point across from this angle.... So let me try it this way...

How many of us here would just as soon see The Inq go away?

One of the quickest ways to do that is to walk away. Don't pay attention to it. No longer give it an audience. If [H]ardOCP, as well as many other websites, would just stop giving The Inq an audience, it wouldn't have the fund to continue and it would go away, right? Then we wouldn't have to deal with people like me, at least for one less topic of hatred... :)

Does that make any sense?
 
cHr0nIc said:
You know what though... it's becoming clear to me that I, for whatever reason, am not getting my point across from this angle.... So let me try it this way...

How many of us here would just as soon see The Inq go away?

One of the quickest ways to do that is to walk away. Don't pay attention to it. No longer give it an audience. If [H]ardOCP, as well as many other websites, would just stop giving The Inq an audience, it wouldn't have the fund to continue and it would go away, right? Then we wouldn't have to deal with people like me, at least for one less topic of hatred... :)

Does that make any sense?
Click to expand...

It does, but,
I read The Inq now and again for the comedy. Really it is that simple. The Inq's style of reporting is of the same school as The Inquirer like news rag trash found in the supermarket checkout line, and just about as inaccurate. But usually it is so inaccurate, so unlikely, and so outrageously written, so Jerry Springer, that you have to laugh. Can't you just see the humor in it and move on?
[H] has linked The Inq b4, I always assumed it was for the comedy myself, or maybe it is for the comedy that erupts on the forums after posting such links.
 
So Valve's management says this is false...

You really mean to tell me management is always truthful? Come on, take a dose of reality. Management, along with politicians and sales, are the biggest bunch of liars and sociopaths around.
 
I've personally found Valve, though, to be a very honest company. Logically, they wouldn't hurt their PR saying a Google buyout is "a complete fabrication" and then turn around and sell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top