L4D3? (Source 2.0 reveal)

L

LeviathanZERO

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
6,496
qjlYbPI.jpg


CBOAT
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=758999
 
You know I can't wait for Source 2 and I hope it is soon. But honestly I don't think it is going to happen as soon as we think.The current consoles on the market can't even max out source as it is today, look at Titanfall for a perfect example on the Xbox One. It is fucking struggling to do 720p @60 fps. And technology as far as engines go tend to follow the dollars -- and that is the consoles. I think Source 2 is probably 5-6 years away ( as well as Half-Life 3). Then again I could be wrong and ol' GabeN could have a brew of Source 2 running on a kernel of linux that is SteamOS and it revolutionishes gaming and every develpoer wants to be a part of it. It loks like UE 4 on crack and runs twice as fast, but i doubt it. Valve tends to be like our grandpas -- reliable, patient, predictable and always on their own time.
 
Last edited:
My body is ready. L4D is the perfect game to launch the source 2 engine as it doesn't have the ridiculous expectations of HL3 & TF3 or even Portal 3.
 
Most likely just shots of a student's recreation of the area in another engine, formatted into a screen grab of a slide deck by some dick.
 
Considering the source, not likely.
It's the only reason to even acknowledge this.

The number 3 doesn't appear once in that shot.
 
naticus said:
You know I can't wait for Source 2 and I hope it is soon. But honestly I don't think it is going to happen as soon as we think.The current consoles on the market can't even max out source as it is today, look at Titanfall for a perfect example on the Xbox One. It is fucking struggling to do 720p @60 fps. And technology as far as engines go tend to follow the dollars -- and that is the consoles. I think Source 2 is probably 5-6 years away ( as well as Half-Life 3). Then again I could be wrong and ol' GabeN could have a brew of Source 2 running on a kernel of linux that is SteamOS and it revolutionishes gaming and every develpoer wants to be a part of it. It loks like UE 4 on crack and runs twice as fast, but i doubt it. Valve tends to be like our grandpas -- reliable, patient, predictable and always on their own time.
Click to expand...
First off, Titanfall is running a very heavily modified version of Source. You can't use that to judge how well Source runs on anything.

Secondly, Source is a rather old engine nowadays, and is heavily CPU dependent. I have no doubts that Source 2.0 will be an entirely different beast.
 
God damn it Valve. It is the one company that we all make excuses for and are willing to bend over for. WE JUST WANT THE FUCKING SOURCE 2 ENGINE AND HALF LIFE 3.


Source 2 is probably more likely since it is only a "2", not a 3 :D
 
naticus said:
The current consoles on the market can't even max out source as it is today, look at Titanfall for a perfect example on the Xbox One.
Click to expand...

FUCK consoles.

naticus said:
I think Source 2 is probably 5-6 years away ( as well as Half-Life 3). Then again I could be wrong and ol' GabeN could have a brew of Source 2 running on a kernel of linux that is SteamOS and it revolutionishes gaming and every develpoer wants to be a part of it. It loks like UE 4 on crack and runs twice as fast, but i doubt it. Valve tends to be like our
Click to expand...

No because Valve. The "more dollars on consoles" selling FPS shooters to xbox kids - that makes sense for EA and Activision, but Valve has bigger interests and longterm plans as we're witnessing with the development of SteamOS. Valve/Steam are the tentpole of PC gaming right now so its hard to imagine them waiting around for consoles to catch up some day because "dollars".
 
xIronCrossx said:
God damn it Valve. It is the one company that we all make excuses for and are willing to bend over for. WE JUST WANT THE FUCKING SOURCE 2 ENGINE AND HALF LIFE 3.


Source 2 is probably more likely since it is only a "2", not a 3 :D
Click to expand...

Gabe is on record stating that Valve isn't in the business of making single player experiences any longer. Their model is social experiences, so you're going to get your L4D3 loooooong before you are ever going to get your Half Life 3.

DPI said:
FUCK consoles.
Click to expand...

Most PC gamer's and their machines couldn't run Titanfall at max either FYI. Like it or not, the average PC gamer is the exact opposite of us here on an enthusiast forum. Most people are running on dated hardware and run games on medium. So .. by your train of thought...FUCK pc's.

Choke on that. Morale of the story? The days of PC elitism are gone, you look silly and immature when you go down that route.

DPI said:
No because Valve. The "more dollars on consoles" selling FPS shooters to xbox kids - that makes sense for EA and Activision, but Valve has bigger interests and longterm plans as we're witnessing with the development of SteamOS. Valve/Steam are the tentpole of PC gaming right now so its hard to imagine them waiting around for consoles to catch up some day because "dollars".
Click to expand...

LOL, you cannot be serious. Valve? The company that currently is monetizing most of its IP on consoles today? The same Valve that positioning itself to enter the console/living room market? The only reason Valve is pushing SteamOS, is because Gabe is scared of a walled garden Windows experience and the Windows Store. He saw that a future on Windows is a future with the Windows Store built into every OS across all platforms, PC, tablet, console or mobile. Valve and their precious SteamOS is Gabe doing the only thing possible to remain in business 10 years down the line. Their livelihood depends on convincing developers to adopt Linux, and lots of luck. If you think Valve has any other agenda other than that, you're drinking too much kool aid.

Lastly Valve is the opposite of a tentpole for "PC gaming". The company is more concerned with building its store, selling "apps" on the platform and bridging the gap to Linux than it is developing games. The last thing Valve is certainly doing is pushing the platform forward in any way. They are a store, just like Walmart and they sell goods. I like Steam very much, many of my PC games have been bought on their platform. Many have not. I like Walmart too, I buy stuff from them as well.
 
Last edited:
theNoid said:
Gabe is on record stating that Valve isn't in the business of making single player experiences any longer. Their model is social experiences, so you're going to get your L4D3 loooooong before you are ever going to get your Half Life 3.
Click to expand...

That's fine by me. I enjoyed L4D2. I did like L4D1 as well, but didn't play it as much.
 
theNoid said:
Gabe is on record stating that Valve isn't in the business of making single player experiences any longer. Their model is social experiences, so you're going to get your L4D3 loooooong before you are ever going to get your Half Life 3.
Click to expand...
While that's true, they also said they were moving to an episodic model and that lasted all of three years.
 
naticus said:
You know I can't wait for Source 2 and I hope it is soon. But honestly I don't think it is going to happen as soon as we think.The current consoles on the market can't even max out source as it is today, look at Titanfall for a perfect example on the Xbox One. It is fucking struggling to do 720p @60 fps. And technology as far as engines go tend to follow the dollars -- and that is the consoles. I think Source 2 is probably 5-6 years away ( as well as Half-Life 3). Then again I could be wrong and ol' GabeN could have a brew of Source 2 running on a kernel of linux that is SteamOS and it revolutionishes gaming and every develpoer wants to be a part of it. It loks like UE 4 on crack and runs twice as fast, but i doubt it. Valve tends to be like our grandpas -- reliable, patient, predictable and always on their own time.
Click to expand...

Gabe has already said publicly that Source 2 is done and ready and they're just waiting to roll a game out with it.
 
naticus said:
You know I can't wait for Source 2 and I hope it is soon. But honestly I don't think it is going to happen as soon as we think.The current consoles on the market can't even max out source as it is today, look at Titanfall for a perfect example on the Xbox One. It is fucking struggling to do 720p @60 fps. And technology as far as engines go tend to follow the dollars -- and that is the consoles. I think Source 2 is probably 5-6 years away ( as well as Half-Life 3). Then again I could be wrong and ol' GabeN could have a brew of Source 2 running on a kernel of linux that is SteamOS and it revolutionishes gaming and every develpoer wants to be a part of it. It loks like UE 4 on crack and runs twice as fast, but i doubt it. Valve tends to be like our grandpas -- reliable, patient, predictable and always on their own time.
Click to expand...

Newer engines don't require more horsepower to look better, they actually make things look and run better using less horsepower.

For example, the original half-life engine didn't have anything like shader 2.0. Source brought shader 2.0 which allowed adding depth and detail without adding more polygons. The only way you could add more detail before that is by adding more polygons which is a big performance hit.

If you created something like that with pure polygons using the old engine it would run really slow, but using the new engine you get the same amount of detail and it runs really fast.

You could in theory recreate Half-Life 1 with identical graphics in the source engine using all the fancy new technology and it would run twice as fast as it did in the original engine.

Of course they typically just make the graphics better and add more detail like better shadows, more realistic animations, physics, etc. to new games because hardware has become more powerful and can handle it.

But basically they could release their new engine and their new game would run better while look better on the new consoles than their old ones.
 
sharknice said:
Newer engines don't require more horsepower to look better, they actually make things look and run better using less horsepower.

...

But basically they could release their new engine and their new game would run better while look better on the new consoles than their old ones.
Click to expand...
I think I know what you are trying to say, but even then I think are dead wrong. :p

All things being equal, newer engines almost always require more ram and faster processors. Following your logic, we should be able to rebuild HL1 in Source 2 and it'll run 2x faster than HL1 ran on our 1998 builds... umm, no I don't think so... but feel free to clarify, by all means. Maybe I forgot to eat my Wheaties this morning...
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Nobody who is a professional would use PowerPoint. Hoax.
Click to expand...

Do you mean for an engine demo or in general? I ask because I have not dealt with an enterprise class company that has not used power point for it's demos and was curious what alternatives you might have seen/used.
 
Shantarr.Dalrae said:
Do you mean for an engine demo or in general? I ask because I have not dealt with an enterprise class company that has not used power point for it's demos and was curious what alternatives you might have seen/used.
Click to expand...

I was just trash talking PP, because it's terrible. The source might be legit, but gaf isn't where I'm going for this type of news.
 
syn3rgyz said:
hope they fix the horrible net code / hitboxes and registration in that engine.
Click to expand...

I think that's only counter strike(I still have no idea how the fuck that game works. It's the most random game when it comes to shooting I have ever played). The L4D games are generally pretty good I think.
 
Rebuilt maps don't necessarily mean L4D3 but on other hand, why the fuck not. It's going to need more than that, though. I am excited about L4D3, not so much about HL3.
 
I'd play another L4D game. L4D2 wasn't horrible it just had some weird pacing and it came too soon. The community for the first game was still alive and well and the release of 2 splintered it.
It has been long enough that a new game would probably be welcomed with open arms.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
I was just trash talking PP, because it's terrible. The source might be legit, but gaf isn't where I'm going for this type of news.
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks for the perspective.

Sorry for the off-topic everyone, I hope source 2 is a thing sooner, rather than later!
 
ZaC851 said:
Agree. Its very simple and works great. Thats why CS is still so great to this day.
Click to expand...

I'm curious how? When you are close to someone it's more effective to spam the ground than it is to shoot directly at them. That doesn't sound like perfection.
 
xIronCrossx said:
I'm curious how? When you are close to someone it's more effective to spam the ground than it is to shoot directly at them. That doesn't sound like perfection.
Click to expand...

CS attempts to have recoil work in a way that doesn't really reflect the gun animation nor crosshair, especially if you are simply holding down the left-mouse 'fire' key.

If CS attempted a 1:1 animation to recoil ratio your character would basically be looking at the sky in automatic fire. TIP: never use automatic fire unless you know the exact recoul and spray pattern for the weapon you are using @ the FPS (120 etc) you are getting at the time of spraying the weapon.

TL;dr the animation of recoil =/= actual bullet location.
 
While I loved HL1 and 2, and well, basically anything on the source engine because it always just felt "right," i'm really starting to not give a shit anymore when it comes to Valve. Too much pointless hype and no substance.
 
chockomonkey said:
While I loved HL1 and 2, and well, basically anything on the source engine because it always just felt "right," i'm really starting to not give a shit anymore when it comes to Valve. Too much pointless hype and no substance.
Click to expand...

There's a certain fluidity about certain engines isn't there?

I simply could not get into, for example, Fallout 3 because the engine just felt like you were walking through treacle all the time. Other games are just as guilty of this but I can't think of an example off the top of my head.

This fluidity is, I suspect, why games such as COD are so popular. There's a pace and ease of movement that just makes them a bit more fun to play.

Just my (probably worthless) 2p.
 
naticus said:
You know I can't wait for Source 2 and I hope it is soon. But honestly I don't think it is going to happen as soon as we think.The current consoles on the market can't even max out source as it is today, look at Titanfall for a perfect example on the Xbox One. It is fucking struggling to do 720p @60 fps. And technology as far as engines go tend to follow the dollars -- and that is the consoles. I think Source 2 is probably 5-6 years away ( as well as Half-Life 3). Then again I could be wrong and ol' GabeN could have a brew of Source 2 running on a kernel of linux that is SteamOS and it revolutionishes gaming and every develpoer wants to be a part of it. It loks like UE 4 on crack and runs twice as fast, but i doubt it. Valve tends to be like our grandpas -- reliable, patient, predictable and always on their own time.
Click to expand...

Source 2 will coincide with Valves game box, I really think it's inevitable that the engine and HL3 will both be released on the new platform to entice people to purchase (ala when Steam was first released).
 
huxley said:
Source 2 will coincide with Valves game box, I really think it's inevitable that the engine and HL3 will both be released on the new platform to entice people to purchase (ala when Steam was first released).
Click to expand...

You may be right. I think Valve is one of two camps; 1) they are going to use SteamOS as a catalyst to launch a new engine and several games based on that engine that run best on their OS, that is also Open-Source and they want to push 'marketing' departements like Sony and Microsoft off there soap boxes and change the way gamers think of living-room gaming, 2) they don't really care about SteamOS from a business prospective but more-so from a marketing prospective and feel the change isn't in hardware but software and marketing and analysis. In the second scenario Source 2 is far away as well as HL3.

As far as games are concerned I would rather have a L4D3 or CS: Source 2 than a Halif-life 3, any day.
 
naticus said:
You may be right. I think Valve is one of two camps; 1) they are going to use SteamOS as a catalyst to launch a new engine and several games based on that engine that run best on their OS, that is also Open-Source and they want to push 'marketing' departements like Sony and Microsoft off there soap boxes and change the way gamers think of living-room gaming, 2) they don't really care about SteamOS from a business prospective but more-so from a marketing prospective and feel the change isn't in hardware but software and marketing and analysis. In the second scenario Source 2 is far away as well as HL3.

As far as games are concerned I would rather have a L4D3 or CS: Source 2 than a Halif-life 3, any day.
Click to expand...

You will not see Valve lock the game down to PC. They would simply be alienating the consoles if they did that and lose out on a ton of sales. You will see HL3 for linux most likely but you wont see them pull a microsoft and make you have a steam client or OS for the game to work as designed lol. Source 2 does exist and has for a while. Its still in development.

I would like to see a Counter Strike 2 over anything personally but looking how bad they dropped the ball on CSGO and some of valves decisions and how they are handling them they probably should not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top