Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Valve Discloses Source 2 Engine In Recent DOTA 2 Update

Posted by timothy on from the where's-the-ignition-switch dept.

MojoKid (1002251) writes News and rumors about Valve's upcoming Source 2 engine have been buzzing for months, but a recent update to DOTA 2 contains the most persuasive evidence yet that a major engine is in the works. After the last patch, the game now contains a number of programmed default paths, directories, and file names that didn't previously exist. Source-related DLLs and executables (engine.dll, vconsole.dll) have been updated to "engine2.dll" and vconsole2.dll." The tileset editor has a default Source path. There's also now an option to save files as "Source 1.0 Map Files" where no previous option existed. Here's the funny thing — while most people think of a game screenshot as the best evidence you can buy, low-level file directories, default trees, and changed application behavior is actually more persuasive. Source 1.0 was never updated to support DX11 or OpenGL 4.x, and while the engine can still be used for impressive titles, its DX9 limitations and ancient modding tools are showing their age. It's time to bring the game engine into the modern world, and hopefully these DOTA 2 updates mean that Valve is moving closer to that goal.

97 comments

  1. HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let me be the first one to welcome Half-Life 3 for Christmas...2025.

    1. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HL4evur

      captcha: eternity

    2. Re:HL3? by Nyder · · Score: 2

      Let me be the first one to welcome Half-Life 3 for Christmas...2025.

      I say Half-Life 3 comes out when the Steam Console comes out. You always want the killer app, and well, Half-life has the chance to bring more people to the Steam Console then probably any other game.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    3. Re:HL3? by Luckyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think most of us would settle for the ending of HL2 at this point.

    4. Re:HL3? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 2

      left5dead

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    5. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is no singular "Steam Console", it's an (apparently loose) set of standards that Valve will expect manufacturers of Steam Machines to conform to. It is likely going to be a stillbirth, because (shockingly) a bunch of random companies schlocking together COTS hardware to meet a standard and getting nothing in return will not be able to compete (in terms of performance or price or both) with a few companies custom designing hardware and subsidizing the manufacturing cost with licensing fees.

      It's obvious the "Steam Machines" are intended to be the biggest thrust in Valve's general desire to decouple themselves from Windows in the aftermath of Microsoft pushing their App Store, but thus far it seems like a move that is doomed to failure unless Valve does an about face and decides to spend some of its massive cash reserves getting these machines out there (or offers its manufacturing "partners" a cut of sales made from their machines -- but due to the nature of Steam this would be difficult).

    6. Re:HL3? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      And this is exactly why you and me are using a 3 Ghz commodore Amigas, right?

    7. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Next question.

    8. Re:HL3? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Then how the "Non IBM"-PC worked at all?
      It was exactly a "bunch of random companies schlocking together COTS hardware to meet a standard and getting nothing in return" competing against closed boxes like the Amiga, ST,mac... and while they didn't as far i know used Subsidy, they were pretty much fully verticalized companies that had no way to compete against in price at least at the beginning.

      A more modern example would be the Android, where its again a bunch of chinese manufacturers following an standard and having no subsidy whatsoever.

    9. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might have been true a decade ago. Nobody cares about or even remembers Half-Life any more.

    10. Re:HL3? by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      HL2 is true to its name. It took me about 16 hours to complete HL2. About 8h to complete Episode 1, and about 4h to complete Episode 2.

    11. Re:HL3? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      look even if it is in the far future of 2015, the argument still stands, they're sitting on it.

      the joke is that I've quit anticipating next half life's release. I mean fuck, it's just going to be a tunnel(as in levels being tunnels from a to b) level shooter with 4 enemies and a broken plot. probably decent at that but hey, nothing to write home about, just like hl2 and the ep's. nothing more broken in a plot than to pausefreeze-end in the middle of a friggin explosion. -- and because of this they can keep it on hold mode until they come up with a release date for the steam machine platform and just whack it together in couple of months(and probably break the controls somehow in the process to make it feel like you should be playing with their shit ass controller).

      so I'll use my steam money for something else.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    12. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Took me about three hours to beat HL2 and an hour a piece for the episodes.

    13. Re:HL3? by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wow. Do you play all your games like that? You must have raced through the game, blasting everything in your path. I realize that official speedruns of HL2 are probably way faster than 3hrs, but it still must have been a hectic run through the game.

      I like to be sneaky, explore the environments, enjoy the views, smell the roses and listen to the stuff the NPC's have to say before moving on.

    14. Re: HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HL3 will actually be free to play, monetized through the sale of a variety of virtual crowbars for sale at resistance outposts. You may be the Free Man, but these custom combine doll crowbars wont pay for themselves!

    15. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Steam Machine is a game machine competing against other game machines. Different ballgame, son.

    16. Re:HL3? by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/da...

      "If and when Valve ever makes Half-Life 3, you wonâ(TM)t have to get Steam to play it. In an interview with IGN, Valve says that it wouldnâ(TM)t dream of using its software division to make exclusive games for the Steam OS, because that just isnâ(TM)t the way Valve looks at the world.

      âoeYou wonâ(TM)t see an exclusive killer app for SteamOS from us. Weâ(TM)re not going to be doing that kind of thing,â Valveâ(TM)s Greg Comer told IGN."

      "...âoeBecause if it can run in both places, we donâ(TM)t like to create those artificial barriers to accessing content. We believe that, in maybe five years from now, folks will find it a quite antiquated notion that you should assume that when you change devices or platforms, that you lose all of your other games and friends. Weâ(TM)re hoping to unify, to get Steam to be as platform- and context-agnostic as possible. You shouldnâ(TM)t have to shed that every generation, or even slightly shed it.â"

    17. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. You win the stupid.

    18. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2:15:55.63 for one recent run. A 3-hour run is still impressive if you didn't use noclip cheats or level skipping.

    19. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much. Everyu console requires exclusive content, so I fully expect Valve to start cracking out new games that are at the very least timed exclusives for SteamOS to get a foothold on the market with their SteamBoxes. The console world already got a taste for Valve's games with the Orange Box, so sequels and new Is would be noticed.

    20. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have raced through the game, blasting everything in your path.

      That's the general point of a first person shooter.

      I realize that official speedruns of HL2 are probably way faster than 3hrs, but it still must have been a hectic run through the game.

      Not at all. I'm old-school Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, Serious Sams, Quakes and Unreals. By comparison, Half-Life 2 is an incredibly easy game.

      I like to be sneaky

      You can't be in HL2, since there are no stealth elements. All NPCs know where you are on the map at all times, you can't hide or sneak. It's not Thief or Deus Ex.

      explore the environments

      HL2 is a straight line from start to goal, there isn't any exploring to be done. It's not like Deus Ex where you can take different paths.

      enjoy the views

      Maybe if they were better looking.

      smell the roses and listen to the stuff the NPC's have to say

      Not much of that happening in HL2 either.

    21. Re:HL3? by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      Are you sure we are talking about the same game when we speak HL2?

    22. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2:15:55.63 for one recent run. A 3-hour run is still impressive if you didn't use noclip cheats or level skipping.

      Or the various exploits seen in those videos that allow for moving impossibly fast, jumping/flying out of the area of the map that is intended for normal gameplay to skip large sections, "teleport" NPCs to shorten scripted sequences, or other tricks.

    23. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About 8h to complete Episode 1, and about 4h to complete Episode 2.

      Shouldn't it be the other way around ? Episode 1 is the shorter game.

    24. Re:HL3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure I know what Half-Life 2 is, but I'm starting to doubt that you do.

  2. We can already use source two in an alpha version by Renozuken · · Score: 1

    the new hammer (the valve map editor) apparently runs source 2.

  3. About bloody time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Source was showing its age the day it came out. Literally every other engine was and still is better. (well, okay, most)
    All it has is reasonably decent physics and facial animation. (the former being very hacky at best. you can destroy the game so easily by doing even simple things, like giving something 0 weight, cool impossible division bro)
    Now they can finally ditch the years of changes and hackarounds that have just piled up.
    Even the modding wasn't that good. Most of them were poor quality and the only really good ones either never came out, came out after all the hype died down, or got abandoned in a buggy state. Damn shame. So many good mods got left to rot from this supposed "godsend" to modders. (hey, at least it isn't UDK2, holy shit that UI, how could they have lived with such an obtuse and inflexible UI?!)
    I think Black Mesa is about the only really thing that kept the dream alive.

    Source2 has been needed more than HL3 is wanted by every fan of the series combined.
    A fresh start. A new horizon to sail to.

    1. Re:About bloody time by preaction · · Score: 4, Informative

      Every software becomes legacy software the minute it is released. Once you enter a real-world scenario, you need to change and write workarounds for real-world problems.

      A new version is a chance to build a better base that handles the real-world problems more smoothly, but it is also an opportunity to forget the lessons those workarounds were written for.

    2. Re:About bloody time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You call source "dated" I call it mature.

      Valve has been updating it since it was released and they carry all of their titles with it. Even HL2 and CS:Source are updated to keep up with source engine improvements.

      Valve consistently publishes big money makers on the platform that have longevity orders of magnitudes longer than other titles.

      Realistically, though, Source2 has already made it's Debut with the AAA title Titanfall. Yeah. That's a source engine game, believe it or not. They may not have given it the source2 title, but that whole game could not have been in any way implemented in older versions of the source engine. It has to be source2, or some early iteration therof.

    3. Re:About bloody time by oneiron · · Score: 1

      I wholeheartedly agree. Source is heavily modded Q1. I think it's pretty shady that they gave it their own name after replacing enough code that they felt justified to call it a completely new engine. It's Q1.

    4. Re:About bloody time by jones_supa · · Score: 2

      GoldSrc was the "heavily modded Q1". Sure, Source builds even on top of that, but it's a bit unfair to say that it reminisces the Q1 engine in any meaningful way.

    5. Re:About bloody time by Brulath · · Score: 1

      All it has is reasonably decent physics and facial animation. (the former being very hacky at best. you can destroy the game so easily by doing even simple things, like giving something 0 weight, cool impossible division bro)

      Branching on the scenario of an object having zero mass in a physics simulation would be a waste, surely? The probability of someone wanting to create something in a physics simulation for a game with a mass of zero is pretty low. Workaround with similar impact is to give it a mass of 1 and call it a day. That's not a problem a player would ever encounter nor most developers, seems like a pretty weak example.

      Even the modding wasn't that good. Most of them were poor quality and the only really good ones either never came out, came out after all the hype died down, or got abandoned in a buggy state. Damn shame. So many good mods got left to rot from this supposed "godsend" to modders. (hey, at least it isn't UDK2, holy shit that UI, how could they have lived with such an obtuse and inflexible UI?!) I think Black Mesa is about the only really thing that kept the dream alive.

      Mods have came out and hit it big, like Gary's Mod, and others have failed. That's not an indictment of the engine, but of the teams doing the modding that couldn't meet their ambitions. Sure, the engine definitely doesn't make it easy for them compared to e.g. Unity3D, but it's a decade old now; I don't think judging the engine based on what random people are doing with it today, whilst using the past tense, is fair. Valve have made some awesome games with it, so it can be done.

    6. Re:About bloody time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. Titanfall is a 3rd party modification to the Source engine and it shows. That's why the visuals are so lackluster, yet the game still requires a beefy CPU and GPU to run at maximum settings. It's a hack and not a very good one.

    7. Re:About bloody time by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 2

      Well I don't know about you, but the day that half-life2 came out the source engine kicked ass, water looked gorgeous, the physics was sophisticated for the time the facial animation was the best there was for games, the graphics just plain looked good and the damn thing could run in reasonably spec pcs of the time. To this day I still consider HL2 the best game ever.

      The tools and documentation for modding on the other hand...

    8. Re:About bloody time by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Mods have came out and hit it big, like Gary's Mod, and others have failed. That's not an indictment of the engine, but of the teams doing the modding that couldn't meet their ambitions. Sure, the engine definitely doesn't make it easy for them compared to e.g. Unity3D,

      Modding has been going downhill since Quake.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:About bloody time by oneiron · · Score: 1

      What the heck is "reminisces" supposed to mean in this context? Of all the words you could have chosen, it most certainly does exactly that. I don't care how much code you rip out and replace over time. Everything after GoldSrc was built on top of it, so how does it magically become something different? It's still built on the same basic set of ideas, and to this day, some parts of environments created in the engine are plagued by the same type of geometric limitations as every other Q1-based engine.

    10. Re:About bloody time by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      No modding has gotten more expensive since Quake. The graphical fidelity expected today makes mods which can't reach it extremely jarring. If you can produce material of that quality, you're already basically good enough to work for a game company and get paid for it.

    11. Re:About bloody time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DUUUUDE!!!! Wanna go play some Halo and pwn sum nubs?

      sssshhh... Adults are talking. There's a LOL game somewhere needing a ragequitter to shout nigger loudly into his mic - you'll do just fine.

    12. Re:About bloody time by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      No modding has gotten more expensive since Quake. The graphical fidelity expected today makes mods which can't reach it extremely jarring.

      Bananas. People still play lo-fi games. People are trying to match up to AAA titles with their mods when it's not necessary, and as a result never finishing their mod, which as a further result is frustrating and thus not actually worth playing.

      Setting realistic expectations is the first key to meeting them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:About bloody time by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      Right. But if you can make a lo-fi game....why not sell it? Modding is dying because the market is getting a lot easier to access and the toolkits are getting easier to use. We're closing in on the point where a competent modding team is essentially a competent development team who definitely should sell the product they create from the outset.

      I'd argue also it's a consequence of the mean age of gamers being somewhere in the 30s now. We all have disposable income - I don't have to pick "free" to have my product get seen by people anymore.

    14. Re:About bloody time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, Half-Life 2 was the first video game you ever played. Everything you listed was done better by other games before HL2 even came out.

    15. Re:About bloody time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny you should mention Halo, since Half-Life 2 is on par with it quality-wise. Try playing some real games, console-noob.

  4. So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by wisnoskij · · Score: 2

    By my count every single Valve game except for Alien Swarm has exactly one sequel.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by Sowelu · · Score: 1

      Ricochet?

    2. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dota 2 has no sequel

    3. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by antdude · · Score: 2

      Alien Swarm was awesome.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    4. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by hibiki_r · · Score: 1

      I am sure you have heard that the proper way of talking about the next half-life sequel is to call it Ricochet 2. It's the only way to get Gabe to actually tell you anything.

    5. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by gman003 · · Score: 2

      Alien Swarm: No sequels
      Counter-Strike: one remake (Source), two sequels (Condition Zero, Global Offensive)
      DOTA 2: No sequels, sort of a sequel itself though
      Day of Defeat: One remake (Source)
      Deathmatch Classic: No sequels
      Half-Life: Three expansion packs (Opposing Force, Blue Shift, Decay), one remakes (Half-Life: Source), one deathmatch version (HL:DM), one remake of the deathmatch mode (HL:DM:S), one direct sequel (2), one sequel to the deathmatch mode (HL2:DM), three expansions to the sequel (Lost Coast, Episodes 1+2)
      Left 4 Dead: One sequel (2)
      Portal: One sequel (2)
      Ricochet: No sequels
      Team Fortress: One sequel (2)

      This isn't counting the multiple non-Valve licensed variants of Counter-Strike, or the arcade version of Half-Life 2.

    6. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dota 2 is the sequel

    7. Re:So I guess all that Leaves is Alien Swarm by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Other than a single "fix all the bugs" patch I don't think Ricochet was ever supported by Valve except as a contractual agreement to keep selling it indefinitely.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
  5. Source Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, Where's My Source?

  6. Don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've given up on everything Valve (including buying anything through Steam) until HL3 comes out. If it never does then they'll never see another cent from me.
     
    I'm almost to the point where if they do they may still never see another cent from me.

    1. Re:Don't care by DrGamez · · Score: 1

      You really like video game dont you?

    2. Re:Don't care by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Because of what?

      Simply wanting HL3?

      Want them to make games rather than distribute and sell them using their DRM system?

    3. Re:Don't care by tepples · · Score: 1

      GOG, Humble, mobile, and consoles are still open to someone who boycotts Valve.

    4. Re:Don't care by sd4f · · Score: 2

      I care little for half life (iunno, I just can't see what others do, not particularly impressed by anything in any of the games).

      I don't like steam and valve for different reasons though, steam because it is DRM and valve because despite their (well gaben's) public stance on win8 was valid criticism, at the time, it was, however, hypocritical for them to say it considering what they're attempting to do with steam and more broadly their steamOS.

    5. Re:Don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      approx 75% of the last 10 humble bundles were steam redemption only, no downloads

    6. Re:Don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot buying good old physical media. I have yet to see anything that was Steam exclusive that I wanted to play.

  7. Re:We can already use source two in an alpha versi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It may support Source 2, but it's just a map editor, it isn't "running" anything.

  8. Source 2 by geekoid · · Score: 1

    AKA the last one we will release.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Source 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Source 3 is slated to be released some time after the heat death of the universe. If you all will stop being so impatient! Geez.

    2. Re:Source 2 by Nemyst · · Score: 2

      Source 2 Episode 1 and 2 will be a thing though, but they won't be feature complete until Episode 3 which will never come out.

  9. Re: Here's the funny thing ... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So? This is about the engine. So move along if you don't care.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  10. Re: Here's the funny thing ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, wow! They renamed 2 files. That means a whole fuck of a lot. Even if you care about the engine, this isn't solid news.

  11. Re: Here's the funny thing ... by DrGamez · · Score: 2

    Thanks for the blog post, liked and subscribed.

  12. HL3 confirmed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    OMG! source 1 + source 2 = 3!

    Half-Life 3 confirmed!

  13. Re:No Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I don't have a crystal ball, I've just been paying attention.

    If you spend your life with your head up your ass, all you see will be shit.

  14. Re:We can already use source two in an alpha versi by Renozuken · · Score: 1

    Actually when you open the editor a version of dota also opens up, presumably running source 2.

  15. Re: Here's the funny thing ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's proof that the new engine is arriving soon, and with it a new generation of source games (with better visual quality and physics).

  16. Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "DX9 Limitations"

    Sigh, it's sad when Microsoft's marketing team actually works.

    1. Re:Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except DX9 really does have limitations...

    2. Re:Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes. it only supports 63 colors and sega cd has 64.

  17. Re: Here's the funny thing ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or they could have just renamed the files on a whim. It's not proof, it's potential evidence.

  18. Re:Why do Republican keep talking about this DOTA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    democrats are the ones passing laws that grant/deny privilege based on race and sex. they are the bigots.

  19. Re:No Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    camera-on-a-stick movement sure beats the wobbly-bobbly 'realistic' blood/smear/hd light blur cam that today's games inundate you with.

  20. Re:Why do Republican keep talking about this DOTA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck off, nigger.

  21. It has been unveiled before by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    News and rumors about Valve's upcoming Source 2 engine have been buzzing for months, but a recent update to DOTA 2 contains the most persuasive evidence yet that a major engine is in the works.

    What? It has already been confirmed two years ago.

    Slashdot 2012-11-12: Gabe Newell Confirms Source 2 Engine

    Slashdot ran Source 2 news this spring too.

    Slashdot 2014-03-05: Valve Prepping Source 2 Engine For VR

  22. You jest but it may be true by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Valve has real problems with focus. The thing is that they have Steam as this massive cash cow. They make so much money, tens of millions of dollars per employee, that they needn't do anything else. Every other project can fail and bleed cash and they'll be fine. You then combine that with their "no management" structure where everything is done by cliques and you have a situation for things to get abandoned. They go after what various people are interested in, and if interest drops, the project stalls or disappears. There's no one in charge to keep things on track, and no financial incentive to do so.

    So as for Source, it'll depend on if there's interest. They've been pretty lackadaisical about keeping it current, hence why it sees few license compared to something like Unreal Engine. It may just peter out at some point and stop getting any real updates. They probably won't make any official cancellation, it'll just be abandoned as they chase after whatever new thing catches their fancy.

    1. Re:You jest but it may be true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Source still does OK from Valve's point of view. After all, four out of the top 10 most played games on Steam are Source based (including all the top 3), with a total peak player count of about a million, and there is even a GoldSrc title (the original Conter-Strike) among the 10 most popular ones.

      It seems having the most advanced visuals at the cost of requiring high end hardware is no longer necessarily what is driving the popularity of a game. It may sell better if it looks "good enough", plays well, and is marketed well. For example, recent graphically intensive and demanding (Direct3D 11 required or recommended) games like Bioshock Infinite, Metro: Last Light, or Thief are no longer even among the top 100 most played titles on Steam, while there are plenty of older ones that "only" use DX9 still on the list.

    2. Re:You jest but it may be true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steam should be a web site that sells games, not an artificially needed piece of spyware/DRM that you have to filth up your system by installing. Aside from spying, EVERYTHING that Steam does could be done on a web site and require no more than a web browser.

      I love gog.com because they don't carry any of that pretense. You buy a game, download it and it's yours to play forever, even if the company goes out of business.

  23. Re:We can already use source two in an alpha versi by Esvandiary · · Score: 1

    Indeed... It's definitely running something different to the normal engine. There are a few minor differences, but the most noticeable (and telling) one is that several graphical effects are a bit buggy or otherwise "strange" in the editor version of the game.

  24. lets do the math by mnt · · Score: 1

    source -> source 2 -> half life 3!!1

  25. Good news everyone! by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

    "the game now contains a number of programmed default paths, directories, and file names that didn't previously exist"

    Let me guess: on the Mac, they're in your Library folder, so you can't put the game files anywhere but your user account, which means you can't fit your user account on the SSD.

    Yay.

    1. Re:Good news everyone! by ledow · · Score: 1

      Maybe buy an OS that lets you configure some of the basics of where you store things?

      Hell, most of my users don't even know where their profiles, documents, favourites, etc. actually end up unless they bother to look into it. And you can set whatever you want to be an SSD and store whatever you want on it.

      The biggest thing I hate about MacOS is "we know better, so you don't get the option".

    2. Re:Good news everyone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mv "~/Library/Application Support/Steam" "/Volumes/SSD/"
      ln "~/Library/Application Support/Steam" "/Volumes/SSD/Steam"

      Before Steam had the feature for multiple library locations on Windows (it might have it on Mac too, I don't know), this is what I had to do to split my library. I had to install a third party tool to make links on Windows so give the "we know better" card a rest.

      N.B. above post may contain shoddy use of ln and/or mv.

    3. Re:Good news everyone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mv "~/Library/Application Support/Steam" "/Volumes/SSD/"
      ln "~/Library/Application Support/Steam" "/Volumes/SSD/Steam"

      Before Steam had the feature for multiple library locations on Windows (it might have it on Mac too, I don't know)

      The same feature also exists on Linux. I do not know why it would not on OS X, even if that platform is often the most problematic one, this should be something simple enough to implement.

  26. Re:No Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No it doesn't, otherwise games wouldn't be using those things today.

  27. Re: Here's the funny thing ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Oh, wow! They renamed 2 files. That means a whole fuck of a lot. Even if you care about the engine, this isn't solid news.

    There are actually more changes than that, which are discussed here, for example: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=869807

  28. Sideloading in Steam OS vs. Windows RT by tepples · · Score: 1

    I don't like steam and valve for different reasons though, steam because it is DRM

    Consoles and iOS are even worse DRM-wise.

    at the time, it was, however, hypocritical for them to [dis Windows Store] considering what they're attempting to do with steam and more broadly their steamOS.

    At the time, Microsoft was heavily pushing Windows RT, which doesn't usefully allow sideloading. Steam OS, by contrast, lets users sideload GNU/Linux games or Wine games obtained other than through Steam.

    1. Re:Sideloading in Steam OS vs. Windows RT by sd4f · · Score: 1

      Steamworks games have DRM which is probably worse than consoles. You generally must be online, and you must have steam running to play the games. Consoles, generally still don't do this. Valve have improved their offline mode, but for a long time no internet meant no play. From what I can see, it's still a paint in the arse, and doesn't allow you to completely run games if your internet drops out all of a sudden. I've had a lot of experience in dealing with steams heavy handed approach to staying online.

      Sideloading is a non-issue since WinRT was always intended for ARM processors. I can't see any valid criticism as games wouldn't work even if sideloading was permitted unless the code was ported and optimised for the different hardware. What my criticism is that many stores are forced to sell games with steamworks ultimately leading their customers to a competing store. I see it as very similar to when MS was forcing OEMs to pay for licenses for computers that didn't ship with any MS products.

      The issue is valve is protecting their walled garden in steam, steamOS is only a few additional fences around their heavily walled garden. They were really concerned about the integrated store in windows as that was something which had the power to directly compete with steam. It's why valve refuse to make a modern ui app available through the windows app store, as the last thing they want is people to realise they can get games elsewhere. One can hardly criticism MS for making a walled garden, and champion valve when valve's own enormous moneymaker is a walled garden itself.

    2. Re:Sideloading in Steam OS vs. Windows RT by tepples · · Score: 1

      From what I can see, it's still a paint in the arse, and doesn't allow you to completely run games if your internet drops out all of a sudden

      I wonder if you're confusing it with the continuous DRM in SimCity and Assassin's Creed 2. Steam requires receipt renewal every couple weeks and that's it.

      Sideloading is a non-issue since WinRT was always intended for ARM processors.

      How is that relevant? Android is for ARM and you can sideload. So was RISC OS. Windows RT is for ARM and you can't. Nor can you develop directly on a device even if it is docked to an external keyboard and monitor. There's no Visual Studio RT, for instance, unlike Steam OS that can accept any GNOME app such as an IDE.

    3. Re:Sideloading in Steam OS vs. Windows RT by sd4f · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you're confusing it with the continuous DRM in SimCity and Assassin's Creed 2. Steam requires receipt renewal every couple weeks and that's it.

      Nope, it's only from a few years ago where they relaxed the requirement. Certainly when I made a steam account, if you didn't move into offline mode while you were online, it wouldn't let you. So if you lost your internet connection, then tough. Steam in the very early days was an abortion comparable to simcity and AC2, actually probably worse all due to DRM requirements. None of this changed until the last 2-4 years where things were starting to get improved. But like you have shown, it still requires you to be online periodically. Compare this with GoG; no DRM, download the game and you can install wherever, whenever you want without having to run a third party client to oversee your game running. It's like as if I'm gaming in the 90's and early 00's again.

      How is that relevant? Android is for ARM and you can sideload. So was RISC OS. Windows RT is for ARM and you can't. Nor can you develop directly on a device even if it is docked to an external keyboard and monitor. There's no Visual Studio RT, for instance, unlike Steam OS that can accept any GNOME app such as an IDE.

      How is a tablet OS not sideloading relevant to steam? It isn't, because your whole issue, while not factually wrong, is a storm in a teacup and offtopic. I explained why, but you snipped that part of the paragraph and probably didn't read it. To further explain my point about it being ARM, is that it was never going to have any effect to steam or desktop computing. No one seems to be criticising apple that iOS doesn't allow sideloading, so why is MS being singled out here? There's also no back catalogue of software for winRT, and definitely no hardware to run graphically intensive games.

      I think the whole issue is simply that valve was worried about MS having an app store integrated with windows. That was the underlying point of contention with windows 8 (aside from the dud UI, but everyone knows that). We all know MS' past history, they tend to be anti-competitive, but these days, who isn't? Valve is just releasing steamOS in an attempt to keep steam closed and making money and largely free from competitors, i.e. the status quo. It's no different to why google released android completely free, because they needed something to protect their premier product, google search, from remaining only in a desktop browser, in a fast moving landscape. Valve is doing the same thing by trying to make inroads into the console market with their steam box coupled with steamOS. They want to keep steam relevant by finding its way into the living room.

  29. Steam/Valve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quite frankly both Steam and Valve are tyrants and both are receiving too much attention just like a tyrant would.

    Why support Valve and the single worst service they've ever put out that is Steam? Or any product present or future for that matter? Argue as much as you like but the Internet is ripe with stories that would make you spit at them... heck I've uninstalled their rubbish just last year because I saw them mistreat not one, not a hundred, but thousands of people and this continues to this day.

    Ask yourselves, is it truly worth supporting a terrorist company with tyrant services?