Comments on: Gabe Newell Calls Linux a ‘Get-Out-Of-Jail Free Card’ PC enthusiasts one-stop resource for high-quality reviews, articles and current technology news. Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:50:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Marfig Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:37:00 +0000 Well, that’s true. Gabe nowhere made any mention these would be gameplay changing items. And in retrospect it is indeed unlikely he will introduce that idea onto Valve games. Well, except perhaps on games where that type of feature is expected. MOBA, MMOs, maybe even ARPGS.

By: Rob Williams Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:47:00 +0000 I haven’t watched those videos, but generally speaking, Valve hasn’t had interest in selling things in its games that can give an unfair advantage to players. In Team Fortress 2, the company DOES offer weapons, but from what I understand, none of them are overpowered. Rather, they’re just “different”. At the same time, these same weapons can be had through regular gameplay.

I’m fine with that kind of thing. I might personally have no interest in purchasing any of it, but I am not going to fault the company for taking advantage of that sales mechanic. It’s been proven many times over that gamers WILL buy this stuff. I just don’t. And though I don’t, I haven’t yet felt like it’s affected me.

Sadly, most F2P titles are not like that.

By: Marfig Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:26:00 +0000 Gabe Newel talk is indeed an excelent 30 minutes well spent and he approaches many of the points of another talk he gave recently at a Texas university:

Besides Linux, which I fully agree, there’s however troubling thoughts to his vision of computer gaming in the future and the direction Valve seems to want to take with its own games. I’ll disagree with you Rob on the matter he knows what gamers want.

Well, obviously he does know what gamers want as a mass of consumers. But there are large groups of gamers who won’t appreciate his ideas of gaming markets where players can trade and make a few real dollars of in-game objects (I suggest anyone interested to take a deeper look at the Texas talk where he explores this concept in more detail, which also discuss btw changes to the Steam platform). Not because there is anything inherently wrong with that approach. But because these type of game systems invariably tend to affect the game design and become transversal to all aspects gameplay.

Now, not everyone wants a game that requires the trade of goods to become playable. This is in effect a game with microtransactions. Whether Valve plans to take a percentage of the sales is irrelevant. What’s relevant is that we have a game that clearly can’t offer a successful experience to gamers if they don’t take advantage of said market.

If this is what we can expect of future Valve games, that gaming studio will become irrelevant to me. And while I have no doubt there will be a huge market for its games, 60% of the global gaming market adopting these games, means that close to 10 million gamers won’t. So, I think Gabe Newell knows only what the majority of gamers want and that’s the only group he plans to have something to offer. I won’t argue against that, but I prefer companies who develop as a result of their passions and in the process end up with all sorts of products that can cater to a wider audience. Not companies that develop first by establishing the value of their game.