New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Source: http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=198032As we rapidly approach the ever-busy Christmas buying season, there's always lots to talk about. And that's a good thing because Valve's chief marketeer, Doug Lombardi, is always happy to talk - whatever time of year it is.
We recently caught up with Lombardi who spoke of Valve's philosophy behind episodic gaming, modern games development, the future of PC gaming, the next-gen and why PS3 is starting to look like a more attractive platform.
He was saying bugger all about Episode 3 though. Look, we tried....
Each episode of Half Life 2 has been different - Ep. 1 was closed in, Ep 2 featured far more of the open outdoors. How will Ep. 3 move things along in terms of overall gameplay focus?
Doug Lombardi: We're really not talking about specifics of stuff on what's going to happen next with Mr Freeman. We definitely feel like things have been wrapping up with each instalment and as you get to a conclusion that gets magnified. Other than that, we're really not talking about it.
So is it all coming to a huge end after Episode III?
Lombardi: We're gonna wrap it all up, put a bow on it - the G-Man is Gordon's father... it's all good.
How has episodic content worked for you guys over the years?
Lombardi: I think it's been really good in terms of us changing our development approach. It took us six years to make Half Life 2. It's been less than four years since HL2 came out and we've put out Episode 1 and 2, Portal, Day of Defeat Source and you've now got Left 4 Dead.
We obviously figured out a way to be more productive and more prolific with out development cycle.
The notion of the word 'episode' conjures up this idea of television where you get something new every week. And people say "we thought that episodic meant we were going to get something new every six months or every year."
We probably said we were going to do that right away, but we're always terrible at predicting our dates. But we're pretty good at putting out something that's quality when it does eventually come out.
At the end of the day we got something out a lot quicker, and we were trying to identify with people through the word 'episode' that we were going to get something out a lot quicker than with Half Life 2. It would be a bit shorter than Half Life 2, but because of that it would be priced accordingly.
It's an interesting way of doing things - smaller packages that are cheaper and more regular...
Lombardi: I think a lot of folks in the games industry saw the same problem that we did with Half Life 2 in that making a 20-hour game with rich graphics, story etc. is a really expensive proposition both in time and money.
And some have started making games about the same length as Episode II, but they haven't changed what they call it, and they haven't change the price.
So I think we tried to be a bit more honest about it, and maybe we chose the wrong word in 'episode' in that it conjured up this TV analogy.
Do you see this becoming a major trend in future - developers releasing smaller chunks of games, as was done with Ratchet & Clank: Quest for Booty?
Lombardi: I hope so, that's what I like. Most people just don't have the time to spend 15 or 20 hours on a game. I think stats say that something like only 30 percent of gamers have time for that.
In a way you're charging people $50 but they're only getting $18 worth out of it - that's not necessarily the best way to go. But if you look at something like Portal, it's a five hour game and although I haven't done a qualified study, the number of people I've spoken to that finished the game feels like a much higher percent.
Steam seems to be gaining new partners on a weekly basis...
Lombardi: We plan to just keep going. When it first came out it had some warts on it. But very much to the team's credit they just stuck with it and kept building.
Is it as good as it needs to be?
Lombardi: I think that it's turned a corner now - it's a high-quality service. And the hate for Steam has gone away. As we look forward there are a million things we want to do and it's just a matter of which ones we tackle first.
We're always looking at features for customers, publishers and developers. On the developers' side, we're going to be looking at some new billing methods, and things like the ability for publishers to create more of their own presence within Steam.
How do you see PC gaming progressing from here?
Lombardi: One thing we're already seeing now and something that's important for the future is multi-core processing.
CPU manufacturers don't have big sexy campaigns with a character that represents a new processor like we see on the GPU side so it's sort of gone under the radar.
But for us it's a great opportunity to put more things on screen, to pull off more complicated AI routines, to have better physics simulations and whatever.
For a long time the GPU side has been leading the charge towards brighter, shinier games, and it usually ends up that whoever has the best looking game at shows like E3 usually gets game of the show.
We've always looked at that shaking our heads thinking it's not always about the graphics. We've all seen games that looked really pretty and got all these awards but then it comes out and there's not much of a game there.
Portal is an example of a game that, before it came out, failed to convince all those who like nice graphics. But when it came out it had really solid gameplay and a clever story, and so it won over 30 Game of the Year awards.
It's more about what you can do in the game. Graphics have started to top-out now. We've got really great-looking games but what we want are more intelligent, more visceral games and the multi-core processors are going to be the way that we get there on PC.
So you think graphical progress from here will be minimal?
Lombardi: I think it's a case of diminishing returns. If you look at a character like Alex, or the graphics in Call of Duty 4 - how much better does it need to look for you? So sure, we could probably fine-tune things a little bit more but I think we can get way more out of AI and physics.
PCs lead the charge over consoles, so do you see the next generation of consoles concentrating on AI and physics rather than graphical improvements?
Lombardi: Yeah I think so. We always see [on PC], leading up to the next console jump, the things that console makers jump on.
For example, online connectivity - it was something the console's didn't have and then in the last generation Microsoft played with it and the other two didn't really bother. Now it's key to all three platforms. It's been a staple of PC gaming since Doom, right?
The graphics possessors of the current consoles - where did they come from? They're little brothers of the PC GPUs we were using a couple years back. You definitely see that migration coming over.
It's no secret that Valve doesn't do PS3. But has there been any change of heart considering the console's recent success?
Lombardi: We're always evaluating what's happening in the marketplace and certainly something that's happening in the last couple of months is that Sony's managed to sell some boxes.
So whether or not you like developing for that platform, if they've got millions of people connected to that platform and buying their games you have to take it seriously.
Out of the box they struggled with that, with the price point and whatever. The numbers showed they were way behind the other two. But they're in the race now, so we've got to re-evaluate that for what it is.
So was it just the console's slow start that lead to you guys choosing not to develop for it?
Lombardi: I think the big thing was that you had the platform holder who had won clearly in the past two generations - who had millions of people who wanted the PS3 to be a huge success. But when it came out it got off to a slow start.
It's kind of painful when the industry leader gets off to a slow start, but like I say, to Sony's credit they've turned it around. They're in the hunt now. The race for number two is on.
The Wii has got a good lead and we'll see if they can sustain that over time, but right now it's all about position two, and think that by the end of the year the install base of the 360 and PS3 are going to be pretty similar.
PS3 seems to be leading Europe right now, while in the States the 360's still holding. But then you look at Asia and you figure out where the tie-breaker is going to be. Sony's clearly got the advantage there, right?
So is that raising your eye now?
Lombardi: We go PC first. Gabe [Newell] comes from the Windows background, a lot of the older guys at Valve all come from a PC background. But there are loads of younger guys are into consoles.
So we got a 360 team together because it's really close to the PC and is shooter-friendly - the audience has been into shooters for years.
So it was natural for us to decide that the first console we develop for internally would be the 360. But now that we've got a strong 360 team we're starting to look at ways to expand out business.
It's much easier to take our games to the PS3, because of the horsepower of that hardware, than it is to the Wii because Wii is very different with its input devices and lower tech.
If we were going for the Wii we'd have to go for a whole new game that's designed for that platform. That's an expensive proposition and riskier than just getting some good PS3 developers on board.
It's something that we're still evaluating, but certainly the install base is the thing that rules all. If there's an opportunity there you've got to take it seriously.
So what are the chances of Left 4 Dead on PS3?
Lombardi: 50-50 right now. There's zero chance of it happening this year. It's something that's being talked about right now as the game is gaining popularity and looking like it's going to be a hit.