Why I hate valve games. (A rant of sorts)

[Redratson]

Graphics only make the game prettier not enjoyable. I play pac man from time to time and I find it enjoyable. Have fun gett'n flamed by fan boys!

 

[Enigma6667]

Oh noes! They're using the same engine!! That totally ruins the games!! Never mind the great level design, polished writing, and solid gameplay, the fact that these Valve bastards think that using the same engine since 2004 is a good idea is just HANUS I tell you! HANUS!!!

/obvious sarcasm

Okay, so you don't think that they're good games, but Jesus Titty-Fucking Christ whining about the Source engine just sounds pathetic. If you made a rant on your own personal opinion on the actual parts that matter i.e. the gameplay, that would've been a valid opinion because games with bad gameplay are bad games. A game with good gameplay and mediocre graphics is still a solid title.

 

[DoctorX41794]

Perhaps you haven't noticed that valve has released the graphics updates from HL2:E2 to ALL of the source games?

Your argument is invalidated by this sir, though I say so respectfully.

Still looks ugly. like they say you can put a tux on a pig and it is still a pig

No, that is one sexy pig, and if it shows me a good time, let's me have fun. I wouldn't turn that pig into bacon.

 

[Flamma Man]

Um. Okay. Someone screwed up the quote pyramid. Basically, I think that Valve games are overrated because they don't play very well. I went into some detail in another thread a couple of days ago, but an example of what I mean is in the vehicle sections. Half-Life 2 came out in 2004, but the vehicle sections had already been done better in Halo in 2001. Valve's vehicles control horribly, due to the tank controls they force on the player because they're unwilling to use the much more durable third person vehicle perspective.

Really? I thought the exact opposite.

The vehicles in Half-Life handle very well, I don't see what you're talking about with "tank controls." As for Halo, the vehicles slide waaaay too much for my tastes.

 

[camokkid]

Are you implying graphics determine the quality of a game? Valve makes fantastic, some times near-perfect, games. Yes the graphics are outdated, but that doesn't detract from things like character, story, gameplay, artistic design, multiplayer balance, and other factors that makes a game great. Your whole argument is based around the fact that they don't look good when in mine and many others opinions, a game like TF2 has wonderful art style and the graphics are one of it's charms.

Woo-yay, your first post didn't suck!

Good for you!

Have a cookie.

[spoiler/][img/]http://www.connersvine.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/cookie.jpg[/img][/spoiler]

I sure-as-peas hope the picture works.

EDIT: Also woo-yay, the picture works!

 

[The Random One]

Well that is a bad analogy too, because the game with no graphics would be better in that regard.

I support any analogy that ends up with the conclusion that Zork is a naked girl.

Also, the graphics are one of the few things in HL2 that aren't bad.

 

[Kanodin0]

Reasons why Valve kicks ass:
1. Great story-telling.
2. Fun as hell gameplay.
3. They listen to they're customers.
4. Revolutionized the FPS genre.
5. Openly support modding they're games.
6. Constantly pumping out creative and unique games.


Of course a game made six years ago is not going to have the most modern graphics, but valve more than make up for it.

Also: To any other people reading this thread; think about this: Low post count, criticizing a popular game development company on a stupid point, and being a dick to those who respond with intelligent arguments.

I'm gonna bet it's a troll.

High probability of a troll, though the join date is oddly early. However that is why I recommend instead of getting pointlessly angry we should all explain our points well and respectfully and then if ignored ignore right back, trolls hate that, and if not a troll then maybe we can get him to understand why we disagree instead of confirming some presupposed opinion that everyone else is a moron and likes moronic things.

 

[scnj]

Um. Okay. Someone screwed up the quote pyramid. Basically, I think that Valve games are overrated because they don't play very well. I went into some detail in another thread a couple of days ago, but an example of what I mean is in the vehicle sections. Half-Life 2 came out in 2004, but the vehicle sections had already been done better in Halo in 2001. Valve's vehicles control horribly, due to the tank controls they force on the player because they're unwilling to use the much more durable third person vehicle perspective.

Really? I thought the exact opposite.

The vehicles in Half-Life handle very well, I don't see what you're talking about with "tank controls." As for Halo, the vehicles slide waaaay too much for my tastes.

I'm gonna let you in on a little secret, and I don't want you telling everyone but I'm a console gamer. I don't like a keyboard and mouse setup, and I can't afford a good computer. When I say tank controls, I mean that the vehicle does it's acceleration and turning using the one analog stick, which is a pain in the ass to use, especially when I have to navigate ramps and narrow passages. I get that Valve is primarily a PC developer, but that doesn't excuse sloppy control systems on their console ports.

 

[Kindlebee92]

I will say this: Valve's engine is old, and their games do not look the best compared to today's standards. However, I hold the opinion that while it is not the prettiest game engine, when you look at Portal you can see it still looks pretty damn good! Same with TF2 (more so, because of the syle). This is the same argument I use with World of Warcraft's graphics - sure a lot of it is old, but you look at it and you see a style that ages extremely well, that still looks exceptionally well considering how old it is. While yes the graphics aren't ZOMG CRYSIS level, where they are at *combined* with the exceptional gameplay and story more than make up for any engine problems

if it ain't broke, don't replace it

 

[The Amazing Tea Alligator]

Um. Okay. Someone screwed up the quote pyramid. Basically, I think that Valve games are overrated because they don't play very well. I went into some detail in another thread a couple of days ago, but an example of what I mean is in the vehicle sections. Half-Life 2 came out in 2004, but the vehicle sections had already been done better in Halo in 2001. Valve's vehicles control horribly, due to the tank controls they force on the player because they're unwilling to use the much more durable third person vehicle perspective.

Really? I thought the exact opposite.

The vehicles in Half-Life handle very well, I don't see what you're talking about with "tank controls." As for Halo, the vehicles slide waaaay too much for my tastes.

I'm gonna let you in on a little secret, and I don't want you telling everyone but I'm a console gamer. I don't like a keyboard and mouse setup, and I can't afford a good computer. When I say tank controls, I mean that the vehicle does it's acceleration and turning using the one analog stick, which is a pain in the ass to use, especially when I have to navigate ramps and narrow passages. I get that Valve is primarily a PC developer, but that doesn't excuse sloppy control systems on their console ports.

All ports have shitty controls. It's like one of the fundamental laws of the universe or something. Deal with it.

 

[The Amazing Tea Alligator]

Pfft, fucking n00b. Go play your crummy Halo, COD, or Crysis shooters. You're not a true gamer to handle the awesome might of Valve's games.

Thanks for contributing.
P.S. This might shock you, but you aren't helping.

 

[scnj]

Um. Okay. Someone screwed up the quote pyramid. Basically, I think that Valve games are overrated because they don't play very well. I went into some detail in another thread a couple of days ago, but an example of what I mean is in the vehicle sections. Half-Life 2 came out in 2004, but the vehicle sections had already been done better in Halo in 2001. Valve's vehicles control horribly, due to the tank controls they force on the player because they're unwilling to use the much more durable third person vehicle perspective.

Really? I thought the exact opposite.

The vehicles in Half-Life handle very well, I don't see what you're talking about with "tank controls." As for Halo, the vehicles slide waaaay too much for my tastes.

I'm gonna let you in on a little secret, and I don't want you telling everyone but I'm a console gamer. I don't like a keyboard and mouse setup, and I can't afford a good computer. When I say tank controls, I mean that the vehicle does it's acceleration and turning using the one analog stick, which is a pain in the ass to use, especially when I have to navigate ramps and narrow passages. I get that Valve is primarily a PC developer, but that doesn't excuse sloppy control systems on their console ports.

All ports have shitty controls. It's like one of the fundamental laws of the universe or something. Deal with it.

But why should I have to deal with it? If a game is released on multiple platforms, I should be able to play on the platform of my choice, content in the knowledge that the developer has put maximum effort into optimising the game for that platform.

 

[ClassicJokester]

Gameplay is more important than graphics. If you do not feel that way then I feel sorry for you you poor dumb bastard.

Sorry for picking this one sentence, but it hit me more strongly than anything else in the thread.
I don't think it's fair to say that gameplay is more important than graphics [or engine for that matter], because often, the level of detail in the graphics dictates options available to gameplay designers. This is a little bit of an extreme example, but I'll use it anyway. Consider Assassin's Creed. Do you think that game would have worked with the same style of climby-stabby gameplay, but with the texture limits and draw distances of a system like the N64?

Gameplay is --of course-- important (some would say King), but if you say that graphics aren't as important, I want you to say it to some artists or people who are not the gameplay designers.

tl;dr [graphics matter]&[gameplay matters]

 

[DkLnBr]

well lets just put on my fire-proof suit.... there!
Now anyways, your entitled to your own opinion, but complaining about the source engine in a Valve game isn't going to go over well. Valve is more about the story and gameplay than graphics. This might be a little bold to say, but Valve games would be like the Mona Lisa. Very well done, and while some people may say its overrated because of all the hype it gets, right all now your doing is complaining about the frame its in.

Valve is more along the lines of putting a Tee shirt on Scarlet Johansen. Sometimes what the package is wearing isn't nearly as important as whats underneath.

another good analogy to get at what im trying to say

 

[scnj]

Pfft, fucking n00b. Go play your crummy Halo, COD, or Crysis shooters. You're not a true gamer to handle the awesome might of Valve's games.

This is exactly what I'd hoped to avoid. The OP might be trolling, but this rampant display of fanboyism (made even more evident by your choice of avatar) is just as bad, if not worse.

 

[skywalkerlion]

Honestly, I never really thought the Valve games were all that amazing either, but it didn't have to do with the graphics.

 

[Tony2077]

i like there sp game not really a fan of there mp games its that simple want more from me find me in real life

 

[UberFische]

but anyways my point is basically we shouldn't stand by valve and these sub par games they keep churning out if we look at crysis or even MMO's theres something much more to validate the strength of our community instead of these games that look like they still got stuck in the last generation.

Also anyone with half a brain can determine that I obviously don't mean that all games need good graphics to be good games.

con-tra-dic-tion - noun
1. a. The act of contradicting.
b. The state of being contradicted.
2. A denial.
3. Inconsistency; discrepancy.
4. Something that contains contradictory elements.