Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Valve Confirms New Engine?

LambdaGeneration has word on Valve's software engineering efforts based on a video of a visit to Valve by some members of 4chan's /v/ (thanks Joao). This seems to offer the first concrete word on hints that they are working on a new game engine. Here's their transcript of the pertinent passage:

Fan: Is Valve potentially already working on a new engine?

Fan: Source 2? Could or… could not be?


Gabe Newell: We’ve been working on Valve’s new engine stuff for a while, we’re probably just [incomprehensible, subtitled as: "waiting for a game to roll it out with"]

Fan: Is it going to be more than just an extension to Source? Is it an entirely new engine?

Gabe Newell: Yeah!

View
54 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

34. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 14:47 webname
 
DRM level 5

Your baby most also be plugged into the internet to play.
Your only allowed to play saterday morning
YOur only allowed to play in a random timezone.

Valve your DRM overlord hath spoken, bow down you lowly untrustable miscreants, and prepare for
implants, so only those with implants can see the screen
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 14:35 Prez
 
What's amazing to me is that considering how old it is games made with the Source engine still look fantastic.

I expect indies and modders will continue making games and mods with Source for some time after Source 2 inevitably arrives.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 14:34 BobBob
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 13:32:

But that's exactly the issue. Everybody just accepts that enemies are meant to pop-up and get killed, offering no exposition, no emotion, no character and no challenge. How about a game where there are only a handful of characters but they have much more significance? We're still at a stage where enemies are simply clones of one another - you have a few different head models but they are essentially cannon fodder. Every single character should be unique and have significance, with their own AI and personality.

You should see this movie but don't read about it too much, to avoid spoilers: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0139809/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 14:28 NewMaxx
 
descender wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 14:10:
People try to knock source all the time... I just don't get it.

I am also of the pro-Source crowd. I remember being all about Source and all against Carmack's Doom 3, at that time. I was attached to ATI back then and getting into the open source fold. That made both engines attractive for different reasons. Fundamentally, though, the modularity you get on a micro-scale with Source is reminiscent of actual source code, from whence it got the name. Yet that also meant HDD thrashing, but I think people will see that tossing a Source game on a SSD (which can handle so many small I/Os, many orders of magnitude over a mechanical drive) shows that in the future we'll get the best of both worlds. For its time, though, Source still enabled some amazing performance and graphical fidelity, plus moddability, it's just that its main drawback didn't have the hardware yet.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 14:10 descender
 
And failed miserably when it comes to scalability, stability and the like.

People try to knock source all the time... I just don't get it.

It runs and never crashes.
It runs on everything, I was able to play L4D2 on an athlon 2700+ and a ati 3850. Think about that for a second.

It just looks right. The world source creates looks solid and behaves in a reliable manner. The entire experience becomes more believable because the rendering of the world never becomes a distraction.

Compare that to the worlds created by other engines, that generally suffer from floaty physics, seams in the world or scenes, horrible aliasing... texture streaming or pop in... overbright bloom and glow on textures...

I would rather play any game in the source engine than any other current one. I'm sure that has a lot to do with the care that Valve takes in level design, but even a game like Dark Messiah looked and felt great.

I've been slogging my way through Skyrim, and just like FO:NV and FO3 and Oblivion before it... this engine it uses makes for pretty screenshots, but it falls apart horribly in motion.
 
Avatar 56185
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:57 NewMaxx
 
eunichron wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 11:34:
They need to start making big leaps in AI. A few games have been pushing it lately (Radiant AI in Skyrim, a few others I can't remember this early in the morning), but we went from companies in the late 90s/early 00s making great advancements in AI, only to be inundated by rail shooters where the extent of the enemy AI is aimbots pouring out of windows and doors

As someone who studied AI professionally (robotics), I find its place in games, and the lack of progress, to be quite interesting. By interesting I mean, we had PhysX for physics, right? Yet we can all agree that was pretty much hogwash to sell some overpriced hardware, and even though Nvidia made it a proper lady, it's still pretty immature in many ways.

I bring that up because the limitations with AI are likewise computationally bound: specialized processing units would do a far superior job. I know this since I've built neural networks and done the coding, and the payoff just isn't worth it with classic approaches. It's not a matter of linearity (where you'd think our faster machines today would be able to handle it much better), it just needs specialization, and without that people just aren't willing to code tightly enough to make it truly workable.

I'm not advocating PhysX for AI so much as stating that expecting a revolution through software alone is a lost cause. There needs to be more dedication on the hardware end. I predict we'll see this as 3D gaming becomes more common, as adding an extra dimension requires processing units devoted to understanding space, which is somewhat sentient. You'd think that'd make AI tougher to program but the hardware will actually enable much greater things for AI.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:55 avianflu
 
Cool, but Source was at best a serviceable engine for its time.

Far Cry's engine blew it away in terms of lighting, world-scaling and much more....
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:40 Beamer
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 13:32:
Beamer wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 12:35:
The thing holding back AI is practicality, not interest.

The average enemy in an FPS game lasts what, 3-5 seconds before you put a bullet in his brainpan? How smart can he be in that time?
But that's exactly the issue. Everybody just accepts that enemies are meant to pop-up and get killed, offering no exposition, no emotion, no character and no challenge. How about a game where there are only a handful of characters but they have much more significance? We're still at a stage where enemies are simply clones of one another - you have a few different head models but they are essentially cannon fodder. Every single character should be unique and have significance, with their own AI and personality.

Is it risky? Absolutely. But most of the best games took chances like that and Valve certainly did with both Half-Life and Half-Life 2, as well as Portal. Most first person shooters follow the same formula and I'm pretty sick of it. Far Cry 2 was a breath of fresh air but it made too many mistakes along the way; Mirror's Edge was bold and it mostly paid off; Prey was innovative and punched above its weight, despite the poor storywriting; Dear Esther was a great example of what you can do with just the environment; Amnesia and Legend Of Grimrock were examples of how you don't need lots of enemies to create atmosphere.

I'd like to see the open world elements of Skyrim and Far Cry 2 combined with the atmosphere of Dear Esther, STALKER, Metro 2033 and Amnesia, yet with flexibility of play styles like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Dishonored. Okay, that's pretty random and remarkably unlikely. But you don't need waves of generic enemies.

How would it work, though? Fewer enemies? What would you spend most of your time doing?
In order for enemies to live longer at least one of the following needs to happen:
1) They need to get hit less
2) They need more health

1 sucks because we want to hit enemies. Games aren't like real life, where it's hard to hit anything. When we point a gun at something in a game and click that mouse button we want to see a direct reaction showing that we hit our targets. Making us less accurate makes it less fun. And making the target harder to hit doesn't work, either. Did anyone enjoy the ninjas of Half Life? No, that's why HL2 didn't have a similar enemy.
2 sucks because it just means you're sitting there doing more work.

Anyway, you're talking about atmosphere with Amnesia and LoG. Not AI. Amnesia was all scripting, which people claim to hate, LoG was something standing there and you clicking on icons. For a game about quick fighting enemies need to quickly die. There's nothing around that. I mean, think even back to the days of Q3 and UT. You played humans, arguably the most intelligent (arguably) and firefights still typically lasted seconds. One person saw another and immediately someone took a rail to the gut, rocket to the face or got melted by lead. Seconds.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:39 Jago
 
Fantaz wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 10:29:
What was 4chan doing at Valve? That's worse than members of Neogaf/Reddit visiting Valve...
Could be worse, it could have been the BBC...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:38 deqer
 
I think Left for Dead 2 is some good AI for what you would expect from a zombie game. A zombie game, you'd expect zombies to come at you and you just kill them. But in Left for Dead 2, the zombies actually dodge your bullets and some of these special zombies do have personalities.

Killing Floor is awesome too, given all the special monsters and their abilities and personalities, plus a Boss at the end who actually will run from you and heal himself and then comes back to try kill you again.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:32 theyarecomingforyou
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 12:35:
The thing holding back AI is practicality, not interest.

The average enemy in an FPS game lasts what, 3-5 seconds before you put a bullet in his brainpan? How smart can he be in that time?
But that's exactly the issue. Everybody just accepts that enemies are meant to pop-up and get killed, offering no exposition, no emotion, no character and no challenge. How about a game where there are only a handful of characters but they have much more significance? We're still at a stage where enemies are simply clones of one another - you have a few different head models but they are essentially cannon fodder. Every single character should be unique and have significance, with their own AI and personality.

Is it risky? Absolutely. But most of the best games took chances like that and Valve certainly did with both Half-Life and Half-Life 2, as well as Portal. Most first person shooters follow the same formula and I'm pretty sick of it. Far Cry 2 was a breath of fresh air but it made too many mistakes along the way; Mirror's Edge was bold and it mostly paid off; Prey was innovative and punched above its weight, despite the poor storywriting; Dear Esther was a great example of what you can do with just the environment; Amnesia and Legend Of Grimrock were examples of how you don't need lots of enemies to create atmosphere.

I'd like to see the open world elements of Skyrim and Far Cry 2 combined with the atmosphere of Dear Esther, STALKER, Metro 2033 and Amnesia, yet with flexibility of play styles like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Dishonored. Okay, that's pretty random and remarkably unlikely. But you don't need waves of generic enemies.
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Star Citizen: Blue's News
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:08 DG
 
Yeah I'm not exactly surprised that they've been working on a new engine given Source is nearly 8.5 years old though there was a possibility they could just do a major increment. I would also expect it to launch with HL3, except that I do not think it prudent to go around expecting HL3.  
Avatar 14793
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 13:07 Topevoli
 
Sure they're working on a new engine and game, but the sun only has enough hydrogen to continue the fusion process for about another 6 billion years. There is no chance this game sees "the light of day".

Edit: Fixed grammatical errors that woman on dating sites would eviscerate me for.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:56 Kastagir
 
Several 4chans in one place and you didn't lock them in a closet and pour bleach on them? What's wrong with you, Valve?

And why is Gabe's quote incomprehensible? I don't want to make the usual joke about his weight, but when an interview is forced to translate for an English-speaking interviewee, I'm not sure how much to trust it.

Valve is Steam in my mind. Portal 1/2 were cute, but ultimately tiresome. HL rumors no longer interest me. I doubt a HL3 would interest me either, should it ever be realized. Too much time has passed. The moment is gone.
 
Avatar 20761
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:48 Smellfinger
 
ItBurn wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 12:43:
I'll go with the crowd. Terrible/Frequent loading times.
I mean you have Skyrim, which is an open world with no invisible walls, looks amazing and loads instantly VS hl2, which, is a video game.

Open world RPGs can hide load times beneath a thick layer of filler scenery, which Half-Life 2 didn't have. I'd rather have load times if it means a more concise and focused experience.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:45 ItBurn
 
zombiefan wrote on Nov 12, 2012, 12:41:
I hate news stories like this. You know, the ones that come from the "No Shit" department. Did anyone really think Valve wasn't working on a new engine all this time?

It's always good to hear information from the actual devs. It always tells a lot more than just the immediate facts. Plus it stimulates discussion.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:43 ItBurn
 
I'll go with the crowd. Terrible/Frequent loading times.
I mean you have Skyrim, which is an open world with no invisible walls, looks amazing and loads instantly VS hl2, which, is a video game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:41 zombiefan
 
I hate news stories like this. You know, the ones that come from the "No Shit" department. Did anyone really think Valve wasn't working on a new engine all this time?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:39 BobBob
 
No AI is going to compete with a good multi-player experience.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Valve Confirms New Engine? Nov 12, 2012, 12:35 Beamer
 
The thing holding back AI is practicality, not interest.

The average enemy in an FPS game lasts what, 3-5 seconds before you put a bullet in his brainpan? How smart can he be in that time?

I remember when PCG/CGW were doing their 1 paragraph blurbs on Unreal. It sounded like a 1 on 1 deathmatch game, where your enemy had all the advantages you did. That sounded pretty cool. (Ultimately that sort of ended up being UT, I suppose.) But, in almost every game, the enemy has none of your advantages. You have more health and can heal. The enemies are made to die quickly, because that's more fun. Those that have more health move slowly, to create a trade-off.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo