Valve Interviews

PC Gamer now offers some interviews conducted during a visit to Valve's headquarters to observe what they are up to. They talk with Gabe, Doug, and Erik about why Valve would want to make a Half-Life movie themselves. They also interview programmer Josh Weier and writer Erik Wolpaw "on their insane Portal 2 ideas." Finally, their interview with Jonathan Sutton discusses why Alien Swarm was a free release: "This is an experiment for Valve to see what would happen if we released a free game, with all of the tools and the SDK, and we could see what results came out of it, how quickly people start using the tools and building things with it. Historically Valve have had great success with mods, from Counterstrike to TF, so this was really something they wanted to encourage, so that’s why we did it for free."
View : : :
10 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  ] Newer
1.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 12, 2010, 15:11
1.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 12, 2010, 15:11
Sep 12, 2010, 15:11
 
Valve would want to make a Half-Life movie themselves

How about you finish making the fucking Half Life game first?
2.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 12, 2010, 16:58
2.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 12, 2010, 16:58
Sep 12, 2010, 16:58
 
Mostly_Harmless wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 15:11:
Valve would want to make a Half-Life movie themselves

How about you finish making the fucking Half Life game first?
Because, as we all know, CGI artists creating their movies are the same people as the game designers, level designers, engine programmers, and the majority of the rest who actually makes games
3.
 
removed
Sep 13, 2010, 00:16
3.
removed Sep 13, 2010, 00:16
Sep 13, 2010, 00:16
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Sep 13, 2010, 08:07.
Avatar 20761
4.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 13, 2010, 00:26
4.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 13, 2010, 00:26
Sep 13, 2010, 00:26
 
Oh for fuck's sake that's a boring question with a boring answer that Valve will give. Stop pretending like asking that question now will make them magically reveal information that they haven't yet revealed.

Valve is obviously taking their time to craft the next Half-Life game into something much more involved than they ever intended an "Episode Three" to be. This notion that some people present - that they still haven't accepted that the episodic model is a failure for the Half-Life franchise - is stupid considering that they've already admitted as much.


The next Half-Life will come whenever the next Half-Life will come. It's not like they've stopped releasing games since the Orange Box. In the meantime, there are far more interesting things to ask Valve about, and those things are prevalent throughout the entirety of all these PC Gamer interviews.

Also: "Gabe the human blimp." Nice. A bit insecure with yourself, are we?

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 2010, 10:51.
5.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 13, 2010, 07:24
5.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 13, 2010, 07:24
Sep 13, 2010, 07:24
 
Does he float? We all float down here.... Evil
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
6.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 13, 2010, 09:43
Dev
6.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 13, 2010, 09:43
Sep 13, 2010, 09:43
Dev
 
Making a movie is a TERRIBLE idea for a game company, even one as big as valve. It will suck up a huge chunk of their cash at a very substantial risk, and take it away from their being able to use it for games. Let's call it $100 million for a movie (probably more nowadays for a decent sci-fi flick regardless of if its CGI or not. According to boxofficemojo toy story 2 cost nearly that amount and toy story 3 cost $200 million, if we are talking CGI). Valve could make 3 games for that price.

Its like saying "Hey guys! Lets take all the money we've made and make a single incredibly risky investment that has a very high potential to bankrupt us".
Now its probably NOT all the money they've made, but it would still be a huge chunk that if gone could significantly hamper the companies operations.

And besides that, how many game movies didn't stink? Even if you exclude all the ones made by Uwe Boll which seem to automatically stink (and WTF do companies keep handing him game movies to make anyway? Do they even bother to look at his track record? Random bums off the street could probably do better), there's NOT that many that didn't stink. I can't even think of any off the top of my head although I'm sure a couple/few exist that at least made a bit more than it cost to make the movie.

Edit:
Ah wait I thought of one that didn't stink. Prince of Persia movie. It didn't hold a candle to the story in the Prince of Persia: Sands of Time GAME, but it was a decent action movie. It also didn't make a ton of money compared to production cost. In fact, it would have been a money loser if it weren't for the international sales. And thats WITH known actors and a well known director.
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=princeofpersia.htm

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 2010, 10:24.
7.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 13, 2010, 10:28
7.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 13, 2010, 10:28
Sep 13, 2010, 10:28
 
Lets that that $200 million number from Toy story, what percentage of that number is to pay big name voice talent? 25% 30? I believe Valve could turn out a high quality movie for a fraction of the 200 million price tag on toy story. What fraction who knows, 2nd we have no idea how much of there own money they are putting up for the movie, they will most likely have 3rd party investment for the movie, again depending on the overall budget. Lastly the stinky ness of game movies.. I would suggest to you its not just game movies but all movies out of Hollywood. There is a large percentage of just random crap coming out of Hollywood and if you want to know why just watch the interview of Kevin Smith and his dealing with the superman movie. Basically a outsider like Valve has a better change of making a good movie than anyone coming from the inside.. less baggage.
8.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 13, 2010, 13:04
Dev
8.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 13, 2010, 13:04
Sep 13, 2010, 13:04
Dev
 
DivineHoliness wrote on Sep 13, 2010, 10:28:
Lets that that $200 million number from Toy story, what percentage of that number is to pay big name voice talent? 25% 30? I believe Valve could turn out a high quality movie for a fraction of the 200 million price tag on toy story. What fraction who knows, 2nd we have no idea how much of there own money they are putting up for the movie, they will most likely have 3rd party investment for the movie, again depending on the overall budget. Lastly the stinky ness of game movies.. I would suggest to you its not just game movies but all movies out of Hollywood. There is a large percentage of just random crap coming out of Hollywood and if you want to know why just watch the interview of Kevin Smith and his dealing with the superman movie. Basically a outsider like Valve has a better change of making a good movie than anyone coming from the inside.. less baggage.

You think that valve's first time effort is going to be a high quality movie for a fraction of the price of others? I seriously doubt that. I'm sure they could put out a decent movie, but its not going to be cheap to do so.

Even if you are correct about lets say 25% being voice acting, thats $50 million. So lets say valve can do the voice acting part for $5 million using unknown actors. Thats still leaves $155 million of the budget. Not exactly earthshattering savings.

If they get 3rd party investment they will also lose some of the potential return on the movie. So its a trade off.

When I'm talking about game movies I'm not just talking movies in the last few years. I'm talking the last couple decades. Can you think of ANY game movies in existance that were decent and/or made decent bank? I agree that many movies out of hollywood stink, but the percentage of game movies have a much higher stink percentage than other categories from what I've seen.

I'm not convinced that valve has a better chance. Keep in mind that valve can't "patch" a movie after its release (unless they throw in deleted scenes in the DVD). Thats where valve shines, fixing things up that weren't exactly shining examples. Look at L4D1, for months after release it was incredibly annoying to get a game going because of the general crappiness of the lobby system. They finally fixed most of it something like 6 months after release with a patch that said "oops we noticed some calls to the server weren't properly done so they were getting lost". I mean I literally spent 2 hours in a lobby once trying to get a friends game going. And it wasn't unusual to spend 30 mins at a time in other cases. Lobbies would repeatedly try to find a server and fail, and lobbies would get "lost" and valve would stop sending players, and many other fail factors. Valve shines at getting a great looking concept to market, but they fail at the logistics and the polish behind that concept. Once its had time to patch up its often ok.

If they did a movie, I'd expect it to have a great story in the hl2 universe and then fail on logistics, like the voice acting would be so horrible it would nearly ruin the movie experiance, or they'd make the whole thing from a FPS perspective and audiances wouldn't like it.
9.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 13, 2010, 19:15
9.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 13, 2010, 19:15
Sep 13, 2010, 19:15
 
District 9's budget was $30 million and it made $210 million.

I would consider it a decent sci-fi flick.
Avatar 17249
10.
 
Re: Valve Interviews
Sep 14, 2010, 00:50
Dev
10.
Re: Valve Interviews Sep 14, 2010, 00:50
Sep 14, 2010, 00:50
Dev
 
Sepharo wrote on Sep 13, 2010, 19:15:
District 9's budget was $30 million and it made $210 million.

I would consider it a decent sci-fi flick.
Agreed.
But it wasn't a video game based movie was it now
10 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  ] Newer