Half-Life 2: Delay? Maybe, Playable? Yes [Oct 07, 2003, 4:42 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
New delay for
Half-Life sequel on BBC News (thanks Eraserhead) has a quote from Christophe
Ramboz of Vivendi Universal Games on the Half-Life 2 source code theft that
takes a completely different direction than the talk of four month delays found
in a different article (story), as they have him saying:
"Vivendi Universal Games is only the distributor of the product, which is
produced by the US studio Valve and so it will up to them to make an
announcement." Meanwhile, Thieves
steal playable version of Half-Life 2 on CNN Money contradicts reports that
downplay the amount of code stolen, choosing to reveal that the Source
source thieves "also stole enough game maps and other components to put
together a playable build of the game. Today, five days after the first leak,
they have released that build."
> Thank you, Mr. Carmack. I'm glad you could weigh in on
> the situation with your intimate knowledge of the
> processes in question.
You don't need an intimate knowledge of anything to see what's going on here.
1) Valve was going to release the game Sept 30. That implies that they had it in a state they were happy to ship.
2) They announce the source was stolen (and I know it is out there, I'm not denying that).
3) They announce a FIVE MONTH delay to the game, to rewrite portions of the game.
Now for a game that was previously 100% finished, five months is a long time. What could they possible need to rewrite? If their game and its supporting systems (ie: Steam) were secure, as one would assume they would be before they released, what is the harm in having other people look at the code? Having people look at the code does not make a secure system vulnerable. Just look at Linux.
If they are writing any code, it is bug fixes for stuff they WERE going to release with before they were given a convenient excuse to delay. And with the "launch" of Steam, they really needed that excuse.
The fact that Valve expects its customers to buy this little sob story is what's really insulting. Bottom line, the game is delayed. Valve missed their ship date. Hackers have nothing to do with this.
> the situation with your intimate knowledge of the
> processes in question.
You don't need an intimate knowledge of anything to see what's going on here.
1) Valve was going to release the game Sept 30. That implies that they had it in a state they were happy to ship.
2) They announce the source was stolen (and I know it is out there, I'm not denying that).
3) They announce a FIVE MONTH delay to the game, to rewrite portions of the game.
Now for a game that was previously 100% finished, five months is a long time. What could they possible need to rewrite? If their game and its supporting systems (ie: Steam) were secure, as one would assume they would be before they released, what is the harm in having other people look at the code? Having people look at the code does not make a secure system vulnerable. Just look at Linux.
If they are writing any code, it is bug fixes for stuff they WERE going to release with before they were given a convenient excuse to delay. And with the "launch" of Steam, they really needed that excuse.
The fact that Valve expects its customers to buy this little sob story is what's really insulting. Bottom line, the game is delayed. Valve missed their ship date. Hackers have nothing to do with this.
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2025 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2025 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 16 July 2025, 20:03.