Valve's Source Engine: What Went Wrong?

This month a year ago Half-Life 2 was made available over steam. Gamers were chomping at the bit dieing to get to play this highly publicized follow up to the ground breaking 1997 Half-Life title. Even though there was a botched release plan of one year due to a hacker leaking an early build, the gaming public pre-ordered in droves. I know I manage to get 8 licenses over Steam just to play over a LAN.

Somewhere between the aborted release and the final Steam release there were bad signs. The leak had shown that the Source engine AI was not anywhere as intelligent as the showing at E3 2003 had illustrated. Then there were the numerous bugs within the game itself. Despite its admirable "low spec" requirements, the Source Engine displayed some serious problems in its sound properties. The game offered sound stutters and glitchy 3D performance. That's not to say that the visuals in this game did not live up to expectations. They did. Everything from the water to the lighting in the Source Engine gets top notches. Even though there are games that match it, few offer so much on lesser hardware.

Valve even added an unexpected last minute surprise. They announced and released a Half-Life 2 Deathmatch component. So players were getting quite a bit for their money and even use the Source SDK to push their experience toward gaming Nirvana.

That Monkey Wrench Sound

As mentioned earlier, there was a profound problem that affected quite a few users. It didn't take much time before people using the Source Engines in game utilities to see how much the sound element was taxing their systems. For whatever reason, it appears that Valve had forsaken using audio hardware in favor of software rendering. Simply put, that means that despite the Source Engines ingenious use of 3D accelerators, the audio factor more than consumes enough CPU cycles to render multiplayer game play annoying.

It started with Half-Life Deathmatch and it's carried over with the release of Day of Defeat: Source. It's clear at this stage that Valve cannot engineer a solution to the problems. With three distinct titles under one engine displaying the same performance, one doesn't have to speculate why no other developer (except Troika) has optioned to license the Source Engine. Also of note are the different Mods that were scheduled to port to the engine before HL2's release. Many have since abandoned it.

With the release of Day of Defeat: Source, the changes that Valve made to game play to bandage the engine are clear. The problems were already apparent in Counterstrike: Source. There are clearly hit registration accompanied by poor Net code issues. In a firefight, people simply can't hit a target standing five feet in front of them. So with the audio demanding such high resources, Valve opted to include an unrealistic "Cone of Fire" to automatic weapons. This cone is designed to arbitrarily set your shots wide of the target. One can only imagine this was designed in to offset the complaints of poor hit registration already confounding players in CS:S. Needless to say, DOD:S is suffering the same backlash CS:S has fallen to. Fewer people playing the new release in favor of the older less buggy version. Although there is talk of much needed fixes to the DOD:S, those game play fixes simply can't address the core engine problems and make them disappear.

Pretty is Not Enough

There are a myriad of reasons why games succeed or fail, but ultimately game play is at the core of any successful series. Although the Source Engine can offer some unprecedented visuals on low end hardware, its overall technology hobbles the game play of some potentially excellent games. In the end graphics and now the inclusion of HDRI are not enough to save this troubled engine. One can only guess if Valve is already hammering out Half-Life 3 with an completely retooled Source Engine. Somehow I imagine there will be more gamers with a "Wait and See" as opposed to lining up to pre-order.

Brothers In Arms: Short Review

Gearbox is a very capable game developer and with the recent release of Brothers in Arms (BIA) there are signs they are still creatively coding entertainment.

Key phrase here is "there are signs". This is not to say that BIA is a awful. It's saying that Gearbox was able to produce a somewhat decent PC offering of a Console port. Yes, Console port. Again a publisher has opted to shovel one development over to the PC. The game does have plenty of eye candy but those blinders quickly start to fall off as the player goes through the single player levels. There are far fewer expanses of land to roam than the marketing campaign would have you believe. The biggest immersion killer during a fire fight comes in the form of invisible walls. I can see for another 20 yards but the designers felt that an unseen barrier was the best way to indicate I couldn't take cover over there.

It's clear that the same multiplayer design conventions that went into SW:Battlefront went into BIA. Again, one game play mode packed with unusual net code and hit box issues. I am not entirely sure who makes and then signs off on these final decisions but they can't be frequent PC game players and have a clear conscience about unfinished products like these.

Is this Realism?

There are plenty of people who like BIA as it is. Some are people who have actually served in the armed forces. They feel that given the era and the control limitations in BIA that this offers a well rounded feel for warfare. Who am I to argue or debate with them? That being written, I find it problematic not being able to hit a target 15 feet away standing up behind a barrier. Round after round hitting an invisible barrier that emits white puffs telling me he really is well protected.

BIA does make an attempt to promote squad team work by forcing/allowing the player to position them into tactical positions. The only problem with that idea is that the soldiers aren't always on their toes about the danger. It feels like walking five unleashed pups down a busy five lane freeway. They keep wandering out into harms way seemingly oblivious to the danger.

As a whole BIA offers a change of pace for WWII FPS titles but in the end falls well short of its potential. The limited 1vs1 and 2vs2 multiplayer further pushes this title toward the uninstall bin after single player is completed.

When Game Developers Go Bad

To start, I'll nail the hot issue at hand.

Question: When is a PC Game a straight Console port?

Answer: When basic PC Gaming conventions are omitted because console systems either don't require them or the fact that PC console hardware is limited.

There is growing rift between PC game players and Console players and it's not between the players. It's between the PC game players and game developers.

Star Wars:Battlefront is a prime example of a title that was fused together as a console title then repackaged as a PC title. There is no denying the initial rush the title wore upon launching into the first mission. Unfortunately it only took a few hours to realize that the gameplay and game world felt small. The full scope of the matter became clear when trying to play multiplayer. For one there was only Conquest as an option for multiplayer. There was also a complete unfinished or badly implemented multiplayer component that offered a spartan game browser at best.

In all the game felt rushed and unfinished to meet the release of the latest Star Wars DVD compilation.


Psychofred Lets the Public Have It

Ok, let the drama begin.
Now comes the announcement of Star Wars: Battlefront 2. This is not a new engine nor are there major innovations over SW:BF1. This is what the PC community would call an expansion pack. For console gamers, it's a whole new game.

Recently on Gametoast.com, one of the games developers from Pandemic put his foot down on what he considered an issue out of the developers hands. His long worded position would not have been so bad had it not sounded so condescending. Reading the rant it is more or less a ramble of excuses with digs aimed at the PC gaming public.

You can read his post here. Psychofred responds

Like it or not the Console port to PC business is only gaining strength. More and more game developers are seeing the benefits of dedicated hardware. Unfortunately accepting that means knowing that the PC version will be hobbled by console hardware constraints.

We have entered a new age in Shovelware.

I'll cover more on this subject in the days ahead.

Rich Cabrera

Map Making Tutorials Update

Update for Half-Life 2 Deathmatch and COD: United Offensive

In my initial post for Half-Life 2 tutorial pages I left the Snarkpit out because the page had been down for quite some time. It looks like the site is up and running again and you can check it out here http://www.snarkpit.com/

Also for those interested in COD: United Offensive map making, the tools for that can be downloaded at the following locations.

www.digitalworks.8m.com

http://www.3dgamers.com

http://www.gamershell.com


RC

Other Blogs
http://pcentertainment.blogspot.com/

http://scifitwist.blogspot.com/

http://cgeffects.blogspot.com/

Websites
http://digitalworks.8m.com

Half-Life 2: Deathmatch and Hammer

There will be No Half-Life 2 Deathmatch

Just before the 2004 holidays Valve released Half-Life 2 Death Match.

What was unusual about this move is that there was to be no Half-Life 2 Deathmatch.
Valve had stated for quite some time that Counterstrike: Source would be Half-Life 2’s multiplayer component. So why the about face? Who knows, but it most definitely changed my view on my HL2 purchase.

Half-Life 2 Deathmatch (HL2:DM) is what Counterstrike: Source (CS:S) should have been. Or at least should have been. CS:S is plagued with technical problems that detract from the overall game play. In HL2:DM the physics game play is superior in every way and hitting enemy targets simply works the way it should.

What separates HL2:DM from other multiplayer games on the market is the Gravity gun. The Source engine uses Havok 2 physics engine to great effect making the Gravity gun fun if not hilarious to use. In an age where games offer ever more expansive fire power, the Gravity gun lets you heave large objects to crush those gun wielding opponents.

For the most part game play is very balanced but there are only two official maps released to play on. That can wear out even the most ardent fan rather quickly.


Make Your Own Half-Life 2 Deathmatch Maps

With Half-Life 2 you get tools in the form of a Software Development Kit (SDK).

What this does it allows game players to design and build playable maps and levels the Source engine games. Valve supplies with the level editor called Hammer you need to download via a Steam which is Valves proprietary Internet delivery system.

Note my previous review of Steam. It is a necessary component of all Half-Life 2 content. If you are willing and able to deal with the technical requirements, more power to you.

So I took the opportunity to try my hand at level design for HL2:DM. I’ll note the Hammer layout is pretty basic and almost devoid of useful information. You are probably better served by visiting a variety of tutorial sites to get an understanding of all the modeling tools and functions. It will save you allot of time and frustration and in the end help you to create trouble free maps.

After a week and a half of tutorials and experimentation I was able to produce my first Beta map. After another week of tweaking I released my final map. It’s a map we play here regularl at the offices.

Download Half-Life 2 Deathmatch Tower Map Here

Hammer Tutorial Sites

http://www.migandi.org.uk/tutorials/half-life2-editing-hammer-tutorials.htm

http://collective.valve-erc.com/

RC

Steaming Valve in Half-Life 2

Half-Life 2

Valve Software’s Half-Life 2 is a sequel to the critically acclaimed and highly successful Half-Life game released for the PC in 1999. At the games core was the aging Quake 1 engine technology, which says allot about Valves ingenuity. Despite its aging game engine Valve managed to produce a very immersive game that offered a strong story line. (As far as PC games are concerned).

Six years later in November 2004 Valve released the long awaited Half-Life 2. This time the game boasts its own cutting edge engine called the Source engine. By January Vivendi (Valves publisher) had stated that they had sold 1.7 Million units in stores. It’s clear that Valve has another hit game in the making but other factors may hamper that success.

Getting Steamed

Anyone who has purchased Half-Life 2 knows exactly what Steam is. It’s Valves proprietary and some would argue buggy Internet software delivery system.

When you buy Half-Life 2 in stores or online, you are required to authenticate your copy via Steam. A broad band connection is most definitely required because once you authenticate your copy Steam will update your files with large downloads. More importantly you can not play Half-Life 2 if you are disconnected, this even after a recent update purportedly allowing you to do so. There are work-a-rounds but none are guaranteed to work.

There are pros and cons to Steam, and here are some points to consider before making your purchase.

• Are you familiar with online forums where you can get technical answers from other users?
• Are you familiar or comfortable editing files in installation directories?
• Are you aware of the differences between dial-up and broad band and which one you have?

The length at which Steam has burned more than a few of its customers relates to End Users License Agreement (EULA). Many are complaining that this agreement is illegal. This has resulted in potential legal problems for Valve. Already the German consumer association VZBV has sent a cease and desist order to both Vivendi and Valve.

Just visiting Valves forums can be a testament to the furor that technical problems customers face on a regular basis. Visit the Steam Forums

In a follow up I will give review on Half-Life 2, Half-Life 2 Deathmatch and Counterstrike Source purchased through Steam.



RC

Call of Duty Mods

Realism Mods

At the top of my list is the AWE mod that adds some much needed realism to COD weapons. This mod has a few customizable features but its base purpose adds some punch to all the weapons. You really won’t see two guys going at it from 8 paces out for a few seconds anymore. Generally the 1^st guy that initiates a shot will be the guy left standing.

Rifles are very lethal and there’s an overall balanced feel for machine guns and sub machine guns. Still each gun has its own feel. The American BAR really kicks but is lethal where as the Axis MP40 kicks less but requires some more shots on target to get a kill.

Overall this mod is getting allot of online support. We play allot of Team Deathmatch and there are allot of servers that run AWE. You don’t have to download and install the Mod. You can simply join a game online that is running it.

How do you know if a game is running a Mod?

On the server list there are icons that run across the very top of the list. You’ll see a hammer icon. If a server is running mods there will be a white check mark here. Keep in mind there are different kinds of mods, but AWE is a very popular one.

You can read more about it here

2^nd on the list is the Merciless mod. Now this mod adds allot more visceral damage to the player models. You won’t get red or white puffs on torso or head shots anymore. For some it may be over the top, but it most definitely outs a real effect on the weapons of war.

You can read more about it here

RC

New Call of Duty Officially Announced

The original Call Of Duty (COD) was an impressive title when it was released in 2003. Even though the market was packed with WWII themed FPS, COD really carved a niche on its release. In the single player campaign you were fighting right along side your squad mates. This was probably the first time in a long time that an FPS game didn't pit the player against the world. This game plays and feels like the movie Band of Brothers.

With the expansion pack United Offensive, COD continued to bring top notch action into a believable world where you and your men were set through various missions to take on the enemy. Even more impressive is that the games multiplayer component now offers drivable jeeps and different classes of tanks. Needless to say, its a fantastic update to an already great title.

Now Activisions CEO Ronald Doornink has stated that the COD will continue with a new release in 2006. It looks like Activision has a franchise not unlike EA's Medal of Honor, which also has a very loyal following. Of interesting note is that the PC version is not a console port. Thumbs up to Activision for keeping these two platforms focused in their respective areas.

RC