Valve could have made Gears of War

Varsity

Newbie
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
2,683
Reaction score
2
Or rather, their equivalent to it.
1UP said:
The feature also reveals such details as Bill Gates' original mandate to offer a version of the Xbox 360 with the Windows OS, Ed Fries' decision to sign an exclusive game detail with Epic Games over Valve (tossing Valve's proposal in the trash), and Epic's influence in upping the system's RAM from 256 to 512 MB (by showing Microsoft screenshots of Gears of War running under both circumstances)...
http://1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3150474

So, what didn't MS like about whatever Valve had in mind? Too PC maybe? And what 360-level stuff did Gabe and co have to show all those years ago?
 
Hmm, i ain't too sure but shouldnt this be in general games chat :S
 
Until there is a General Valve Chat forum, this is the best spot IMO.
 
nah, it should be in general games chat.

this must be [slightly] kind of 'embarassing' for valve to not be chosen, kind of like not being picked for the school soccer team, especially when you think you're good enough yet it seems the coach doesn't. :D
 
Thats quite interesting this being said not tooo long after VALVe announce working with the 360 now too. I'd like to know myself.
 
DiSTuRbEd said:
Thats quite interesting this being said not tooo long after VALVe announce working with the 360 now too. I'd like to know myself.
Same.
 
Interesting, id really like to see what Valve showed MS.
 
Why did they not just choose both? Valve are an MS centric company.

And the more I see GoW the more I feel like it is going to be pretty but a flop in the gaming department.
 
Big mistake of Microsoft.

Valve > all

Maybe Gabe will give more info about this subject in an interview.

But just think what Valve would do with the Wii... :O
 
I want Valve only as a pc company games that are split between different platforms usually gets screwed up, and I dont have enough faith in Valve to belive they would not have the same problems.
 
Valve probably chose to put their effort in useless things such as storyline, voice acting and gameplay. :eek:
 
I'm actually sort of glad. I don't want Valve wasting their time developing a game exclusively for the Xbox 360 when the could making games for thier real fans on the PC. The 12 year old kiddies would probably be saying "omg this gaem blows i want cutscens wher master chef rides teh bomb into teh spaecship!11!!" if they played one of Valve's games.
 
Dont dismiss Epic's talent though. Clearly with the new e3 showing of gears of war, it is clear they are not only amazing at creating visuals but seem to have made some great gameplay. Of course, i doubt it will be better than half life 2, but doesnt mean ms is stupid for this.
 
ElFuhrer said:
I'm actually sort of glad. I don't want Valve wasting their time developing a game exclusively for the Xbox 360 when the could making games for thier real fans on the PC. The 12 year old kiddies would probably be saying "omg this gaem blows i want cutscens wher master chef rides teh bomb into teh spaecship!11!!" if they played one of Valve's games.
how about you stop now before someone starts stereotyping pc fans ? it's not hard, from either side.
 
I don't think they've stopped because of this article.
 
Chances are, Epic won through because their "concept" was already in progress. The Gears of War content was already being developed at the earliest stage we were shown Unreal Engine 3 (GDC 2004?), and they were fully focused on UE3 projects that wouldn't emerge until 2006/7: truely next gen stuff. By comparrison, Valve were deep inside putting out projects like Half-Life 2 there and then. Any future projects they could offer up to Valve would be on Source which can't compete with UE3 without major augmentation. Even if you're Valve Software, you can still get beaten down by any other big-name developer touting better tech than you.

Don't be confused by the stupid phrasing in the article ("tossing valve's proposal in the trash"). I can't imagine that the rejected proposal would have hurt Valve / MS relationship much. Frankly, being a console development slave is far more an Epic thing than a Valve thing. Epic makes games specifically for consoles, Valve has yet to do so.
 
Varsity said:
I don't think they've stopped because of this article.
On the contrary, the release of this article made the Valve HQ at Seattle explode, destroying everything in a radius of ten kilometers.
 
Personally I'm glad Valve didn't get taken up. Consoles are all gloss and no substance.
 
The fact that Bioshock is being developed for consoles is an enourmous worry, had you not heard?
 
Cerpin said:
I wouldn't say that about Bioshock.

Consoles are closed systems. Players aren't able to adapt or adjust the content like they are with PC games. A closed system can only offer up a finite number of options.
 
there are 'mods' available for some consoles games, like halo 1/2 .. sure, it's not really legal or as robust as on pc's but it's there.

also, if you're looking for mods, you avoid consoles, they're not designed that way (as we all know), that's also why you don't really upgrade hardware (core components, unlike a pc where you might upgrade your video card or whatever).

it's like look for a 4wd amongst sedans and expecting more or less exactly the same thing.

^ horrible analogy but meh.
 
Kadayi Polokov said:
Personally I'm glad Valve didn't get taken up. Consoles are all gloss and no substance.

Of course, you've played every console game on the market haven't ya :thumbs:

I mean let's disregard Xenosagas, KOTORs, MGSs, GTAs, Silent Hills, Killer 7, Resident Evils, Zeldas, Second Sight, Timesplitters, Indigo Prophecy, Dreamfall.

No, quite obviously the biggest properties and franchises are all style, absolutey no substance.
 
hah, i think kadayi just got smacked in the face by deusexmachina.
 
Back
Top