What if Half-Life 3 is not what we expect it to be?

[Ra1nMak3r]

So, I am bored these days, replayed the half life series, portal series, and I read for the fifth time The final hours of Portal 2. The previous times I had read it, I had forgoten about half life 3, though this time, I did remember it. And so I read, until I came across the part where it says: Portal 2 will possibly be the last VALVe game with isolated single-player. Though, HL3 is thought to be in the works. If portal 2 is the last, what could HL3 realy be? I cannot imagine a Half-Life MMO, or an online multiplayer shooter! So anyone could possibly have any ideas of what this could mean for the half-life franchise? I may be overreacting and this may mean nothing.

 

[Barnz]

It's going to be a racing game.

 

[rikt]

It´s going to be a Free to Play MMORPG from now on. You will have lots of adds and you can buy new armour and weapons with real money.

That´s the worst idea I can come up with, so that´s got to be it!

 

[trunk_slamchest]

It's going to be a racing game.

Half-Life Racing 3: Fast Times at Black Mesa High

 

[Shem]

It's going to be a racing game.

There you go with your sardonic commentary. He was asking an honest question. Grow up. You're not funny.

 

[Ra1nMak3r]

xD Thanks for all the the funny awnsers, though as Shem said, I am not posting for fun, I realy am puzzled with the thought of Half-Life not being as previous Half-Life games.

 

[rikt]

Seriously now, there was a rumor around regarding HL3 and it was about it being open world, but honestly I have no idea how that turned out. In fact you have a post about it here.

 

[Ra1nMak3r]

Seriously now, there was a rumor around regarding HL3 and it was about it being open world, but honestly I have no idea how that turned out. In fact you have a post about it here.

Thanks, I agree though that open-world will not be that good of an idea. I mean it worked for rpgs, but not for half-life and everyone is going to call it a fallout copy.

 

[trunk_slamchest]

well on a serious note, i think the only concrete mechanic that will be in HL3 is 100% completely destructible enviroments a la red faction.

considering what Havok stated about physics and the roll they will play in next gen games (and how close Valve is to Havok), i wouldnt put it past Valve to be the first that properly makes a game where everything, even down to soil and dirt, will be destructible.

in that respect, mining materials from a building you blew up in a battle with a strider, and being able to scrap the strider for parts to build better weapons, could possibly work; albiet it feels like it goes completely against the grain of Half Life.

we all know valve loves physics. an multi rail-esque shooter with 100% destructable environments is what i am kind of expecting at this point.

 

[Ascension]

It's going to be a 2D side-scrolling platformer where you have to save Princess Alyx from an Advisor. Instead of killing enemies, you throw hearts at them and they give you a cookie. Which you can use for the boss battle.

 

[Vincent Pride]

- HL2 universe "XX years later"
- Combine is replaced by its successor
- Open world with a few interwoven stories (still character-centric)
- No stupid quests, just meaningful narration via exploration
- Shared singleplayer experience: persistent world, PvE
- Experiental: selling physical items to augment HL3 experience with ARG

 

[DEATH eVADER]

It's going to be a racing game.

Technically it would be. Your racing the Combine to the Borealis.

 

[ríomhaire]

I think what we're trying to talk about is the fact is not that we're not thinking about single-player games..Portal 2 I think is a pretty good example of what we've learned over the years in terms of how to create those [single-player] experiences.

It's more that we think that we have to work harder in the future. That entertainment is inherently increased in value by having it be social, by letting you play with your friends, by recognizing that you're connected with other people.
Single-player is great, but we also have to recognize that you have friends and wanted to have that connected as well.
It's not about giving up on single-player at all. It's saying we actually think there are a bunch of features and capabilities that we need to add into our single-player games to recognize the socially connected gamer. Every gamer has instant messaging, every gamer has a Facebook account. If you pretend that that doesn't exist, you're ignoring the problems that you're taking on.

It's single-player plus, not ‘no more single-player.'​