
Valve Announces Source 2, and It’ll Be Free - goeric
http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/03/valve-announces-source-2-and-itll-be-free/
======
mutagen
The article attributes all these free engines to Unity but I think they've
missed 20+ years of videogame history.

First, Valve has always been very open to game mods. Some of their most
popular franchises (TF & CS) grew out of the mod community around HL1 and
they've always made tooling available for the Source engine.

HL1 was based on the Quake engine and id has always embraced the mod
community. Id software has also contributed greatly by open sourcing their old
engines.

The Torque Game Engine (Tribes) was opened up to low cost licensing by
GarageGames in the early 2000s.

Unreal has long made their tools available for free, though licensing wasn't
quite favorable to the indie developer until more recently.

Blender made an attempt at including a game engine but it never really took
off from my point of view, although they're still including and improving it.

Even Blizzard's inclusion of map tools with Warcraft 3 spawned one of the
biggest gaming trends of the past 10 years, DOTA / MOBA games. Though these
have all been recreated with other engines (including Valve's Source), the
inclusion of modding tools with games is part of the story and some of the
competition that the current crop of free tools must face.

Open source deserves a mention as well. Ogre 3D, the above mentioned Blender,
and other engines and especially tools have sprung up in a variety of games
and often fill missing gaps in asset creation.

Unity certainly deserves some credit, however. Their simple tooling,
relatively early start on mobile, and aggressively lowering the barriers from
side project to published game has definitely moved the goalposts for game
tooling. The Unity Asset Store is also a great thing.

I've really only scratched the surface though. XBox DNLA deserves a mention,
the role of the iPhone and mobile in general has been huge, Minecraft's until
recently ambiguous quasi-open source nature, and there's many more. We're in a
golden age of game creation and I hope to play some amazing new game ideas. I
realize there's also going to be an abundance of mediocre imitations from
creators like me but its all part of the fun.

~~~
jokoon
> Ogre 3D

I recently chose to give up on Ogre3D as I was completely frustrated by my
inability to make it run on mac. It's also way too big (I don't know if OOP is
a reason for that, but I still tend to dislike OOP nevertheless). For example
it doesn't seem that you can choose to not use the scene graph.

I loved that engine at some point, but as time passed, I wasted an incredible
amount of time trying to either build it (oh the pain) or make a project run
across platforms (mac especially).

I recently found an opengl 3.3 core profile tutorial (learnopengl.com, it's
really good for motivated beginners), I felt really better learning that since
I like to understand how lower level stuff works and how to make things as
simple as possible.

Unity/source/unreal engine are great when one wants to sell a beautiful,
smooth 3D game quickly and doesn't have too specific or uncommon requirements.
But when you want to experiment, there's nothing else than raw opengl.

I really wish Ogre3D was lighter, or that there was be a minimal engine with
plain helper functions that let you use, understand and talk to OpenGL to make
the best use of it. I can understand that indie devs want to be able to use
the best 3D right away, but sometimes it can be nice to give more control to
the programmer.

I guess I hard a hard time learning by myself, or that I'm just trolling out
of frustration. 3D is not easy and sometimes I think some small dose of KISS
would be appreciated.

~~~
mintplant
If you're willing to go the Java route, LWJGL is pretty close to what you've
described.

[http://www.lwjgl.org](http://www.lwjgl.org) (their website seems a bit odd
right now)

~~~
gambiting
lwjgl is so plain it's no more than a wrapper around OpenGL context.

If you want slightly more than than(but still not a proper engine), I would
wholeheartedly recommend libgdx:
[http://libgdx.badlogicgames.com/features.html](http://libgdx.badlogicgames.com/features.html)

------
mangeletti
The thing that boggles my mind is how there seems to be concern about this
concept of charging 5% (like Unreal 4 does).

In my mind (not a game developer - tell me if I'm way off here), the framework
gives you about 90% of the work up front (10s of thousands of man hours).
Then, once you finish your game and it's a success (sales-wise), you pay only
5% of your revenue. This seems like a wonderful deal, right?

~~~
pertinhower
Absolutely. In the 2000s the Unreal Engine had a price tag of half a million
dollars up-front plus royalties (I don't remember the percentage) on the back
end. That these companies are giving their engines—even their source code—away
essentially for free indicates either that (1) engine sales was never a very
lucrative line of business or that (2) the promise of establishing your
technology as a defacto game engine standard—the Panavision of games—is even
more appealing than immediate revenue.

~~~
talmand
Engine sales used to be lucrative, quite a few companies have been based
solely on that business model for years. But just like most things, the market
changed over the years. High quality alternatives started to appear, big
publishers started making or buying their own tech, and easier entry to market
are among some of the reasons.

In my mind, the biggest contributor is simply competition.

~~~
stevehawk
This is a very good point. In all honesty, id Software really moved from
'making games' to 'making tech demos' with Quake 2 and Quake 3: Arena. The
same is pretty much true for Epic and the Unreal Tournament games.

------
zak_mc_kracken
Unreal, Unity and now Source within just a few days from each other... It
looks like the game engine market is commoditizing rapidly.

~~~
hcarvalhoalves
I have a (possibly crazy) theory:

Companies like Valve and Epic have already amortized the cost of development
of their engines - those are codebases that span 16 years, and both companies
had multiple commercial successes. All it took was Unity to give a little
nudge.

Now, IMO, the reason for giving so much for free is to keep a player out
(Unity) and milk the cow one last time with the eventual royalties.

I think it's clear by now the next generation will be real-time raytracing
(engines like Brigade [1]), so I wouldn't doubt they are already working on
those, and to be sold in the old model.

[1] [http://brigade.otoy.com](http://brigade.otoy.com)

~~~
z3phyr
Real Time Ray tracing is still very far off. Brigade serves as a good proof of
concept, but a lot of things are yet to be researched and implemented to make
it viable in commercial sphere. Seeing the progress, I do not think commercial
real time ray traced game will be a reality any time soon in this decade.

~~~
hatu
It's been "next gen" for decades. It's just a terribly inefficient brute-force
approach to lighting a scene. I don't think it'll ever be viable for real-time
graphics.

~~~
ygra
Even if it'd be viable, the traditional approach is much faster and easier on
resources. You still want to retain a part of the GPU for physics, maybe. Or
run on lower-end hardware, too. Using ray-tracing for accurate shadows or
reflections in part of a scene may be viable, but I severely doubt games will
just use ray-tracing for rendering. CAD and architecture stuff may benefit
more from that, I guess.

------
comex
In addition to the business model, another key question: source available or
not?

For reference: the Half-Life (GoldSrc) and Source Engine SDKs, long free to
download for modders, are on GitHub these days, but don't contain the complete
engine source code.

Note: The above space previously claimed the full GoldSrc code was available,
because that is what I read somewhere and is repeated at least at [1], but
this appears to be incorrect. Sorry :|

[1]
[https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Goldsource](https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Goldsource)

~~~
jzelinskie
Do you have a link to the GoldSrc engine on GitHub?

~~~
daxelrod
I think it's here, as part of the HalfLife source:
[https://github.com/ValveSoftware/halflife](https://github.com/ValveSoftware/halflife)

~~~
angersock
That's just the HL1 SDK--there isn't any engine source in there worth
mentioning AFAIK.

~~~
comex
Yep, I am wrong. Serves me right for repeating what I read somewhere without
verifying it myself. Too bad.

------
chc
Based on the context of the "free for content developers," it sounds to me
like they mean it will be free for people developing add-on content for
existing games, not that it will be free for people making their own games.

~~~
squeaky-clean
I agree. If it was free for game development, they would have said "game
developers" and not "content developers."

Someone in /r/gamedev posted a link to this press release. [0] It looks
official, and steamdb is usually reputable. Here's the most relevant section,
it definitely doesn't sound like Source 2 will be free for original game
development.

> "The value of a platform like the PC is how much it increases the
> productivity of those who use the platform. With Source 2, our focus is
> increasing creator productivity. Given how important user generated content
> is becoming, Source 2 is designed not for just the professional developer,
> but enabling gamers themselves to participate in the creation and
> development of their favorite games," said Valve's Jay Stelly. "We will be
> making Source 2 available for free to content developers. This combined with
> recent announcements by Epic and Unity will help continue the PCs dominance
> as the premiere content authoring platform."

[0]
[https://steamdb.info/blog/source2-announcement/](https://steamdb.info/blog/source2-announcement/)

------
malkia
And to top that, not exactly an engine - but a level editor used by several
Sony Studios, it also uses a framework that Sony released months ago:

[https://github.com/SonyWWS/LevelEditor](https://github.com/SonyWWS/LevelEditor)

[https://github.com/SonyWWS/ATF](https://github.com/SonyWWS/ATF) (the
framework)

[https://github.com/SonyWWS/SLED](https://github.com/SonyWWS/SLED) (Debugger?
for lua?)

------
connerbryan
From a purely gamedev perspective, examining the Source engine taught me a lot
about engine development, so it's exciting to hear about the next version.

Valve's articles on how they implemented networking in Source are particularly
useful and interesting[0].

[0]
[https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Source_Multiplayer_...](https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Source_Multiplayer_Networking)

------
unethical_ban
Odd that idTech, known historically as a corss platform engine that was unique
for being opened after its profit was done, is now seemingly one of the more
closed engines on the market.

~~~
djloche
They sold the company, and now Carmack at Oculus. It makes sense that the
values of the company have changed.

~~~
CmonDev
_"...the values of the company have changed..."_ \- a polite way of saying
"the founders sold out".

~~~
jpgvm
Carmack didn't "sell out", he spent decades at id and was responsible for vast
swathes of 3D technology and the open-sourcing of multiple cutting edge game
engines.

He went above and beyond what you could expect of anyone who cofounds a game
development house and he is treated like a literal programming icon for good
reason.

~~~
CmonDev
_" On June 24, 2009, ZeniMax Media acquired the company."_

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_Software](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_Software)

=> sell out

~~~
talmand
The selling of the company that you don't outright 100% own doesn't equate to
the traditional meaning of "selling out".

------
locusm
Check out Project Reality for a great example of a very engaging game that
will benefit from game engine licensing like this. Current version is BF2
based and some of the best squad based gameplay I have experienced.

~~~
krustchinsky
Very interesting that I find this here! I was on the PR2 team for awhile
before things stagnated. I don't think the team at this point over at
realitymod.com would benefit from anything happening at EA in regards to BF2's
license. A lot has changed and things are moving very slowly nowadays.

You might want to check out Squad (joinsquad.com)

~~~
locusm
I did take a look at some Squad footage that was released from the team months
ago, looking forward to its release.

------
fekberg
How does Source and Steam fit together? Would it make sense to lower a
potential fee for Steam exclusive games built on Source? Would it be "risky"
trusting the same company with both the game engine and distribution?

It's really great seeing Source 2, Unreal Engine and Unity lowering the bar
for game developers to deliver their products.

~~~
sliverstorm
_How does Source and Steam fit together?_

Source is an engine, Steam is a distribution platform. I think the only truly
significant interplay is:

\- Source games will probably behave well with the Steam Overlay and probably
work in Big Picture Mode with controllers

\- Steam recognizes the Source libraries as a distinct element, so you only
have to download the Source engine once even if you have many games that use
that engine

~~~
dtech
> Steam recognizes the Source libraries as a distinct element

I don't think that's correct, all Source1 games include their own copy of the
engine and aren't automatically updated to newer versions etc. (Valve does
update them though). The engine download is only for mods and some 3rd-party
games.

~~~
rjaco31
What do you call Source1 games? I'm pretty sure I had a common source download
for CS:S, DoD:S and HL:DM

~~~
reubenmorais
The games you mentioned _used_ to run on the same branch of the engine, and
when that does happen you only download it once. Most shipping Source games
today use distinct branches of Source. There's a Portal 2 branch, a DotA
branch, a TF2 branch, a CS:GO branch, etc.

------
oatmealsnap
Can Source 2 really compete with UR4 and Unity5? HL2 was amazing for it's
time, but the reason that Portal looks so good is because most of the
animations and lighting effects are pre-rendered.

------
ChikkaChiChi
Can any developer comment on Source, Unity, and Unreal and how well they
handle mods after the fact?

Modding in PC gaming adds such an incredible level of value and creativeness
that it being a constant afterthought is bordering on criminal. Steam Workshop
is an interesting mechanic, but it would be nice if an engine set out a
baseline in advance that didn't require using additional services.

------
eklavya
Speaking of open source games, I hope openage becomes playable soon. I
loved/still love Age of empires. Although, I have been playing 0ad and it's
pretty good but has to cover a lot of ground in performance region.

------
arca_vorago
Honestly I'm hoping Source 2 is everything I dream it can be. I've been
focused on asset creation instead of game logic so that I have leeway in
deciding on engine (which right now for me is UE4).

------
thrillgore
I'm interested in knowing if Source 2 will only be targeting PC and Steam
Machines, or if Valve has plans for Xbox/PlayStation/Wii and
iOS/Android/Windows Phone.

~~~
waterfowl
hopefully mac also, I think all of valve first party titles run on mac so I
would hope they wouldn't drop it for source 2(and mythical HL3)

~~~
cupofjoakim
Due to the new steam machines running on linux there's a high probability for
the games to work for os x as well. I think (can't find the reference right
now) that gabe newell really want games to be able to run on all major pc
os's.

------
CHY872
So it'll be: You can use it for free, but you have to sell it on Steam? Valve
will still get their pound of flesh.

------
erose
Headline abuse. The quote is "free for content developers."

------
CmonDev
_" Announces ... Free"_ \- as if they had a choice.

~~~
ygra
Was Source even licensed as extensively as Unreal or idTech? I got the
impression that most Source games were Valve's own and licensing the engine
wasn't really a priority (or source of revenue) for them.

~~~
jsheard
Not even close, most of the licenced Source games were existing HL2 mod
projects being moved to a commercial standalone format. The only high profile
original game ever developed on it outside of Valve was TitanFall, and they
had to rewrite a good chunk of the engine to bring it up to modern standards.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
I thought they rewrote stuff because they were using it as a prototyping tool,
and its design didn't quite fit their game?

~~~
forgottenpass
A project like Titanfall isn't going to be able to treat an engine as a
blackbox library. They're going to spend a lot of time tailoring that engine
to their needs.

Anytime a game developer is asked to publicly comment on using an external
party's engine, that developer is probably a producer and wants to make their
project look good. They don't want their game to be seen on the same level as
games that CAN get away with treating the engine as a blackbox. The exact
reasoning they give (or internet apocrypha) are generally not very useful to
understanding the changes they do make.

------
bobofettfett
Half-Life 3?

------
joshu
Half-Life 3 confirmed?

~~~
keyle
I wonder when that's going to get old. On an odd note, they did deny "source
2" to ever exist until recently. So, I guess there is hope for you.

~~~
geon
Developing the engine (even if it is mostly incremental enhancments from the
games released over the years) must have taken up signifficant resources
lately. If the engine is "done" now, there should be people available to work
on new titles.

~~~
spuz
Chances are, they are developing the engine alongside a new game built on that
engine. That is after-all how most game engines are built.

~~~
geon
That would be the "mostly incremental enhancments from the games released".

Releasing something publicly makes a huge difference.

------
curiously
I can't find any information on steam, thought thats where the news would be.

anyways, not sure what source 2 will look like, but if it means that we can
use the existing source code for games like counterstrike or any of the
valve's fps series, then for fps indie developers this is a welcome news.

we should see an explosion of new types of fps games with the availability of
such base to build new games from, add new content, new modes of play etc.

------
anandaverma
Awesome. After long time something interesting from valve

~~~
BinaryIdiot
Ouch. Steam box stuff and VR not that interesting? Though I'd really love for
them to FINALLY announce a Half Life sequel.

~~~
freehunter
Steam Box and VR is interesting, but only if it actually happens. So far we've
seen next to nothing from the Steam Box idea except a ton of companies
releasing small form-factor PCs that were originally slated to run Steam OS
but then switched to Windows when Valve decided to back out.

