The first question is, do you care by now whether Half-Life 3 comes out and blows you away, or would you rather just see a well-made game that finishes up the story? The other question is, if Valve had no interest in it and said another developer could do it, who would you like to see them pick to make the game? I've just started playing The Orange Box (I plan on now going through the main game and the two episodes on hard all the way through again), and the questions crossed my mind. I just want a really well-made Half-Life 3. I don't need them to revolutionize. As for who I would personally like to see make a Half-Life 3 if not Valve, and if it were possible, have two teams: both the people that make Metro as well as the people that make the latest Wolfenstein games.

I think they're currently the best at taking up the mantle of making games somewhat similar to Half-Life and could do the sequel justice in my opinion. I don't really know why I started to replay The Orange Box. I generally play Half-Life 2 for at least an hour every year I believe despite thinking a lot of it is somewhat archaic. To be honest, I am enjoying it more now than I have in the past decade of replaying some of it. Maybe awkwardly to some, I am enjoying the 360 version more than the PC one. That's probably because the frame rate on my PC fluctuates from 80fps to around 15fps in stressful points while the 360/One version is a near steady 30fps. I played up until the Ravenholm section on Steam yesterday, but when father Grigori came out to greet Gordon the frame rate just sank with all the fire effects.

I'm playing the game on the One now and despite the lower resolution which is the biggest differential, it doesn't look as bad as I remember. It also has a nice bloom effect that my PC for some reason doesn't allow for in the game. I love playing games without auto-aim, but on the console, there's no way to turn it off, and it is also weirdly factoring in me enjoying it a little more. The control setup also allows for a much more console-style shooter, with toggle sprint with the click of the left analog and toggle duck set to B. Lastly, my PC's speakers don't do the games sound justification. They're fine and I can use faux surround sound, but it's no alternative to a home theater system, so listening to every little detail is more immerse on console than when I play on PC, where often the sound can just sound artificial.

I know I said two questions, but maybe two more: how often do you go back to Half-Life, either one or two, and do you still enjoy it/them? Half-Life 2 around the time of its release and in 2005 was one of, if not my favorite game, but already in 2007, I was feeling less enthusiastic about it. I still think the game retains some very high-quality aspects, but ultimately, in my opinion, can feel very archaic. That said, again, I am enjoying it more than I have in the past decade right now. Isn't it kind of sad that the joke 'Half-Life 3 confirmed?' is hardly used anymore? It's an old joke/meme by now.

I'm in a similar boat to you Re: HL3. I just want an end to the story, the 2007 engine is fine for me and if they expanded it similarly to how they did with the 2 episodes (eg. Interesting new enemy types and scenarios) that would be a bonus. Don't know who should make it these days but Metro dev sounds good tbh if they can keep the writing/world in line.

I haven't replayed them in some time but I used to regularly replay them all and always enjoyed them, I'm not sure I can continue to watch that same cliff hanger knowing that Valve stopped giving a shit about a resolution anymore. It's been a long time and I gave up years ago, still a very sore subject for me personally though.

I did my Half life 1 and 2 plus episodes about two years ago, and I believe they may be my last. I believe the information coming out of Valve seems to be HL 3 will never happen. Nothing like Portal will ever occur, either. It's just an end of a thing, if not an era, or a series of games that set standards. It's DOTA, and DOTA makes money. Not lambasting that in particular, but I suspect the culture and expertise that put the Half Life-s out is gone. This seemed to be somewhat of a consensus the last time in a past thread.

I guess it is sad, and I was rather invested with the whole thing. But it's just how it rolls.

I'd still like to see a Half Life 3, i doubt it could set the world on fire like the first two did, but it can still be good.
I don't think anyone else can make a Half Life as good as Valve, many talents have left, but they have of course hired people and they can gather more talent for a project if they want to, but i think since the end of the last generation most big budget developers can't put soul in their games anymore, indie games are making up for that but AAA is all about games as a service.

@cikame: A lot of AAA developers seem to be that way, but not all. I'm sure Valve would still be a fine choice to make a sequel, but I think another developer could do it as well (with the possible help of previous and existing Valve employees that know Half-Life well).

@bybeach: Yep. I don't know what has been said in threads, but reading about Half-Life through articles it seems anyone that has worked on Half-Life that really contributed to making the games the way they were aren't there anymore (I'm not trying to sell short what anyone else's contributions on the game were that still work there, but as a whole it's different). That's why I brought up new developers for the game that can take up the mantle.

@someoneproud: I suppose they could use the same engine and really work on it to make it feel up to modern standards. I would be interested in seeing that come about. As for writing and world, yes definitely. When I think new developers though, I would hope that the new developers worked with previous Half-Life creators on staying true to what everyone knows and loves about Half-Life. I only bring up new developers because Valve doesn't seem too interested in making it themselves, and yet allow their property to be used in a handful of different ways, like the recent Final Fantasy thing, and allowing the creators of Black Mesa to get money off of it.

---

It's probably not in the cards, and most PC's I assume can run the Half-Life games just fine, but it would be cool to see a 1080p/4K/60fps The Orange Box on current-gen consoles. Heck, they should even implement Black Mesa in there if possible once it's fully done!

Black Mesa came out after a long development by fans as I understand it. Also there is free to play something called Transmissions Element 120 that may interest you. It seemed more combat puzzle based. I played it for a while, was very loyal to the set(world) and setting.

I would be interested if another developer gave it a go.

I replay HL1+2+the episodes every few years and still enjoy them. I would definitely like an end to that story, and I don't think it needs to revolutionize the FPS again. Honestly, the revolutionary aspects of HL1 and 2 aren't the reasons I really give a shit about them, now or when I played them for the first time.

Starbreeze might also be a good pick, although I guess I don't know what they're all about at this point. Assuming they're still capable of making things like Syndicate or the Riddick games, then I would be totally down with them making HL3.

@relkin: The people that made Riddick/The Darkness pretty much made the new Wolfenstein games, so kind of the same thing. I think the people that made Syndicate were a little different since some of the leads had left. Starbreeze would have been my pick back then if it wasn't Valve, or Monolith since I thought F.E.A.R. and NOLF were superb and enough like Half-Life that they could attempt it, but now it's a little different to me. And yeah, I agree about it being a revolution and how that doesn't really matter or never really did aside from the first game due to how it presented story without cutscenes. The only thing that might be considered revolutionary about two was the gravity gun, or its use of physics, as well as perhaps impressive facial animations. Otherwise, it was more or less very similar to the first game just with much, much-improved visuals and in many respect sound design aside from the iconic sounds.

@bybeach: Yes, it did, and it's still being worked on. Xen hasn't even been finished last I checked. I've seen Transmissions Element 120. I never checked it out because my PC is poo at gaming. I was also under the impression that it isn't canon (which would automatically make me less inclined to try it). I am reading what the Steam page says and it says that it's set in the same universe. I don't know. I did play that fanmade Portal game that seemed relatively well-made despite its not-so-terrific voice work (although better than I was expecting). I don't remember what the name was called.

The first question is, do you care by now whether Half-Life 3 comes out and blows you away, or would you rather just see a well-made game that finishes up the story?

I actually pretty much just want the latter. I want a fun 8-12 hour linear shooter up to the standards of Half-Life 2 that wraps up the story. That is it. If they decide to make it some revolutionary mind-blowing, genre-bending thing, you will hear no complaints from me, but really I just want some resolution.

The other question is, if Valve had no interest in it and said another developer could do it, who would you like to see them pick to make the game?

I don't know, really. id Software? Machine Games? Starbreeze? Bungie, if Bungie can still make a linear single player shooter and not a sorta-MMO with shitty F2P trappings? Those guys that made Black Mesa? There are plenty of devs that can make a solid single-player shooter, really, and I don't care who they pick as long as it feels good to play with either M+K or controller, can fit into the Half-Life aesthetic, and tells a satisfying conclusion to the story.

@cikame mentions games as service in which developers are taking a liking to these days. Funny enough with the points being made about Starbreeze being a company that might be a good choice is that in checking what they're up to recently, it seems Payday is their thing right now, and right on their site they say 'Starbreeze is applying the "Games as a Service" concept for all of its titles.' So... No thanks? Starbreeze of The Darkness and Riddick days aren't anymore. Syndicate was okay, but not really up to the standards of their previous first-person games in my opinion. I'm not trying to shoot anyone's ideas down, I'm just saying, Machine Games is what Starbreeze was. I'm also not trying to crap on Starbreeze as it is now because they could still make great games for all I know.

@justin258: Good point. I'm not sure about Bungie. I love Halo (not so much Destiny), but the idea behind id would be interesting. Their 2016 Doom (even Doom 3) was similar enough to a Half-Life game I'd be confident in them making it.

I've played through Half Life 2 and the episodes once. They were great games, but at this point I just don't care about Half Life 3. It's sort of a joke at this point. If Valve came out and made it, great! I'm not getting my hopes up though. As far as a developer? I would probably go with MachineGames or Arkane. They both go to the level of detail for worlds that I would like to see in a Half Life sequel.

I think the best studio to pick it up would be Arkane, Dishonored is probably the only other first person game i've ever played that's really nailed a sense of place as well as Half Life 2 did for me. Heck, maybe it's actually possible, since Valve seems totally cool with letting anyone make a game with their IP now(seriously, go read about Hunt Down The Freeman if you haven't heard of it yet...)

@colonel_pockets: @panfoot: You probably know, (about Arkane as you both mentioned) but Dishonored and Half-Life 2 had the same art director. I liked the first Dishonored fine and thought Prey (until the last several hours) was great. I wasn't a big fan of Dishonored 2. I suppose they could pull it off, but I'd have some reservations as they haven't shown that they could pull off shooting in games. I actually liked the shooting in Prey mind you, it's just that that wasn't the main focus of the game I feel. Yes though, Half-Life has always been fascinating in large part due to their settings. It's one of the main reason loved the games.

I used to play through HL2 and the episodes once a year. Haven't played through them all in several years, though I started a HL2 play-through last year I would like to pick up again. I feel in confident in saying that HL2 is still very much my favorite game of all time. The sense of place it creates and the atmosphere that fills it is just unparalleled. Despite the fact that it's a very linear shooter, it feels like there's this huge sprawling world and story unfolding outside the area the gameplay is contained in.

To say I'm disappointed in what Valve have become would be a massive understatement. Between Half-Life, Portal, and L4D, I used to have an easy time saying they were my favorite developer. They have all the fucking money and can literally do whatever they want. And they choose to basically become exclusively about DOTA and managing Steam. It's incredibly sad.

I guess I do have some sliver of hope that the HL story will be properly concluded one day, but at this point it's hard to care. I never needed anything revolutionary; simply a well-made sequel with maybe a handful of unique ideas thrown in is all I ever wanted. I didn't love HL1 or 2 because of their innovations (well, maybe with HL1 because there was nothing like it at the time), so just give me an amazing shooter that resolves the gaping fucking story.

If anyone else had to make HL3 besides Valve, I would likely choose 4A or Arkane to do it. I think even Eidos Montreal could do a great job provided they used a different engine.

I think Half Life was memorable for its parts, and not as a whole, and those parts have been left in the fridge for too long. I think that, if anyone were to bring it back, HL3 would have to be nearly unrecognizable for it be fresh and relevant. Probably even create a new story and call it something else.

@onekillwonder_: Yeah... I used to feel that way about the setting, but the visuals, at least to me detract from it in a large way now. For me, it filled my imagination; the mystery of every locale either in view and not, or places you could see but couldn't go. It all made me wonder, but now looking at the flat textures it just looks outdated. Maybe my imagination just got worse, but I think it's just the technology behind it that doesn't support it. That said I am filling a tinge of that again as I go through it. I am trying to take it a little slower with this playthrough, see if I can find any nooks and crannies that I might have originally missed, or simply sit there and soak in the view more.

Back in 05 when the original Xbox version came out, I got the game on Christmas and I played the game religiously it seemed like for a whole year almost every day for hours. As for Valve making another one, maybe thousands of people need to flood the streets of Bellevue, WA at their headquarters to make a point, ha ha. No. I was also thinking about Eidos. I, however, really like their Dawn Engine. I don't want to criticize the art too much because it's great, but if it's due to the art direction or perhaps it's the animation work, but the faces in the Deus Ex games and the animations in general really never looked great. Those getting tweaks I think the Dawn Engine would work fine.

As for the aspect of innovation, I suspect many might feel that way, but I had the thought that at least some might expect something bigger than what should be expected. I would just feel bad if Valve didn't make Half-Life 3 all this time because they didn't know how to execute some revolutionary masterpiece that some might want. One of those 'go big or go home' ordeals. I don't care about that. There are talented people at work there, and if they have a chance at making a solid conclusion then I am more than happy. Now, to some or many it might feel disappointing if it does just come out and doesn't reach the lofty standards of what they remember feeling of their first time with Half-Life/Half-Life 2, but still, a great game is a great game.

Just being straightforward and not argumentive, but I see it as completely opposite. There was a story ark that needed to be finished. That has been one of the main sticking points for me and many. Besides the love of a bleak world that somehow had some striking humanity. For a FPS...

Don't mind what you said though, if it was Half Life 4!

I loved Half Life 1 , but didn't like Half Life 2 very much apart from the gravity gun shenanigans. I rather see them just declare that there won't be any new Half Life games in the future. Messed up for the fans? Not as messed up as keeping people hopeful for decades. There are other franchises out there without endings. It happens.

@ntm: I agree with you about the combat. I exclusively play the Dishonored games stealthily. Basically if there wasn't the blink ability, I would hate playing that game. What MachineGames did with Wolfenstein II's shooting wouldn't give me much confidence either. It's tough though. I guess Id Software? DOOM was incredible.

@colonel_pockets: I'm in the minority around here I guess because I thought Wolfenstein II was exceptional in how it controlled and how at least in terms of enemies' reactions to bullets, felt when taking the A.I. down. They weren't very smart which is the only downside to me, but otherwise a superb shooter, though faulty stealth design I found. I beat the game on easy first which was fun enough, and then relatively recently went back to it and played through the game on I am death incarnate and had a blast. I could be wrong, but it seems the biggest issue people bring up is simply the difficulty and how it was surprisingly punishing on mid difficulties. Doom, in my opinion, was superb, but the shooting itself not necessarily. It was when you ramp up the difficulty and have to be on the run and strategically get around to achieve your goal that felt good when overcoming it. The shooting didn't necessarily feel amazing in and of itself but was elevated when everything else surrounding it supported it. The game balanced things near perfectly. It's apparent when you play it on easy and get super bored though that it's just not a whole lot of fun just to shoot guys. A games shooting should feel good regardless of the challenge I think.

I would like them to remake both half life 1 and 2(and episodes), as i cant get through the archaic design of the old games for the life of me. Since i never beat 2 i dont have much interest in a 3 besides the interest in seeing the fans would react.

Kinda sucks they just let the IP die and none of that will ever happen though

@ntm: I guess that's why I picked Id. They balanced things perfectly. I felt that Wolfenstein II did not balance the combat well. The shooting was OK? But feedback given from the game was bad. It wasn't apparent how much health you were losing in combat until it was too late and the AI wasn't great. Though that shotgun was awesome.

I honestly don't think the game looks that bad. Sure, it is dated, but the world is still very detailed and some of the wide vistas it has are quite nice. Then again, I also don't mind dated looking games in general, as playing them now makes me nostalgic for the way I felt back then. I feel like HL2 has aged better than most games over a decade old in any case. The facial animation is still pretty good. The sound design also aided in making the world feel really rich.

As for Eidos, I don't mind their engine. My main point there was that, despite the Deus Ex games they've made being very good, they don't play particularly well as shooters. I don't know what that engine is capable of but moving and shooting would have to be way, way improved.

@onekillwonder_: Sound design does help a lot in the games; it is a factor in why I loved the game so much. The weapon sounds are cool, but the sound of the Combine chatter, or the bleep when they die as well as Overwatch's voice spewing warnings over a city-wide intercom. I also love the sound of the vehicles, either on the ground or in the air as well as Strider noises. It's all very good. And yes, the game has aged better than most games that came out around that time, especially the facial animations that still hold up. It doesn't look terrible, or bad, but could be much improved to just stand out as looking modern. If they made Half-Life 3 and it looked largely the same as Episode 2, that would be underwhelming because it can look better. Cleaner more realistic textures, tesselation on things, and... well etc. It can look better, but I agree. I wasn't saying it looked bad, it's just not necessarily modern looking.

I would never be able to recall which video or podcast it was, but at some point around the launch of modern VR headsets, Jeff had mentioned that if Valve were to release Half Life 3, it would make sense for it to be developed as the game that sells people on VR as a gaming technology. I still really like that theory since the previous two proper Half Life games were used to tout some new engine technology. At this point, if Half Life 3 is even still in development, it would never live up to the hype built up around its 10 year absence unless it was in some unexpected format such as VR where we do not have as much of a basis of comparison.

Valve would be the ones to break new ground rather than trying to compete with all the games that have iterated on the FPS formula in the past decade. Going back to Half Life 2, it is easy to see areas where it hasn't aged gracefully, and the same would be absolutely true of Half Life 3 being a pioneer. BUT at the time of release, it could be incredibly impactful, just as Half Life 2 was. Most of us would agree that VR is still mostly unproven for "real" games, but all it would take is the right hardware release with the right pricing alongside the right game to prove it is something worthy of interest.

I don't think I would want a different developer to take the reigns on the franchise though. I have no doubt that 4A or MachineGames (or Arkane!) could make a great single player FPS in the Half Life universe, as you mention, but it would simply be... off. Valve has (or at least, had) a unique style that wouldn't be easy to replicate. Though that could also be attributed to the Source engine itself and its shared aspects between their games.

As crazy as it might sound I'd probably pick Respawn Entertainment to do Half-Life 3. Titanfall 2's use of different concepts in the different levels and use of gadgets/technology could fit great with Half-Life. They might need to hire a new writer for the actual story/dialogue though. Irrational Games would be my number one choice, but they're dead now. MachineGames is very good choice too.