Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
First Person Shooters (Games) PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

Half-Life 2's Technical Details, Cost Estimates 60

Thanks to Computer Graphics Magazine for its feature on the graphical technology being used in Valve's eternally-awaited FPS Half-Life 2. Among the specifics discussed are innovative paths to graphical variety ("Using the same morph targets sculpted for facial animation, the system automatically alters the facial geometry to create, for example, a flatter or broader nose, or a squarer jaw. As a result, all the scientists, soldiers, and other homogeneous characters appear as unique, differentiated models"), and potential game mod options ("To firmly entrench itself in the future of game development, Softimage will package XSI EXP, a lite version of XSI, with every PC copy of Half-Life 2 [and make it available on the Softimage site this week].") Elsewhere, a Maxitmag interview with Valve's Gabe Newell has him musing: "Last time I checked, we were about $40 million into the project. Yikes, that's a scary number."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Half-Life 2's Technical Details, Cost Estimates

Comments Filter:
  • by Dreadlord ( 671979 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @06:58AM (#8643353) Journal
    They are targetting a Summer release now [slashdot.org].
  • by Cebu ( 161017 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:00PM (#8646953)
    The Source engine currently has one known licencee, which has a game scheduled for release at the end of this year: Troika Games with Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines.

    Given the media released to date, Troika seems quite far into the development cycle -- which is rather siginficant given that Troika started work on the game with the Source engine in December of 2001. So, if there was delays and stalling, it wouldn't be because they didn't have something to give this other company you heard about (unless that company asked for the Source engine far more than 2 years before it was launched) -- it would because they didn't want to give that company.

    "Granted, they were a really small company, so maybe they didnt look interresting, but it would have been the same cash in the end, right?"

    I think that is rather significant. If I were Valve, I would want all the initial licencees to have reasonably high quality products -- or better still, high quality products that are high profile. A smaller development house might be able to muster enough for the engine, but can it deliver a product that Valve can trust to showcase the engine?

    On another note, are you sure that this really small company could actually meet the price tag Valve wished? The Unreal Warefare engine runs at $750,000 US with an additional $100,000 US for each additional platform, or $350,000 US with an additional $50,000 US for each additional platform plus 3% royalties. Quake II's engine reportedly costed between $400,000 US plus 10% royalties, to a hefty $1,000,000 US. Even the aging Quake engine, which is now operating under the GPL, has a $10,000 US price tag if you wish to not operate under the GPL. All these fees are non-recoupable.

    Given the development cost of the Source engine, I wouldn't at all be surprised if it cost more than the Unreal Warfare engine.

Happiness is twin floppies.

Working...