The Crafting of Half-Life 2 - Episode Two

Now that they have some time to stop and think, the folks behind Half-Life 2: Episode Two are making the interview rounds. Halflife2.net has up a discussion with HL2 scribe Marc Laidlaw. They discuss some of the world-shaking events in this latest chapter of the game, with plenty of spoilers. (So be forewarned.) RPS, meanwhile, has an interview with project lead David Speyrer. The developer talks John Walker through the process of playtesting at Valve, what it's like to work at such a creative company, and the decisions they made regarding DX9 vs. DX10 tradeoffs during the dev process. "RPS: You chose to not use DX10 for the new games. Why was that? DS: For this set of products we decided to use some DX10 features, but not through the API itself. It's because we didn't want to be Vista only. We didn't feel there was an enough of an install base for the Orange Box launch. I'm sure we will use it - it's pretty much inevitable. But this time, things like the hardware face morphing is implemented via a back-door API. RPS: DX9 can do what DX10 offers then? DS: Yeah, but through driver-back doors. And I'm sure we'll rethink it at some point. For this roll out it was fine to do it as we did."

Episodic content? What episodic content?

[ScotchForBreakfast]

I don't understand why the folks at Valve still keep talking about their two irregularly released expansions as "episodic content". I would expect episodic content to be released at some reliable (intervals, and more than just two "episodes". This isn't "episodic content" they're just expansion packs.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Think about the future

[ischorr]

Okay, fine, then use OpenGL for the 3d rendering, and platform-specific stuff for the rest. It's still MUCH easier to port, and breaks you out of the Vista lockin (unless the audio and interface handling APIs in DirectX 10 really ARE that much better/required).

However, I cringe when I hear this argument for the same reason that I cringe every time I see someone correct someone saying "Linux" with "GNU/Linux". Yes, you may be technically more correct, but you KNOW what they meant, and in 99% of cases the pedantism doesn't change the point of their argument one bit. (Please, let's not get off on this tangent)