Valve: No new Portal this year

By Robert Purchese Published 25 April, 2008

"I think you have to be ambitious."

Valve's Doug Lombardi has told Eurogamer that you won't see a new Portal this year.

Instead, the developer will knuckle down and try to do something as revolutionary as Half-Life 2 was to the original Half-Life - because that's the Valve way.

"In typical Valve tradition, it won't be Portal with different colours," said Lombardi, dressed as a companion cube. "I think that when you hit something like that, you have two choices: you can quickly replicate it and stick it out there - do the opportunistic thing and cash in on it; or you can do the crazy thing like we did after Half-Life was so successful and go off and try and say, 'Okay, that was revolutionary, so its successor has to be equally as revolutionary.'

"That's the spirit I think we're approaching it in," he added. "You won't see a new Portal at retail this Christmas because of that. That's the trade off. People want more, but we don't want to give them more of the same right away because that would just be boring."

Portal was released last October and Valve was surprised at the effect it had; Lombardi says it shocked him to see people dressed as companion cubes as soon as a week or two after release.

The original game - described as an "experiment" - went very well, then, and now Valve is doing plenty of research and development to find out what "more" it is going to offer.

"I think you have to be ambitious. For us, that's really paid off. Half-Life 2 was the right decision, it was painful, six years and upwards of 40 million dollars to develop, but that paid off. That's our recipe," concluded Lombardi.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (34) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • superjag86 #1 4 years ago

    Hmm, that reminds me... I still have to play Portal!

  • Kyle #2 4 years ago

    Good on them.

  • Killerbee #3 4 years ago

    Portal was excellent and is one of very few games I really do intend to play again one day. I'm actually not too concerned that they're not going to rush out more content for this Christmas. I kind of figured we'd probably have to wait for another Orange Box style pack alongside Episode Three anyway, so a bit of a wait for something really good isn't too difficult to endure.

  • Triggerhappytel #4 4 years ago

    But honestly, I don't think anyone expected a new Portal this year - this is Valve, after all!

    $40 million for Half-Life 2 though? Fucking hell. Its worth it, but jeez, that's a lot of cash.

  • That_Happy_Cat #5 4 years ago

    Yes... they are in a great position where for some reason they can act as a publisher whilst OTHER publishers let them sell their games over Steam giving Valve enough money to develop new games that compete with the new games those other publishers are publishing.

    Valve... kudos to you.

    Other publishers.... DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH!

  • oceanmotion #6 4 years ago

    40 Million isn't so bad spanned over 6 years, developing the engine yourself, then making the game. Plus they use it for all their all other games. Other devs buy Unreal and then spend 20-30 million to develop over 2-3 years Love Valve's approach to gaming. Community and time matter.

  • Frumper #7 4 years ago

    A level editor for this would be a fantastic addition, enable user created content. Like the N+ one, but bigger. :o)

  • braddrac #8 4 years ago

    I sincerely wish more developers would adopt (or were allowed to by their publishers) that blizzard-style "done when it's good and ready" approach to design. It always pays dividends in the long term, in harbouring the devout loyalty of gamers everywhere. I hope they take as long as they bloody well please with portal 2, and I expect it to show every hour of effort that went into it.

  • Penguinzoot #9 4 years ago

    Have to admit, I haven't played the first yet (I know, shame on me). I've been saving it for a rainy day so I can fully savour it. But with GTA IV coming out next week, I don't know when I shall find the time ;-)

    /glances guiltily over at stack of uncompleted games

  • Rash' #10 4 years ago

    WooHoo!!! Well I wish Valve would take the time to show the PS3 community they matter. We're still waiting on that patch to fix the shoddy job EA's devs did on OB. They command a lot ot deserved respect, but their attitude towards PS3 development, in retrospect really doesn't do them any favours. If they didn't have faith in the system then they shouldn't have agreed to have their game represented on the platform. Delivering a half arsed job doesn't do anybody any favours.
    Edited by 1 at 25/04/08 @ 17:55

  • Davemanz #11 4 years ago

    Valve is the best developer for the PC right now. They deserve every bit of praise they get.

    Doug Lombardi, however, is a twat. He's been that way since the moment HL2 was announced.

  • RabidChild #12 4 years ago

    "In typical Valve tradition, it won't be Portal with different colours," said Lombardi, dressed as a companion cube.

    teehee

  • hiddenranbir #13 4 years ago

    This is why valve rule.

    And silly numpties like Koei drool and get no respects (or monies) from me.

    ---$40 million for Half-Life 2 though? Fucking hell. Its worth it, but jeez, that's a lot of cash.---

    The cool thing is, they didn't set that as the budget. They just got on with developing and whatever the end cost - so be it. I consider a rather risky thing but god damn it, the reward was well worth it.
    Edited by 1 at 25/04/08 @ 19:14

  • The_Pope #14 4 years ago

    Couldn't we have just a LITTLE more, costing just a little...?

    People can vote with their credit cards - those who want to wait for "revolutionary" can do so; everyone else can have some fun this side of the year 2014! :(

  • Lemming81 #15 4 years ago

    Never mind all that shit, stop talking to the press and finish the Half-Life 2 story arc with Episode 3 while we are still alive! *slaps Gabe*

  • smelly #16 4 years ago

    I'm strange - I felt very "meh - that was okay but overhyped" after playing portal from beginning to end.

  • Darkish #17 4 years ago

    I have yet to buy a poor Valve game.

    The fact that even EA has taken onboard quality and a " get it done when it's done right" attituted speaks volumes for the pc consumer. (see spore)

    We just don't buy crap anymore.

  • dudefella #18 4 years ago

    To those saving Portal for later: Don't, you'll have it finished in 3 hours, tops, anyway. It is a fantastic experience though, one of the best games of 2007 and highlight of the Orange Box for sure.

  • daz_john_smith #19 4 years ago

    Some DLC levels wouldn't hurt

  • zoidberg #20 4 years ago

    This is why I would pay $100 for a Valve-developed game and $10 for anything else...

    (Except maybe Blizzard's work, and id maybe... but they've been let-downs lately... 3D Realms would've been in this category but they've made a mess of things as well).

  • holsty101 #21 4 years ago

    I'd hardly use Spore as an example of a change of heart at EA, it is after all, being helmed by the guy who came up with the money printing machine that is The Sims.

  • Milbe #22 4 years ago

    For me Portal is on the same level as ICO in terms of how a _good videogame_ should play and feel like.

  • Golgo #23 4 years ago

    "Instead, the developer will knuckle down and try to do something as revolutionary as Half-Life 2 was to the original Half-Life - because that's the Valve way."

    FAST head crabs and FAST zombies.

  • Kostabi #24 4 years ago

    Aye, Spore is more of a vanity project for EA to keep Will Wight sweet I suspect. After all, he's the reason that the boardroom is made of solid gold and they all own small African countries for summer homes.

  • _Price_ #25 4 years ago

    Good! The first one only came out last year!

  • Super_Zee #26 4 years ago

    Good stuff Valve, now just release Portal as a standalone game on XBLA and/or PSN and I'll be happy.

  • Lemming81 #27 4 years ago

    @Super_Zee:

    What possible reason would you have for not buying the Orange Box??

  • Chalee #28 4 years ago

    Wait a sec - people were expecting a new portal this year? For god's sake, this is Valve - by the time they get a new portal game out, portal technology will be readily available at an affordable price in real life!

    lol.

  • Nikanoru #29 4 years ago

    I'm strange - I felt very "meh - that was okay but overhyped" after playing portal from beginning to end.


    Then you should've played it before the hype. I might have felt the same way if I'd only played it now. The internet has ruined Portal, and I'm so glad I got to it before that happened.




    'Okay, that was revolutionary, so its successor has to be equally as revolutionary.'


    To be honest I don't agree with that assessment of Half-Life 2.

  • Slipstream #30 4 years ago

    I love these guys =)

  • muscleblade #31 4 years ago

    Valve is fantastic. Take your time guys. HL2 Episode 3 will be great. Make it short but sweet like episode 2.

  • Concrete #32 4 years ago

    "A level editor for this would be a fantastic addition, enable user created content. Like the N+ one, but bigger. :o) "

    Frumper, check out the Hammer editor, Valve released it yonks ago (previously Worldcraft), and it allows you to create your own levels.

    I would be happier if they said "we are going to make something as revolutionary as HL1" instead of HL2, because 1 was a much better game. Sure number 2 was more rounded and polished, but it never really had those awesome standout moments that made 1 such a good game for me. All IMO of course.

  • InsoFox #33 4 years ago

    "To be honest I don't agree with that assessment of Half-Life 2. "

    Gotta remember that when HL2 came out not only did it raise the bar technically (hey, it still looks perfectly acceptable today, and the facial modelling /animation laughs in most other games' faces.) but it integrated physics in a way that hadn't really been -successfully- done before. It also came out at a time when it was still very common to take players out of the action and into a pre-rendered or non-interactive cutscene, but now we've seen the way Valve do it, it's often seen as detrimental to the game to do this, except for effect (like in Bioshock).

    Maybe it doesn't seem so revolutionary now, because most of its best features have just been absorbed into Modern FPS games, but I remember playing it when it came out, and there was nothing like the city at the beginning, or slicing your way through ravenhol(d)m at the time.

    I'll concede that it didn't change the way we think about games forever, which is maybe what you want 'revolutionary' to mean. I think it was more like a series of mini-revolutions.

  • Nikanoru #34 4 years ago

    I don't agree that it really looked that good. Doom 3 came out earlier, and THAT raised the bar in terms of completely hiding the polygons and making us feel as if we were looking at a CG movie. HL2, in comparison, just felt like HL1 with sharper textures.

    The physics were nice, but have they really influenced anything? The only physics we really see to this day are hardly of consequence, just some falling barrels or chucking stuff at the enemy (basically just another way to shoot).

    Also, I don't get what everyone's deal is with Ravenholm. Aside from (only) the first time I encountered one of those fast jumping headcrab zombies, it seemed really boring to me. Just felt like... just another HL2 engine level made by a fan in the level editor, with low lighting. Idunno. It seemed mundane, especially in comparison with some of the "on the road" sequences with the boat or the buggy where you'd stop at points of interest every now and then (which is really the only thing I remember the game fondly for).

    And this:
    It also came out at a time when it was still very common to take players out of the action and into a pre-rendered or non-interactive cutscene,

    I've been hearing this stuff for a while, but you know what? I can skip a cutscene.

    Being forced to sit around and wait for the NPC to stop talking and unlock the door for me is, IMHO, much, much more aggravating than a skippable cutscene. And when you do want to watch a cutscene you don't have to worry about story elements you missed because you happened to not be looking where the game wanted you to look.