It wouldn't be the first article from this source that was made up out of thin air. It was my first time being on the opposite side of a fabrication recently, and everyone at our company kind of chuckled and said "how did they come up with this stuff?".
I would think that most of the bloggers got it all wrong.
If Google have bought Valve, it would not be for the Android app store.
The most obvious reason why Google would buy Valve is that Microsoft is moving aggressively into in-game advertising and by buying Valve, Google just got themselves a massive platform to distribute their future in-game advertising solutions.
I'm actually not sure we should be convinced this will happen since it's just coming from a single rumor from a single news source-- but we'll see how it goes.
I'm a big fan of Valve (I integrated/wrote some popular scripting engines for their Source engine), but I'm not so certain this is a fantastic match. They probably don't need Google and Google doesn't need them-- but while it's not a great idea, it's probably not a bad one.
One thing to note is that not only does this get Google a content distribution network, but Steam also has a community, IM, etc. I don't know any real numbers for who uses those pieces, but it's likely to have grown to become one of the largest gaming social networks. Those have shown to be worth a good bit to the right company (for example, Xfire sold to Viacom for $100 million).
Top that off with the advertisement network and technology Valve integrated already into some games.
So compared to most game companies, I think Valve has some really great business decisions in their portfolio that should make them attractive to pretty much everyone. They took the money from the Half-Life series and created a great game platform, solid titles, an innovative and well-established software distribution network, some in-game advertisement technologies, along with an up-and-coming social network with no sign of slowing-down.
If you're looking to invest in an entertainment company that's built some long-term value, you can do much worse than Valve.
Maybe the combination of gaming and info harvesting, like in Google's image labeling game, makes such a merge plausible. Given how much online gaming happens, I think there's a lot of potential there.
Valve's Steam system is built around DRM. You can't even play a singleplayer Steam game without a connection to the Internet with Steam phoning home. And it's Windows-only.
What does this have to do with organizing the world's information, what does it have to do with "don't be evil", and what does a computer science outfit know about making stuff that's fun? I don't get it.
All I know is I'm still fully addicted to Counter-Strike a full 8 years after I first played it so Steam is alright with me. I don't even remember paying the original fee (maybe $50 years ago), and I don't need to mess with discs or reinstalls. Just download Steam, login to my account and BAM! all my games are downloaded and ready for playing, no patching no mess. Genius.
Now if Valve wanted $50/year to maintain my access to CS:S (something I can see Google doing), I'd find a new game.
In TFA, there is much focus on the quality of Steam as a content distribution platform, and it's relevancy to Googles own efforts in that venue.
It sounds more like Google want to use Steam technology in other products, and don't have any particular interest in Valves current business.
<dream class="pipe">Maybe they'll even opensource CS, since cash flow from that is probably pretty insignificant by now, and there's a lot of good-will to obtain.</dream>
Open-sourcing CS would be awesome. Bring the game full circle back to the days when it was just a fee mod made by Gooseman and Cliffe. What ever happened to those guys?
Agreed, overall I'm favorable to Google but I do not like this plan ONE bit. I mean if they're buying it to get at the code base, that's fine provided they leave Steam, the Games, and the Community alone. But if they go poking their fingers around in this stuff I'll be upset.
Steam doesn't always need to check online to play single-player games, only occasionally. And for my part, not having to store CDs and keep track of CD keys is worth having to stay connected to the internet (oh noes!) and not being able to trade away my PC games.
And if Google did buy Valve, they obviously know enough about fun to purchase a developer/publisher who knows what they are doing. That said, I doubt this deal is going to happen as I think Valve is comfortable with the position they are in.
The article stresses the value of Valve's content distribution system, not their content protection system or their content production system. Would you have been as incredulous if Google was proposing to buy, say, Akamai?
(what do you need for an os)
Web Browser - Check! (Chrome)
Value Proposition - Check! (Android)
3d Rendering - Check! (OpenGL ES)
Windows application support - Check! (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080219-google-intoxic...)
Gaming Engine (valve)
Application Suite (Google Pack)
"Google Content Distribution (Beta) however should make just about every other competitor lose several years of sleep, most of their remaining hair, and large gobs of stock price."
Valve is a great company because of the amazing games it has in its kitty. Games for PC's are not doing great and i am pretty much sure, in couple of years developers will stop making games for PC.
Steam is good content delivery system but will it be able to compete with XBOX Live, i really don't think so. Future for gaming is consoles, most of the in-game advertising will be done by the platform's like Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.
Consoles are ALWAYS going to have a market, and possibly a growing market.
Games are getting harder and more expensive to make, but projects like Irrlicht and Ogre 3d are becoming more complex. As the years go on the paradigm will change from a content centric design in PC games, to a complexity and community centric design philosophy. I can see a time when the community builds the environment within the bounds of the rules of the game engine - and I'm not talking about second life.
And where do you suggest all the millions of Modders will go?
Consoles are becoming computers, and I can guarantee the operating systems will look more and more like a simplified version of windows, or OSX as the years go on.... OpenGL, DirectX will continue to be developed. The simple fact alone that Console games must be developed on a PC is going to keep the PC kicking - it has to run emulated versions of the software that the console (lesser hardware) runs - PC Gaming isn't dead at all ... All you need to realize that is an internet connection and a POGO account.
I realize this isn't the market segment you are talking about but the largest private website in the world is an online PC games site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniclip)
As long as there is a pc - AND THERE always will be a device that allows for open development, and deployment of software - there will be games (irregardless of how complex) for that platform.
Bottom Line: as long as people have computers they, and their kids are going to want to put games on them.
"I can see a time when the community builds the environment within the bounds of the rules of the game engine - and I'm not talking about second life."
Hey! Like Spore! I think it's a damn great idea :)
