Adriaan N. Modernfictum.com
For what feels like the umpteenth time, rumors have begun to fly
about the possibility of a Half-Life 3 announcement at this year’s E3. While I’ve prepared myself for these rumors to be completely false (Valve seems to think they are), I can’t help but feel as if Valve has been mum for far too long regarding the Half-Life franchise’s future, and that this really could be the year that we see Gordon Freeman and Co.’s next big step. Expectations are high in general, but given just how insanely influential Half-Life 2 was on the shooter genre when it released, mine could be considered astronomical, unrealistic even. I expect nothing but near perfection after almost 8 years of waiting, but I believe Valve is up to the challenge. Here’s what I want to see.
600°
160°
20°
10°
30°
40°
Ad 
20°
No...just no
Multiplayer/Co-op should never be included in Half life, it's a great single player game that dosen't need something like that tacked on
Look I thought the Portal 2 co-op was a pretty neat idea and it worked well but the fact that Valve even said they had to cut some of the single player to make room for co-op made my heart sink.
They've done co-op DLC so I don't see why they don't focus on making a long single player and then add multiplayer/online after the game has came out. It's a lot easier to add a seperate co-op story line them trying to add single player cotent to an already finished story
Although saying that, I don't think online in Half life would work in any shape or form.
People these days think of FPS as games that suck the moment they don't have a MP segment. Unfortunately some devs/publishers cave under this pressure due to competition and try to put together an unnecessary multiplayer segment, cutting in on the single player part and sometimes unbalancing the whole experience. Dead Space 2 comes to mind.
Half-Life 1, 2 and the episodes are examples of how a game can be awesome if games focus and stick to the single player experience. I would love Half-Life 3 to stay the same.
These days people want MP or GTFO; and once they have it, some want it to be similar to Call of Duty MP or, once again, GTFO.
Why not finish Single Player, and then make multiplayer?
Did Multiplayer made Uncharted 2 worse? When its was better than Uncharted 1? No
You cut stuff from single player to make multiplayer - bad thing
You finish making single player and now make multiplayer - good thing
HL3 dose not need a multiplayer.....everything dose not need a multiplayer most of the time if not all of the time. Adding a multiplayer means the resources they would have used on the singleplayer would be taken away, which is NEVER a good thing. There are games like battlefield or call of duty that in reverse shouldn't have a single player to make the multiplayer better....or in call of duty's case actually be a halfway decent game
Related image(s)
Should stick to what made HL2 great.
And I disagree with the article, Source really is a fine engine, if HL3 looked like Portal 2 I'd be just fine with it. Multiplayer in Half Life? Just no. It just doesn't belong. The tie-ins with Portal are just fine too, no need to go crazy with tie ins.
Another type of cool weapon though, I see no harm in. But keep the Gravity Gun the way it is, thing is amazing.
PS: What's with the haters of Half Life multyplayer? Sure,i it wasn't exactly without flaws but it was great in its own right. I loved the first deathmatch multyplayer that the original brought, and truth be told, we need more fast paced competitive shooters...