Voice Actor Claims He Worked On Half-Life 3

Not that long after a Valve employee was spotted wearing a Half-Life 3 T-shirt, an American voice actor told OXM that he has worked recently on "Half-Life Episode 3."

OXM believes that the word "Episode" in the title is probably a tongue slip; however, they promised to dig deeper into the matter.

We'll keep you updated.

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Comments

Gumby

I ran H2 on my 6600GT and it ran ok, but anything less it sucked donkey scrotum. So don't say H2 is the be all and end all of coding efficiency. Its an overhyped POS. Time for a DX11 update for H3. Otherwise its still just H2.

Agree with "And why the hell not, When"

i agree on all .. i thought i was the only one in this world who think that valve did SUPERB job on source engine that made it run on most kind of PC, and this should be the example of PC GAME ENGINES which is really for PC.

people these days only care of .. "Wow Graphic ftw!#%#@#" ,, i am still playing some good old games , Games these days get boring after a short while, except for skyrim

GAMEPLAY ftw (to me)

Agree with "And why the hell not, When"

i agree on all .. i thought i was the only one in this world who think that valve did SUPERB job on source engine that made it run on most kind of PC, and this should be the example of PC GAME ENGINES which is really for PC.

people these days only care of .. "Wow Graphic ftw!#%#@#" ,, i am still playing some old games coop , lan sometimes and all fun, Games these days get boring after a short while , skyrim is exception

GAMEPLAY ftw (to me)

I wouldnt say a waste of

I wouldnt say a waste of time, the main reason they still use the source engine is it's incredibly stable. This makes it so dated computers can still run the game(s) fine (valve knows this from the hardware serveys). But thats not to say it doesnt need a good update. But for there next engine I wouldnt be expecting Crysis like visuals.

And why the hell not, When

And why the hell not, When the Source Engine came out it was well ahead of any other engine on the market feature wise and visually and yet ran very well even on dated machines not because it was designed with older pc's in mind or because they held back but because they spent the time to iron things out and make a rock solid engine with great graphics and features.
Valve have been pioneering new and untested techniques and have been driving the industry forward with each release, Crysis 1 was visually stunning but needed a beast of a PC to run when it came out but now most mid range computers could run it just fine and with a Company like Valve they could easily make something that looks better than Crysis but runs well due to better engine design, lets face it the CryEngine was a poorly optimised engine which is somthing the team admited many times so why couldnt a company like valve blow them out of the water.
Crysis 2 isnt special either, no reason that Half Life 3 couldnt match it or surpass it Visualy due to how similar the games are in construction, being so linea and all.
People seem to forget just how Impressive the Half Life games were at there release, there was nothing that even came close to them and I suspect we will see the same thing with Half Life 3.

sears is not the place to buy 3d cards

dont know in which shitty country you lived but when half life 2 came out I was playing with a shitty geforce4 mx 440 without any lag on a p4.
This engine was taking advantage of the cpu and this is why it ran so great on most machine.
7 years later this engine still powers tons of games (vindictus,portal2 etc..) so it shows how good Valve really is and how impressive their next engine might be.

Lol Doom 3 was a buggy arse

Lol Doom 3 was a buggy arse piece of crap that was poorly optismised and poorly supported, you cant even compare the two.
Source Engine was well ahead in ever way and is still used to this day, can you say that about the Tech 4 Engine no you cant.
Keep in mind Doom 3 and Half Life 2 were released only 2 months apart.
Half Life 2 looked better, played better, was better supported, perfomed better, had better features, it was hands down better in every way.
Doom 3 just looked like melted plastic.

I agree with what that other

I agree with what that other Guy said, Doom 3 did look like plastic and played like shit, I think you might be the fanboy here using something like awards to base your argument which by the way is odd seeing as Half Life 2 not only won more awards but is considered by many of these critics that give out these awards to be the best FPS if not best Game ever made, critics are a poor judge in my experince though, everyone has a differnt opinion of whats good after all. I think you missed his point, what the guy before seems to be saying is that Source has been pushing the industry which I agree with, there were no real physics in games till Half Life 2 for example, they definately took FPS up another notch just like they did with Half Life 1 as well.
Personaly Half Life 2 looked better than Doom 3 but who cares they both took that extra step in graphic quality its the whole package that counts, doom 3 was lacking in to many areas for it to influence people as much as HL2 did, Half Life 2 is like he said a Hands Down winner out of the two games and you can sook an bitch and use excuses like Raging Fanboy ect you might even think that of me but it just proves you are unwilling to look at the bigger picture and have a serious discussion. Trying to belittle someone with insults is pathetic and shows how insecure you are about you argument.

Everything here is a matter

Everything here is a matter of opinion, and mine was I believe that valve wouldnt take a huge step from source to there next, they should, and I hope im proved wrong. This isnt really a proper disscussion cause the subject changes every reply, if they are even from the same person lol. Im aware that graphics arnt every thing, but doom had taken an extra step in visuals(not by much) do remember I wasnt comparing the engines on a whole, just the visuals at the time. Its quite clear that source is a far more advanced engine (even witout considering its still being used today), I still belive its the best engine to date!

Doom 3 was a great dark game

Doom 3 was a great dark game in terms of visuals, and thats what "id" is known for if you look at all the games they've made up to the game "Rage" they got a darker gritter look in there games then most. Doom 3's engine was great for what it was completely different then Valve's. But i do love Valve's source engine more, it changed everything, and the way it played not just for half life but CS:S man it was a game changer and visually outstanding across the board, the environment the water it just looked stunning when it came out. Even to this day i still go back and play CS:S and still believe it looks amazing to the point where CS:Go looks like crap. I wasn't too impressed by valve's take on there new CS game. Will see what they have in store when Half life 3 or HL Epsidoe 3 comes out. Here's to hoping its a new Engine, because lets face it, source is really old, and for being 7 years old, we need a new engine to dethrone source and actually use the hardware we have today.

Add new comment