Talk:Source 2

Feedback
Feel free to give me feedback on this page so I can improve on it. Picaxe01 11:18, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Picaxe01 - What a pointless exercise creating another page, when Source (game engine) has plenty of room for this WP:STUB. Reference 1 and 4 don't even mention the subject.--Vaypertrail (talk) 20:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Those sources cite the claims listed, they don't necessarily have to mention Source 2 directly. ~ Dissident93  ( talk ) 20:30, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe there is enough potential content for this to be a stand-alone article, but it does need to be expanded greatly. This article seems rather rudimentary. D ARTH B OTTO talk•cont 22:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that valve themselves haven't actually announced Source 2 for CS:GO, or commented on the slide. The only evidence for this is a slide from an event held by the chinese distributor, not the developer, so should certainly be taken with a pinch of salt. In any case, I wouldn't feel that there were enough evidence for an imminent port, until valve announced it. 86.178.201.167 (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm starting to be inclined to simply remove it until Valve officially speak on it again. A part of what Valve said in that presentation has already been released; that being the free-to-play Chinese region release. If no news regarding it is announced by the end of the year, we should just remove it. ~ Dissident93  ( talk ) 23:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

???
Since when this article got brought back from deletion. There isn't any more information on the game engine and its availability. Picaxe01talk

Update: Literally answered my question second later as of writing this. The latest version of Source was released with it's the newest title and I will find more info eventually. I would want to know why this article through? Just let me know. https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/354549/Valve_releasing_Source_2_tools_alongside_HalfLife_Alyx_next_March.php Picaxe01talk —Preceding undated comment added 00:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Listing scripting languages
We should list VScript here since Source 2 uses it and supports Lua, Python, Squirrel and GameMonkey. It's certainly relevant to the article, I do not see why that would be undone? I can list the official Valve wiki which practically says Source 2 uses VScript. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GlorifiedPig (talk • contribs) 09:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , the official Valve wiki (assuming you mean the Valve Developer Community) should not be considered a reliable source as it's user generated. I don't oppose the inclusion of this (outside of the lead) but we need to have more reliable source. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:29, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Sandbox
So this has been somewhat of a recurring issue so I thought we should discuss it. Per MOS:TMSTYLE, is preferred to use normalized English spelling followed by the stylized title as a note. However, since it also allows for the stylized version to be used as the article title in rare cases, the real debate lies here. Would a standalone article use S&box? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 05:07, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We're likely not going to know until the game is released and we have more sources to work from, as to use the TMSTYLE advice "When a name is almost never written except in a particular stylized form, use that form on Wikipedia.". There's simply not enough data points to know that sources are sticking to "S&box", so for the time being, it should be kept at "Sandbox" and then once released, we can review the case. --M asem  (t) 16:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Release of first Source 2 tools to the public
The page states that the first public beta of Source 2 tools was with the Half-Life: Alyx Workshop tools. The first time the public got their hands on Source 2 tools such as Hammer, the Model Editor, the Material and Particle Editors, S2FM, Panorama, Lua VScripts and a few others. The relase was June 17, 2015 on the patch that enabled the Reborn beta. Respektor (talk) 18:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Those tools were only meant to make assets for Dota 2 and is already mentioned in the article. However I reworded the part about Alyx since it was the same thing. There hasn't been a Source 2 SDK released so far that is not tied to a specific game. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:46, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Re: Aperture Desk Job & Flip Flop Edits
I was reviewing the article source history and noticed something like 11 flip flop edits over my addition of Aperture Desk Job to the games list. Some dude got blamed for my mistake of citing the Steam Store page and there seems to be confusion over if the game even uses Source 2. Levi_OP and Ferret both removed edits that added ADJ to the list because "theres no citation for it using Source 2", then Levi_OP re-added it saying the article in 27 cites ADJ as using Source 2, even though the article only mentions it off-handedly and doesn't cite anything there either. ADJ isn't listed on the Valve Developer Community wiki as using Source 2, so that can't be cited as a source even though it's likely just out of date because if you look in the game files it incudes Source 2 assets that you can load and view in VRF. How this is supposed to be cited as actually using Source 2? Ctaetcsh (talk) 18:31, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


 * pinging @Ferret as they are mentioned
 * Without a reliable source, nothing should be added to wikipedia. Until the article confirms that it being made in source 2 is the case, it shouldn't be added to the list. Once the adj article got a source saying that it was made in source 2, I added it to the list. It's obvious the the game is made in source 2, but I didn't want to add it. The source, even if off-handedly mentioning it, was an excuse to say that a reliable source had mentioned it. Also, the valve wiki is just that, a wiki, so it can't be sourced either. Anyone could go to the valve dev wiki and add it there themselves and it wouldn't be counted as a source. I also don't think that just because you can go in the game files and see for yourself that something is made in a certain engine it should be able to be cited. Seems like a WP:ORIGINAL type of thing.
 * I'm pretty sure that the article saying that it was made in source 2 is good enough, as it just confirms what is already known. I've never been in a situation like this before so I don't know if this should have been done another way. If so, let me know. Thanks, ― Levi_OPTalk 18:41, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

CSGO Source 2
In light of the frenzy about CS:GO going to source 2 and recent edits on this article mentioning the same, I just want to remind everyone of WP:RUMOUR: "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation, rumors, or presumptions. Wikipedia does not predict the future." It is inappropriate to add information about this subject until there is definitive information from a reputable source on the topic. 9yz (talk) 01:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)


 * So, we should remove CSGO as it's not officially announced by Valve cuz this predicts future and misleading many people. #𝕾𝖆𝖋𝖚𝖆𝖓</b>(𝖙𝖆𝖑𝖐) 11:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)