

(They’ve already stated they won’t do Portal: VR because of the nausea issue.)
I completely agree with your analysis, they would need to completely switch up the ambitions from a writing perspective for Portal 3 to make any sense. There are plenty of super interesting stories to be told in Aperture Labs, but I don’t think that Valve is structured to write any of them
Valve has always been “gameplay/tech first, story second”, and it just happened that Portal 2 delivered unexpectedly well on the writing. But I don’t think they can make a game with gameplay/tech twice as ambitious as Portal 2, and at the same time double down on Portal 2’s amazing writing. They’re just human and most of the people involved have moved on with their lives; in fact Portal 2 was their last truly ambitious narrative-heavy game, and they had to hire the old writers as consultants to make Alyx (which I haven’t played but from what I heard the narrative wasn’t on HL2’s level).
I’d love to be proved wrong but IMO there won’t be a Portal 3 for as long as Valve exists in its current form.
What do you mean what was the plan?
This is the new CEO, spinning into “stripping Intel off for parts” mode.
The previous CEOs (Brian Krzanich, Bob Swan, and Pat Gelsinger) meanwhile made more money than you or I will ever make on maximizing short-term profits by refusing to invest into competitive levels of R&D.
That has always been the plan. If you want to figure out why Intel paid 3 CEOs millions to shoot itself in the foot, then one has to start investigating the board of directors since 2013-ish. They’re either inside traders, incompetent, or both.
Intel, Boeing, and the Big Three are emblematic of the ultimate decline of American capitalism post-2008. They inherited empires and had virtually unlimited state welfare and still fucked it up because halfway decent corporate governance is apparently a bigger challenge for these big companies than building airplanes the size of buildings or mass-printing circuits with sub-micrometer resolution.