Valve has dashed reports that a PS3 version of its co-op zombie shooter Left 4 Dead is being handled by EA.
A company spokesperson told CVG, "There's no PS3 version currently in production." So there you are then.
Valve is currently developing the Xbox 360 and PC versions of the exciting-looking shooter in house - just as it did with The Orange Box - while the PS3 has been left out in the cold.
The developer has a bit of history with Sony's console; Valve boss Gabe Newell even famously called the PS3 "a waste of everybody's time".
Marketing man Doug Lombardi told us earlier this year, "We're not PS3 developers - we're doing PC and 360 like with Orange Box. EA came to us and said 'Wow, Orange Box was an incredible project, can we do a PS3 version?'
"Left 4 Dead doesn't have that guaranteed appeal yet - it's a new IP," Lombardi explained. "If you mention a new Half-Life, people want to make as many versions of it as possible. If Left 4 Dead is big, then we may see a PS3 version later, or if and when we do a sequel, people may be more interested in that."
If you're a PS3 owner you might have to get yourself a half-decent PC for Left 4 Dead then, which is looking fantastic by the way.
If I had Xbox Live I would be very excited about this game.
On topic: PS3 owners should not worry. Valve said, if Left 4 Dead is big(which it will be, because it's like a more fun version of Counter- Strike) they will make a PS3 version.
Im really looking forward to Left 4 Dead, the only problem I can see for the game is it gets released same day as Gears2, which may be an issue to folks that wouldnt normally buy 2 games on the same day.
If it sells though and I think it will then no doubt a PS3 version would follow but I dont think PS3 owners would want an EA port of the game going by past records.
If I had Xbox Live I would be very excited about this game.
It does look pretty good, but only as a multiplayer game. This will be something I may pick up next year during the quiet period as I can't see it faring too well against GOW2 and RFOM2 for online play this side of xmas.
Could that be in the same context as the 'No PS3 Bioshock in production'?
Funny how one minute its "no PS3 version in production" to "if Left 4 Dead is big, we may see a PS3 version later".
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Although personally, I've seen nothing of this game to put it on my 'wanted' list, so couldn't care less whether it comes to PS3 or not..
what is valves problem anyway? 0_0 omg thats it! fanboy developers! Even worse than normal fanboys! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Valves problem is that they are stuck in the development past and are too stubborn or lazy to learn new technology. They will only get left behind by more diverse and talented developers if they don't buck up.
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Just buy a 360, they cost next to nowt these days, then you can feel smug all over.
Valves problem is that they are stuck in the development past and are too stubborn or lazy to learn new technology. They will only get left behind by more diverse and talented developers if they don't buck up.
Ha! You make me laugh. Name one developer that is more diverse and more talented?
Funny how one minute its "no PS3 version in production" to "if Left 4 Dead is big, we may see a PS3 version later".
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Although personally, I've seen nothing of this game to put it on my 'wanted' list, so couldn't care less whether it comes to PS3 or not..
I believe the idea is that if L4D is good, some 3rd party publisher, like EA, will want to pick it up and convert to PS3. Like they did with the Orange box. Nothing to do with Valve. They're sticking to PC and 360. Because 360 is much closer to PC in its architecture, and Valve is primarily a *PC* developer. Shock, horror.
Now why do people always want to average everything out?! What is it about being drawn into the middle ground like some sort of greay mass of unoriginality? What is this equality bullpoo that has so much appeal?! In my opinion, the more exclusives, the better. And that doesn't extend to games. If a cricketer is talented, there is no, absolutely no reason why he should be made to play other sport is there?!
So I say make games for individual platforms. Make them personal and make them exclusive.
what is valves problem anyway? 0_0 omg thats it! fanboy developers! Even worse than normal fanboys! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
If Valve are anything, they're PC Fanboys. (sorry I nearly wrote fanyboys! )
Yea well thats true, but why the hate on the PS3? calling it a "waste of time" and saying "we're not a PS3 developer"? where's the love, man?
Alot of those PS3 quotes are very much recycled "Old News".
That's not the point.... I just cant see why they would want to lessen the intake of the game by shunting Sony. Im personaly not over fussed by L4D, but i think alot of people are, i hope for their sake i ports over ok if they port it at all! anyway....bring on farcry2, fallout3, pop, LBP, mercs2 and sh5!!!! ^_^
The game's going to be awesome, Valve are one of the few dev's that you know are going to release something special every time.
As for a PS3 version being developed subject to it performing well at retail on the PC & 360...if Valve don't see the PS3 as a viable development platform this generation, that means that any conversions will most likely end up being sloppy ports, so probably best to give it a miss anyway.
I know I shouldnt but where is Lord Von PS3 or whatever his name is?
Work again is going so slow (if I keep complaining, I may have to look for a new job) and I reckon sitting back and watching this descend into farce could be quite fun.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on. Easier to push on to the next episode of Half-life 2 or an entirely new IP.
Personally, I quite like the idea that not all developers feel the need for EVEN MORE CASH than they already have.
Left4dead looks tops by the way - anyone with XboxLive should invest immediately!
Valves problem is that they are stuck in the development past and are too stubborn or lazy to learn new technology. They will only get left behind by more diverse and talented developers if they don't buck up.
Ha! You make me laugh. Name one developer that is more diverse and more talented?
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
Too many developers are running scared from taking risks, the 360 version is probably a result of it being so similar to the PC to develop for that there isn't much extra effort required, whereas they may see the PS3 version as not being worth the effort for that small boost in overall sales.
It could do alright on the PS3, there are plenty of other shooters selling well or being hyped up by the fanboy masses, one more shouldn't make that much of a difference.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
I disagree.
It's not completely stupid from a business point because develping for the PS3 is going to need a lot more staff(who need to be paid), plus Valve have said that they take their time when hiring people and only choose the most talented.
And why would they waste their time trying to figure out how to develop for the PS3 when they have games to deliver to nearly 20 million Xbox owners and god knows how many PC users.
Valve are simply quite satisfied with what they've got.
WOW Valve really dont like the PS3, it is quite refreshing to hear a developer being honest & getting off the fence.
Left 4 dead is gonna be awesome on LIVE with a few mates really looking forward to this 1. no doubt some other developers will make a port for the PS3 at some point, but it seems Valve would rather floss their ball bags with razor wire than code for the PS3...
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
Nintendo - diverse? Sorry, what platforms does Nintendo develop for? Is it Wii? And....
In terms of ingenuity, yes I give them a 10/10, although the only successful item so far is the Wii. Look at virtual boy for example...
Sadly, unlike Valve, Infinity Ward need the money, hence the "develop everywhere we can" approach.
And why bother with "the challenge" as you have mentioned? Why not just concentrate on producing better games for the easier, more suitable platform?
It's like saying "Why don't the make a car out of cheese. That'll be challenging..." Well, no. Don't.
I wonder if it's to do with those early supports that the PS3 was hard to develop for and that Sony weren't interested in assisting developers/potential developers.
After panicking about the number of exclusives Xbox was getting, or ports that were being made from PS3 --> Xbox, all this has changed now, apparently. However, I wonder if certain developers, like Valve, have held a grudge. I'm pretty sure i've heard of this kind of thing in the past...
While it's on PC I don't care about console versions. Especially when it comes to FPS genre, the PC is "the way it's meant to be played" anyway.
But saying that developing for PS3 is a waste of time is stupid or just ignorant. Maybe they just don't have the manpower and/or know-how and/or are just lazy so they have to make such silly excuses. If I remember correctly, some developers were complaining about the same things with PS2. Well, looking on PS2 now, they must feel stupid heh. It's like some people never learn.
Left4Dead looks interesting and I know I'll be getting the PC version anyway.
This is an old story rehashed and retold. What Valve actually said at the time was they didn't have a big enough development team to cover all formats (only 150 employees or something). The PS3 version of Left 4 Dead will be ported by a 3rd party. You can bet with EA behind it you will even see a version of Left 4 Dead on the Wii. There's nothing new here. CVG need to employ some real journalists rather than have some prat sitting copying stories from other sites.
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
Nintendo - diverse? Sorry, what platforms does Nintendo develop for? Is it Wii? And....
In terms of ingenuity, yes I give them a 10/10, although the only successful item so far is the Wii. Look at virtual boy for example...
Sadly, unlike Valve, Infinity Ward need the money, hence the "develop everywhere we can" approach.
And why bother with "the challenge" as you have mentioned? Why not just concentrate on producing better games for the easier, more suitable platform?
It's like saying "Why don't the make a car out of cheese. That'll be challenging..." Well, no. Don't.
Only succesful item is the Wii?????? and you highlight their one blip in an otherwise incredibly successful line up of systems????
While it's on PC I don't care about console versions. Especially when it comes to FPS genre, the PC is "the way it's meant to be played" anyway.
But saying that developing for PS3 is a waste of time is stupid or just ignorant. Maybe they just don't have the manpower and/or know-how and/or are just lazy so they have to make such silly excuses. If I remember correctly, some developers were complaining about the same things with PS2. Well, looking on PS2 now, they must feel stupid heh. It's like some people never learn.
Left4Dead looks interesting and I know I'll be getting the PC version anyway.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
I disagree.
It's not completely stupid from a business point because develping for the PS3 is going to need a lot more staff(who need to be paid), plus Valve have said that they take their time when hiring people and only choose the most talented.
And why would they waste their time trying to figure out how to develop for the PS3 when they have games to deliver to nearly 20 million Xbox owners and god knows how many PC users.
Believe it or not, the PS3 also has an install base of quite a few million. I'm sure they'd welcome Valve games to their platform with open arms and cash in hand - meaning a profit for valve - as long as they aren't as bad as the Orange Box port (from what I'm heard anyway).
And it IS stupid from a business perspective. Who wouldn't want to expend their popularity/audience?
Valve are simply quite satisfied with what they've got.
Well that's only a bad thing. They'll have to expand their audience at some point thanks to rising dev costs.
what is valves problem anyway? 0_0 omg thats it! fanboy developers! Even worse than normal fanboys! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Valves problem is that they are stuck in the development past and are too stubborn or lazy to learn new technology. They will only get left behind by more diverse and talented developers if they don't buck up.
you reckon? Valve dont concentrate on technology but rather on good games. i dont see another dev who is as talented and consistent as Valve on any platform. valve have been around for over 10 years now and you reckon they will get left behind when games like killzone 2 and resistance 2 are not pushing anything better than what half life 2 did 4 years ago except better graphics?
This is an old story rehashed and retold. What Valve actually said at the time was they didn't have a big enough development team to cover all formats (only 150 employees or something).
That'd make sense why they don't develop for PS3, but still, saying such silly things of hatred just to save their face is childish at best. If they can't afford to develop it on PS3 that's fine, but they should be mature enough to keep such hate out of it and not use it like excuse...
you reckon? Valve dont concentrate on technology but rather on good games. i dont see another dev who is as talented and consistent as Valve on any platform.
Believe it or not, the PS3 also has an install base of quite a few million. I'm sure they'd welcome Valve games to their platform with open arms and cash in hand - meaning a profit for valve - as long as they aren't as bad as the Orange Box port (from what I'm heard anyway).
And it IS stupid from a business perspective. Who wouldn't want to expend their popularity/audience?
Valve are simply quite satisfied with what they've got.
Well that's only a bad thing. They'll have to expand their audience at some point thanks to rising dev costs.
Yeah I agree with that, especially with EA about to step in and take them over.
I played Orange box on the PS3 and Xbox360 and didn't see a lot of difference between them. Sadly the PC version of Half Life 2 blows them both away.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
I don't know if that necessarily follows? From a sheer technical point of view, a coder might want to take on the challenge of PS3 development, but for a games developer, they might well look at Left4dead on PC and 360 and think "we've made a great game here, do we really need to code it all over again just to get a slightly under par clone (judging by Orange Box) on another console?"
The quality game experience is surely the true challenge for Valve, not the technical aspects of getting a particular machine to run their game. I understand what you're saying, but I don't think I emphathise with that view. That's not to say that I'm not in favour of everyone getting to enjoy a quality game - just playing devil's advocate really (the life blood of forums!)
And another thing to consider is that the PS3 base is growing quite quickly now and it seems to have found a decent stride compared to last year in sales. Therefor, developers who release games now for the PS3 will only benefit as those numbers rise.
Saying all that though, I don't honestly believe that Valve have a place in Playstation fans hearts. Only PC/360 fans worship them, so it won't be a massive loss in the long run.
Also there's probably a few million people that may disagree with your judgement on the SNES and N64.
Just because I used the word "special" doesn't mean that N64s and SNESs that had names qualify. But they were bog standard consoles. OK, ignoring the portables AND VB, what has Nintendo done that is innovative and not completely bonkers?
P.S.
GB? GBA? DS? Micro GBs?
Again, not really that exciting from the innovation point of view. Game.com did the touch screen way back in '97, by the way.
Also there's probably a few million people that may disagree with your judgement on the SNES and N64.
Just because I used the word "special" doesn't mean that N64s and SNESs that had names qualify. But they were bog standard consoles. OK, ignoring the portables AND VB, what has Nintendo done that is innovative and not completely bonkers?
P.S.
GB? GBA? DS? Micro GBs?
Again, not really that exciting from the innovation point of view. Game.com did the touch screen way back in '97, by the way.
May have been 'bog standard' consoles as you put it but both had an incredible array of innovations over the years SFX chip, silicon graphics in the 16 bit era, rumble paks the list goes on and on...and if you're going to just dismiss portables like that then there's not really any point to anything you're saying.
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
Although I agree, it is really up to how much money the developer thinks they can make, compared to the amount of work gone into it. If the Developers don't like the PS3 in general-they've made a choice. It does sound stupid though. Not that I care, I hated Half Life...on the PS3. So I tried it on a mates 360, and found it wasn't much better-so the developers games don't appeal to me automatically. Portal was the s**t though
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
Although I agree, it is really up to how much money the developer thinks they can make, compared to the amount of work gone into it. If the Developers don't like the PS3 in general-they've made a choice. It does sound stupid though. Not that I care, I hated Half Life...on the PS3. So I tried it on a mates 360, and found it wasn't much better-so the developers games don't appeal to me automatically. Portal was the s**t though
back on topic: If Valve have looked at the PS3 architecture and thought 'I don't like the look of this' then they are well within their rights to say so. If a PS3 port was going to be twice that of a 360 port for example but the sales would work equal on each platform then the PS3 doesn't make anywhere near the financial returns. They might as well create another game for the 360 instead. That's my guess anyway.
I don't believe it's stupid of Valve to reject working on the PS3. Given how much it would cost to put a team together and to learn the tech, that money could be better spent elsewhere. And there's no guarantee that they would be able to make anything of the architecture anyways.
So don't whinge at Valve because you believe they're stupid. Sony are for making the PS3 so hard to program for. Obviously if the majority of the developers complain about it then there's something wrong. Sony could have made it easier but they didn't. Therefore it's their loss.
back on topic: If Valve have looked at the PS3 architecture and thought 'I don't like the look of this' then they are well within their rights to say so. If a PS3 port was going to be twice that of a 360 port for example but the sales would work equal on each platform then the PS3 doesn't make anywhere near the financial returns. They might as well create another game for the 360 instead. That's my guess anyway.
Yes, I could buy this for my 360, but that isn't my argument. And there are far more interesting games coming out for both platforms around that time, so I wouldn't buy it before xmas anyway.
May have been 'bog standard' consoles as you put it but both had an incredible array of innovations over the years SFX chip, silicon graphics in the 16 bit era, rumble paks the list goes on and on...and if you're going to just dismiss portables like that then there's not really any point to anything you're saying.
You mean the rumblepacks that were far superior in the dual shock PS controller, the silicon graphics that megadrive did on a less powerful console??
And the portables, OK - GB was the most successful handheld. Hardly the most exciting with its B&W graphics now....
May have been 'bog standard' consoles as you put it but both had an incredible array of innovations over the years SFX chip, silicon graphics in the 16 bit era, rumble paks the list goes on and on...and if you're going to just dismiss portables like that then there's not really any point to anything you're saying.
You mean the rumblepacks that were far superior in the dual shock PS controller, the silicon graphics that megadrive did on a less powerful console??
And the portables, OK - GB was the most successful handheld. Hardly the most exciting with its B&W graphics now....
But they were innovations at the time..... and the megadrive's SG was just a knee jerk reaction (although Sega were arguably as innovative as Nintendo, just in all the wrong ways).
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
I disagree.
It's not completely stupid from a business point because develping for the PS3 is going to need a lot more staff(who need to be paid), plus Valve have said that they take their time when hiring people and only choose the most talented.
And why would they waste their time trying to figure out how to develop for the PS3 when they have games to deliver to nearly 20 million Xbox owners and god knows how many PC users.
Believe it or not, the PS3 also has an install base of quite a few million. I'm sure they'd welcome Valve games to their platform with open arms and cash in hand - meaning a profit for valve - as long as they aren't as bad as the Orange Box port (from what I'm heard anyway).
And it IS stupid from a business perspective. Who wouldn't want to expend their popularity/audience?
Valve are simply quite satisfied with what they've got.
Well that's only a bad thing. They'll have to expand their audience at some point thanks to rising dev costs.
I like the way this is purely seen as laziness by Valve. How many years now have we heard complaints about Playstation (so the whole brand)being difficult to develop for? There was an article on here a few days ago where a developer had had to hire a specilised PS3 team to get things working... whereas PC & 360 seem to be quite inter-changeable.
It's a shame Valve won't take the risk but why hire a specialised team for an un-proven franchise that "might" bomb when they can simply sit back & wait to see if it's successful & wait for someone else to pick up the port? Yuo think they didn't get cash from EA for the PS3 port of Orange box? Don't think you can argue that is bad business sense... it's just good risk assessment surely?
it seems as though lots of PS3 owners have a lot to say about this as they are missing out.
Mark, do you complain that resistance 2, killzone 2 and MGS4 are only on the PS3?
Valve don't have the resources to do it and believe it or not it takes time to assemble a new team and get it operational. if they divert staff to the PS3 the speed and quality of all games will suffer, don't forget they are doing EP3, portal 2 and continuing TF2 as well.
I think Valve can decide for themselves what they want to do. Chances are a lot of the current install base of PS3 users own either a PC (capable of playing L4D) or an Xbox 360, so they can purchase the game for either one of those platforms. I think it is good business sense.
As for their attitude towards the PS3...it can't be all that bad if the Orange Box did in fact make it to the PS3 catalogue, albeit produced by a 3rd party.
I don't believe it's stupid of Valve to reject working on the PS3. Given how much it would cost to put a team together and to learn the tech, that money could be better spent elsewhere. And there's no guarantee that they would be able to make anything of the architecture anyways.
So don't whinge at Valve because you believe they're stupid. Sony are for making the PS3 so hard to program for. Obviously if the majority of the developers complain about it then there's something wrong. Sony could have made it easier but they didn't. Therefore it's their loss.
Sad but true. Blame Sony, not Valve, for arrogantly dismissing the wishes of developers.
This is an old story rehashed and retold. What Valve actually said at the time was they didn't have a big enough development team to cover all formats (only 150 employees or something). The PS3 version of Left 4 Dead will be ported by a 3rd party. You can bet with EA behind it you will even see a version of Left 4 Dead on the Wii. There's nothing new here. CVG need to employ some real journalists rather than have some prat sitting copying stories from other sites.
Yeah i thought something was strange, im not getting at cvg but they do seem to post what they want, especially as theres a little tiny bit in this months Official Playstation Magazine thats says EA will be porting the game to ps3 an doing the development in-house, anyway ill probably be getting it for my 360 but that will be ages away, Little Big Planet, Gears Of War 2 an Resistence 2 interest me more than Left For Dead
Could that be in the same context as the 'No PS3 Bioshock in production'?
Funny how one minute its "no PS3 version in production" to "if Left 4 Dead is big, we may see a PS3 version later".
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Although personally, I've seen nothing of this game to put it on my 'wanted' list, so couldn't care less whether it comes to PS3 or not..
Not really. There are plenty of great PC titles that arent successful when broung to consoles. I guess that is Valve's worry.
So don't whinge at Valve because you believe they're stupid. Sony are for making the PS3 so hard to program for. Obviously if the majority of the developers complain about it then there's something wrong. Sony could have made it easier but they didn't. Therefore it's their loss.
I agree with you there's no point whinging at Valve but there's really no point taking a dig at Sony either.
Developing for all platforms doesn't seem to be a problem for Square. They've invested time and money so they could release titles on all platforms and you could argue that they have significantly more costs than Valve. I think part of the problem here is America like Britain just doesn't have enough talented programmers or engineers.
it seems as though lots of PS3 owners have a lot to say about this as they are missing out.
Mark, do you complain that resistance 2, killzone 2 and MGS4 are only on the PS3?
Valve don't have the resources to do it and believe it or not it takes time to assemble a new team and get it operational. if they divert staff to the PS3 the speed and quality of all games will suffer, don't forget they are doing EP3, portal 2 and continuing TF2 as well.
No I wouldn't complain about those PS3 games that you mentioned because they have been PS3 exclusives for years, in the same way that Gears and Halo have been for the xbox. However, I do believe that LBP would do remarkably well on the 360 and cross-platform would only add more to the users experience, if it was possible.
Valves problem is that they are stuck in the development past and are too stubborn or lazy to learn new technology. They will only get left behind by more diverse and talented developers if they don't buck up.
Ha! You make me laugh. Name one developer that is more diverse and more talented?
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
Valve make awesome FPS games nothing else. That's not diversity. They are talented though.
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
Nintendo - diverse? Sorry, what platforms does Nintendo develop for? Is it Wii? And....
In terms of ingenuity, yes I give them a 10/10, although the only successful item so far is the Wii. Look at virtual boy for example...
Sadly, unlike Valve, Infinity Ward need the money, hence the "develop everywhere we can" approach.
And why bother with "the challenge" as you have mentioned? Why not just concentrate on producing better games for the easier, more suitable platform?
It's like saying "Why don't the make a car out of cheese. That'll be challenging..." Well, no. Don't.
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As for valve, they should stick to what there good at and if ps3 owners wanna play it get a decent pc or buy the console that has more top draw exclusive games than the ps3 will ever have.
By the same rationale, is Kojima just a lazy scrote for not bothering to make a 360 version of MGS4? After all, they'd make more money...
There is no-one holding a gun to Valve's collective head saying they *must* develop for the PS3. If they don't want to, and can afford not to, then it's up to them.
By the same rationale, is Kojima just a lazy scrote for not bothering to make a 360 version of MGS4? After all, they'd make more money...
There is no-one holding a gun to Valve's collective head saying they *must* develop for the PS3. If they don't want to, and can afford not to, then it's up to them.
I can't see Left4Dead selling close to 3 million copies though.
it seems as though lots of PS3 owners have a lot to say about this as they are missing out.
Mark, do you complain that resistance 2, killzone 2 and MGS4 are only on the PS3?
Valve don't have the resources to do it and believe it or not it takes time to assemble a new team and get it operational. if they divert staff to the PS3 the speed and quality of all games will suffer, don't forget they are doing EP3, portal 2 and continuing TF2 as well.
No I wouldn't complain about those PS3 games that you mentioned because they have been PS3 exclusives for years, in the same way that Gears and Halo have been for the xbox. However, I do believe that LBP would do remarkably well on the 360 and cross-platform would only add more to the users experience, if it was possible.
good answer, but i put this to you - are valve lazy because they don't develop for the mac as they develop for the PC?
its kind of a futile argument as they obviously want to do what they are comfortable with. it might be worth noting that the guys that founded and still run valve are ex-Microsoft employees!!!
i like your avatar but not the joke by the way, i expect my dad will tell me that one when i see him next!
Edit: half life sold around 8 million and hl2 sold 4 million by june 2006 so if left for dead is good i can see it selling a hell of a lot of copies.
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
Nintendo - diverse? Sorry, what platforms does Nintendo develop for? Is it Wii? And....
In terms of ingenuity, yes I give them a 10/10, although the only successful item so far is the Wii. Look at virtual boy for example...
Sadly, unlike Valve, Infinity Ward need the money, hence the "develop everywhere we can" approach.
And why bother with "the challenge" as you have mentioned? Why not just concentrate on producing better games for the easier, more suitable platform?
It's like saying "Why don't the make a car out of cheese. That'll be challenging..." Well, no. Don't.
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As for valve, they should stick to what there good at and if ps3 owners wanna play it get a decent pc or buy the console that has more top draw exclusive games than the ps3 will ever have.
dude nes didnt introduce the d-pad it was the intellivision console released in 1980(sorry being picky)
it seems as though lots of PS3 owners have a lot to say about this as they are missing out.
Mark, do you complain that resistance 2, killzone 2 and MGS4 are only on the PS3?
Valve don't have the resources to do it and believe it or not it takes time to assemble a new team and get it operational. if they divert staff to the PS3 the speed and quality of all games will suffer, don't forget they are doing EP3, portal 2 and continuing TF2 as well.
No I wouldn't complain about those PS3 games that you mentioned because they have been PS3 exclusives for years, in the same way that Gears and Halo have been for the xbox. However, I do believe that LBP would do remarkably well on the 360 and cross-platform would only add more to the users experience, if it was possible.
good answer, but i put this to you - are valve lazy because they don't develop for the mac as they develop for the PC?
its kind of a futile argument as they obviously want to do what they are comfortable with. it might be worth noting that the guys that founded and still run valve are ex-Microsoft employees!!!
i like your avatar but not the joke by the way, i expect my dad will tell me that one when i see him next!
Edit: half life sold around 8 million and hl2 sold 4 million by june 2006 so if left for dead is good i can see it selling a hell of a lot of copies.
It could simply be that Valve are loyal to Microsoft and are purposefully dissing the PS3. However, if EA buy Valve then they are going to have to get used to the idea of multi-platform development.
The Halflife games are brilliant and deserve the sales that they achieved. Unfortunately, Left4Dead is in a different ballpark altogether. It doesn't have the strong story, or characters like HL; it is just a simple multiplayer coop shooter at the end of the day, with a few interesting additions like the random waves of enemies, but it has all been done before. And at the same time RFOM2 comes out with 8-player coop.
I believe Left4dead would have fared better earlier in the year.
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As was mentioned earlier Nintendo did not invent the D-Pad. The N64 Trigger came out at the same time as the Playstation and the PS trigger format are widely acknowledged as better. Same for vibrate function. I mentioned it earlier. But thanks for showing what an imbecile you are.
Analogue Stick was first released by Atari. In the very early 80s. And if you mean consoles as we know them, then Sony released an analogue controller a full year before Nintendo. And again, kinda did it better.
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As was mentioned earlier Nintendo did not invent the D-Pad. The N64 Trigger came out at the same time as the Playstation and the PS trigger format are widely acknowledged as better. Same for vibrate function. I mentioned it earlier. But thanks for showing what an imbecile you are.
Analogue Stick was first released by Atari. In the very early 80s. And if you mean consoles as we know them, then Sony released an analogue controller a full year before Nintendo. And again, kinda did it better.
Valves problem is that they are stuck in the development past and are too stubborn or lazy to learn new technology. They will only get left behind by more diverse and talented developers if they don't buck up.
^The absolute truith. They appear to be just a bunch of old-school PC developers who are un-interested newer systems. They are stuck in their litle PC-comfort-zone and are scared to learn new things.
^The absolute truith. They appear to be just a bunch of old-school PC developers who are un-interested newer systems. They are stuck in their litle PC-comfort-zone and are scared to learn new things.
I guess the whole point is that even if what you say is true, who cares?!
If they continue making such quality games as TF2, Portal and HLs, why are we arguing? Stop being bitter and enjoy your own exlusives PS3 users. I'm all for exlusivity!
If they continue making such quality games as TF2, Portal and HLs, why are we arguing? Stop being bitter and enjoy your own exlusives PS3 users. I'm all for exlusivity!
I'm not really bothered about whether they make games for the PS3 because the best thing about being a PS3 owner is that you can just buy all the best 360 games for your PC. And they look better
As for valve, they should stick to what there good at and if ps3 owners wanna play it get a decent pc or buy the console that has more top draw exclusive games than the ps3 will ever have.
You do realize, that PC is not a console right? Otherwise, I have no idea what console you are talking about. PS2 perhaps?
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As was mentioned earlier Nintendo did not invent the D-Pad. The N64 Trigger came out at the same time as the Playstation and the PS trigger format are widely acknowledged as better. Same for vibrate function. I mentioned it earlier. But thanks for showing what an imbecile you are.
Analogue Stick was first released by Atari. In the very early 80s. And if you mean consoles as we know them, then Sony released an analogue controller a full year before Nintendo. And again, kinda did it better.
So yes, wow. Do some research, fanboy.
I'm sorry, what was this analogue controller that sony released before Nintendo?
Certainly when the PSX came out, it had no analogue sticks - then when the N64 controller came out and was used for 3D gaming and was a hit, Sony stuck two analogue sticks onto their controller (stuck them on badly) - which i believe was first used for Ape Escape.
Then the N64 rumble pak was a success, sony again copied and created the dual shock.
also what are these trigger buttons you talk of on the PSX controllers? If you mean R2 and L2, well, they aren't triggers are they, they are shoulder buttons which Nintendo invented too.
The N64 z-button trigger was entirely different than anything sony came up with.
I'm happy to be proved wrong, but I think, shlobadov, that you have been on the wodkas.
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As was mentioned earlier Nintendo did not invent the D-Pad. The N64 Trigger came out at the same time as the Playstation and the PS trigger format are widely acknowledged as better. Same for vibrate function. I mentioned it earlier. But thanks for showing what an imbecile you are.
Analogue Stick was first released by Atari. In the very early 80s. And if you mean consoles as we know them, then Sony released an analogue controller a full year before Nintendo. And again, kinda did it better.
So yes, wow. Do some research, fanboy.
Actually the first d-pad as we know it (a cross) was on the game and watch, that other console (which my bro had) was more like a circle type thing.(but admittedly a d-pad none the less) As for the rumble pad, well that launch early 97 with starfox (lylat wars) and sony copied (sound familiar) and released it at the end of the same year….and the trigger buttons again The ps pad had shoulder buttons (first seen o the snes), no trigger, the analogue stick by Atari?? I think your getting that confused with a joystick (arcade stick) And finally for the record I aint no fanboy….I haven’t owned a Nintendo console since the gamecube came out (and promptly sold) got a ps1+2 on release (had my ps1 imported0 and recently bought a ps3 just to play the awesome MGS4
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As was mentioned earlier Nintendo did not invent the D-Pad. The N64 Trigger came out at the same time as the Playstation and the PS trigger format are widely acknowledged as better. Same for vibrate function. I mentioned it earlier. But thanks for showing what an imbecile you are.
Analogue Stick was first released by Atari. In the very early 80s. And if you mean consoles as we know them, then Sony released an analogue controller a full year before Nintendo. And again, kinda did it better.
So yes, wow. Do some research, fanboy.
I'm sorry, what was this analogue controller that sony released before Nintendo?
Certainly when the PSX came out, it had no analogue sticks - then when the N64 controller came out and was used for 3D gaming and was a hit, Sony stuck two analogue sticks onto their controller (stuck them on badly) - which i believe was first used for Ape Escape.
Then the N64 rumble pak was a success, sony again copied and created the dual shock.
also what are these trigger buttons you talk of on the PSX controllers? If you mean R2 and L2, well, they aren't triggers are they, they are shoulder buttons which Nintendo invented too.
The N64 z-button trigger was entirely different than anything sony came up with.
I'm happy to be proved wrong, but I think, shlobadov, that you have been on the wodkas.
lol i just wrote pretty much the same thing. most likley some daft kind trying to google everything and getting it all mixed up by the looks of it....
As for valve, they should stick to what there good at and if ps3 owners wanna play it get a decent pc or buy the console that has more top draw exclusive games than the ps3 will ever have.
You do realize, that PC is not a console right? Otherwise, I have no idea what console you are talking about. PS2 perhaps?
correct me if im wrong but the game is coming out on the 360, which is why i said buy a decent pc or get a 360!
So they're denying themselves further income and success merely because of their favour towards the PC and 360. Not good financially.
True - but if developing for PS3 is a tough job (which seems to be the common verdict) and you already have all the financial clout you'll ever need (AKA - HALF LIFE) then coding Left4dead for PS3 is a job you don't have to take on.
The fact is that it's pure laziness. A developer should want to take on a challenge of coding for a platform that they don't normally. It's just pure laziness and from a business perspective totally stupid.
no - you dont know that
they can easily do a ps3 version later if it sells
ps3 makes life 200% harder for developer according to john carmack and if anyone he should find it easier than most
I still dont get how Naughty Dog can develop Uncharted, one of the most beautiful looking games ever made, withought HDD installs or loading times. Yet, every other developer struggles. Are ND holding some kind of secret they they aren't telling the other developers?
What a retard……have a look at today’s gaming world….most of the features Nintendo created. Analogue stick…..N64, Rumble pads….N64, trigger buttons……N64, D-pad……NES……need I go on, and that’s just hardware side of it. Christ Nintendo pretty much invented video games as we know them……
As was mentioned earlier Nintendo did not invent the D-Pad. The N64 Trigger came out at the same time as the Playstation and the PS trigger format are widely acknowledged as better. Same for vibrate function. I mentioned it earlier. But thanks for showing what an imbecile you are.
Analogue Stick was first released by Atari. In the very early 80s. And if you mean consoles as we know them, then Sony released an analogue controller a full year before Nintendo. And again, kinda did it better.
So yes, wow. Do some research, fanboy.
I'm sorry, what was this analogue controller that sony released before Nintendo?
Certainly when the PSX came out, it had no analogue sticks -...
lol i just wrote pretty much the same thing. most likley some daft kind trying to google everything and getting it all mixed up by the looks of it....
Yea, I was about to make the same comment - and I had intended to pull the game and watch fact out the bag but left it out too. damn it.
Anyway, i would agree, i think shlobadov is just some kid on his school holidays, armed with wikipedia and a console knowledge that goes no further back than the ps2 and xbox.
I love the irony that he is the one calling people an imbecile.
Shlobadov - judging by posts like that mate and you'll fail your GCSEs... or keystage 3 exams or whatever you happen to be taking. imagine what your mum will say!
The Halflife games are brilliant and deserve the sales that they achieved. Unfortunately, Left4Dead is in a different ballpark altogether. It doesn't have the strong story, or characters like HL; it is just a simple multiplayer coop shooter at the end of the day, with a few interesting additions like the random waves of enemies, but it has all been done before. And at the same time RFOM2 comes out with 8-player coop.
I believe Left4dead would have fared better earlier in the year.
maybe this is why there is no ps3 version yet, perhaps they dont have the confidence in something unproven to put extra resource into a ps3 version that might bomb. if they produce a great game on the 360 and PC they can then port a little later and everyone is happy.
i cant help but feel cvg is prompting angry comments by ps3 owners by bringing up quotes from people that were made moths or even years ago. Valve dont really support the ps3 a great deal but a lot of the negative comments towards it were quite a while ago and opinions might have change somewhat.
Actually the first d-pad as we know it (a cross) was on the game and watch, that other console (which my bro had) was more like a circle type thing.(but admittedly a d-pad none the less) As for the rumble pad, well that launch early 97 with starfox (lylat wars) and sony copied (sound familiar) and released it at the end of the same year….and the trigger buttons again The ps pad had shoulder buttons (first seen o the snes), no trigger, the analogue stick by Atari?? I think your getting that confused with a joystick (arcade stick) And finally for the record I aint no fanboy….I haven’t owned a Nintendo console since the gamecube came out (and promptly sold) got a ps1+2 on release (had my ps1 imported0 and recently bought a ps3 just to play the awesome MGS4
My bad with the shoulder buttons. I thought you meant those.
The D-pad was first released by Intellicom in 1980. Before NES. The first ANALOGUE STICK was indeed a joystick. No, not a digital joystick, but a real, ANALOGUE one. It was released by Atari and used a type of variable resistor to achieve the desired effect. We can even fast forward to the 90s when Sony FIRST released The FlightStick controller, which again included analogue controls. Also, both Nintendo AND Sega released analogue controllers virtually at the same time (I've actually decided to google that to make sure).
lol i just wrote pretty much the same thing. most likley some daft kind trying to google everything and getting it all mixed up by the looks of it....
Come on, this is coming from someone who starts sentences with "lol"?! Maybe you should google stuff yourself.
Yea, I was about to make the same comment - and I had intended to pull the game and watch fact out the bag but left it out too. damn it.
Anyway, i would agree, i think shlobadov is just some kid on his school holidays, armed with wikipedia and a console knowledge that goes no further back than the ps2 and xbox.
I love the irony that he is the one calling people an imbecile.
Shlobadov - judging by posts like that mate and you'll fail your GCSEs... or keystage 3 exams or whatever you happen to be taking. imagine what your mum will say!
Ha. Getting personal? Perhaps your gaming experience goes further back than mine, but that's not hard. My first console was a NES and there were games-a-plenty before 1989. You're right. So, like I said before, your turn.
The Halflife games are brilliant and deserve the sales that they achieved. Unfortunately, Left4Dead is in a different ballpark altogether. It doesn't have the strong story, or characters like HL; it is just a simple multiplayer coop shooter at the end of the day, with a few interesting additions like the random waves of enemies, but it has all been done before. And at the same time RFOM2 comes out with 8-player coop.
I believe Left4dead would have fared better earlier in the year.
maybe this is why there is no ps3 version yet, perhaps they dont have the confidence in something unproven to put extra resource into a ps3 version that might bomb. if they produce a great game on the 360 and PC they can then port a little later and everyone is happy.
i cant help but feel cvg is prompting angry comments by ps3 owners by bringing up quotes from people that were made moths or even years ago. Valve dont really support the ps3 a great deal but a lot of the negative comments towards it were quite a while ago and opinions might have change somewhat.
Yep, journalism is the bane of society. It is up to us to seperate the wheat from the chaff. I've actually come away from this discussion with a slightly different outlook, thanks to those, like yourself, who offer good arguments.
I suppose keeping an open mind is important nowadays.
Ha. Getting personal? Perhaps your gaming experience goes further back than mine, but that's not hard. My first console was a NES and there were games-a-plenty before 1989. You're right. So, like I said before, your turn.
Ok, so you found Wikipedia. Good work. If you mean the Nights controller for the Saturn - well that was released after the N64 controller. It doesn't matter how soon after - it was released after it.
Also - if you can't tell the difference between the Sony FlightStick controller and the analogue thumbstick on the N64, then, well, as we've already discussed, you may have to retake year 11.
And yes, it does stretch back further than yours - not by much though, but 87 with my C64. Which puzzles me that you got so much wrong - particularly with claims about a whole lot of mid-90's
However, you were right about the d-pad - though i didn't make any claims about that.
I see what you mean, but I guess it's a matter of perception. I don't see a lot of difference between a large analogue stick and a small one. If you make a small car, you're not being innovative. You've just reinvented, albeit a slightly smaller, wheel.
Now, the Wii controller, that's different.
I am referring to the Nights controller. And I don't think you can claim Nintendo invented the analogue stick as it takes kinda longer than a week to design and build one...
I did find the Wiki page. Helped to make it too.
What did I get wrong about the 90s? Apart from the shoulder buttons. Got very confused there... It's hard juggling work and arguments, you see.
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Just buy a 360, they cost next to nowt these days, then you can feel smug all over.
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Just buy a 360, they cost next to nowt these days, then you can feel smug all over.
Actually the first d-pad as we know it (a cross) was on the game and watch, that other console (which my bro had) was more like a circle type thing.(but admittedly a d-pad none the less) As for the rumble pad, well that launch early 97 with starfox (lylat wars) and sony copied (sound familiar) and released it at the end of the same year….and the trigger buttons again The ps pad had shoulder buttons (first seen o the snes), no trigger, the analogue stick by Atari?? I think your getting that confused with a joystick (arcade stick) And finally for the record I aint no fanboy….I haven’t owned a Nintendo console since the gamecube came out (and promptly sold) got a ps1+2 on release (had my ps1 imported0 and recently bought a ps3 just to play the awesome MGS4
My bad with the shoulder buttons. I thought you meant those.
The D-pad was first released by Intellicom in 1980. Before NES. The first ANALOGUE STICK was indeed a joystick. No, not a digital joystick, but a real, ANALOGUE one. It was released by Atari and used a type of variable resistor to achieve the desired effect. We can even fast forward to the 90s when Sony FIRST released The FlightStick controller, which again included analogue controls. Also, both Nintendo AND Sega released analogue controllers virtually at the same time (I've actually decided to google that to make sure).
lol i just wrote pretty much the same thing. most likley some daft kind trying to google everything and getting it all mixed up by the looks of it....
Come on, this is coming from someone who starts sentences with "lol"?! Maybe you should google stuff yourself.
Yea, I was about to make the same comment - and I had intended to pull the game and watch fact out the bag but left it out too. damn it.
Anyway, i would agree, i think shlobadov is just some kid on his school holidays, armed with wikipedia and a console knowledge that goes no further back than the ps2 and xbox.
I love the irony that he is the one calling people an imbecile.
Shlobadov - judging by posts like that mate and you'll fail your GCSEs... or keystage 3 exams or whatever you happen to be taking. imagine what your mum will say!
Ha. Getting personal? Perhaps your gaming experience goes further back than mine, but that's not hard. My first console was a NES and there were games-a-plenty before 1989. You're right. So, like I said before, your turn.
The whole point of this was at the dude that basically stated Nintendo have had one good idea.....and as i have proved most of the best ideas came from Nintendo.
As i said Nintendo brought us the d-pad as we use today (the cross) with the game and watch, Nintendo brought us the analogue stick with the n64 (this is something we move with our thumbs, not grasp with our whole hand i.e. flight sticks etc) as well as the rumble (came out before the ps version) and the trigger with the n64. Points being that Nintendo have made the biggest lasting contributions to the gaming industry than any other company
i understand what you are saying dude but most of it is of the mark and clearly stuff your just pulling from wiki etc.
I see what you mean, but I guess it's a matter of perception. I don't see a lot of difference between a large analogue stick and a small one. If you make a small car, you're not being innovative. You've just reinvented, albeit a slightly smaller, wheel.
Now, the Wii controller, that's different.
I am referring to the Nights controller. And I don't think you can claim Nintendo invented the analogue stick as it takes kinda longer than a week to design and build one...
I did find the Wiki page. Helped to make it too.
What did I get wrong about the 90s? Apart from the shoulder buttons. Got very confused there... It's hard juggling work and arguments, you see.
Juggling homework and arguments - tricky indeed! And I wouldn't call it an argument - more discussion, or debate.
Personally I think N64 analogue stick - created for the N64 - Pretty much every single game utilised it. Nights controller - created as soon as Sega found out what Nintendo had in the works - utilised 1 or 2 games. N64 controller - launched before Nights controller. I think Nintendo have a fair shout on that.
Personally I think the analogy is a pretty bad one with regards to your car sizes. A car, whether it is large or small is driven in the same way. The joystiq is held in your fist, the analogue thumbstick with one thumb - and is also a whole lot more precise. The layout being completely different. Different fingers free for different buttons.
Oh and rumble paks, triggers/shoulder pads.
I will admit I am also beginning to lose track with this. Not least because you quoted me and another poster in the same post - I can assure you I don't use 'lol'.
"Dude"! You can't claim that Nintendo invented the d-pad, just because it's a cross! How can you even begin to believe that? Many-a-gamepad don't use the "cross". Analogy: The first guy to paint a car green didn't invent the frigging car even though there are many green cars today!
Also, (I admit I got confused with the trigger issue) but again, it is just A BUTTON THAT ONE PRESSES WITH ONE'S MIDDLE FINGER. So whether it is on the shoulder of the controller or underneath it, it does not matter in the least.
I mean following your logic one can say that Nintendo invented the controller.
Also, my original point was that Nintendo did make original stuff, but poorly implemented it. And the "thumbstick" (which is just a small joystick, so is basicaly the same thing) is a great example (and was also released by Sega at almost identical time, hence NOT copied from N). It was so badly protected from dust etc. that it was one of the most unreliable aspects of N64.
The presence of zombies, in combination with co-op gameplay should have me bouncing off the walls like an 8-year old after too many bags of Haribo, but unfortunately my excitement is somewhat tempered by my (admittedly limited) experiences with regards to some of the lovely folk on Live...
Perhaps the "co-operate or die" nature of the gameplay will drive out the idiots...
Ok, I see, you view it as more car/motorcycle analogy... Also you interpretation of my "work" made me chuckle slightly.
Like I say, I don't believe that having a week release advantage can be claimed for a "first". Well it can literally, but then that's ridiculous.
It's all a matter of personal taste and/or perception, to be honest. I think, and that was my original, and hopefully final point, that N had great ideas most of which were very poorly implemented. Until the Wii came out.
"Dude"! You can't claim that Nintendo invented the d-pad, just because it's a cross! How can you even begin to believe that? Many-a-gamepad don't use the "cross". Analogy: The first guy to paint a car green didn't invent the frigging car even though there are many green cars today!
Also, (I admit I got confused with the trigger issue) but again, it is just A BUTTON THAT ONE PRESSES WITH ONE'S MIDDLE FINGER. So whether it is on the shoulder of the controller or underneath it, it does not matter in the least.
I mean following your logic one can say that Nintendo invented the controller.
Also, my original point was that Nintendo did make original stuff, but poorly implemented it. And the "thumbstick" (which is just a small joystick, so is basicaly the same thing) is a great example (and was also released by Sega at almost identical time, hence NOT copied from N). It was so badly protected from dust etc. that it was one of the most unreliable aspects of N64.
Seriously, stop with the car analogies - they're terrible.
Regardless of whether or not you liked the N64 analogue thumbstick, it was released before the Nights controller.
You don't know what you're arguing here - you've gone from arguing whether x feature came first or not, to whether you like the thing. And you're arguing with too many people now anyway - you're ignoring a decent response in favour of a weak response from someone else.
Anyway, I don't know why I'm even f*cking bothering - I don't even like Nintendo any more. It just made me laugh when you appear to be crediting Sega and Sony with Nintendo 'inventions'.
Yay, the old "What did Nintendo actually invent" debate.
Okay...
The cross-shaped D-Pad was invented by Milton Bradley, who beat Nintendo to market by a year.
I had a 3-button controller with an Analogue Thumbstick in 1983, so Nintendo can't claim that, either. They were the first to take that feature from the home computer and apply it to a home console, although as Shlobadov mentioned above Sony did actually get there first with analogue sticks. (Only theirs was a lot bigger, should the distinction be important.)
Before the Wii, I wouldn't count Nintendo as a major hardware innovator. They got where they were through a combination of good timing, canny business sense, a brilliant knack for cherry-picking and refining the best of existing technology, and some of the greatest damn games you could buy at the time.
Even the Gameboy wasn't the first ever handheld with interchangeable games, but it was so damn refined compared to what came before, it felt like the freshest, newest thing ever when it hit.
Back on topic, it's pretty much a no-brainer that Left 4 Dead is going to get ported to the PS3 at some point in the future, and that PS3 owners world wide will flock to videogame-related forums worldwide and tell everybody how unbearably happy they are about it, despite the of moanings from a couple of people here who suddenly decided they didn't want it after being told they weren't going to get it.
You could get handheld joysticks for the Amiga with trigger buttons underneath, in pretty much the same place the N64's was, only the little stick on top was a digital one.
I still dont get how Naughty Dog can develop Uncharted, one of the most beautiful looking games ever made, withought HDD installs or loading times. Yet, every other developer struggles. Are ND holding some kind of secret they they aren't telling the other developers?
I don't really understand the big deal many people make about Uncharted. I didn't buy it but I have played through a lot of it with a mate. The background graphics are fairly decent but up close it really is nothing special. Character details and animations are pretty awful imo, this coupled with the very poor combat and it feels like such an arcade game. Maybe it's the setting and opportunity to be a dashing(lol?) explorer.
Also there's probably a few million people that may disagree with your judgement on the SNES and N64.
Just because I used the word "special" doesn't mean that N64s and SNESs that had names qualify. But they were bog standard consoles. OK, ignoring the portables AND VB, what has Nintendo done that is innovative and not completely bonkers?
P.S.
GB? GBA? DS? Micro GBs?
Again, not really that exciting from the innovation point of view. Game.com did the touch screen way back in '97, by the way.
Yep, and the 360 is truly innovative isnt it? A machine that has a high chance of overheating and dying coming off the production line and doesn't function as a good dvd player because it sounds like a jet taking off?
Nintendo have always been the most innovative developer/manufacturer around FACT
Yep, and the 360 is truly innovative isnt it? A machine that has a high chance of overheating and dying coming off the production line and doesn't function as a good dvd player because it sounds like a jet taking off?
You forgot that it makes you put on weight and turns you into an obnoxious American teenager
Nintendo have most definitely made the largest contribution to the industry hardware wise by innovating or refining existing technology and making it popular. Then there is the software innovation.
I have to ask why are you lot talking about hardware in an article on Valve, what innovative hardware have they made lately?
As for diversity and innovation in games, Valve make FPS games...nothing more, loads of diversity there! The amount of innovation present in Goldeneye would put all of Valves portfolio to shame.
Bearing in mind that,
Portal is basically a repackaged Narbacular Drop. Team Fortress was originally a mod for Quake. Left 4 Dead was already long into production before Valve bought the developers.
Could that be in the same context as the 'No PS3 Bioshock in production'?
Funny how one minute its "no PS3 version in production" to "if Left 4 Dead is big, we may see a PS3 version later".
So if its complete s**t, PS3 owners will be missing nothing, if its successful and one is confirmed later, it will be one 360 exclusive less to feel smug about.
Although personally, I've seen nothing of this game to put it on my 'wanted' list, so couldn't care less whether it comes to PS3 or not..
Um....yeah if you had a brain you would understand that 'no PS3 version in production' means exactly that...if the game is a sucess they will make a 360-PS3 port.
Yes PS3 owners are missing out...this game could be quite special and is made by a developer with a platinum games record. At least 360 owners have a number of decent exclusive titles to be 'smug' about.
I still dont get how Naughty Dog can develop Uncharted, one of the most beautiful looking games ever made, withought HDD installs or loading times. Yet, every other developer struggles. Are ND holding some kind of secret they they aren't telling the other developers?
I don't really understand the big deal many people make about Uncharted. I didn't buy it but I have played through a lot of it with a mate. The background graphics are fairly decent but up close it really is nothing special. Character details and animations are pretty awful imo, this coupled with the very poor combat and it feels like such an arcade game. Maybe it's the setting and opportunity to be a dashing(lol?) explorer.
Just being pernickety as usual chaps.
For anybody else, Uncharted is the opposite of everything you've just said. I've played games for over 20 years and I have not seen many games with such brilliant animation and character as Uncharted. It is almost the 3d equivalent of the first POP. I'm not saying that it is a perfect game, far from it, but any problems with the game do not involve bad animation and (which in my opinion is better than Gears because of the many different animations that happen depending on where you shoot the enemies) combat.
Yep, and the 360 is truly innovative isnt it? A machine that has a high chance of overheating and dying coming off the production line and doesn't function as a good dvd player because it sounds like a jet taking off?
You forgot that it makes you put on weight and turns you into an obnoxious American teenager
My, you sound like you must own about 12 360's then!
Just want to quash this jet taking off thing fanboys keep talking about. The 360 is fairly noisy, I'll give you that, not that you hear it when you're actually playing games unless you've muted the telly. In which case you're probably a numb skull anyway.
And when playing DVD's it's nigh on silent. Suggest you actually try using one before the crazy statements buddy!
Aaaanyway, like most people here, I reckon it'll be released on PS3 eventually. For better or worse is anyones guess.
Thank you for support SunScramble. A voice of PCZ reason at last. If only you were there earlier I wouldn't have needed to fight off so many underresearched....people.
By the same rationale, is Kojima just a lazy scrote for not bothering to make a 360 version of MGS4? After all, they'd make more money...
There is no-one holding a gun to Valve's collective head saying they *must* develop for the PS3. If they don't want to, and can afford not to, then it's up to them.
I can't really see how Valve 'not bothering' to learn how to code on the PS3 is suddenly 'lazy'.
Like other people have said, it all boils down to whether it makes good business sense and whether the outlay required makes it worthwhile in profit.
How many times have you been abroad? Did you learn the language of that country before you went there? No, because it just isn't worth it. It's exactly the same in these circumstances for Valve.
The big difference is they can outsource the conversion (just like they did with the Orange Box) and let someone else do the donkey work whilst reaping in the cash.
Are they also 'lazy' for not porting to DS? especially as there are millions of them in homes? I think the answers above boil down to the usual fanboys.....some people have sour grapes because they won't get exposure to the game....it's no different for other exclusive games on other systems - are PS3 developers lazy too for not porting to PC/360 when there is money to be made.
Mark else mentioned that Half-Life is a well-known IP therefore 'Left for Dead' won't make any decent money in comparison.....!! On release, Half-Life wasn't previewed or hyped but it got everyone bubbling because it was simply a great game. Sales went through the roof due to word of mouth and critics hailed the game design, AI, graphics and sound, there is nothing to say that Left for Dead won't be a great game and will deservedly sell millions either.
As for 'starvinbull' claiming that MGS4 is not possible on the 360, you'll have to expand on that, if only to make everyone laugh. The fact that each scene could be on it's own disk and would require no mandatory install and no pre-scene install makes it a better option than the PS3 in my opinion....and many times faster to play.
Just want to quash this jet taking off thing fanboys keep talking about. The 360 is fairly noisy, I'll give you that, not that you hear it when you're actually playing games unless you've muted the telly. In which case you're probably a numb skull anyway.
And when playing DVD's it's nigh on silent. Suggest you actually try using one before the crazy statements buddy!
I have an Xbox360 and you couldn't watch a DVD on it. You can ignore the noise when you're playing a game but not if you try to watch a DVD. If you had some manners and bit of intelligence you might be able to admit the Xbox360 isn't just the perfect piece of kit you think it is.
As for 'starvinbull' claiming that MGS4 is not possible on the 360, you'll have to expand on that, if only to make everyone laugh. The fact that each scene could be on it's own disk and would require no mandatory install and no pre-scene install makes it a better option than the PS3 in my opinion....and many times faster to play.
I agree the MGS4 is possible on the Xbox360 but don't get what you mean when you say it would be many times faster?
No install times would make the game run faster? I don't think it would work putting episodes on each disc. What if you went back over a level again? Multi disk games for the Xbox would be a lot easier if Microsoft eased off on the rule than all games have to be able to run without a hard drive.
I have not really enjoyed this thread. I think there are valid points for most sides of the situation. Everything went completely off track.
My perspective on the actual article is that EA have known for a long time about Valve's project. They are well aware of the pedegree of the developer. Surely like with most EA ventures they could have farmed this out as soon as possible, to a capable PS3 studio. This seems to be how it happens with most titles. What is it that overcomplicates that process where Valve are concerned? I have yet to invest in a console this generation. There seems to be a political motive behind this. Now the PS3 is out of the door...what point is there left to make?
Maybe I have this slightly wrong and it is EA. But considering their corporate aspirations. It seems unlikely. They know they are going to release games that sell less.
As for valve, they should stick to what there good at and if ps3 owners wanna play it get a decent pc or buy the console that has more top draw exclusive games than the ps3 will ever have.
You do realize, that PC is not a console right? Otherwise, I have no idea what console you are talking about. PS2 perhaps?
correct me if im wrong but the game is coming out on the 360, which is why i said buy a decent pc or get a 360!
And since when has 360 SO Many great exclusives please? Especially when so many 360 exclusives are ported to pc. You want most exlucives? Get a PC.
Btw L4D is coming to PC and 360, with PC as the main platform (it's Valve we're talking about)
I sold my ps3 for an elite last week and, while i don't notice the noise of the drive when watching dvds (seems fairly silent to me), the noise made by the thing when i'm playing halo 3 is offensive. to the point where, if I didn't know better, i'd suggest it was broken.
Not only that, but when i played through halo 3's first 3 levels, first time I stuck the disk in it was damn noisy. but a day later when i loaded up the savepoint in the 4th level, it was just as loud but with an added annoying, grating sound. not sure if that's ok, so turned it off then turned it on its side. haven't tried it again yet, but hoping that has sorted it...
I sold my ps3 for an elite last week and, while i don't notice the noise of the drive when watching dvds (seems fairly silent to me), the noise made by the thing when i'm playing halo 3 is offensive. to the point where, if I didn't know better, i'd suggest it was broken.
Not only that, but when i played through halo 3's first 3 levels, first time I stuck the disk in it was damn noisy. but a day later when i loaded up the savepoint in the 4th level, it was just as loud but with an added annoying, grating sound. not sure if that's ok, so turned it off then turned it on its side. haven't tried it again yet, but hoping that has sorted it...
Yeah, I just px/ed my PS3 for an Elite too - the reason being that my flatmate's about to buy a 40gb PS3 and is going to put it in the lounge. I expected the Elite to be much quieter than the 3 Premiums I previously owned but it sounds like a bloody Concorde. However, the two of my friends that have them have run them for over a year with no probs and one of them is always leaving his on for hours at a time.
So... From this page of the thread we can conclude that some people think the 360 is noisier when playing DVDs and some people think it noisier when playing games. SO the conclusion is:
My 360's louder between the hours of 2pm and 7pm, on an average day. It does rise again slightly between midnight and 1am.
I've also noticed that the changing phases of the moon can have an effect of the total decibels output by the machine, although I've yet to identify any actual pattern as to which ones effect the X360 the worst.
It's definitely much louder playing games. I think the point being made was that it's very noticeable when watching a DVD due to the lack of peripheral noise.
while i don't notice the noise of the drive when watching dvds (seems fairly silent to me),
<>
I have an Xbox360 and you couldn't watch a DVD on it. You can ignore the noise when you're playing a game but not if you try to watch a DVD
I would like to add that I think that 360s respond well to certain Zodiac signs; not so well to others.
My friend Pisces, for example, had all matter of problems with it (including noise issues on the 3rd Tuesday of every second month), where as Virgos tend to reflect their alligmnet well upon the 360s Jupiter phase.
Um, nobody seems to have considered the rudimentary fact that 360's tend to get louder as they gradually work their way towards the RROD. That would explain the discrepancies in volume.
Also, the first guy may be trying to watch a dvd in a quieter environment than the latter and common sense would dictate that it would be more noticeable. So there, the mystery is explained for all you dummies.
Um, nobody seems to have considered the rudimentary fact that 360's tend to get louder as they gradually work their way towards the RROD. That would explain the discrepancies in volume.
Also, the first guy may be trying to watch a dvd in a quieter environment than the latter and common sense would dictate that it would be more noticeable. So there, the mystery is explained for all you dummies.
Nintendo. Amongst many others. Infinity Ward are living proof of talented developers who can work on many platforms. Valve just look amateur in comparison.
Nintendo - diverse? Sorry, what platforms does Nintendo develop for? Is it Wii? And....
In terms of ingenuity, yes I give them a 10/10, although the only successful item so far is the Wii. Look at virtual boy for example...
Sadly, unlike Valve, Infinity Ward need the money, hence the "develop everywhere we can" approach.
And why bother with "the challenge" as you have mentioned? Why not just concentrate on producing better games for the easier, more suitable platform?
It's like saying "Why don't the make a car out of cheese. That'll be challenging..." Well, no. Don't.
i shall start, with an insult...prat! It's blatantly obvious the 'suitable' camp you reside. In all fairness i would love to goto town with regards to the majority of your posts, but i refrain.Mainly due to the fact of feeding underbridge dwelling creatures, is not on my 'what to do' list.
and yes, i do realise that that was contradictory..but hey
How many times have you been abroad? Did you learn the language of that country before you went there? No, because it just isn't worth it. It's exactly the same in these circumstances for Valve.
er...when i go to a 'foreign' country, i at least like to learn pleasantries, such as ..hello, goodbye, thank you, yes, no, please, can i?, could you? judging from your previous posts, you are EXACTLY why most counties in the EU and abroad (i.e anywhere else in the world) really don't like the Brits (and Americans)... there's a box over there on the floor, how about you try and take your thought processes out if it?? :roll
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
)
