We've all read that Valve doesn't like PS3, or refuses to work with it, or prefers 360 and PC. At a recent London-based event for Left 4 Dead 2, Valve's spokesman Doug Lombardi further explained the reasons why the developer shuns Sony's platform.
And of course you're still snubbing PS3 on the Left 4 Dead front. Surely this has to come down to your preference as a company now, rather than any sort of technical limitation?
"I think I'd use a little bit of the same answers. We look at it as if we were customers of this product, how would we want to be treated and what sort of product would we want out of it?
"We've run a couple of experiments over the years of PlayStation in general; we did Half-Life on PS2 with an outside company and then we did Orange Box PS3 with an outside company. We weren't able to deliver the same type of product on PS3 and PS2 for that matter that we were on the 360 and PC.
"If you look at it as a matter of Valve doing it, Valve did the 360 and the PC version of the Orange Box and they both go 96 on Metacritic - The PS3 version was nowhere close to that. Left 4 Dead got a 89 or a 90 on 360 and PC.
"We're really, really proud of the fact that whatever platform you play the game on you're getting the same experience, you're getting the same Metacritic score. And with Left 4 Dead, you're getting the same DLC with the survival pack and some of the stuff that we have coming.
"Until we have the ability to get a PS3 team together, until we find the people who want to come to Valve or who are at Valve who want to work on that, I don't really see us moving to that platform.
"We've kind of learned a lesson in that again, if we were customers of that product on PlayStation, we'd feel like we sort of got the stepchild version of the product while the guys on the PC and the 360 got the sweet version of it."
Full interview coming as soon as Andy's fingers cool down.
Not enough consoles out there to justify the effort and money required to develop for a pain in the ar$e system.
I don't blame Valve in the slightest and it's PS3 owners that are losing out in the longrun, unless they settle for inferior ports or have a PC to play Valve's superb games on.
Why would they make more profit everyone knows that with every single multiformat game the PS3 version sells less then the 360. Just look at the charts every week and you will see
So they refuse to work for ps3, but they take the metacritic score into consideration for the orange box on ps3 when it wasnt even developed by them?
If they worked on it instead of EA and made the changes they'd wanted, it would have done better. Personally, I thought the control scheme sucked for the orange box, which was a shame, and i wanted valve to work on it.
Another letdown from the most annoying games company ever.
Amusingly enough, I have a gaming PC, one that far exceeds the performance of my PS3. And still, to this day, I have zero interest in Valve games. I've even been offered free downloads from my father via Steam. Still, couldn't care less. Keep the garbage off the PS3, I say.
Why would they make more profit everyone knows that with every single multiformat game the PS3 version sells less then the 360. Just look at the charts every week and you will see
Every single multiformat game sells less on the PS3 than the 360 does it?
I've got HL1 and HL2 and must admit I didnt finish either got too repetetive so what can I say Valve? .... stay where you are trash up pc and xbox with your crappy over hyped games they need such games more than the ps3.
Here is how I see it. You buy a car from Sony along with a few million other people around the world. It's a great car with plenty of bells and whistles and reliable as hell. The odd thing is that it has square wheels and tires. So when it comes time to buy tires you take it to the tire shop. The old boy says "I don't have the right machine to remove and mount those tires" You fly off the handle and blame him because he does not want to invest the money and time for training into a machine that changes tires on a car that only a few million people own WORLDWIDE. So don't blame the tire guy blame Sony for trying to reinvent the wheel....Am I drunk?
I've got HL1 and HL2 and must admit I didnt finish either got too repetetive so what can I say Valve? .... stay where you are trash up pc and xbox with your crappy over hyped games they need such games more than the ps3.
Why would they make more profit everyone knows that with every single multiformat game the PS3 version sells less then the 360. Just look at the charts every week and you will see
ok say the ps3 version sells a couple hundred thousand or so in a month. looking at l4d the dev costs surely cant be that much, they'd be making a profit right off the bat. a cool few million is still a profit is it not?
valve just cant code for the PS3 and dont want to invest in a team that can do so. if they would just say this they would get a lot more respect from people but they cannot acknowledge their inability on the platform and this kind of p**ses me off. or are they saying its almost impossible to make a stable game on the PS3?
good gameplay. but valve simply arent the best coders out there.
their games, the graphics always have basic feel to them. for instance, wheels or curved objects will always be pentagon-like, more so than other developers. and they stick to tired old engines.
they cant develop on nothing but the pc, the 360 being basically a pc at heart.
and they have the cheek to say THEY worked on OB with an outside team. no you whored it out because you couldnt do the job yourselves - no wonder OB feels like a step child, you put it up for adoption just because it was a difficult child!
cant believe they are using that as an excuse, it basically reads 'were not talented enough'
look at what criteron does with BP on ps3. technically amazing. as a team, im sure they worked around any problems. thats what technical teams do.
they could get skilled ps3 developers in an instant - put a f**king ad in the vacancies. they are acting like spoiled brats!!
on top of that valve games are nowhere near the most technical games out there. and they still cant cope?!
I enjoyed Half life and agree that Valve make games of a high quality. However as a PS3 owner with a good choice of other games, I am not concerned if they disregard my format of choice.
They seem to be to lazy to code on a machine which requires a bit of effort, nothing wrong the 360 but it is very similar to a PC so if course not a big challenge to develop for.
As Regards to potential sales, I think Valve may want to look at the charts from the land of the rising sun.
Anyway it is their loss, they'd make more profit if they released PS3 L4D etc too.
Im interested to hear what one of the industries leading figures has to say. So for me, not a slow news day at all.
What this come down to is Valve being an independant Dev & Publisher, they have a team with a remit and at the moment the PS3 does not fit into their plans.
This will change in the future (I think?) but for the time being Valve develop for the PS3 and 360, exclusivley, just like lots of other Devs and its the same with the PS3 and its Devs.
good gameplay. but valve simply arent the best coders out there.
their games, the graphics always have basic feel to them. for instance, wheels or curved objects will always be pentagon-like, more so than other developers. and they stick to tired old engines.
they cant develop on nothing but the pc, the 360 being basically a pc at heart.
and they have the cheek to say THEY worked on OB with an outside team. no you whored it out because you couldnt do the job yourselves - no wonder OB feels like a step child, you put it up for adoption just because it was a difficult child!
cant believe they are using that as an excuse, it basically reads 'were not talented enough'
look at what criteron does with BP on ps3. technically amazing. as a team, im sure they worked around any problems. thats what technical teams do.
they could get skilled ps3 developers in an instant - put a f**king ad in the vacancies. they are acting like spoiled brats!!
on top of that valve games are nowhere near the most technical games out there. and they still cant cope?!
You have basically saved me typing out a rant at Valve there SVD, agree with pretty much all that. Valve blame the PS3 fo there own deficiencies as developers.
I bought The Orange Box, but I could have lived without it. Until Valve gets people who are talented enough or at least not lazy and willing to learn the new coding of the PS3 then they can have their Steam and 360 love for all I care.
good gameplay. but valve simply arent the best coders out there.
their games, the graphics always have basic feel to them. for instance, wheels or curved objects will always be pentagon-like, more so than other developers. and they stick to tired old engines.
they cant develop on nothing but the pc, the 360 being basically a pc at heart.
and they have the cheek to say THEY worked on OB with an outside team. no you whored it out because you couldnt do the job yourselves - no wonder OB feels like a step child, you put it up for adoption just because it was a difficult child!
cant believe they are using that as an excuse, it basically reads 'were not talented enough'
look at what criteron does with BP on ps3. technically amazing. as a team, im sure they worked around any problems. thats what technical teams do.
they could get skilled ps3 developers in an instant - put a f**king ad in the vacancies. they are acting like spoiled brats!!
on top of that valve games are nowhere near the most technical games out there. and they still cant cope?!
You have basically saved me typing out a rant at Valve there SVD, agree with pretty much all that. Valve blame the PS3 fo there own deficiencies as developers.
No, what they're saying in a nutshell is that the PS3 as a viable gaming platform isn't worth the effort required 1st Party, (but if another company wants to take the risk, good luck!)
And judging by Activision's recent press release, this is a growing concern...pontificate as much as you want Sony, but your machine is in deep trouble!
good gameplay. but valve simply arent the best coders out there.
their games, the graphics always have basic feel to them. for instance, wheels or curved objects will always be pentagon-like, more so than other developers. and they stick to tired old engines.
they cant develop on nothing but the pc, the 360 being basically a pc at heart.
and they have the cheek to say THEY worked on OB with an outside team. no you whored it out because you couldnt do the job yourselves - no wonder OB feels like a step child, you put it up for adoption just because it was a difficult child!
cant believe they are using that as an excuse, it basically reads 'were not talented enough'
look at what criteron does with BP on ps3. technically amazing. as a team, im sure they worked around any problems. thats what technical teams do.
they could get skilled ps3 developers in an instant - put a f**king ad in the vacancies. they are acting like spoiled brats!!
on top of that valve games are nowhere near the most technical games out there. and they still cant cope?!
You have basically saved me typing out a rant at Valve there SVD, agree with pretty much all that. Valve blame the PS3 fo there own deficiencies as developers.
No, what they're saying in a nutshell is that the PS3 as a viable gaming platform isn't worth the effort required 1st Party, (but if another company wants to take the risk, good luck!)
And judging by Activision's recent press release, this is a growing concern...pontificate as much as you want Sony, but your machine is in deep trouble!
stop being a fanboy, please.
every developer has made a return, on every ps3 they have made - especially activision!!
so you cant make ps3 games as a carbon copy of pc versions. its a console!
seems they want to run a wizard and have the game program itself.
No, what they're saying in a nutshell is that the PS3 as a viable gaming platform isn't worth the effort required 1st Party, (but if another company wants to take the risk, good luck!)
And judging by Activision's recent press release, this is a growing concern...pontificate as much as you want Sony, but your machine is in deep trouble!
its amazing how people will believe many things without thinking for themselves.
sure man, if they made l4d for the PS3 it will make valve lose a hell of a lot of money and ya sure activision will drop the PS3. i bet you believe the people who say elvis isnt dead too.
good gameplay. but valve simply arent the best coders out there.
their games, the graphics always have basic feel to them. for instance, wheels or curved objects will always be pentagon-like, more so than other developers. and they stick to tired old engines.
they cant develop on nothing but the pc, the 360 being basically a pc at heart.
and they have the cheek to say THEY worked on OB with an outside team. no you whored it out because you couldnt do the job yourselves - no wonder OB feels like a step child, you put it up for adoption just because it was a difficult child!
cant believe they are using that as an excuse, it basically reads 'were not talented enough'
look at what criteron does with BP on ps3. technically amazing. as a team, im sure they worked around any problems. thats what technical teams do.
they could get skilled ps3 developers in an instant - put a f**king ad in the vacancies. they are acting like spoiled brats!!
on top of that valve games are nowhere near the most technical games out there. and they still cant cope?!
You have basically saved me typing out a rant at Valve there SVD, agree with pretty much all that. Valve blame the PS3 fo there own deficiencies as developers.
No, what they're saying in a nutshell is that the PS3 as a viable gaming platform isn't worth the effort required 1st Party, (but if another company wants to take the risk, good luck!)
And judging by Activision's recent press release, this is a growing concern...pontificate as much as you want Sony, but your machine is in deep trouble!
stop being a fanboy, please.
every developer has made a return, on every ps3 they have made - especially activision!!
so you cant make ps3 games as a carbon copy of pc versions. its a console!
seems they want to run a wizard and have the game program itself.
LOL...engage your brain just for a second, just this once anyway!
So, Valve are "purposely" not developing for the PS3 out of spite, and Activision Corp are thinking of ditching development because they're making great profits from the PS3, i think not!...and show me this report of "every developer has made a profit from PS3 releases!", just vapourous s**te and you know it!
No, what they're saying in a nutshell is that the PS3 as a viable gaming platform isn't worth the effort required 1st Party, (but if another company wants to take the risk, good luck!)
And judging by Activision's recent press release, this is a growing concern...pontificate as much as you want Sony, but your machine is in deep trouble!
its amazing how people will believe many things without thinking for themselves.
sure man, if they made l4d for the PS3 it will make valve lose a hell of a lot of money and ya sure activision will drop the PS3. i bet you believe the people who say elvis isnt dead too.
Not sure about Elvis but be careful with that syringe before the gyro arrives! Still your next hit can't be that far away thank f**k!
activision are not thinking of ditching ps3 development at all. if you believe that your a retard. why would they cut their profit margin by millions?! can you explain that?!
f**king lemming, engage MY brain?! do you believe all headlines? thats what it was - a statement trying to get sony to reduce the console price, therefore making activision even MORE profit.
Sounds like a lot of PS3 users have a lot of sour grapes on here because they either get
A) a less than great version of some great games B) do not get those games at all
C) its not valves fault its sony's for releasing a machine so trickt to develop for when devs have an easier & still technically profecient machine to release on.
activision are not thinking of ditching ps3 development at all. if you believe that your a retard. why would they cut their profit margin by millions?! can you explain that?!
f**king lemming, engage MY brain?! do you believe all headlines? thats what it was - a statement trying to get sony to reduce the console price, therefore making activision even MORE profit.
Reducing the consoles price within sony profit margins as they stated they are actually making money on the hardware now would allow sony to sell more machines & the more consoles sold the more they make thus reducing their costs further thus making them more cash in the long run Sony like all companys are in it to make money granted but none take the utter p**s out of the consumer especially in the EU like Sony do.
Here is how I see it. You buy a car from Sony along with a few million other people around the world. It's a great car with plenty of bells and whistles and reliable as hell. The odd thing is that it has square wheels and tires. So when it comes time to buy tires you take it to the tire shop. The old boy says "I don't have the right machine to remove and mount those tires" You fly off the handle and blame him because he does not want to invest the money and time for training into a machine that changes tires on a car that only a few million people own WORLDWIDE. So don't blame the tire guy blame Sony for trying to reinvent the wheel....Am I drunk?
activision are not thinking of ditching ps3 development at all. if you believe that your a retard. why would they cut their profit margin by millions?! can you explain that?!
f**king lemming, it was a statement trying to get sony to reduce the console price, therefore making activision even MORE profit.
Easy foolish one, of course the devs are going to abandon the PS3, why develop and massively overspend on a system that has by far the fewest recipients?
Even for your "pea brain" this makes perfect business sense...think Ninty Gamecube and Sega Dreamcast to see how gamer attitudes change and companies fail!
Ultimately, I don't think PS3 owners will care. I have no time for flash in the pan games like L4D and its cash cow sequel.
To be honest, I think Valve are way overrated. People are just impressed by simple games. Anyone who tries to flame me on this can f*ck off. I'm not easily impressed as most 360 owners out there when it comes to games. Most of the 'big' games I own on the 360 are broken to hell in terms of mechanics and when a good one comes along (SF IV), the dpad by retards ruins the experience. Only Ded Rising and Bioshock are games that have impressed if they haven't bored me to death or require way too much time - Fallout and Oblivion
360 - the cry baby's machine for deluded snooker cues with chips on their shoulders with some sort of belief they're playing the best games around
activision are not thinking of ditching ps3 development at all. if you believe that your a retard. why would they cut their profit margin by millions?! can you explain that?!
f**king lemming, it was a statement trying to get sony to reduce the console price, therefore making activision even MORE profit.
Easy foolish one, of course the devs are going to abandon the PS3, why develop and massively overspend on a system that has by far the fewest recipients?
Ultimately, I don't think PS3 owners will care. I have no time for flash in the pan games like L4D and its cash cow sequel.
To be honest, I think Valve are way overrated. People are just impressed by simple games. Anyone who tries to flame me on this can f*ck off. I'm not easily impressed as most 360 owners out there when it comes to games. Most of the 'big' games I own on the 360 are broken to hell in terms of mechanics and when a good one comes along (SF IV), the dpad by retards ruins the experience. Only Ded Rising and Bioshock are games that have impressed if they haven't bored me to death or require way too much time - Fallout and Oblivion
360 - the cry baby's machine for deluded snooker cues with chips on their shoulders with some sort of belief they're playing the best games around
Your chosen console is going to fail...and you know it!
activision are not thinking of ditching ps3 development at all. if you believe that your a retard. why would they cut their profit margin by millions?! can you explain that?!
f**king lemming, it was a statement trying to get sony to reduce the console price, therefore making activision even MORE profit.
Easy foolish one, of course the devs are going to abandon the PS3, why develop and massively overspend on a system that has by far the fewest recipients?
to make millions of pounds.
the logic of some is like this: if it doesnt sell a gazzillion copies then its a failure coz getting a few million is not good enough. a profit is a profit! its hard to try and explain sometimes.
Valve have never liked the PS3, I remember Gabes comments about it, saying Sony should scrap it and start again. Maybe Sony should have followed his advice.
Its a common theme from developers that PS3 is a time consuming difficult platform. why some people try to wear blinkers and deny it is beyond me.
The fact is that a company like Valve doesnt need Sony or the the PS3 anymore. If it was a decent developers platform then it wouldnt be an issue, but it isnt.
Ultimately, I don't think PS3 owners will care. I have no time for flash in the pan games like L4D and its cash cow sequel.
To be honest, I think Valve are way overrated. People are just impressed by simple games. Anyone who tries to flame me on this can f*ck off. I'm not easily impressed as most 360 owners out there when it comes to games. Most of the 'big' games I own on the 360 are broken to hell in terms of mechanics and when a good one comes along (SF IV), the dpad by retards ruins the experience. Only Ded Rising and Bioshock are games that have impressed if they haven't bored me to death or require way too much time - Fallout and Oblivion
360 - the cry baby's machine for deluded snooker cues with chips on their shoulders with some sort of belief they're playing the best games around
If it is a machine for crybaby's as you put it & you admit to actually owning 1 then that must you also a crybaby by your own logic
L4D2 or The Last Guardian, I know what one I would pick.
I would not pick either as niether of them are out yet & I will bet you that as good as last gaurdian may turn out to be that more people will buy L4D2.
Ico & Collusus were good games & in terms of being artistic are great titles but neithers sales set the world alight did they.
And at the end of the day its not a games art that determines its success its how many copies it shifts
tiny dev houses are proficient in making ps3 games, why cant an established well known developer do the same?
everyone around them is doing it!
last time around their excuse was their arent enough ps3's sold to make a profit. they changed their tune now...
even cvg says "Surely this has to come down to your preference as a company now, rather than any sort of technical limitation?"
even cvg knows the ps3 is capable.
Nobody not even valve have said that the ps3 is not capable its just the amount of time & money they feel they would need to invest in making games for it is not worth the return they would get & seeing as they do very well from pc & 360 to the point that they do not feel the need to even make games for it is very telling.
BTW what are the names of these "tiny dev houses" you mentioned & what games have they brought to the PS3?
Apart from titles funded & published by sony themselves most ps3 games are from big publishers & as such the financial commitments would have been met by them & not the developers making the game for them.
At the end of the day valve are not saying they do not want their games on ps3 just that they do not have the time or inclination to be bothered to do it themselves because the machine is a pain in the bottom for them & a lot of other devs have also said this.
I love the way some of you blindly ignore the content of the article, it's either 360 fanboys saying it is because it won't sell enough and PS3 fanboys stating (from nothing more than assumptions) that Valve are not capable of creating games for the machine. I used to know a guy at Rockstar and I remember him saying that the team that did GTA4 on the PS3 had significantly more difficultly in developing the graphics engine because the hardware is quite mind boggling when compared to the 360.
Now the fact that Valve choose not to develop for PS3 is their choice, you can hardly state they are incapable because they don't find it financially viable to develop and manage a whole team for the platform, this is not 3 guys sitting round a PC and making shapes! God help us should you start up your own company.
I would not pick either as niether of them are out yet & I will bet you that as good as last gaurdian may turn out to be that more people will buy L4D2.
Ico & Collusus were good games & in terms of being artistic are great titles but neithers sales set the world alight did they.
And at the end of the day its not a games art that determines its success its how many copies it shifts
Last Guardian was just an example. I could have used Uncharted 2 etc. All of which will entertain just as much as any game from Valve on the 360. Reading some of the comments on this thread you'd almost think only Valve made good games. The PS3 will do just fine without them.
Sadly I have to agree with Valve, they put across a viable arguement that while the company as a whole have developed from a PC heritage and through xbox360's similarities have only had a minimal learning curve to port with ease. It still boils down to the fact that, in this generation sadly the PS3 didn't quite come out with the bang we were all expecting. Add to the overall cost of buying the console when compared to the dramatically reduced prices of the wii and xbox and the range of exclusives to tempt and increase the market share and you can understand the reason why so many third parties are reluctant to develop.
Personally im not biased, I own a PC, 360, Wii and PS3 but my preferences on titles leave me purchasing 360 and wii titles long before PS3 (PC always has the advantage of a lower price point on new releases)
I'm sure the fan boys will act up on this, but let me put across a viable point of recent history.. we had the same occourances with Sega with the Dreamcast, and Nintendo with the N64 and Gamecube. all slowing of take up due to an lack of understanding as to the consumer needs.
Sony have had a geat decade of profits flowing through via clever marketing and excellent communication with the loyal fan base. Yet this time they have fallen a little? Except the console for what it is, like the psp, a new source for the homebrew community, which maybe next time (like the xbox before it) be a winner in the next gen.
A member of my family works for a major multi platform british developer, working on a game that is due out this year. He said to me the other day that getting the PS3 to do what the 360/PC can do is a major hassle.
He has a PS3 at home, not a 360 but the amount of extra time (and therefore) money required to achieve similar results is very, very obvious. He's a smart guy, but it seems to go against what programmers have been taught.
And come on, the upcoming Sony releases, as amazing as they look, have had the development time that only first party developers can afford and that only Sony seems to allow. To me that says it all - spend three or four years on a title and the PS3 will outdo the 360 no worries, but how practical is that for MP developers?
And personally, I'd take L4D over pretty much any other game this gen, certainly on the 360. Anyway, don't worry PS3 owners, you've got plenty of good stuff heading your way over the next 12 months!
Am i wrong in thinking here that if given the choice people would have both consoles. I was lucky enough to acquire a PS3 for free with my phone contract (phones4u if any one was wondering) and I'm not going to lie i bashed the ps3 before owning one. but now that i do i play it just as much as my 360 and even chose to buy prototype on ps3 over 360. both consoles have their quality's and each has a good set of developers behind them. These flame wars come down to people who get annoyed by the quality's of a rival console that isn't included within there console at the end of the day neither console is going to disapeer like the dreamcast the company's behind them are too big and the user bases of each console are larger than the amount of people buying DVD's and cd's per week. all in all its pointless.
I would not pick either as niether of them are out yet & I will bet you that as good as last gaurdian may turn out to be that more people will buy L4D2.
Ico & Collusus were good games & in terms of being artistic are great titles but neithers sales set the world alight did they.
And at the end of the day its not a games art that determines its success its how many copies it shifts
This is very true, but im not sure how that shows the 360 to be a superior gaming console. Developers are getting lazy because the 360 is just a pc in a box with a controller...it isnt exactly an involved process to port between the two. I doubt people would have said the same back in the megadrive/snes era. Totally different machine hardware, yet many game were released on both. I know the games nowadays are more complex, but thats just part of the industry. Whether its cost efficient is another matter. Again, it has nothing to do with the integrity of the console, which is solely based upon its games.
One would hope that people that understand games better than the layman on the street would appreciate games like Ico etc over homogenous crap like CoD (i understand the draw of the excellent multiplayer, but that is all), but it seems that is not the case.
In the end, if Valve wish to ignore the Ps3, very well..they'll cause some outrage among their fans, give the xbots something to crow about, and the rest of the world will either get it off steam, bootcamp it off steam or, like me, not give a damn. I wanna shoot zombies i play RE5 or Dead Space.
I doubt people would have said the same back in the megadrive/snes era. Totally different machine hardware, yet many game were released on both.
I was thinking the same, but think of the best games in that gen on each console. My top ten for each console are all exclusive (apart from maybe SF2, but that was better on the SNES apart from the lovely MD six button pad!).
I doubt people would have said the same back in the megadrive/snes era. Totally different machine hardware, yet many game were released on both.
I was thinking the same, but think of the best games in that gen on each console. My top ten for each console are all exclusive (apart from maybe SF2, but that was better on the SNES apart from the lovely MD six button pad!).
I don't have a bad thing to say abot Valve asi think they rock hard but it sounds to me they have been bought by Microsoft (Like most companies). They say that they weren't happy about the PS3 Meta score of the orange box cause the XBox version got 96 and the PS3 version "got nowhere near that" at 89. Then they go on to say that they were really happy the L4D got 89 on the Xbox on Metacritic!?!?!!! And they say its NOT a preference? 89 no good on PS3, i'll stop making games on that system...89 On Xbox 360, Yay! lets make babies...
stick to your Guns Valve!. look at what happened to BIoshock on the PS3?. 2.2 million sales on the 360, but 300K on PS3??. is that the kind of investment thats smart for a 3rd party company?. the facts are most 3rd party games don't sell well on PS3, and development time is longer due to the complex nature of Sony's console. meaning any version will take longer and cost more. so why spend more to get less?. I agree with Valve!.
You cant compare those two sales figures. One was released a year earlier during a drought on video games. If they had been released at the same time the numbers would be closer together, though of course due to the larger install base ms would be ahead. Of course a game which is out a year later will not sell as much as it did at the original launch
so many focking ps3 fanboys have posted here. and every single focking one of them has complained how valves games are s**t . well ill tell them HL2 was rated 10/10 EVERYWHERE if it was a focking ps3 exclusives all the ps3 fanboys would go and suck doug lombardis dick and tell everyone how it is the best game ever. But theryre so focking ungrateful for their own exclusives
so many focking ps3 fanboys have posted here. and every single focking one of them has complained how valves games are s**t . well ill tell them HL2 was rated 10/10 EVERYWHERE if it was a focking ps3 exclusives all the ps3 fanboys would go and suck doug lombardis dick and tell everyone how it is the best game ever. But theryre so focking ungrateful for their own exclusives
STFU. HL2 is not the greatest game ever...its a good game if you like that kind of thing, but its far from being the greatest game ever. Grow up and deal with the fact people have opinions of their own, some people dont like FPS's. Just because the press says its 10/10 doesnt mean it is 10/10. re GTA4, or in a more obvious case Gerstmann gate and Kane and Lynch. If you think its the greatest game ever..good for you, but dont expect the world to agree with you, and damn do you have low expectations for the greatest game ever...12hr game with no replay and a mediocre story..niice.
Sony's attitude towards developers (and even their customers) is quite frankly officious.
Had they simply come out and admitted that they put the innards of a turkey into the PS3 then it might be admissable as a poor show by the designers. However, they seem content to make silly facetious claims like "it was so the PS3 wouldn't hit it's potential too early" or some other rubbish like that.
I mean...stating that people will have to work harder to afford the PS3 or whatever it was that old Ken said is utterly ludicrous.
And to think that some people lap it up like warm milk....
lmao While i dont diagree with the difficulty of programming, to say that the innards of a ps3 are a turkey, obviously comparing to the 'far superior' 360 is a joke.
RROD anyone? My ps3 is still fine after 2 years..2 360s in 3 years..not interested in buying another.
Still....You are right in saying that Sony are making a complete mess of it PRwise and certainly consumerwise, at least thats how it seems.
Sony's attitude towards developers (and even their customers) is quite frankly officious.
Had they simply come out and admitted that they put the innards of a turkey into the PS3 then it might be admissable as a poor show by the designers. However, they seem content to make silly facetious claims like "it was so the PS3 wouldn't hit it's potential too early" or some other rubbish like that.
I mean...stating that people will have to work harder to afford the PS3 or whatever it was that old Ken said is utterly ludicrous.
And to think that some people lap it up like warm milk....
ooohhhh its silly isnt it, to think some people bought 360 HD drives only for microsoft to say LOL! downloads are the future you morons, to think some people spent their hard earned cash on a 360 only for it to melt 2 weeks later, and then for there replacement model to explode a month later, to think some people pay microsot £40 a year to use a service that should be free.
How they can call the Wii "a bit pricey" and then stoicly refuse to drop the price of the PS3 is utterly amazing. Especially when their main competitior (which is mullering them by the way!) is actually the same price as a PS2.
Absolute lunacy!
I think my personal fave is Phil Harrison's statement that "The PlayStation 3 is a computer. We do not need the PC."
Which was purportedly followed by his denial of having an arrogant attitude.
I mean...how the feck is the PS3 supposed to replace the medium of the PC when it can't even come close to winning the console race, duh!
good gameplay. but valve simply arent the best coders out there.
their games, the graphics always have basic feel to them. for instance, wheels or curved objects will always be pentagon-like, more so than other developers. and they stick to tired old engines.
they cant develop on nothing but the pc, the 360 being basically a pc at heart.
and they have the cheek to say THEY worked on OB with an outside team. no you whored it out because you couldnt do the job yourselves - no wonder OB feels like a step child, you put it up for adoption just because it was a difficult child!
cant believe they are using that as an excuse, it basically reads 'were not talented enough'
look at what criteron does with BP on ps3. technically amazing. as a team, im sure they worked around any problems. thats what technical teams do.
they could get skilled ps3 developers in an instant - put a f**king ad in the vacancies. they are acting like spoiled brats!!
on top of that valve games are nowhere near the most technical games out there. and they still cant cope?!
i bit short sighted i think, they have excellent coders, they take strategic decisions in their games and tech. how many other companies have come up with an AI director as thye call it? they were one of the first to incorporate HDR lighting, one of the first with proper physics, brought a facial system far in advance of anyhting else at the time in hl2. tech is irrelevant anyhow, LBP is probably the highest rated ps3 game yet its not exactly pushing boundaries grpahically, its what you do with it and valve in my opinion are the best.
dont forget that valve are still an independent company, how many of those are left? they dont have the resource (number of people) to produce games over 3 formats without dropping some other work. as the man says, if they find people internally that want to do it and can recruit outsiders with ps3 experience then it could happen. the fact that they still make plenty of profit without the ps3 means they dont need the ps3 to survive, in fact, how do we know the added cost of working on the ps3 will be less than the revenue gained? i dont think anyone can be certain of that.
I had respect for Valve once. I used to think they were a very talented studio and the best PC developer there is.
However, I have no respect for them anymore. They're pussies. Wimps. Little moany bitches. They go cry in the corner while every other developer in the world just gets on with it and adapts to PS3.
If they'd spent half the time with dev kits as they've spent crying about the PS3, they'd be well able to develop for it. They're just little bitches.
If a company like GRIN can get their mediocre titles on the PS3 without a hitch, then surely Valve could do the same? Of course they're not going to make anyt money from developing on the PS3 if they spent the previous three years trashing it, by which point the PS3 owners will have simply stopped caring about what Valve say.
Also unsurprising to see so many complaining at the supposed number of PS3 fanboys in this thread when there's the similar amount of xbox fanboys present, or does trolling the PS3 not count on this site?
I had respect for Valve once. I used to think they were a very talented studio and the best PC developer there is.
However, I have no respect for them anymore. They're pussies. Wimps. Little moany bitches. They go cry in the corner while every other developer in the world just gets on with it and adapts to PS3.
If they'd spent half the time with dev kits as they've spent crying about the PS3, they'd be well able to develop for it. They're just little bitches.
I disagree!
The "bitches' are the ones who put up with shoddy hardware and dev tools and don't say anything about it.
The only people crying in the corner are the PS3 fanboys - note I said "PS3 fanboys" not "PS3 owners".
Another point is, how can you compare the score of a game released a year earlier with the ps3 one? Of course its going to get a lower score...a year has gone by and it hadnt changed.
Metacritic causes way too many problems in the industry..its useful for those outside it..but it shouldnt be the end all for developers.
And for christ sake, remember what that the 360 has the same infrastructure as a PC..Of course its going to be easier for pc devs to progam for.
and again i repeat...shoddy hardware is the 360. Ps3 is overly expensive hard to design for hardware. not shoddy in the slightest.
and again i repeat...shoddy hardware is the 360. Ps3 is overly expensive hard to design for hardware. not shoddy in the slightest.
thats just flame bait, do you know that the same team at ibm worked on the cell and the processor in the 360? the gpu in the 360 is excellent so what is shoddy about the 360 exactly? can you actually give a single piece or are you just generalising?
the main problem of the 360 has been cooling and the quality of how the bits are connected rather than shoddy hardware.
they are fanboys. imagine saying sony should scrap the ps3. a real technical team wouild revel at the chance to do something different with the ps3. john carmack said you could do a ps3 specific game that wouldnt be possible on anything else - but you'd need to put in the hard work. but do you expect something fresh and different to appear through lackluster, run-of-the-mill work?!
once the ps3 comes out on top, i hope they get no support.
rockstar said agent is something that is much more suited to the ps3 architecture, and they are getting full support from sony.
they pushed the boundaries on GTA4, so id love to see what they can do with a dedicated game. rising to the challenge you see. valve will end up with egg on their face.
and again i repeat...shoddy hardware is the 360. Ps3 is overly expensive hard to design for hardware. not shoddy in the slightest.
thats just flame bait, do you know that the same team at ibm worked on the cell and the processor in the 360? the gpu in the 360 is excellent so what is shoddy about the 360 exactly? can you actually give a single piece or are you just generalising?
the main problem of the 360 has been cooling and the quality of how the bits are connected rather than shoddy hardware.
the hardware is the overall product, not individual chips or processors.
if they have shoddily constructed them, then its shoddy hardware.
SVD off on one again!! Come on here for a quick browse and this son bitch is googling his words in so he/she/it can p**s people off 24/7 . Child if you put this much enthusiasm into a job you would be rich. But no you are still always going to be a itch in some guy's JOCK strap!! Keep your s**te game valve!! come back when its good!!
Perhaps "shoddy hardware" was a bad choice of words on my part.
However, the 360 performs well for the large part. Multiplatform games generally turn out better, Live utterly destroys PSN (I have owned both!), and furthermore developers praise the architecture.
The PS3 doesn't have any major design flaws which are seen as "errors" yet is still cursed for its design.
I suppose you could say that the 360 is like an Alfa or a TVR - unreliable but exhilarating when it works. I mean, as I've said before it's ludicrous to poke fun at the 360's critical flaw when it's still leading the race.
It's like the hare laughing at the tortoise as the tortoise crosses the finish line....
Perhaps "shoddy hardware" was a bad choice of words on my part.
However, the 360 performs well for the large part. Multiplatform games generally turn out better, Live utterly destroys PSN (I have owned both!), and furthermore developers praise the architecture.
The PS3 doesn't have any major design flaws which are seen as "errors" yet is still cursed for its design.
I suppose you could say that the 360 is like an Alfa or a TVR - unreliable but exhilarating when it works. I mean, as I've said before it's ludicrous to poke fun at the 360's critical flaw when it's still leading the race.
It's like the hare laughing at the tortoise as the tortoise crosses the finish line....
you cant say multiplatform games turn out better on 360 if they were MADE on 360, then PORTED!! its laziness. id like to see a ps3 game ported to 360. wouldnt happen... MGS4?
look at CoD4, burnout. both made from the ground up on ps3. easily as good as the 360 versions.
SVD off on one again!! Come on here for a quick browse and this son bitch is googling his words in so he/she/it can p**s people off 24/7 . Child if you put this much enthusiasm into a job you would be rich. But no you are still always going to be a itch in some guy's JOCK strap!! Keep your s**te game valve!! come back when its good!!
you cant say multiplatform games turn out better on 360 if they were MADE on 360, then PORTED!! its laziness. id like to see a ps3 game ported to 360. wouldnt happen... MGS4?
look at CoD4, burnout. both made from the ground up on ps3. easily as good as the 360 versions.
i thought a lot of devs these days lead on the ps3 as its easier to move from the ps3 to the 360 than vice versa. there is no reason any game cant be ported to any platform, it just takes time and effort, what valve are saying is they dont have the time.
i'd like to know how many other independent devs support all three platforms and make games for 5 different ip's? the only game in the top 20 on metacritic that is from an independent dev i can see is lbp but they had loads of support from sony. the orange box technically was by EA so probably doesnt count, but that seems to be the only other one.
“This is a prime example of why I'm really starting to hate CVG.”
Agreed, and thensome
Why can’t we all have a sensible debate, and discuss the merits of Lombardi’s comments in a mature fashion? Can’t we all just agree that the PS3 has some great games, and so does the 360? PS3 owners should be thankful for the 360, and 360 owners thankful for the PS3 as they create competition for one another, which is good for us, the consumer. If one company ruled the gaming industry, we would become unstuck as they would not have to produce anything especially inspiring and our much loved hobby would become a bland and tedious affair.
I really cannot agree with the arguing and bickering over who has the best console. So f**king what? Must competition be involved in all elements and arguments? Do you often find yourself arguing with people over who has a better fridge? It keeps food cool, consoles play games.
As a serious question, does anyone know where it is possible to have sensible discussions, without it resulting in a bitch fest? I would do Edge, but I find that the people there take themselves too seriously..
“This is a prime example of why I'm really starting to hate CVG.”
Agreed, and thensome
Why can’t we all have a sensible debate, and discuss the merits of Lombardi’s comments in a mature fashion? Can’t we all just agree that the PS3 has some great games, and so does the 360? PS3 owners should be thankful for the 360, and 360 owners thankful for the PS3 as they create competition for one another, which is good for us, the consumer. If one company ruled the gaming industry, we would become unstuck as they would not have to produce anything especially inspiring and our much loved hobby would become a bland and tedious affair.
I really cannot agree with the arguing and bickering over who has the best console. So f**king what? Must competition be involved in all elements and arguments? Do you often find yourself arguing with people over who has a better fridge? It keeps food cool, consoles play games.
As a serious question, does anyone know where it is possible to have sensible discussions, without it resulting in a bitch fest? I would do Edge, but I find that the people there take themselves too seriously..
if you skip past the usual nutters on the forums you can get a decent discussion going. I'm an edge subscriber but i don't frequent their forums.
i find it a little odd that valve take stick for not supportng the ps3 and being quite open about it but other devs who work solely on the playstation brand are fine, whats that about? insomniac have only ever released games for playstation and are supposedly and independent dev, perhaps we should berate them for not supporting the 360 or pc or wii or ds or mac. maybe its because valve make better games than insomniac that people want to play but cant so they get annoyed.
“This is a prime example of why I'm really starting to hate CVG.”
Agreed, and thensome
Why can’t we all have a sensible debate, and discuss the merits of Lombardi’s comments in a mature fashion? Can’t we all just agree that the PS3 has some great games, and so does the 360? PS3 owners should be thankful for the 360, and 360 owners thankful for the PS3 as they create competition for one another, which is good for us, the consumer. If one company ruled the gaming industry, we would become unstuck as they would not have to produce anything especially inspiring and our much loved hobby would become a bland and tedious affair.
I really cannot agree with the arguing and bickering over who has the best console. So f**king what? Must competition be involved in all elements and arguments? Do you often find yourself arguing with people over who has a better fridge? It keeps food cool, consoles play games.
As a serious question, does anyone know where it is possible to have sensible discussions, without it resulting in a bitch fest? I would do Edge, but I find that the people there take themselves too seriously..
Edge is much too serious, I agree. I find Eurogamer tends to be pretty good for genuine discussion - for the most part, anyway (there will always be c**ks on the internet).
i find it a little odd that valve take stick for not supportng the ps3 and being quite open about it but other devs who work solely on the playstation brand are fine, whats that about? insomniac have only ever released games for playstation and are supposedly and independent dev, perhaps we should berate them for not supporting the 360 or pc or wii or ds or mac. maybe its because valve make better games than insomniac that people want to play but cant so they get annoyed.
That's different. Valve is a 3rd party company, not bound by any exclusivity deals. Those other devs are paid to develop exclusively for one system. Valve on the other hand simply can't be bottomd.
HERRO PLEASE I AM HORNY ASIAN MAN SUCK ME RONG TIME
Ah Crimbo...all these characters you manage to create - the PS3 fanboy, the generally abusive man, the attempted conversationalist, and now a racist. It's quite extraordinary. Quick...bring back the bunnies before you get booted again!
i find it a little odd that valve take stick for not supportng the ps3 and being quite open about it but other devs who work solely on the playstation brand are fine, whats that about? insomniac have only ever released games for playstation and are supposedly and independent dev, perhaps we should berate them for not supporting the 360 or pc or wii or ds or mac. maybe its because valve make better games than insomniac that people want to play but cant so they get annoyed.
That's different. Valve is a 3rd party company, not bound by any exclusivity deals. Those other devs are paid to develop exclusively for one system. Valve on the other hand simply can't be bottomd.
how is it different? insomniac dont have to sign those deals plus i'm sure they could create a new ip for the 360 if they chose to.
one thing to remember is that valve were started by people that worked for MS so maybe they feel some loyalty, who knows.
Single player wise COD4 is an equal on both systems, however nowadays for a large chunk of people, online is of equal or more importance. On this note 360COD4 murders PS3COD4 because Live is frankly bomb proof.
Only Blizzard and EA actively develop games for Mac alongside their counterparts. Its sad, but i dont have a mac for games..
Back to the 360.. Im afraid i obviously dont agree...id pick a ps3 for build quality and ease of use and general personal preference over a 360 anyday of the week. but each to their own. Its ultimately futile arguing over it, people will vote with their feet. At the moment the only incentive is the price, the length of market saturation and the pack mentality (very evident on these forums) As you say they both have their plus points, but i would still question how anyone can call the 360 amazing when its just very meh. A pc in a box..whoop de do. Ps3 is no better in that regard i suppose, but its hardly something to be impressed by. They're just games consoles.
Who cares? The console versions of The Orange Box and Left 4 Dead are p**s poor compared to the PC versions due to poor frame rates, inferior online (i.e. TF2, Left 4 Dead) and poor graphics.
resistance and ratchet are seen as 'sony' titles...
sony publish them, insomniac are independent apparently. a bit like MS now owning the halo brand even though bungie made it. there is no reason insomniac cant switch publisher and there is no reason why sony cant publish games on the PC but they dont, at tleast the ps3 games anyway.
actually head of valve was basicaly saying that they are looking for talented PS3 developers and once that happened then they would certainly make games for Playstation, BUT untill they hire the people they want/need they have no plans to make games for the console and they dont want to end up with inferior ps3 ports like alot of lazy devs end up with.
but no one wants to hear that, let the fanboy war continue
Sony have a lot of first party developers, can't say that about microsoft and their xbox 360, now where is all there great games this year an the foreseable future, please pray tell me TONYB, regarding Left4Dead had that for a couple months then traded it in coz it got boring very very quickly.
I can understand Valve's decision - maybe they aren't the best coders, and want to stick to one or two platforms so they can deliver the best games they can. Their skill is in design and in-game storytelling, in my opinion.
Don't understand the Sony-baiting tone of the comments though. Sounds a bit smug, all that Metacritic talk.
Valves excuses only promote its arrogant stance, and its lack of ability in any pushing bundries since Half Life 2. Making a zombie game using the same old engine then releasing a sequel a year later shows their lack of commitment to creativity and development, heck before that was HL 2 ep 2 and HL2 e 3!
One could argue other devs do the same i.e. Infinity Ward but they at least have the capibility and technical understanding making the same game play exactly the same on different hardware, activision moans but IW didn't, heck they even made it look p**s poor simple, Valve just dont even compare on a tech side.
Valves excuses only promote its arrogant stance, and its lack of ability in any pushing bundries since Half Life 2. Making a zombie game using the same old engine then releasing a sequel a year later shows their lack of commitment to creativity and development, heck before that was HL 2 ep 2 and HL2 e 3!
One could argue other devs do the same i.e. Infinity Ward but they at least have the capibility and technical understanding making the same game play exactly the same on different hardware, activision moans but IW didn't, heck they even made it look p**s poor simple, Valve just dont even compare on a tech side.
IW only make cod games, valve have at least 5 different ip's. what has tech go to do with it, valve aim their pc games at a certain tech level that they know their customer base has through steam and this translates through to the consoles. it is why they sell so many pc games - it runs on a good proportion of machines.
it seems to me that most of the negative comments are coming from teenagers or lower that have no concept of business or technology. bad times.
i think that makes him and the whole company Valve sound like there unable to work with the ps3 because they havent got the talent to make a decent game on the console, they obviously havent got a clever enough team in the company to work with a more complicated console. They need to employ better employees, they ought to start by employing some of naughty dogs or guerillas employees; talented game developers that can work with a more complicated console and show what you can get out of it if youve got talent instead of just taking the easy way out.
They're not aimed at PC, they love the Xbox cuddo's. I think that a company that can release a great game such as COD MW 2 onto a system available to millions of eger gamers then why cant another arguably more talented company?
I loved orange box and the only bit that slowed was the water room with electric cables. It was not a chuggy mess.
Its really down to a lack of understanding the tech or biased opions of the sony machine although the tech side hasnt stopped IW or even Rockstar (ps3 version of GTA4 being arguabley better than the xbox version) from producing fine work on PS3.
Anyhow with Killzone 2 showing what is capable on the hardware followed by Uncharted 2 and Last Guardian, I dont think we'll miss L4D 2, alothough I'd be gutted if HL 2 ep 3 skipped PS3.
I own a PS3, im not worried about vavle not doing games for Sony there are plenty of exclusive titles out and also is there anything on the Xbox that looks as good as Killzone? It is far more superior to Xbox just look at Drakes Fortune 2 sorry but you cannot say that this game is not impressive? We have naughty dog and Insominac Games so we have got plenty of coders to push the PS3 technology, we haven't seen yet what the PS3 is capable of.
Perhaps I'm an idiot, but I really don't see what the big deal with this story is. Valve have essentially said that until the point that they get a decent PS3 team on board, they aren't gonna release games on that platform, as they will essentially be sub-par and shoddy. What the hell is wrong with that? You could argue that Doug is actually being pretty bloody responsible!
Some of the BS in this thread has been ridiculous however.
Some are saying that naughty dog & insomniac are enough to push the PS3 tech, in a sence yes but in real terms no.
A console needs a breadth of support from 1st & 3rd parties alike the n64 had excellent first party support but after a while its 3rd party support died out Dreamcast likewise.
If a dev as talented as valve & I am sick of hearing people say they are not the scores their games receive seems to point otherwise. Are saying that in essence the PS3 does not interest them is a huge blow for a platform holder.
Valve saying until they get a team for PS3 games that they will not develop games themselves is not going to happen if they do not believe they will get a decent return on the investment that will take on their part when they can get a big enough return on other platforms then spending all that extra cash on staff specifically for PS3 games is not money well spent.
And from a business point of view it makes sense to concentrate on other formats where the return is greater.
As for some saying is there anything on 360 looking as good as killzone well maybe mabye not but there are much better games than killzone on 360, & the fact that a game as technically good made by sony for their own console has not shipped at least 1 million copies is a very telling sign to Sony that they need to do more if they want to win.
Uncharted 2 is looking good to but so was the first game & it did not set the world alight either.
The example of Burnout paradise is a good one but I bet EA has seen a higher return for less money spent on the 360 version which is the point exactly if having teams of extra coders just to make a PS3 version look as good & as smooth as a 360 version is needed then its all extra cash that a lot of devs & publishers just do not either have or are willing to spend hence certain games not being released for ps3 or being inferior ports.
Anyhow with Killzone 2 showing what is capable on the hardware followed by Uncharted 2 and Last Guardian, I dont think we'll miss L4D 2, alothough I'd be gutted if HL 2 ep 3 skipped PS3.
Just a hint mate but saying we'll as in ps3 owners will not miss left 4 dead 2 I know from reading past forums & posts that there are a fair few who really want left 4 dead on ps3 so despite the games you mention will & are missing the game & will its sequel as well.
And if something does not change then you will probably miss out on episode 3 as well.
Left 4 dead has become one of my favs this gen & I am looking forward to the sequel.
The other point is yes killzone does show that the ps3 is a more than capable console the problem is that a lot of publishers & developers are getting tired of the expense & problems getting their multi plat titles onto the console with only a few exceptions because sony chose to release a console that compared to their competition is a pain in the ass to make games for.
Devs want consoles to be easier now not harder times have changed from the days that devs had to code straight to the hardware & learn new tricks & new ways of doing things & sony should realise that by making their machine harder to work with they have alienated a lot of people.
Just a hint mate but saying we'll as in ps3 owners will not miss left 4 dead 2 I know from reading past forums & posts that there are a fair few who really want left 4 dead on ps3 so despite the games you mention will & are missing the game & will its sequel as well.
not a valid argument. However many people may want to play l4d on the ps3, there will be twice as many who dont know what it is or dont care. He was using a general outlook. The majority of people who own a ps3 or even the other consoles do not come on websites or forums and bitch about what they are or are not getting. This is the minority and as such not exactly a good method of measuring who cares about what.
Anybody who really wants to play it will get it off steam instead so who cares?
I own a PS3, im not worried about vavle not doing games for Sony there are plenty of exclusive titles out and also is there anything on the Xbox that looks as good as Killzone? It is far more superior to Xbox just look at Drakes Fortune 2 sorry but you cannot say that this game is not impressive? We have naughty dog and Insominac Games so we have got plenty of coders to push the PS3 technology, we haven't seen yet what the PS3 is capable of.
trouble is that some valve games have been heralded as the best of all time - obviously this is just an opinion but how many naughty dog, guerilla, or insomniac games come into that category? i cant think of any.
sony may have good devs onboard but how many of them are considered great? again not many.
also, of course 1st party devs will push the ps3 - its the only platform they work on! if kz2 was multi platform would it have looked as good? mabye but it would have taken longer and cost way more to produce.
Valve are a pc dev anyway. Their console support is mostly non existent. What would kick ass would be the ability to use steam on a console, but there is as much chance of Jacko turning up at the 02 as that happening. If you like Valve games, get a decent PC. Left 4 Dead was great on 360 but it isn't as well supported and the SDK release now makes the 360 version obsolete. It seems to be in vogue for developers to publicly castrate the PS3, which is fair enough if your company's output if prolific and profitable. Valve releases are few and far between and I don't think PS3 users are missing out that much. Its not like EA when they blacklisted the dreamcast, or Square abandoning Ninty. People don't buy consoles for Valve games.
Couldn't care less Ps3 is the greatest off all time like Ali Xbox 360 is like the oldest of all time pure awful, The Xbox fanboys on here no they have backed the wrong horse!!
Couldn't care less Ps3 is the greatest off all time like Ali Xbox 360 is like the oldest of all time pure awful, The Xbox fanboys on here no they have backed the wrong horse!!
The oldest of all time? I have a Sega Master System (somewhere), does that mean the 360 is older than that!!?!?
Think you might have to go back to school there pal.
And neither the 360 NOR the PS3 is the greatest console of all time. Not even close.
Valve are a pc dev anyway. Their console support is mostly non existent. What would kick ass would be the ability to use steam on a console, but there is as much chance of Jacko turning up at the 02 as that happening. If you like Valve games, get a decent PC. Left 4 Dead was great on 360 but it isn't as well supported and the SDK release now makes the 360 version obsolete. It seems to be in vogue for developers to publicly castrate the PS3, which is fair enough if your company's output if prolific and profitable. Valve releases are few and far between and I don't think PS3 users are missing out that much. Its not like EA when they blacklisted the dreamcast, or Square abandoning Ninty. People don't buy consoles for Valve games.
In what way does SDK make the xbox version obsolete? I play my copy all the time. I think you should look up the term obsolete.
lmao While i dont diagree with the difficulty of programming, to say that the innards of a ps3 are a turkey, obviously comparing to the 'far superior' 360 is a joke.
RROD anyone? My ps3 is still fine after 2 years..2 360s in 3 years..not interested in buying another.
Still....You are right in saying that Sony are making a complete mess of it PRwise and certainly consumerwise, at least thats how it seems.
good point there. I am on my second 360 elite in one years ownership. But even with the very well publicised hardware issues on the 360 the PS3 hasnt toppled it. You would think the disasterous 360 reliability would have opened the floodgates for PS3 takeup...but it hasnt really. That says a lot about Sonys failings too. My young son loves the 360, but I'm still a PC gamer. Valve arent stupid, they are a very inventive company who rarely get it wrong.
Valve are a pc dev anyway. Their console support is mostly non existent. What would kick ass would be the ability to use steam on a console, but there is as much chance of Jacko turning up at the 02 as that happening. If you like Valve games, get a decent PC. Left 4 Dead was great on 360 but it isn't as well supported and the SDK release now makes the 360 version obsolete. It seems to be in vogue for developers to publicly castrate the PS3, which is fair enough if your company's output if prolific and profitable. Valve releases are few and far between and I don't think PS3 users are missing out that much. Its not like EA when they blacklisted the dreamcast, or Square abandoning Ninty. People don't buy consoles for Valve games.
In what way does SDK make the xbox version obsolete? I play my copy all the time. I think you should look up the term obsolete.
It means you are playing a gimped version and in terms of future replayability it is obsolete. With all the custom maps that will pop up now, i would switch to PC. Did you really not understand what i meant? Or are you so anally retentive that you had to add that dumb comment? Good luck getting a game on it in a few months, it will be dead. I'd be amazed if it gets anymore DLC also.
Hi everyone , ps fanboy here, MUST SAY i really loved the orange box, really a piece of genius , completly brilliant actually.
Dont really like Microsoft that much ,they seem to have bullied other companies and played many dirty tricks over the years to really (or attempt to) stitch others up.
So im not really keen to support Microsoft products unless i have too.
I feel that others feel the same,and probably like me really enjoyed the orange box. So to summerise i just think its a big shame. PS Maybe if Valve advertised for a PS3 team then im sure there are people who love a challenge and the ps3 environment and would love to work for valve+ getting a version of steam intergrated into home would pay dividends in the future im sure.
I am a massive fan of games. I can't believe that people get so insensed by these things. Why hate microsoft/sony/valve? (delete where appropriate). They choose to do what they want. I'm all for a frank diologue with companies when they ask for feedback but to stand at the side and critise because they're not doing it the way you want is just sad. We pay for the product they sell, not for the product we want them to create next. How they invest my money in new projects is up to them. If the next game/product doesn't meet my requirements then that's fine, I'll spend my money else where.
Their larger business practices are another matter. When Valve start murdering Pandas then I might feel the need to boycot them.
I cant believe that people are so blind to the power of the PS3. Obviously the PS3 has more computing power than 8 of the best xbox 360's out there. People are succumbing to the lure of MSFT and believing that they have the best console. and i hope Gabe reads this because he obviously does not fully understand the full capabilites of a PS3. He takes the easiest route, if he ever is able to get a PS3 team on Valve he sure will not regret it.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
