Valve 'up' on idea of PS3 development, waiting to build talented PS3 team

Maddens Raiders - 164 days 22 hours ago

considering us lowly, lowly PS3 owners in your future endeavours and discussions. If only we were truly worthy of your efforts.

/sarcasm o_O

Seriously, I know I may be in the minority here, but I don't give a flying shyt what Valve or any of their company heads have to say. The PS3 is a beast and their apparent lack of interest or expertise in programming for ((it)) speaks volumes after 2 1/2 years on the shelves. Are you freaking kidding me?

Valve, that rotund atrocity Newell, and Nolan Bushnell joined the lot of a**hole Programmers / devs that can suck my .... a long time ago. I'll contribute nary a dime to any of their half-hearted projects.

/rant

Agree(50) | Disagree(8) | Report

zlatko - 164 days 22 hours ago

If Valve is "such a good developer" and they have yet to give the PS3 proper support, then wouldn't that make them just a bunch of hot air? Seriously if you can't port your games over because you are that lazy or incompetent, then just do everyone a favor and admit it already. Plenty of other devs with brains attached to their spinal cords would be more than willing to tell you how to get the job done right.

I'm still waiting for a game from these guys that I can put in my all time favorites list, because even Half Life 1 and 2 aren't on my big list of games I think everyone should play. :/

Agree(11) | Disagree(3) | Report

lociefer - 164 days 22 hours ago

no thank you i do not want older gen games on my powerhorse 3

Agree(17) | Disagree(5) | Report

Brutallyhonest - 164 days 21 hours ago

I personally have not contributed a dime to a valve project on the consoles this whole generation. I really never saw what the big stink was over Orange Box and especially L4D and shooters are my favorite genre.

They are running on such dated engines and OB lagged liked crazy online while L4D is just wave after wave of zombies attacking. It felt more like a mod inside of a full version game then the ability to stand on it's own. I will never understand the appeal of these titles and yes I have played them both on the PC and 360.

Agree(7) | Disagree(3) | Report

All-3 - 164 days 21 hours ago

--> Of course they will. This article comes as no surprise. Because PS3 is doing better than 360. Hell, anyone in the industry can see that by now.

Oh really? Better in what way? Not in unit sales worldwide.

--> PS3 has higher attach rates...

No it does not.

--> ... PS3 first and second year sales beat 360. That means that if you deduct the headstart of the 360, PS3 has a higher install base.

Except that the industry doesn't do that... only rabid supporters do that. The industry acknowledges that the 360 has a larger install base vs the PS3... and the 360 games give game publishers/developers more profits on their investments.

--> Furthermore, 360 is already twice as cheap as PS3.

That's Sony's problem. The PS3 would sell more if Sony could afford to drop the price... unfortunately Sony can't afford to thus far.

--> They blew all their cards away by now and are running out of ideas. Halo this halo that. Even Halo will fail eventually.

There's much more than just Halo... and if you want to go that route... how many God of War games are there? Don't forget the handheld version either.

--> The industry isnt a fool. There is not a single big time developer that doesnt want to support the PS3.

Support at what cost though? Why isn't the PS3 the dominate development platform for 3rd party publishers/developers? No company is going to sacrifice profit margins just because of some raving PS3 supporters.

--> If you look at Konami, EA even Capcom for instance, you can see that they made the most money last year on the PS3. This is not different than on any platform.

That's why the PS3 is the lead development platform for all their games right? Oh wait... not it's not.

Those companies made more money because of the entire Sony platforms combined... not on the PS3 alone.

--> Eventually even die hard studios will see that they are at a disadvantage BY NOT developing for the PS3.

Why would they NOT develop for the PS3 in the first place?

--> This is Valve's wake up call. Sooner or later, the smell of profits will lure even the die hards. Valve is no different.

But with the 360 and PC markets... Valve doesn't need to support the PS3 yet... and it still appears that they won't be for some time to come. You're not upset when developers claim that their games will only be on the PS3... or can only be done on the PS3 are you?

Agree(8) | Disagree(31) | Report

potenquatro - 164 days 20 hours ago

Just because Gabe is a human with opinions and preferences. I for one welcome more games on the ps3, specially coming from Valve. Could you imagine if they manage to put STEAM running on ps3? I doubt it, but I bet if they do, everybody will be on their nuts.

@lociefer: Older gen games? You know Source is probably the most optimized engine in the industry right? You know Source debuted in 2004, waaaayyyy after last gen started right? kids today are so dependent of that "wow" factor, they can't even apreciate a good thing when they see one.

Agree(5) | Disagree(10) | Report

ThanatosDMC - 164 days 17 hours ago

Meh... i really dont care about Valve and consoles. I buy Valve games on Steam. All their games are meant to be played with keyboard and a mouse after all.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

All-3 - 164 days 17 hours ago

--> Deal with the fact that you are delusional and cant refute facts.

That's hilarious coming from you.

--> Your big wall-o-text of post is full of failure. And quite frankly, there is nothing more irritating than to see a retarded response where some 14 year old is picking apart your previous post quote you 400 times over, each with a seperate reply.

Looks like you've been practicing being a 10 year old.

--> You think Im going to read that crap? Learn how to properly response to someone first and then maybe when you turn 18 years old, Ill consider you as a legal adult and start to have discussions with you.

No... I don't expect you to read much of anything... you like to make things up, to soothe yourself to sleep. However - if it helps you... just skip past all the BS that I've copied from your initial post, and included in my first response.

Agree(2) | Disagree(15) | Report

thesummerofgeorge - 164 days 17 hours ago

You say the industry doesn't look at the fact that the PS3 sold more if you don't include the head start, but I think they would. First off I don't know if that's accurate or not, but if it is, it would show a higher growth rate, meaning potential future sales would likely be higher if it's selling more in it's time than it's competition. I mean it would be remiss of them to ignore the fact that one is selling faster than the other, even if the one selling slower has more overall sales due to it being out longer. Wouldn't you agree?

Agree(14) | Disagree(1) | Report

Bubble Buddy - 164 days 16 hours ago

Valve, I love Left 4 Dead. Played it at my cousins and had a blast. I'd buy it for PS3 but if they take long (which they will), I'll just upgrade my cr@ppy PC and get it there. :P

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

All-3 - 164 days 16 hours ago

The units sales are one thing. Fact is - the 360 has a larger install base regardless of the circumstances.

--> I mean it would be remiss of them to ignore the fact that one is selling faster than the other, even if the one selling slower has more overall sales due to it being out longer. Wouldn't you agree?

I agree... however, since the PS3 is more powerful, and apparently more future-proof vs the 360... and since the PS3 sales vs the 360 compared to when the PS3 launched onward, are better... wouldn't you agree that it's strange then, that:

1) Most 3rd party games still aren't developed first on the PS3 and then ported over to the 360.

2) Most Publishers/Developers would want to help increase PS3 sales even more, so they could make even more money... by releasing the better versions of their games on the PS3, but they're not.

3) People keep forgetting that profits from game sales aren't the same for PS3 games vs 360 games... because development costs aren't the same. It costs publishers/developers more to develop PS3 games vs 360 games.

And no matter what else - having a larger install base which has generally resulted in larger game sales, and therefore profits - is going to get 3rd party publishers/developers attention more than anything.

---

--> poor sales of ps3 games? Just another popular misconception. Uncharted, Motorstorm and Resistance all sold better than Mass Effect, Crackdown and L4D on the 360. GTA4 almost equals sales despite a big difference in install base.

Uncharted: Drake's Fortune - 2.46 million

MotorStorm: Pacific Rift - 0.66 million

Resistance: Fall of Man - 3.6 million

* Halo 3 - 9.84 million

* Gears of War 2 - 4.95 million

* Mass Effect - 2.06 million (360)

* Crackdown - 1.5 million (360)

* Left 4 Dead - 2.27 million (360)

GTA IV - 7.11 million (360)

GTA IV - 5.65 million (PS3)

Agree(1) | Disagree(13) | Report

thesummerofgeorge - 164 days 15 hours ago

I'm just saying I think the growth rate of a console seems relevant to the industry. But since you asked, I don't think that a company developing a game for the 360 or PS3 first reflects badly or says anything about the quality of the system, clearly both systems have had great games that were developed for them specifically.

Maybe the 360's easier to develop for in general, or maybe it's just easier cause developers have had more time with it, so it's cheaper to start with it and port to the PS3. Maybe that'll change maybe it won't. I think if anything, how good or bad a port is says more about the developer than the systems.

Edit: Also all things considered, sure a larger install base is advantageous, but a higher growth rate implies that won't last, thus if a company is looking towards the future, this would be something to consider.

Agree(10) | Disagree(1) | Report

thesummerofgeorge - 164 days 15 hours ago

I wish people would cite where they get their numbers from. I'm not sayin your numbers are wrong All3, but it'd be nice to know the source.

Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report

darkride66 - 164 days 14 hours ago

All3 made the point that "The industry acknowledges that the 360 has a larger install base vs the PS3... and the 360 games give game publishers/developers more profits on their investments."

Now, this bit was apparently in response to the fact that the PS3 is being adopted by consumers at a much faster rate than the 360 and it's incorrect. The industry looks to the future, which is why I'm sure it's not lost on them how much faster the PS3 is catching on compared to the 360. If the developers only looked at install base we'd all still wading through new PS2 games, or everyone would have switched to the Wii and clearly that hasn't happened. That rather disproves your "it's all about the install base" argument.

Secondly - you are indeed correct, the PS3 does not have higher attach rates. Sony recently commented that sales of AAA games have a higher attach rate then the 360, but overall attach rates are lower than the 360.

However, the PS3 attach rates are consistent with the 360's attach rates at the 2 1/2 year mark, but the PS3 is approx 4 million consoles ahead of where the 360 was at this point in it's life.

Clearly there isn't an issue with developers and the PS3 from what we're seeing. Despite the Xbox 360 having 30% more consoles in the wild (allegedly) revenue posted from companies like EA, Ubisoft, Take Two clearly indicate the revenue generated by fewer PS3's is a match for revenue generated by the 360. Again, your points don't really hold up against the reality we're seeing.

Finally, as for the costs to develop a game on the PS3 being higher, it depends on who you talk to. Activision recently had their hissy fit complaining about costs - all sound and fury signifying nothing - but other companies like Ubisoft and EA have commented that the price of developing for the PS3 is similar to the 360 and PC (Sony has made numerous changes over the past two years to bring the cost of development down while increasing the tools available) Costs to develop for the Wii are considerably lower.

Agree(9) | Disagree(1) | Report

thesummerofgeorge - 164 days 14 hours ago

And that's the thing, sometimes people don't consider the PS3 is doing as well as the 360 did when it was at the same point in it's lifespan (I realize I'm generalizing). People sometimes expect the PS3 to not only already be caught up to the 360's sales in a shorter time, but already surpass them in less time, or it's failing. I'm sure Microsoft considered this as well, appearances carry alot of weight.

Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report

Liquid_Ocelot - 164 days 13 hours ago

FVCK YOU VALVE & Gabe "fa99ot @ss" Newell, FVCK YOU...

"ehh? how you like that you fvckin maric0n" -Tony Montana

Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report

Traveler - 164 days 12 hours ago

Unlike some of the PS3 fans here I really like Valve's games. I mostly play them on the PC, but I think it would be great if PS3-only owners could also get a chance to play them. I really hope that Valve makes some serious efforts in that direction.

Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report

Raz - 164 days 10 hours ago

Insulting someone in Spanish (even a Tony Montana quote) = instant agree + bubble

^_^

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

mythamp - 164 days 6 hours ago

I stopped reading the moment i read "Oh really? Better in what way? Not in unit sales worldwide." You simply do not understand marketing/sales/the gaming industry. It is not about the total sales of units, its the product lifecycle, xbox360 has reached maturity and is on its way down while the PS3 is still on its growth run. The main difference is being the steepness of the curve. Just put month by month sales of both machines from their beginning and see the results in excel through a line graph, you will see what I mean. PS3 sells higher software compared to xbox, the reason is obviously piracy in the xbox, (more units sold which get modded for pirated games and so developers make 0 from those sales).

Valve is now back pedaling from their previous stance, hoping to get alil good PR in the PS3 base, I am sure they are feeling likes fools and also learned from the activation ceo's episode to think before talking trash.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

I did not murder him - 164 days 4 hours ago

These are the real remarks before they changed Valves words.

"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."

http://www.computerandvideo...

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report

BWS1982 - 164 days 2 hours ago

Valve would "have decent coders" for the PS3 if they didn't shove it to the side as a "failure" 3-4 years ago when it was new tech for the rest of the industry as virtually every other dev. was getting familiar with it and the dev kits/demonstrations. Just getting to it now, I see? Gee, that "comfort zone" I keep seeing people call it must have been uber comfortable.

I also don't buy the whole "Valve is a small company" bit, they won a lawsuit for 2 million something a few years back, they have Turtle Rock Studios now, Steam has to be raking in the dollars, and if they can pump out 2 Left 4 Dead games in about 2 years, "getting around" to learning the PS3 is not impossible. Media Molecule is tiny and they've done beautifully with LBP on their first attempt. Excuses, Gabe, excuses.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

theEnemy - 164 days 22 hours ago

While other devs are pushing the PS3 beyond limits.

Agree(11) | Disagree(2) | Report

Fishy Fingers - 165 days ago

The source engine is CPU intensive? Perhaps if your CPU pre dates fire. The source engine in general is very forgiving.

Agree(12) | Disagree(0) | Report

potenquatro - 164 days 20 hours ago

When HL:2 came out I had a p4 3.2cpu and 5800ultra card. Valve was being a real btch about nvidia cards then(wich doesnt surprise me when they b!tch about the nvidia equipped ps3). And even though the card was completely dx9c sm-2.5 256-mb, it still reverted to dx8, unless you had an ATI even if it was less powerful. I figure if it was cpu intensive, that whole little story would've never happened.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

LinuxGuru - 164 days 16 hours ago

What? The Source Engine IS CPU intensive. As they update it with more animations, more AI, more characters on screen....it becomes more and more CPU intensive.

Why do you think that you get such a huge performance boost when you play L4D with multicore rendering enabled?

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

Persistantthug - 164 days 12 hours ago

I remember that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

LinuxGuru - 164 days 5 hours ago

Because of the increase in particle effects, AI, and increase in geometry and physics...the Source engine is now a lot more CPU intensive than it used to be.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

rayjelic - 165 days 1 hour ago

Your right but it's mostly just media gathering around there jocks, Because everyone I know and forum with could care less about it, or just rather play it on PC.

Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report

darkpower - 164 days 16 hours ago

They're the pioneers of the "PS3 is too hard to develop for" argument that other devs that tried to screw the PS3 out of (good) games tried to use. If they suddenly stop saying that and start developing quality games for the PS3, then it'll have a ripple effect on the rest of the industry, regardless of if they games sell well on the platform or not.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

stewgart - 165 days ago

poor sales of ps3 games? Just another popular misconception. Uncharted, Motorstorm and Resistance all sold better than Mass Effect, Crackdown and L4D on the 360. GTA4 almost equals sales despite a big difference in install base.

Valve would definately make money off the ps3 because their games are well known and of good quality, it's just a question of whether it's worth the hassle since the profits wont be as big as other platforms because of the resources they would need to put into developing for the ps3. Hence they are considering the possibility. As for activision, they are making a healthy profit off of the ps3, they are just money grabbers who want to make even more profit like any business.

Agree(13) | Disagree(9) | Report

The Round Peg - 164 days 23 hours ago

Uncharted, Motorstorm and Resistance were bundled with PS3.

Mass Effect, Crackdown and Left4Dead has NOT been bundled with Xbox 360.

Do you know why Wii Sport is the best selling game of all times? Because it's bundled with every single Wii that's sold.

Agree(5) | Disagree(9) | Report

stewgart - 165 days ago

but if the game is fun why do you care? You're only doing a disservice to yourself, pretty much what the fanboys do to themselves.

Agree(5) | Disagree(4) | Report

ArcticWolfUK - 164 days 23 hours ago

it aint got nothing to do with fanboyism, i just dont like the developers, so i aint gonna support em n buy there games

i own a 360 and a pc so its not like i cant buy em

Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report

gamingisnotacrime - 164 days 22 hours ago

one of the reasons why u bought inFAMOUS is because i saw an interview to the developer team and they seem so dedicated into this game. i bought it and the game is phenomenal, just like Naughty Dog delivers, developer support is a big deal for the informed gamer.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

sidar - 164 days 22 hours ago

But even then, if valve consist out of rotten people, doesn't mean their games are trash.

I'm glad i bought the orangebox 2 weeks back, thought i would never like Half-life/eps1/2.
Hell i don't don't even know who the important guys are at valve. I played the games and enjoyed it. Slapped myself on the head for missing out.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

DMasta718 - 164 days 13 hours ago

If the game is great, why should I care about developer's personal life?

As long as the game is good, you have my money. Whether I don't like your personality or not.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

mastiffchild - 165 days ago

But that shows them up as the frauds they are. Gabe is soooo much a MS posterboy(in his head anyway) that whatever Doug says gets scuppered on the PS3 front EVERY time it's brought up.

IF they're so damn good why don't they prove it, eh? I'm not saying port everything over. No, just one project to shut up the doubters and show what they can do-not exclusively-but on PS3 at least?

Gabe has spent his entire coding life opn things for MS platforms and doesn't want the hassle of changing the way he works, he's too old and too much in his safety zone and soean't want the first and second party Sony devs to look superior to him and his crowd. He's basically too scared and doesb't have the belief in his team to pull it off otherwise they would NOT deny themselves a stream of income that serves many other devs very well.

L4D is OK(great fun for an hour or two now and again) but HL is where it's at Valve wise and the godawful, though nothing to do with Valve, port to PS3 opf The Orange Box seems to have killed off REAL interest in making their games for platforms outside the ones in their comfort zone.

So, they're waiting til they hire some good PS coders? How long are they tking? This could/should have been pi55 easy considering most devs are really capanle by now and it shows thar really there is NO desire fir them to go to PS3-they might just fall flat on their faces and after all the talk they would look really daft if they couldn't pull things off like ND or GG wouldn't they?

So, are Valve THAT great? IDK, I really don't, but if they're not capable of coding for PS3 it suggests there's plenty better than they are does it not?

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

kwyjibo - 165 days ago

Some of the best devs stick to single platforms. I'm sure you can name plenty.

Left4Dead was one of the best new IPs of last year, more critically and commercially successful than pretty much every other new IP. That's not exactly "comfort zone". The stuff that they're doing with TF2, the whole art direction of TF2 wasn't comfort zone. Pioneering digital distribution wasn't comfort zone.

I have questioned Valve's recent moves, L4D2 seems cynical to me, and I'm not a fan of TF2's unlock confusion. Still, to suggest that Valve aren't top tier soley because they don't do full multiplatform releases doesn't really hold.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

mastiffchild - 164 days 23 hours ago

True, if it wasn't for the noises they make I'd agree entirely. When Gabe tells us the PS3 is a pointless platform and Sony should scrap it, then Doug occasionally says they intend to do something for it you have to wonder what they reaqlly feel or what the problem is.

If they want to say the PS3 is too dificult for devs and don't really change their tune even after plenty have secured both good results and good sales it becomes, to many observers, more of a comment on the way they see themselves, doesn't it? If it's too hard for them but not for others then what do they mean now?

Personally I don't, not for a second, doubt the ability that they have at Valve but they allow Gabe to create this situation and without Lombardi or whoever at Valve actually saying there's a game in the works it's all so much hot air, imo.

As far as I know the real similarity between 360 and PC is in the dev toolkits provided by MS, no? These apart the 360 and PS3 are just as different to developing for the PC (or so I'm told by people who are meant to know!)but to say at this stage that they still need PS3 coders seems either very slapdash, lazy or that they actually have no intention of doing PS3 games.

So, the fact they can manage on 360 while saying, earlier at least, that the PS3 is too much of a pain is part of it but also there were the reported ways they reacted when the rumours of a L4D PS3 version were put to them-derisory laughter wasn't the way to defuse the situation but , more pointedly may show their actual attitude to PS3.

Also, I guess it's really fanboys putting them on the "best dev" pedestal but still a developer with that reputation shouldn't be saying, not in public anyway, what Gabe has as it does make them look less skilled than they are when other devs with less illustrious CVs manage great results on PS3.

Mainly, though, I'm a big fan of their games and would like to see them push themselves over this and expand their fanbase and the empty promises are staring to frustrate me a little-do you believe they have ANY intent on the PS3 front? It's just a bit of a shame, that's all.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Sir Ken_Kutaragi - 165 days ago

But...Gabe Newell did win an Award for eating the most PIES in a minute!!! ;-D

'Touch Gabe'Jabba the Hutt'Newell's PIES and you will be Left 4 Dead'
;-D

+ I wouldn't buy a Valve Game in a BILLION YEARS after what he said about the PS3 in the past :-/ I hate Gabe as much as M$+ChavBots!!!;)

Agree(13) | Disagree(1) | Report

Winter47th - 164 days 23 hours ago

Whatever.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

Tony Scarboni - 164 days 22 hours ago

Valve used to be one of my favorite devs, but with the lack of quality in their recent titles, I have lost all interest in their games. I thought L4D was complete garbage. The controls were an abomination, and the graphics were atrocious.

Until they bring out a new graphical engine I don't think I'll waste anymore time w/ their outdated software. And w/ the way they drag their feet, I'm sure the next wave of consoles will hit before HL3 gets here.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

dustgavin - 164 days 19 hours ago

Nah. 360 are the ones that keep crying for MG and end up with a "side" mission with Raiden.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

saimcheeda - 164 days 14 hours ago

we have seen only 2 or 3 topics about l4d....after mgs4 was released, for 1 year there were topics by idiot xbots like u that mgs4 would come to the sh!tbox360...and in the end like my SONY Brother dustgavin said u guys are sharing a side mission with us...its not even exclusive to u idiots!

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

GiantEnemyCrab - 164 days 10 hours ago

Valve are loyal to the PC and the 360 just happens to be really easy to port from PC. If you want to act like a dipsh!t direct it at Sony for making a non-developer friendly kit.

But if it makes you feel better just blame MS like a typical PS3 dolt.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

devilhunterx - 164 days 21 hours ago

"until we find the people who want to come to Valve "

Clearly even PS3 developers know they are big douchebags.

And BAM! There it is!

Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report