surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
@Golden avatar - every company does this all the time? I don't even know what to say to that... I will say this, I find it hard to believe that every company fails to step up their game when it comes to new challenges. The software company that I work for thrives on it. Where would Microsoft be if they didn't want to step out of the box and jump into the gaming industry? More importantly, where would Valve be? I imagine stuck on the PC.
Sour grapes, fellow robots. The PS3 is a great system, in my opinion. I really like mine. However, just because a developer doesn't make stuff on your console of choice, it doesn't mean they suck. Valve has a good thing going on the PC and 360, and this might just be an excuse for a business decision. In any case, the lack of Valve games on the PS3 or Wii means just one thing: they don't care for them; and that's okay. Last I checked, it was still a free country and you can make what you want where you want.
@PappaDukes
What a coincidence. The software company I work for develops products for the Windows environment. We could port our products to a linux or Macintosh environment, but it's not worth the time or effort for us to do so.
When someone asks us if we have solutions for linux (which has happened once or twice, though it's very rare) we tell them they have to use Windows. We don't throw common sense to the wind and start development for linux just because there exist people who want our product on that platform.
It's a business decision based on a business model. Unfortunately Valve's business model does not include direct development on the PS3.
What a coincidence. The software company I work for develops products for the Windows environment. We could port our products to a linux or Macintosh environment, but it's not worth the time or effort for us to do so.
When someone asks us if we have solutions for linux (which has happened once or twice, though it's very rare) we tell them they have to use Windows. We don't throw common sense to the wind and start development for linux just because there exist people who want our product on that platform.
It's a business decision based on a business model. Unfortunately Valve's business model does not include direct development on the PS3.
It's almost like Valve is a business trying to make money, instead of trying to make me happy. I just wonder how long they can remain competitive in the video game industry if they keep upsetting my undue sense of entitlement.
Seems like an awful lot of people here are confusing business decisions with lazy-ness.
Sure, Valve could learn to port their games to the PS3 and recieve little to no monetary gain (they are a business after all).
OR
They could focus on doing what they do best and make great game play experiences for the remaining 90% of the population.
It's not lazy, it's optimal utilization of your resources. It's business.
The people who understand that are the only ones making reasonable arguments on this thread. The rest are PS3 owners who are upset because they can't play Valve games and come across like whiny idiots.
Sure, Valve could learn to port their games to the PS3 and recieve little to no monetary gain (they are a business after all).
OR
They could focus on doing what they do best and make great game play experiences for the remaining 90% of the population.
It's not lazy, it's optimal utilization of your resources. It's business.
The people who understand that are the only ones making reasonable arguments on this thread. The rest are PS3 owners who are upset because they can't play Valve games and come across like whiny idiots.
@Golden avatar - We did take make the effort to port our software to Mac since we had a couple clients request it. We didn't promise anything, but we took the time and effort to broaden our horizons and make a couple clients happier in the process. It was hard as balls, but now we can proudly say we support PC and Mac. But fuck Linux, fuck it in the ass.
I understand what you are saying about this being a business decision, but again, that's not where the problem lies with me. Sure, why change your business model to please a couple Linux users? But what if there was suddenly thousands? Would your company then accept the challenge and develop for Linux? Or would you take Valve's stance and just say it's too hard to do and leave it at that?
I understand what you are saying about this being a business decision, but again, that's not where the problem lies with me. Sure, why change your business model to please a couple Linux users? But what if there was suddenly thousands? Would your company then accept the challenge and develop for Linux? Or would you take Valve's stance and just say it's too hard to do and leave it at that?
Ok a couple of points because this is too good of a stupid internet arguement to not be a part of.
1. Ignore all those people that are still using the default avatars. It will help cut down on all the stupid floating around.
2. I love to hear fanboys howl. And this is like an orchestra of howling. So Valve doesn't like the dev for the PS3? Ok, big deal, it's their choice, get over it. Call them lazy if you want but why all the flaming? Golden Avatar brought up a good point. The Valve devs mainly for the PC not for consoles. 360 is closest to a PC as far as hardware architecure goes, so it makes sense to easily port games to that system. As well as having a much larger user base than the PS3. Makes sense from a business standpoint.
3. Wii forever!!
1. Ignore all those people that are still using the default avatars. It will help cut down on all the stupid floating around.
2. I love to hear fanboys howl. And this is like an orchestra of howling. So Valve doesn't like the dev for the PS3? Ok, big deal, it's their choice, get over it. Call them lazy if you want but why all the flaming? Golden Avatar brought up a good point. The Valve devs mainly for the PC not for consoles. 360 is closest to a PC as far as hardware architecure goes, so it makes sense to easily port games to that system. As well as having a much larger user base than the PS3. Makes sense from a business standpoint.
3. Wii forever!!
i think eventually ea will put the pressure on them to advance. what are they gonna do when the 720 comes out? eventually all hardware is gonna get harder than todays.
@PappaDukes
If our business model changes, sure, but right now it doesn't include development for Linux. In the future Valve might change their model and decide that it's profitable and worthwhile for them to develop for the PS3.
But right now they don't want to develop for a dead-end architecture on a third-place platform.
If our business model changes, sure, but right now it doesn't include development for Linux. In the future Valve might change their model and decide that it's profitable and worthwhile for them to develop for the PS3.
But right now they don't want to develop for a dead-end architecture on a third-place platform.
In one sense I can understand. Valve built itself up off of PC gaming, they are for the most part PCcentric. The only reason they hopped onto the Xbox 360 is because the console wasn't that different to program for than a PC. Valve appears to be a company that likes to work with what they got and run with it, without expending too much time and energy on anything new or different. They're successful so I guess you can't knock how they want to run things. Too I know they got a hate-on for Sony's PS3.
Too bad they are not more open minded because they may find the PS3 more flexible to work with in the long run. Respect for Half Life but you know even the last few installments were beginning to feel a bit dated.
Too bad they are not more open minded because they may find the PS3 more flexible to work with in the long run. Respect for Half Life but you know even the last few installments were beginning to feel a bit dated.
I agree with whowhatwherehow. Valve is supposed to be a team of highly skill full developers and for them to say its "To hard" ..kinda puts their skill in a negative light.
However if they said "well its a very time consuming platform and getting it polished to not only our standards, but our CONSUMER standards as well"...then thats a bit different.
However if they said "well its a very time consuming platform and getting it polished to not only our standards, but our CONSUMER standards as well"...then thats a bit different.
@Golden Avatar - You win sir. I am leaving right now to go buy a 360 and L4D.
I just have to accept that Valve will always be sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions that Sony makes with their platform(s). This is the same issue that PS2 had when it was in its infancy. Sony really just needs to learn how to scale down their hardware and make it more accessible to more developers like Valve.
I just have to accept that Valve will always be sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions that Sony makes with their platform(s). This is the same issue that PS2 had when it was in its infancy. Sony really just needs to learn how to scale down their hardware and make it more accessible to more developers like Valve.
everyone here having a temper tantrum because a pc developer isn't wasting its time trying to port pc games onto another console: go buy a $10,000 sony dev kit and start trying to program parallel instructions across 8 different processors. no really, I'll wait.
Redeye: That's not a valid excuse as other PC developers like Epic, id Software or Crytek don't seem to have trouble with the PS3, or at least aren't crying about it.
They don't have to like the PS3, they don't have to develop for it. The bottom line to multiplatform games is profit. If Valve doesn't want to spend the time learning the PS3 and are making enough money being XBox exclusive, then they don't have to.
Game developers don't owe people anything beyond tech support after they buy a game. It's like saying Ferrari owes you a car because you drive a Ford. I would love to see L4D on PS3, but I'm sure XBox users would love to see Valkyria, MGS4 and Uncharted on XBox. It's the industry.
Game developers don't owe people anything beyond tech support after they buy a game. It's like saying Ferrari owes you a car because you drive a Ford. I would love to see L4D on PS3, but I'm sure XBox users would love to see Valkyria, MGS4 and Uncharted on XBox. It's the industry.
I fully understand Valve not learning/bothering to develop for the PS3, but as for not bringing their games to the PS3, that just seems lazy to me when Valve could just outsource the project to another developer like they did with the Orange Box.
(Also before anyone brings it up, I know of the problems the PS3 version had, but problems are fixable.)
(Also before anyone brings it up, I know of the problems the PS3 version had, but problems are fixable.)
I'm guessing most of you PS3 fanboys aren't as vocal to have PS3 exclusive developers diversify to other platforms. Let me know when Guerilla Games stop being so lazy and incompetent and release Killzone 2 on the PC or the Xbox 360, and I'll put in a word with Valve for you.
For those PS3 fanboys who think Valve's games are so crappy, why the hell do you care if they develop for the PS3 or not?
For those PS3 fanboys who think Valve's games are so crappy, why the hell do you care if they develop for the PS3 or not?
Valve is mainly a PC dev, of course they have to develop something for the 360 but you see that they dont give them as much support as they do to their child, STEAM.
They should at least have a team at EA or some other company making the ports to the ps3, that team could become really good eventually go to Valve and say: we can handle this.
They should at least have a team at EA or some other company making the ports to the ps3, that team could become really good eventually go to Valve and say: we can handle this.
I love watching Sony fanboys work their panties up into knots talking about how Valve sucks because the company chooses to focus on developing games with technology they are already familiar with. Valve is awesome. They consistently delivery good games. They are focused on PC development, but offer gamers the nice bonus of some 360 ports because the architecture is similar.
Expecting others to cater to your system of choice is ridiculous, especially when said system is the most expensive to develop for and provides the smallest install base. If you want to get upset, blame Sony for always using the most complex and advanced architecture... a great decision in theory, but (sometimes) a pain in the ass in practice.
For the record, I wish Valve would develop something for Wii - but that's just not likely to happen. Tough cookies!
Expecting others to cater to your system of choice is ridiculous, especially when said system is the most expensive to develop for and provides the smallest install base. If you want to get upset, blame Sony for always using the most complex and advanced architecture... a great decision in theory, but (sometimes) a pain in the ass in practice.
For the record, I wish Valve would develop something for Wii - but that's just not likely to happen. Tough cookies!
No wonder Valve won't make games for the PS3. PS3 fanboys treat them like shit.
And in case anyone forgot (because it sounds like everyone has), The orange box is on PS3.
And in case anyone forgot (because it sounds like everyone has), The orange box is on PS3.
Alright Valve doesn't want my PS3-lovin' money but how about EA? Is EA willing to miss the opportunity of sure success by not porting over the game? Only time will tell.
So wait, when a company wants to make good games instead of quickly porting them for a load of cash, we complain?
I am confuse.
I'd rather have 1 good game than 3 glitchy, broken ones plzkthxbai.
I am confuse.
I'd rather have 1 good game than 3 glitchy, broken ones plzkthxbai.
@ JonB
Yes, especially when the game being ported is L4D :p. Besides EA did a near perfect job of porting over the Orange Box to the PS3. The only ones who were complaining were 1up when they tried to review a prerelease code for the game.
Also this game still might not exist since Valve would never release a sequel so soon. It's not their style lol.
Yes, especially when the game being ported is L4D :p. Besides EA did a near perfect job of porting over the Orange Box to the PS3. The only ones who were complaining were 1up when they tried to review a prerelease code for the game.
Also this game still might not exist since Valve would never release a sequel so soon. It's not their style lol.
@Arch469:
"The orange box is on PS3."
Correct, and Valve had nothing to do with that. EA made that decision and farmed out the porting to another developer. Which is probably why it runs like shit.
"The orange box is on PS3."
Correct, and Valve had nothing to do with that. EA made that decision and farmed out the porting to another developer. Which is probably why it runs like shit.
lol, here come the fanboys! "Valve admits PS3 is TOO HARD to develop for!" Yeah, right, that's exactly what they said. /rolleyes
Get over yourself. The PS3 hardware is junk and Valve isn't afraid to admit it. Don't try and take out the anger from your wounded fanboy pride on Valve by saying they "just aren't skilled enough" to develop for the PS3. That's retarded.
Get over yourself. The PS3 hardware is junk and Valve isn't afraid to admit it. Don't try and take out the anger from your wounded fanboy pride on Valve by saying they "just aren't skilled enough" to develop for the PS3. That's retarded.
Valve is obligated to port their games to every platform known to man.
They are not fulfilling their OBLIGATION. End of story.
rabble rabble rabble
They are not fulfilling their OBLIGATION. End of story.
rabble rabble rabble
I'm really getting sick of Valve. I'm a big PC gamer and love most of their games, Counter Strike, Half Life, TF2, Portal L4D... but the attitude they are putting out right now seems so fucking arrogant and really they are not KINGS. Get the fuck off your high horse...
Funny so far everyone who used the word fanboy on this article needs to have a look in the mirror, the guilty are usually the first to accuse.
Any way on this occasion if valve get called morons they earned it for violating one of the unwritten rules NEVER SAY CAN'T unless circumstances dictate otherwise.Devs are in a technology based environment where constant improvement of your skills isn't optional. This may have been acceptable back in 2006 when the tech was new but as of now were damn near every dev have stated the PS3 structure is just different and some find it easier than the 360s or PC saying can't will make you look foolish.
So if your defending valve, can it.After a statement like that any normal person would call them idiots (even if its not true) and they have nobody to blame but themselves.
Any way on this occasion if valve get called morons they earned it for violating one of the unwritten rules NEVER SAY CAN'T unless circumstances dictate otherwise.Devs are in a technology based environment where constant improvement of your skills isn't optional. This may have been acceptable back in 2006 when the tech was new but as of now were damn near every dev have stated the PS3 structure is just different and some find it easier than the 360s or PC saying can't will make you look foolish.
So if your defending valve, can it.After a statement like that any normal person would call them idiots (even if its not true) and they have nobody to blame but themselves.
Has anyone here remembered that Valve is a relatively small developer? They've got a cabal system that works well for them, and they divided their efforts up long ago to work on different things relating to PC games. They decided that they had enough resources to make in-house 360 ports because it's similar technology. But for the PS3, they had to outsource because they simply don't have the manpower, and they can't tap another team because all the other teams are BUSY with their own projects. When people whined because the product was inferior (way to be lazy dicks, EA), Valve decided it wasn't worth it to have shitty ports tarnish their reputation, and that it wasn't a good business decision.
If they could find a team that would be willing to do work on the PS3, or if they weren't so small, that'd be a different story. But the fact of the matter is that Valve is a small, focused developer. And right now their focus is on 360 and PC titles. Really, can anyone fault them for that?
(This spoken as a PC gamer that's going to buy a PS3, so I've got all my bases covered.)
If they could find a team that would be willing to do work on the PS3, or if they weren't so small, that'd be a different story. But the fact of the matter is that Valve is a small, focused developer. And right now their focus is on 360 and PC titles. Really, can anyone fault them for that?
(This spoken as a PC gamer that's going to buy a PS3, so I've got all my bases covered.)
"But right now they don't want to develop for a dead-end architecture on a third-place platform."
"The PS3 hardware is junk and Valve isn't afraid to admit it."
Many of you have valid points but comments like these make you no better than the "PS3 fanboys". It will just draw out more flamebait responses. Like a never ending cycle.
"The PS3 hardware is junk and Valve isn't afraid to admit it."
Many of you have valid points but comments like these make you no better than the "PS3 fanboys". It will just draw out more flamebait responses. Like a never ending cycle.
As I recall a lot of the dudes at Valve came from Microsoft. Maybe there's a loyalty there or is it possible there's some kind of exclusivity deal lurking in the shadows? The PS3 currently has 101 exclusive titles... Is it solely up to Valve to make up for this?
To be frank, when you claim to want to give good experiences, it kind of negates it when you leave people out of your experience just because of their system of preference or even if its the only one they own (shocker!) Also to note, when the hell has Valve made a NOT Half-Life engine redux game of late? How much work are they actually doing that they seem to be "sweating bullets"? Let alone the Orange Box is on PS3, so there you go. They already did it. I think this is more one of those inside baseball things where money might have changed hands.
Did everyone forget that Valve isn't a large company to begin with? Maybe most if not all of their team is only skilled in programing PC games? Why should Valve waste their resources hiring another team just to program PS3 games? If they feel it's not worth their time then so be it, stop all the fucking whining, if you want to play Valve games so bad get your self a descent PC or a 360 end of story. I don't see you people complaining when a company decides they only want to develop for the PS3, no instead you get on your soapbox and rub it in everyone's faces. You fan boys are nothing but a bunch of fucking hypocrites.
follow
