PS3 Development For Dummies: Is Valve Being Lazy Or Are They Biased?

[QUOTE="skektek"]

Ninja Theory developed the amazing Heavenly Sword which has sold over a million copies to date. Free Radical was a small independent studio that developed a crappy game and closed their doors, no fault of the PS3. Level 5 developed the infamous half baked Lair but they have went on to develop another PS3 exclusive White Knight Chronicles,

Unless you evidence to the contrary?

kolkov01

actually I do

first of all Ninja Theory claimed that they found Heavenly Sword's sales disapointing. It was an old link so all i could find on it was this:

"With the story's second part already scribed, fans of big-haired action epic Heavenly Sword have eagerly been awaiting confirmation of a sequel. Though it hasn't arrived just yet (possibly waylaid by disappointing sales of the original)"

Free radical was a small studio (like the Valve) that was famous for developing great shooters (like Valve), they chose to develop a game for the PS3 and now they are no more

Oh and I made a mistake, Lair was developed by Factor 5, not Level 5

Factor 5 was a small studio (like valve), that became famous for it's action games (like Valve), they chose to develop for the PS3 and now they are no more

indeed I can't blame the PS3 for having a dificult hardware, I can only blame developers for making games on the PS3 knowing too well it would be a risk, if they had been more like Valve then maybe we would still have a Factor 5 and a Free radical

In your link the article author says "disappointing" not Ninja Theory.

You can't blame the PS3 for Haze, it was barely mediocre game in a crowded genre filled with exceptional titles.

My appologies on the confusion of Factor 5 and Level 5 :P

[QUOTE="kolkov01"]

[QUOTE="skektek"]

Ninja Theory developed the amazing Heavenly Sword which has sold over a million copies to date. Free Radical was a small independent studio that developed a crappy game and closed their doors, no fault of the PS3. Level 5 developed the infamous half baked Lair but they have went on to develop another PS3 exclusive White Knight Chronicles,

Unless you evidence to the contrary?

badtaker

actually I do

first of all Ninja Theory claimed that they found Heavenly Sword's sales disapointing. It was an old link so all i could find on it was this:

"With the story's second part already scribed, fans of big-haired action epic Heavenly Sword have eagerly been awaiting confirmation of a sequel. Though it hasn't arrived just yet (possibly waylaid by disappointing sales of the original)"

Free radical was a small studio (like the Valve) that was famous for developing great shooters (like Valve), they chose to develop a game for the PS3 and now they are no more

Oh and I made a mistake, Lair was developed by Factor 5, not Level 5

Factor 5 was a small studio (like valve), that became famous for it's action games (like Valve), they chose to develop for the PS3 and now they are no more

indeed I can't blame the PS3 for having a dificult hardware, I can only blame developers for making on the PS3 knowing too well it would be a risk, if they had been more like Valve then maybe we would still have a Factor 5 and a Free radical

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

Companies smaller than Valve have invested in the PS3 with amazing results.skektek

alves two biggest problems is that they approach new technology with fear and trepidation instead of excitement and enthusiasm. skektek

Why would anyone sane be excited about that technology? It's outdated, clunky and hard to work on. ..yay.....

Imagine a floor you have to walk over to get to a fridge, PC/360 is like flat floor, PS3 is like the same floor filled with broken glass. Sure, you can walk over it, it won't be pleseant, but it can be done, but it's not pleseant and definitly not somethign you should aproach with "excitement and enthusiasm"

In your link the article author says "disappointing" not Ninja Theory.skektek

Like I said, I remember an interview back in 2007 where the Ninja theory said the games sales were disapointing or underwhelming, but I can't find it right now

You can't blame the PS3 for Haze, it was barely mediocre game in a crowded genre filled with exceptional titles.skektek

This isn't about the PS3, it's about Dev's being accused of being "lazy" when they're actually doing the smart thing. If Valve feels like they're not at their best making PS3 games then they shouldn't make PS3 games, just like Free Radical and Factor 5 shouldn't have. They were great devs and no they are no more because of this. I can however blame sony for using an alien architecture for the PS3, while it is true that it does allow for some great visuals like uncharted 2 it can also cause that some great games end up being poorly translated like the orange Box, Haze or Lair.

My appologies on the confusion of Factor 5 and Level 5 :P

skektek

A very common and understandable mistake

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

skektek

/p>

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

skektek

[QUOTE="badtaker"][QUOTE="kolkov01"]

actually I do

first of all Ninja Theory claimed that they found Heavenly Sword's sales disapointing. It was an old link so all i could find on it was this:

"With the story's second part already scribed, fans of big-haired action epic Heavenly Sword have eagerly been awaiting confirmation of a sequel. Though it hasn't arrived just yet (possibly waylaid by disappointing sales of the original)"

Free radical was a small studio (like the Valve) that was famous for developing great shooters (like Valve), they chose to develop a game for the PS3 and now they are no more

Oh and I made a mistake, Lair was developed by Factor 5, not Level 5

Factor 5 was a small studio (like valve), that became famous for it's action games (like Valve), they chose to develop for the PS3 and now they are no more

indeed I can't blame the PS3 for having a dificult hardware, I can only blame developers for making on the PS3 knowing too well it would be a risk, if they had been more like Valve then maybe we would still have a Factor 5 and a Free radical

skektek

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

[QUOTE="skektek"]

Companies smaller than Valve have invested in the PS3 with amazing results.AdrianWerner

alves two biggest problems is that they approach new technology with fear and trepidation instead of excitement and enthusiasm. skektek

Why would anyone sane be excited about that technology? It's outdated, clunky and hard to work on. ..yay.....

Imagine a floor you have to walk over to get to a fridge, PC/360 is like flat floor, PS3 is like the same floor filled with broken glass. Sure, you can walk over it, it won't be pleseant, but it can be done, but it's not pleseant and definitly not somethign you should aproach with "excitement and enthusiasm"

Read the thread, your questions have been answered (with the exception of your ridiculous analogy).

Read the thread, your questions have been answered (with the exception of your ridiculous analogy).

skektek

[QUOTE="skektek"]

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

AdrianWerner

If he had spent over a decade steadfast stuck in the same architecture refusing to broaden his skillset in the light of increasing criticism and the emergence of of other viable options, then yes you could call Kojima lazy too.

[QUOTE="Ravenlore_basic"]

seems common knowlege Valve'sGabe Newelljust does not like the PS3 http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/77826-Gabe-Newell-Calls-PlayStation-3-A-Waste-of-Time

even other developers have spoken out

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.153970

SO, they do not want to make games for PS3. As long as there are developers showing up Valve like ID and EPIC who cares, oh, and lets not forget ND and other games coming to PS3 that show that its not a waste of time.

ronvalencia

yes but what he said was true.

first up is Gurella, new to developing games they were able to make a game sure they had more resources but for a new development team compared to Valve they did a great job.

next is Naughty Dog... a great team that puts Gabe's words to shame. maken Gabe look bad

next to come out is Blupoint games God of war 3 Blupoint may not have all the experience as Vavle but I think they did a great job... Showing Gabe how its done

There are plenty of games that will be coming out showing how games on PS3 are great.. But to B&M about something like Gabe did is Fanboyism at its best

cant wait for ID and Epic to step up and smack Valve around like always with their new shooters I just wish they would make an PS3 only games to show off what it can do. Like Gears of wars does on Xbox 360

Umm... I Do have a few questions and something that makes me wonder...

Correct me if im wrong, but Valve does not port thier games to the 360, it is an EA team, EA is licensing the games and they do the porting to the 360. Valve themselves has very little to do with it? or has that changed?

Now my point. IF the PS3 was NOT har d to develop for, then why was the PS3 launch games (pretty much all of them) dealayied 1-2 years? Ill give you a little hint here, the devs does not START making the game when the console launches, launchgames are usually made with an sdk and usually takes 2-3 years to develop before the console launches...

Noone think there is a connection between the PS3 is hard to code for, and that it took 3 years for most of its games to come out?

And yeah there wont be another generation of the Cell, and the PS3 I doubt will be around for 10 years, so 3 years just to learn to code for it, allows for 1-2 games, in its lifespan?? Man what a waste of money -.- Unless you are financed by the platform itself.

[QUOTE="skektek"]/p>

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

kolkov01

I know Kojima Productions is working on the title, but I wasn't aware that Kojima himself wasn't working on the game. Do you have a link?

Wow, you really hate the Cell? Did it kill your kitten?

I am talking about this:

"Technologically, I think every game developer should be terrified of the next generation of processors...So it's not even clear that over the lifespan of these next generation systems that they will be solved problems. The amount of time it takes to get a good multicore engine running, the Xbox 360 might not even be on the market any longer. That should scare the crap out of everybody."

-Gabe Newell

Gabe is scared of new tech, and apparently he thinks that everyone else should be too. While he is cowering in the corner developers like Epic and Naughty Dog are doing amazing things with multi-core engines.

skektek

Nice 2005 article, fast forward to now and what do we see?

Valve is doing their bit to implement multicore support into their games. Multicore development is hard, very hard, companies are investing in the research to do it right. Look at the beginning of this generation and next to no one had decent multicore support, yes even Unreal Engine 3 which apparently only utilized one core in Gears of War 1.

See the thing is not all developers have the privilege of receiving the support they need for this sort of work, Naughty Dog got it from Sony and Epic Games got it from Microsoft. Valve is on their own, it is entirely up to them to optimize their engine. They are not in a position to benefit from other peoples work by licensing someone else's engine, that's what the majority of cross platform developers do these days. Even then, we have seen developers receive Sony support and still fail, as with the games you pointed out earlier. This isn't easy, you cannot cherry pick the successes and criticise those who didn't make it.

They will eventually get full multicore support, just like everyone else. But it will be for today's and tomorrows processors, not to please people like you who have loyalties to dead technology.

Your problem is you haven't recognised the truth of this generation. PS3's unique traits are irrelevant, 360s unique traits are irrelevant, yes even PC's hardware advantages are irrelevant. There is only one thing that matters to 3rd party developers this generation, one size fits all. Even if they managed to easily utilize the full processing power of Cell in PS3, all you would get is a smoother running carbon copy.

That's what the majority of 3rd party developers care about this generation; and Cell development difficulty is a hindrance to that, not a exciting challenge to conquer and take full advantage of.

[QUOTE="skektek"]

[QUOTE="badtaker"] let's blame hideo kojima for not making PC/360 games :Pbadtaker

(?) They are making a PC/360 game.

I wasn't aware of that. I the 360 being ported too?

[QUOTE="skektek"]

Read the thread, your questions have been answered (with the exception of your ridiculous analogy).

AdrianWerner

Yeah it is ridiculous. A better analogy of multi-core/thread vs single core/thread development would be a car with an automatic transmission vs a standard. Sure the standard is harder to initially learn but once you grasp it's intricacies you will get better performance and fuel economy.

The point is that multicore computing is the future, you can embrace it and prosper or ignore it and get left behind.

[QUOTE="skektek"]

Wow, you really hate the Cell? Did it kill your kitten?

I am talking about this:

"Technologically, I think every game developer should be terrified of the next generation of processors...So it's not even clear that over the lifespan of these next generation systems that they will be solved problems. The amount of time it takes to get a good multicore engine running, the Xbox 360 might not even be on the market any longer. That should scare the crap out of everybody."

-Gabe Newell

Gabe is scared of new tech, and apparently he thinks that everyone else should be too. While he is cowering in the corner developers like Epic and Naughty Dog are doing amazing things with multi-core engines.

AnnoyedDragon

Nice 2005 article, fast forward to now and what do we see?

...Valve dragged kicking and screaming into the mulicore age despite Gabe Newell's pessimistic, pants pissing, predictions.

...Valve dragged kicking and screaming into the mulicore age despite Gabe Newell's pessimistic, pants pissing, predictions.

skektek

Except that Left 4 Dead's design required multicore support from the start, that being 2004, and they hired a former Weta technician to write their new physics solution. Their animation and particles systems are using both CPU and GPU processing. That doesn't sound like "dragging".

...Valve dragged kicking and screaming into the mulicore age despite Gabe Newell's pessimistic, pants pissing, predictions.

skektek

If you still feel the need to insult them for not catering to your platform of choice, how about clarifying some of those questions I asked earlier?

You have given examples of Sony supported projects doing well on the PS3, now let's see the ones that did well in Valve's position.

No Sony support, no 3rd party engine, show me companies in Valve's position that have excelled with PS3 development.

[QUOTE="skektek"]

...Valve dragged kicking and screaming into the mulicore age despite Gabe Newell's pessimistic, pants pissing, predictions.

AnnoyedDragon

If you still feel the need to insult them for not catering to your platform of choice, how about clarifying some of those questions I asked earlier?

You have given examples of Sony supported projects doing well on the PS3, now let's see the ones that did well in Valve's position.

No Sony support, no 3rd party engine, show me companies in Valve's position that have excelled with PS3 development.

*cricket chirp*

they aren't obligated to develop for the ps3 and probably don't have the time/staff to do so without delaying their other projects. for example, tf2 hasn't had a class update in quite some time because a chunk of the tf2 had to help develop l4d2. the marginal profits valve would make off the ps3 probably wouldn't warrant hiring more people/ taking longer.

*cricket chirp*

tempest91

I'm half expecting Unreal Tournament 3 to be brought up, I cannot remember what the end product was like on PS3.

Ah yes UT3, the game that not only looked better in 2005 but boasted about PS3 development being "easy". Yet it got delayed over and over again, they ended up having to change its name because they weren't sure if they could release it in 2007, they just made it onto PS3 in December 2007.

[QUOTE="tempest91"]

*cricket chirp*

AnnoyedDragon

I'm half expecting Unreal Tournament 3 to be brought up, I cannot remember what the end product was like on PS3.

Ah yes UT3, the game that not only looked better in 2005 but boasted about PS3 development being "easy". Yet it got delayed over and over again, they ended up having to change its name because they weren't sure if they could release it in 2007, they just made it onto PS3 in December 2007.

There is nothing to be brought up. Sony relies on 1st party titles and realizes that it will never have strong 3rd party support because it's terrible to develop on in terms of r & d and initial investment. That's why only Sony backed companies have such success, and even some of them fail hard.

Yeah it is ridiculous. A better analogy of multi-core/thread vs single core/thread development would be a car with an automatic transmission vs a standard. Sure the standard is harder to initially learn but once you grasp it's intricacies you will get better performance and fuel economy.

The point is that multicore computing is the future, you can embrace it and prosper or ignore it and get left behind.

skektek

Also your analogy is ridiculous, PS3 doesn't offer any advantage, just more hassle. Remember: Valve is primarly a PC dev. Tell me exactly what advantage would PS3 hardware offer compared to PC? None. No matter how good you are at PS3 coding it will still result in something vastly inferior to what you can do with PC hardware. So why bother?

And I'm still waiting for a list of all those devs who invested so much into PS3 and has such miraclous results because of it

skektek

How much of a genius does one need to be to know that Valve doesn't like propriety software that they cannot build off of? PS3 is PS3 and will always be PS3. These guys are PC devs. The 360 only gets ports because the similarity in architecture. From Valves stand point as a PC dev why the hell wouldn't you port to 360? Its simple, quick, easy money.

I don't understand why the PS3 fans think they are owed something. Its hilarious to me that they all blame Valve and NOT ONE, not freaking ONE PS3 fan has pointed the blame at Sony the guys who claimed they made their system intentionally hard to develop for.

I applaud Valve. As a developer I'd say **** a hardware manufacturer who is intentionally trying to make my job more difficult. I don't see people calling Kojima lazy for not making MGS4 on 360.

You guys need to get over yourselves. Just by the game on the PC. The Source Engine isn't even most demanding.

Crying to Valve ain't gonna do you squat. What you need to do is start crying towards Sony and their idiocy of architecture. The Hardware manufacturer is supposed to cator to the developers needs not the other way around. Or did we all forget why the PS1 destroyed the N64? Were all those devs lazy and overrated for making PS1 games and not taking the time to put them on N64? Or later Dreamcast or hell even Saturn?

I have no problem with the PS3 but as long as Valve takes with their games on PC and with their constant flow of updates the PS3 is just going to slow that process even more. A simple and small sacrifice for THEIR PRIMARY FANBASE of PC users.

You guys need to get over yourselves. Just buy the game on the PC. The Source Engine isn't even most demanding.

[QUOTE="The__Havoc"]

You guys need to get over yourselves. Just buy the game on the PC. The Source Engine isn't even most demanding.

>blue_hazy_basic

Who is they? The PS3 fans?

At this point it could be they just want to concentrate on X360 developement. They could be getting special incentives for it not making it to the PS3 but we'll probably never know the full details. It doesn't make any sense not to hire a couple devs with PS3 knowledge to port their games but it seems they just don't want to do it. Why would they want to miss out on possible millions of sales......I have no idea other than they are getting paid.darthogre

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="The__Havoc"]

You guys need to get over yourselves. Just buy the game on the PC. The Source Engine isn't even most demanding.

>

Who is they? The PS3 fans?

You're missing the entire point. Valve's argument is not that the PS3 can't produce good games but rather that it takes too much effort and resources to do it. They're right. themyth01

Oh please. Enough with this Valve is loyal to MS crap. Valve is and has been primarily a PC developer and they prefer the 360 because it and desktop PC's share hardware that is extremely similar. Therefore, it is easier to port PC games to the 360 without spending millions of dollars to rewrite the game's code.. Plus, lets not forgot the 360 has a larger fan-base.

So, for valve this is the picture:

360= low cost, high return.

PS3= high cost, low return.

Why would a company risk millions because of brand loyalty? They are making good money with the 360/PC and they don't want to break the mold.

CannedWorms

Why are they risking millions again? Other companies achieve platform parity AND make money, both on the PS3 and 360 versions of their games. That alone makes any excuse Valve or fanboys here come up with a fallacy.

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

Why would a company risk millions because of brand loyalty? They are making good money with the 360/PC and they don't want to break the mold.

NielsNL

Why are they risking millions again? Other companies achieve platform parity AND make money, both on the PS3 and 360 versions of their games. That alone makes any excuse Valve or fanboys here come up with a fallacy.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="Gta3-fan334"]

Oh please. Enough with this Valve is loyal to MS crap. Valve is and has been primarily a PC developer and they prefer the 360 because it and desktop PC's share hardware that is extremely similar. Therefore, it is easier to port PC games to the 360 without spending millions of dollars to rewrite the game's code.. Plus, lets not forgot the 360 has a larger fan-base.

So, for valve this is the picture:

360= low cost, high return.

PS3= high cost, low return.

jwsoul

EDIT and to show how daft that is, should PC/360 gamers shun all Sony products for them developing PS3 exclusives? :lol:

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

Why would a company risk millions because of brand loyalty? They are making good money with the 360/PC and they don't want to break the mold.

SpruceCaboose

Why are they risking millions again? Other companies achieve platform parity AND make money, both on the PS3 and 360 versions of their games. That alone makes any excuse Valve or fanboys here come up with a fallacy.

What exactly do you mean by not knowing Valve's situation?

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

Why would a company risk millions because of brand loyalty? They are making good money with the 360/PC and they don't want to break the mold.

NielsNL

Why are they risking millions again? Other companies achieve platform parity AND make money, both on the PS3 and 360 versions of their games. That alone makes any excuse Valve or fanboys here come up with a fallacy.

What exactly do you mean by not knowing Valve's situation?

NielsNL

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

Why would a company risk millions because of brand loyalty? They are making good money with the 360/PC and they don't want to break the mold.

AdrianWerner

Why are they risking millions again? Other companies achieve platform parity AND make money, both on the PS3 and 360 versions of their games. That alone makes any excuse Valve or fanboys here come up with a fallacy.

Who said anything about independent devs? The studios operating under the wings of the big publishers are proving that multiplats can be roughly equal in terms of game performance and that money can be made from both versions. Didn't EA'sannualfinancial report show that they make more money from the PS3 than the 360 (I could be wrong about that though)? I'll give you that there's additional risk when a smaller company has to make an investment, but how much factual risk is there?How likely would it be for games by a renowned studio like Valve to not sell well enough on the PS3 to earn back the investment? Not very if you ask me. Especially with the install base growing relatively rapidly as it is now.

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

What exactly do you mean by not knowing Valve's situation?

SpruceCaboose

I would say it is highly unlikely that Valve couldn't earn a lot of money by also working with the PS3.