So why doesn't Valve like Playstation?

I mean, the Ps3 is the future of gaming, is any other console running on blu-ray?

Why does Valve like living in the passt with with 360 and PC? M$ pay-off?

Playstation fed Valves dog chocolate and it died. No i think its just buissness they dont want to waste their time developing on something that will take them longer than they really need to. Well thats what i guess it is.

its got no games.

Playstation fed Valves dog chocolate and it died. No i think its just buissness they dont want to waste their time developing on something that will take them longer than they really need to. Well thats what i guess it is.

Jono789

Because Playstation doesn't make them money? And the dualshock sucks for FPS games which they make.

Two very good reasons imo

Because teh cell is so powerful and almighty that the Valve devs literally p****d their pantsin fear the first time they got their hands on it.Just to be on the safe side,their PS3 dev kits are now locked away in the basement.So they won't be making any PS3 versions of their games for a while.

Valve develops games for PC -> 360 development environment is pretty similar to PC -> it's easier to port the games to 360 -> not so much with PS3 -> hence the popular belief that Valve doesnt like PS3funsohng

[QUOTE="funsohng"]Valve develops games for PC -> 360 development environment is pretty similar to PC -> it's easier to port the games to 360 -> not so much with PS3 -> hence the popular belief that Valve doesnt like PS3Couth_

Because VALVe found it wasn't worth the R&D tomake games for PS3.

But it's alright since every cow owns a gaming PC, right? :)

They hate the architeture. Its fair considering they can port with little effort to the 360 but would have to do some serious work to get there stuff to ther PS3. The extra sales aren't really work it.

my guess is that they aren't familiar with the ps3'sarchitecture

Playstation fed Valves dog chocolate and it died. No i think its just buissness they dont want to waste their time developing on something that will take them longer than they really need to. Well thats what i guess it is.

Jono789

It's too hard to develop for.:cry: Can we give this a rest, now?

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

Valve is lazy, they don't want to learn a new platform.

lazy developers who like making games for 9gb dvd discs

lol "dvd" it already sounds last gen

Playstation fed Valves dog chocolate and it died. No i think its just buissness they dont want to waste their time developing on something that will take them longer than they really need to. Well thats what i guess it is.

Jono789

lazy developers who like making games for 9gb dvd discs

NICKKELANIUS

they don't have the money plain and simple.

the CELL architecture is VERY different to PC/X360 architecture.

PS3 is therefore more difficult & time consuming to develop for.

Valve do not see the point in the the PS3 architecture. It is unnecessarily complicated.

I mean, the Ps3 is the future of gaming, is any other console running on blu-ray?

Why does Valve like living in the passt with with 360 and PC? M$ pay-off?

Coffeemakes

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

smithster118

That's poor reasoning imo. That is a one sided argument, its not just that they don't want to do, its that they have no reason to and they see nobenefit init. Not the same thing as simply choosing not to. In the time it would take Valve to learn the PS3 architecture and develop a competent port, they could have been working on their next project and for what, the minimal PS3 owners that will buy it which will only balance the time they took to port it? On top of the fact that they make plentiful money off the 360 and PC, they have no real reason to bother financially or logically. I hardly call that lazy.

I mean, the Ps3 is the future of gaming, is any other console running on blu-ray?

Why does Valve like living in the passt with with 360 and PC? M$ pay-off?

[QUOTE="smithster118"]

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

ActicEdge

That's poor reasoning imo. That is a one sided argument, its not just that they don't want to do, its that they have no reason to and they see nobenefit init. Not the same thing as simply choosing not to. In the time it would take Valve to learn the PS3 architecture and develop a competent port, they could have been working on their next project and for what, the minimal PS3 owners that will buy it which will only balance the time they took to port it? On top of the fact that they make plentiful money off the 360 and PC, they have no real reason to bother financially or logically. I hardly call that lazy.

How do they know there is no benefit? The PS3 users have probably quadrupled from 2007 and many (including me) are hopeful for a decent looking Valve game.

They're just lazy and once you play Half-Life2 you do not want to play it again. Team Fortress 2, I'd only play it on PC but I don't want to waste money on a PC.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="smithster118"]

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

That's poor reasoning imo. That is a one sided argument, its not just that they don't want to do, its that they have no reason to and they see nobenefit init. Not the same thing as simply choosing not to. In the time it would take Valve to learn the PS3 architecture and develop a competent port, they could have been working on their next project and for what, the minimal PS3 owners that will buy it which will only balance the time they took to port it? On top of the fact that they make plentiful money off the 360 and PC, they have no real reason to bother financially or logically. I hardly call that lazy.

How do they know there is no benefit? The PS3 users have probably quadrupled from 2007 and many (including me) are hopeful for a decent looking Valve game.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="smithster118"]

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

smithster118

That's poor reasoning imo. That is a one sided argument, its not just that they don't want to do, its that they have no reason to and they see no benefit in it. Not the same thing as simply choosing not to. In the time it would take Valve to learn the PS3 architecture and develop a competent port, they could have been working on their next project and for what, the minimal PS3 owners that will buy it which will only balance the time they took to port it? On top of the fact that they make plentiful money off the 360 and PC, they have no real reason to bother financially or logically. I hardly call that lazy.

How do they know there is no benefit? The PS3 users have probably quadrupled from 2007 and many (including me) are hopeful for a decent looking Valve game.

Here, let me bold it for you. Why would they bother? PS3 owners buy less software than 360 owners, even if they made a profit doing it, it wouldn't be nearly enough considering how much further into development of another game/tech while not having to learn anything substantially new. Wanting a Valve game is fine but there underlying reason is more than fair. The risk really isn't worth bothering.

[QUOTE="smithster118"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

That's poor reasoning imo. That is a one sided argument, its not just that they don't want to do, its that they have no reason to and they see nobenefit init. Not the same thing as simply choosing not to. In the time it would take Valve to learn the PS3 architecture and develop a competent port, they could have been working on their next project and for what, the minimal PS3 owners that will buy it which will only balance the time they took to port it? On top of the fact that they make plentiful money off the 360 and PC, they have no real reason to bother financially or logically. I hardly call that lazy.

Jono789

How do they know there is no benefit? The PS3 users have probably quadrupled from 2007 and many (including me) are hopeful for a decent looking Valve game.

Without Risk, There Is No Reward.

[QUOTE="Jono789"][QUOTE="smithster118"]

How do they know there is no benefit? The PS3 users have probably quadrupled from 2007 and many (including me) are hopeful for a decent looking Valve game.

Without Risk, There Is No Reward.

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

smithster118

Valve are too lazy to learn their way around new technology.

Why is it ok for japanese developers to dis the 360 but when Valve does it for the PS3 all of a sudden they are lazy? lol. It's ridiculous. Maybe they feel they don't need to. It's quite possible that the cost of customizing the source engine to work on the PS3 is too much compared to what they would get back.

I know, I know, I'm trying to make sense. I'll go back to playing Mass Effect now.

Cause they whine about how its hardware is confusing. It's just a poor excuse by valve really.n00bkid

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

smithster118

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

smithster118

Ah no. It's because it's not economical, nor is it cost effective. Valve is only a small development team, they don't have the resources, time or money to train staff how to port to ps3. They port to 360 because its fairly similar to PC and thus fairly easy.

I'm pretty sure they have stated this themselves, it's purely a business decsion.

Basically, they are lazy.

Wait, let me defend myself before you flame me.

Basically you all agree that it is easier to port to 360 rather than PS3 as it is easier to develop for. Now, in my book, if someone refuses to do something that might require a bit more effort than usual, I think that's lazy.

smithster118

lazy developers who like making games for 9gb dvd discs

lol "dvd" it already sounds last gen

NICKKELANIUS

Cause they whine about how its hardware is confusing. It's just a poor excuse by valve really.n00bkid

The amount of bashing to valve is ridiculous. It already takes them years to make games on something their familiar with. Now take the time it takes them learn the Ps3's architecture and for them to actually do it. It doesn't make sense.

Well it's Valves loss, they can't see how surperior the ps3 is.

i dont think they can develop the same quality for the same game as 360 or pc so they choose not to make ps3 versions or their games thats what i think

I mean, the Ps3 is the future of gaming,Coffeemakes

Well it's Valves loss, they can't see how surperior the ps3 is.

Coffeemakes