good for valve. someone has to stick it to Sony for not consulting devs before releasing final specs for the machine - something that has historically been done for nearly all console hardware.
If they don't want to waste time on trying to figure out the baffling architecture of the PS3 doesn't mean they're lazy, it just means they aren't a fan of wasting time. Valve has usually been good about releasing quality titles in succession. To call them lazy would be ignorant at best, the devs that have actually had the will to ATTEMPT to figure out the ordeal that is the PS3 were usually funded by Sony themselves, so we can expect a lot of this in the future.
So basically one of the best devs this generation is considered lazy? Maybe they are right... ever think of that?
Valve is not the only company expressing their disinterest of developing on the ps3 platform... maybe it's not a coincedence that many developers claim it's a difficult platform to develop for.
Heck, why is almost every multi plat better on 360 then.
Good, now they can focus on their awesome franchises and not fiddling about without awkward PS3 hardware. Stop being so butt-hurt Cows, yawl guys should have gaming PCs anyhoo.
Maybe the developer wants to make some money $$$$$ (everyone should know by now if you want to make money on making games release it on the 360/pc or the wii) :roll:
Valve are MS fanboys.They make some good games but other than that they are *******s
MJPK
They show their disliking of a system that would take more time from them to make 1 game than it would to make 3 entirely new Ip's, and that makes them Douches?
"The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform. [...] I didn't come into this business in the 90s because of some technical fetish. I came in because I wanted to give people experiences that made them have fun."
Thats funny, other developers are doing just fine:?-Pred-Alien-
QUOTE: The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform. [...] I didn't come into this business in the 90s because of some technical fetish. I came in because I wanted to give people experiences that made them have fun.
Their just saying they just wanna make game expierences. Why should they invest tons of money and learn the PS3 architecture because of Sony's design moves?
I can understand their situation. They like to work with hardware they're comfortable with. Like with a PC or with the 360 (architecture relatively similar to a PC's). I bet they're afraid they won't be able to pump at games that looks as good as killzone 2 or uncharted 2 and feel that, that makes them inferior devs.
Valve has had that stance since the beginning so it's not a surprise. I still think they should just let EA handle the Left 4 Dead port (s) like they wanted to. The Orange Box wasn't perfect but I'm sure most PS3 only owners would take that.
Sounds like some of the employees at Valve need to start taking some classes at Naughty Dog University.Jared2720
a 1st party of sony that receives MASSSIVE amounts of money from sony, and the latest and best R&D out of sony for the ps3 as well as every trick and new method created by other developers that then report it to sony, and likely loads of coding workers inside sony it self doing half of all codding work on naughty dog games.
[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Well, all the PS3 guys have high end PCs so this really isn't a problem.shaggygrosser
yah, I was under the impression that everyone with a PS3 had gaming-grade PC's, so there's no need for a 360. :lol: I would have assumed that too, with the "I'll get the better version on PC" response being very prevalent in, say, Mass Effect 2 threads.
Valve are MS fanboys.They make some good games but other than that they are *******s
Dead-Memories
They show their disliking of a system that would take more time from them to make 1 game than it would to make 3 entirely new Ip's, and that makes them Douches?
Check my edit.The hole €1=$1 situation on Steam made me lose all respect for them.
I bet if they couldn't port there games almost straight over to the 360 they wouldn't be 360 fans either, it's just they don't feel the want/need to spend money to port it to an alien archtype. So I really don't blame them, MS just has it lucky with the similar Archtype to PC.
Sounds like some of the employees at Valve need to start taking some classes at Naughty Dog University.Jared2720
Yeah becuase ND created HL, HL2, Portal, TF2 and L4D all of which have recived numerous GOTY awards, especially HL2 and HL which is rearged by some as the greatest game of this decade and HL of the last. Oh wait, they didn't. That was Valve. Valve also created CSS and CS, still 2 of the most popular competative shooters. I think if anyone should be teaching it should be VALVE.
Lazy? "We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform" No they just feel there efforts are better placed ont eh game itself.
That probably explains why the Ghostbusters of 360 has better finishing touches and burning Stay-Puff is cooler. It just must be easier to do on 360 than it is on PS3. And before you cry lazy developer on that, realize they are always approaching deadlines, time is money, and I don't blame them not wanting to work overnight for nothing just because they have to do a techinical dance where they don't have to on 360.
[QUOTE="-Pred-Alien-"]Thats funny, other developers are doing just fine:?After_Math
QUOTE: The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform. [...] I didn't come into this business in the 90s because of some technical fetish. I came in because I wanted to give people experiences that made them have fun.
Their just saying they just wanna make game expierences. Why should they invest tons of money and learn the PS3 architecture because of Sony's design moves?
They are a small dev (in terms of people working on products) so its understandable, but theres no reason as to why they cant support the PS3 given the money they make
[QUOTE="Jared2720"] a 1st party of sony that receives MASSSIVE amounts of money from sony, and the latest and best R&D out of sony for the ps3 as well as every trick and new method created by other developers that then report it to sony, and likely loads of coding workers inside sony it self doing half of all codding work on naughty dog games.WilliamRLBaker
anyway some1 needs to take these guys down the Sony Santa Monica studios to show them what real devs are 8)
Any of the 1st party Sony devs will probably never achieve what Valve has in their lifetime. If you check their history and what they've done for the gaming business. No way in hell.
[QUOTE="Jared2720"]Sounds like some of the employees at Valve need to start taking some classes at Naughty Dog University.BoloTheGreat
Yeah becuase ND created HL, HL2, Portal, TF2 and L4D all of which have recived numerous GOTY awards, especially HL2 and HL which is rearged by some as the greatest game of this decade and HL of the last. Oh wait, they didn't. That was Valve. Valve also created CSS and CS, still 2 of the most popular competative shooters. I think if anyone should be teaching it should be VALVE. ND created all those games you mentioned above for the PLAYSTATION3? really
Log in to comment