Why aren't the American game companies supporting the PS3?

Valve and Ubisoft are two of my favorite companies; and yet they aren't supporting the PS3 at all.

WHen they have graced that system with one of their games, they provide a really crappy port.

Why can't they throw the PS3 owners a bone?

I want my cake (MGS4) and eat it too (Splinter Cell) dang it!

The best version of Valve's games are on PC, anyway. I didn't buy this PC with gaming in mind, and yet, it runs every single one of Valve's games fine. What are your PC specs? You might be able to run some of their games on PC without knowing it. As long as it isn't from 1998 or something.

Well, with the 360 they have a better chance of seeing a profit considering how much better 360's software sells.

The best version of Valve's games are on PC, anyway. I didn't buy this PC with gaming in mind, and yet, it runs every single one of Valve's games fine. What are your PC specs? You might be able to run some of their games on PC without knowing it. As long as it isn't from 1998 or something.

DeathScape666

I use a laptop.

It does what I need for school; but it doesn't run valve games.

Valve just doesn't like working with the PS3. It isn't dev friendly. SO you should expect a port from some other dev.

As for other devs.

Epic makes games for the PS3
So does Ubisoft(I doubt Conviction stays exclusive for longer than 6 months)
Bioshock is now coming to the PS3
Bioware should make games(Canada)

I mean I don't see many western exclusives on the 360 that aren't published by Microsoft.

I think the only one they have is Table Tennis, atleast from a western dev.

Oh and GRAW, but GRAW 2 was multiplat.

valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Sigh.

??? ubisoft isn't an american company & they do support the PS3.

Valve doesn't even make that many games, and they are a PC dev. mainly anyways

valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Valve and Ubisoft are two of my favorite companies; and yet they aren't supporting the PS3 at all.

WHen they have graced that system with one of their games, they provide a really crappy port.

Why can't they throw the PS3 owners a bone?

I want my cake (MGS4) and eat it too (Splinter Cell) dang it!

mstc_Q

Isn't it obvious? They make PC GAMES. To port the game to the 360 is a non-issue. If you get the Mr. Softy game developer studio, you can make your games on the PC & they'll run on the 360 with minimal effort. To port the game to a PS3 requires some serious learning curve & they don't want to deal with the headache. They're looking for most bang for the buck.

valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Or they don't like it. But hey, I love making things up too.

do u know the gap between 360 and PS3 in NA?

do u know the gap between 360 and PS3 in NA?

-GhostMLD-

[QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityjg4xchamp

The most hilarious thing about it is, all of those games populate many "best games of all time" or "Most innovative games" lists and yet SOMEHOW, Valve is LAZY.

I mean, what the hell is wrong with people in here?

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityheretrix

The most hilarious thing about it is, all of those games populate many "best games of all time" or "Most innovative games" lists and yet SOMEHOW, Valve is LAZY.

I mean, what the hell is wrong with people in here?

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityheretrix

The most hilarious thing about it is, all of those games populate many "best games of all time" or "Most innovative games" lists and yet SOMEHOW, Valve is LAZY.

I mean, what the hell is wrong with people in here?

On top of that Valve offers great support for its fanbase.

valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Please say you were joking.

valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Valve is lazy?

Now that's some serious bull **** right there, holmes.

Maybe because they like money?goblaa

..that made alot of sense

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityheretrix

The most hilarious thing about it is, all of those games populate many "best games of all time" or "Most innovative games" lists and yet SOMEHOW, Valve is LAZY.

I mean, what the hell is wrong with people in here?

It's not the cows fault, it's Metal Gear Fever it's making them delirious. :lol:

[QUOTE="mstc_Q"]

Valve and Ubisoft are two of my favorite companies; and yet they aren't supporting the PS3 at all.

WHen they have graced that system with one of their games, they provide a really crappy port.

Why can't they throw the PS3 owners a bone?

I want my cake (MGS4) and eat it too (Splinter Cell) dang it!

jknight5422

Isn't it obvious? They make PC GAMES. To port the game to the 360 is a non-issue. If you get the Mr. Softy game developer studio, you can make your games on the PC & they'll run on the 360 with minimal effort. To port the game to a PS3 requires some serious learning curve & they don't want to deal with the headache. They're looking for most bang for the buck.

Wow usually what you post is anti-PS3 nonsense but that was actually a good nonbiased, legit post. Nice. :)

Well, with the 360 they have a better chance of seeing a profit considering how much better 360's software sells.

Lionheart08

I almost got it. :roll:

[QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is toolazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityMongo-Boss

Please say you were joking.

Why would i bee joking valve can't get off their asses and learn the ps3s architecture. Yes is may be hard but what isn't. Besides the company run by an arrogant ....... that thinks sony should cancel the ps3 and redo it.

[QUOTE="Mongo-Boss"]

[QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is toolazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Please say you were joking.

Why would i bee joking valve can't get off their asses and learn the ps3s architecture. Yes is may be hard but what isn't. Besides the company run by an arrogant ....... that thinks sony should cancel the ps3 and redo it.

Valve arrogant? They're one of the most modest developers around.

Gabe Newell is arragont not valve. reread what i wrote

Gabe Newell is arragont not valve. reread what i wrote

hornymushroom

Proof?

[QUOTE="DeathScape666"]

The best version of Valve's games are on PC, anyway. I didn't buy this PC with gaming in mind, and yet, it runs every single one of Valve's games fine. What are your PC specs? You might be able to run some of their games on PC without knowing it. As long as it isn't from 1998 or something.

mstc_Q

I use a laptop.

It does what I need for school; but it doesn't run valve games.

[QUOTE="hornymushroom"]

Gabe Newell is arragont not valve. reread what i wrote

DucksBrains

Proof?

Calls the ps3 a waste of everybodies time, thinks they should redo it, He also didn't think the ps2 would do well but look how that turned out.

[QUOTE="hornymushroom"]

Gabe Newell is arragont not valve. reread what i wrote

DucksBrains

Proof?

Pahlease.

That isn't debatable, he's up there with Itagaki.

Still, I don't care if they are, as long as the deliver.

Valve is great and all, but they seriously need to hire some PS3 programmers, and get to work porting. Eventually, their games make it to PS3. If the PS3 versions have issues, blame Valve, not the porting company, because it's Valve that are being d**ks about the PS3. Valve should be commited to gamers. I'm a gamer. I have a PS3. Surprise.... I'm still a gamer.

I may be a bad example though, because I'm a STEAM user, and will get Episode 3, etc, on the PC. but you get my point.

[QUOTE="hornymushroom"]valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityMongo-Boss

Please say you were joking.

Valve is great and all, but they seriously need to hire some PS3 programmers, and get to work porting. Eventually, their games make it to PS3. If the PS3 versions have issues, blame Valve, not the porting company, because it's Valve that are being d**ks about the PS3. Valve should be commited to gamers. I'm a gamer. I have a PS3. Surprise.... I'm still a gamer.

I may be a bad example though, because I'm a STEAM user, and will get Episode 3, etc, on the PC. but you get my point.

fiscope

[QUOTE="-GhostMLD-"]

do u know the gap between 360 and PS3 in NA?

jack_russel

...and 1

Arn't Ubisoft.. French?

And really the 2 biggest American video game companys, EA and Activision, support the PS3 just fine. Sorta.

valve is too lazy to learn the how to develop for the ps3 and ubisoft was paid by microsoft for ssc exclusivityhornymushroom

Lazy?

No not wanting to waste time and funds on a CPU that will never be used for games, except in the PS3.

Arn't Ubisoft.. French?

And really the 2 biggest American video game companys, EA and Activision, support the PS3 just fine. Sorta.

user_nat

yes they are french, but the studios in canada do all of the work, the french studio is more of a HQ.

I love the HL series, but I will also call them lazy. Shoot their engine for hL ep 3 will prolly be the same engine with maybe some minor upgrades such as ep. 1 and 2. I mean how long will they use that engine. I mean it has been great and held up nicely over time but shoot I load up hl2 now after playing my ps3 and well its getting old. So they want take time with the ps3 and dang they want take time coming up with a new engine for their games to be developed on. So yea lazy is the key word for them.

Like someone else said most bang for the buck and that is what they are doing. Oh and I'll get epi. 3 on the pc aswell :)

I love the HL series, but I will also call them lazy. Shoot their engine for hL ep 3 will prolly be the same engine with maybe some minor upgrades such as ep. 1 and 2. I mean how long will they use that engine. I mean it has been great and held up nicely over time but shoot I load up hl2 now after playing my ps3 and well its getting old. So they want take time with the ps3 and dang they want take time coming up with a new engine for their games to be developed on. So yea lazy is the key word for them.

Like someone else said most bang for the buck and that is what they are doing. Oh and I'll get epi. 3 on the pc aswell :)

GreyFoXX4

Bad design decisions from Sony = lazy developers??? I think not.

The console war would have been over before it started if cell and its spu's were developer friendly.

Its not lazy, its business. why put double the time and money for equal/less results???

Because the PS3 is a failure with incredibly high development costs and low software sales

That's all there is too it