[QUOTE="speedsix"]Valve are one of the biggest developers out there, they certainly didn't get where they are being lazy or apathetic.You even commented that all Valve had to do was outsource the development, so you comments about being lazy don't make any sense. PS3 owners will pin the blame on anyone except Sony. skektek

But what if that particular new technology really isn't that exciting to them? They see the Cell as a burden (as do many other devs). Just because it's new doesn't necessarily make it exciting to everyone.

If anything, the PC always offers new and exciting technology since it constantly changes. Over the life of the Source engine, we've seen the move from single core processors to dual and quad, we've see the change of OS from XP to Vista, we've seen the idea of multiple parallel graphics cards with SLI, the move to DLC...they have enough on their plate, and instead of churning out a sub-par port, they're continuing down their own path. They don't have the PS3 in their plans since they're busy on other things, it's as simple as that.

Why aren't people jumping all over other devs like Blizzard for ignoring all consoles? They could be making millions more, they must be lazy!!!

[QUOTE="myke2010"]

Valve is just being lazy, but quite frankly I don't blame them. Put yourself in their shoes for a second.

Your a dev making tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, by making games with hardware architecture that is very familiar to you and easy to use. Then somebody comes up and says, "Hey, if you spend way more time and money on this platform that doesn't move nearly as much software you could possibly make another couple of million (providing the consumers don't purchase it for the other platforms like normal). You'd think to yourself, "hmmm, take it easy and rake in the bucketloads of cash or work really hard and maybe eke out a relatively small profit?"

Then you'd probably tell the person to STFU and go get you a margarita (or beverage of your choice). When you're already rolling in cash from doing what you love, what's the point of busting your back for a little bit more?

TREAL_Since

LMAO. Perfectly put. 

Ok, we can spin this as much as we want.

Sony is lazy for throwing together the PS3. They've been working on this Cell thing with IBM and other companies for years, with no real product in sight. Instead of going to the drawing board and developing an architecture perfect for gaming needs, they threw together a product that included the Cell and BluRay to help recoup their R&D costs, gamers and game devs be damned.So lazy. :roll:

[QUOTE="odin2019"]

With no ps3 port of the game it leaves me to one of question is valve stupid or just plain lazy?  You got millions of ps3 owners willing to easily give you $60 for a decent port of the game.  Is it that hard to make the game for ps3?  Is it not a wise move to make the game for ps3 to make millions more?

I don't think MS is paying to have the game be exclusive for 360 but I'm pretty sure Valve just doesn't like ps3.  This is pretty much the only game that I want that ps3 doesn't have.

skektek

PC devs have probably been working with multiple processors longer than 360/PS3. They're not really scared, they're practical. 

Tell me, was the Cell architechture developed with gaming in mind? No, it wasn't. Why should a dev throw hundreds of man hours to learn an overly-complicated for nothing architecture, when they can do the same for less time/money?

Look at Killzone 2. It looks fantastic. All it took was Sony's full backing and one of the biggest budgets in gaming history. Who knows how many copies they'll have to sell to break even?

Personally, the only thing I didn't like about the demo was the length of the first map. I hope the levels in the full game are longer.

I don't understand why people are bemoaning the graphics so much. Didn't you notice how two dozen zombies fill the screen instantly, limbs being chopped off, cool death animations, flashlights crossing everywhere....and no FPS slowdown? Okay, it's not Crysis, but in Crysis you move slowly through the jungle, and the added textures are needed to create the sense of immesion. In L4D, it's clearly the cool moving zombie hordes that steal the show. Complaining that you can't knock down every box is rediculous.  

I also don't understand people saying "I'll stick with TF2, screw L4D". I love TF2 as much as the next person, and will be playing it for years (until the next RTCW/Enemy territory with no vehicle spam), but I'll probably pick up L4D since it's a different experience than TF2. If it's not L4D for you, I'm sure there's some other game that you need to keep things interesting. Even I get sick of Uber rushes once in a while...

As a Canadian 360 owner, I think your "facts" are wrong.

Frankly, I could care less what console is selling where. As long as I keep getting the games I like (360, PC, and PSP satisfy my needs) I'm happy. Monster Hunter can sell a billion copies in Japan...but I still won't be interested :-/

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

I'm going to check out the 360 demo just for kicks. :D

 

GodLovesDead

The framerate and controls need some work. Other than that, it's pretty much the same that's to be offered on the PC version.

You think so? I thought it ran smoothly on the 360, and I didn't really have any problems blowing out brains (this coming from someone whose years of KB+M have made gimp with a controller). And the only time I even noticed a bit of a slowdown was when I started tossing multiple Molotovs around with zombies pouring in, but it wasn't that bad.

I haven't fired it up on my PC yet, but I'll be checking it out to make the final purchase judgement. I hear it runs better than TF2 for some people, which is already butter on my rig :-) If anything, kudos to Valve for giving a great effort on both platforms. Now they just need to support one after release better...

Not since Doom have I had as much *fun* playing a shooter.foxhound_fox

There trully isn't a higher praise possible. Pure...unadaultered...fun.

Now if they'd be so kind to release both demos (PC/360), I'd be a happy man. I need to see if my wife will want to play (360 purchase) or not (PC purchase). Although I may just wait for the inevitable "Steam Holiday Blowout Sale" that's sure to happen for the PC version...Steam+Holidays = win.  

YES it's wrong to buy used. Those games are sold pure profit....usually in excess of 500%. That $10 game was traded in for less than a dollar, which is 1000% markup.

BobHipJames

Seriously, a month ago I walked into EB Games to buy Halo3. It was $60, but the clerk said "Why don't you get a used one, they're cheaper." Yeah, a whole $5 cheaper.

Who are these people that buy a game for $60, sell it back for $5, then go buy a used game for $55? I know that used games are a big thing on consoles, but for the life of me I don't understand the economics from a gamer perspective (unless you shop on Ebay, where you can find deals, or if that $5 really makes/breaks it for you). I guess if you're really never going to touch the game again, it makes cents (pun intended), but you really get crap in return.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]

In the US, and that would be risky anyway, as its still being used in a for profit game.

LBP is a worldwide game, and as such has to abide by laws in all the countries.

thinicer

It's used in a for-profit game, but the maps themselves are not for profit. They are free of charge and are not included on the media that comes with the game.

I'm not sure how the server-client relationship works for LBP, but if the content remains on the servers in the US (and cannot be transferred to the client in another country) then I believe no laws would be violated....if fair-use applies, that is. This is a gray area though.

This is a definitely a litigation issue, but you CAN use copyrights in certain instances if the work is deemed transformative and the extent to which it effects the original work's value. There is a gray area here as well. I don't think anybody here can definitively state that copyrights are definitely violated - that's up to the courts to decide. The thing is, Sony is not taking any chances at all. They are not going to risk it. I think that's wise.

Like I said, this looks more like a trademark issue. Using a trademarked character or setting in a transformed way doesn't get you off the hook.

What does seem strange is that you can get a Kratos suit in LBP, but can't make a GoW level :-/

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]How come they just can't have it like PC Mods? Is it because PC is an open platform while PS3 is not?SpruceCaboose

More or less, yes.

On PC, since its open, if I make a level that steals an IP, I am the one responsible, and suing me would be useless, as I have no money.

Making a level in LBP that steals an IP, since its closed and policed by Sony/MM, puts me and Sony/MM at fault, and Sony/MM have money, and are a great target to sue.

PC mod creators that use another IP (say, Star Wars or Stargate) typically need to ask the IP owner for a blessing to use said IP. For example, a few years ago there was a Star Wars mod for the UT2004 Make Something Unreal Contest, and they had to do that. I'm sure there are those that don't, but real fans go the extra mile to cover their bases. The fact that the PC is an "open platform" really does't mean that it's OK to do it, but that it can easily be done.

Oh, and I'm no Intellectual Property lawyer, but I don't think that this LBP issue is copyright infringement, but trademark infringement. You're not making a physical copy of an IP, but using trademarked likenesses of those IPs. But I may be out of my legal depths...