By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
BMaker11 on 01 March 2010
Edit Thread
Twistedpixel said:
BMaker11 said:
Twistedpixel said:

So what if they crapped on the PS3. Pretty much every Sony developer has talked shit about other consoles too. Do you give them crap for it?

Well...for the most part, you're wrong. Didn't one of the guys at Insomniac say they would love to make a Wii game at some time?

Valve, on the other hand? Without even developing for the PS3 "it's shit, not worth it, too hard, too many resources needed"....for THREE YEARS!

Now they want to retract their statement (still not having developed a PS3 game yet) and say it's a viable platform? Because it's selling more now? MGS4 has sold more than any of their games on the 360, and cost more than any of their games. But when it released, Konami was rolling in money afterwards. And that was in 2008 when the PS3 had a userbase of like 12M. So to say that it wasn't worth it, and that their input would eclipse their return was just ignorant. 

But I already know what's going to happen. They've done this before. The 360 is going to get another price later this year, and the US media is gonna be all like "PS3 is doomed again, because the 360 outsells it by 9k each week", and Valve will hop back on their original bandwagon and say PS3 sucks again

So? Pretty much every Sony game developer has mentioned the Xbox 360 in some negative fashion. Why don't you condemn them or something? If you cannot condemn them then anything you say about Valve is irrelevant as you'd be a hypocrite. Sony talks smack all the time, Sony gets their developers or lets them talk smack all the time. Its only fair in a fair world that Sony gets blasted in return.

For very little effort they have created 3 very profitable games and sold them on the Xbox 360. Effort vs reward is extremely good for them. For less effort than it took to make one single average PS3 game they have reeled in over 6 million units of sales. Sony hasn't even approached this ROI for anything they have done.

 

What? By saying "this game wouldn't be the same on the 360"? Because it's TRUE! Their engines are tailor made for the PS3, and they simply wouldn't work on the 360. They could change some things....but then it wouldn't be the same game. 

And less effort (for a 360 games) to make an average PS3 game? How do they know how much effort it takes to make an "average" PS3 game? What benchmark are they able to compare to? THEY HAVEN'T MADE ANY PS3 GAMES, NOR HAVE THEY EVEN ATTEMPTED TO! If I'm not mistaken, LBP cost $10-15M to make. That's an ABOVE average game. And it's sold over 3M. Media Molecule, which was basically a whole in the wall developer, who's idea would've probably not been picked up by anyone other than Sony, has tons of money now. What POSSIBLE excuse could you come up with to defend Valve, knowing the above statement? 

How about Infinity Ward? They spent plenty of money making Modern Warfare on the PS3 (as a contrast to LBP relative cheapness). What was the result? Only the biggest entertainment launch in history. "But the PS3 isn't worth it", right? "Too much effort, not enough return", right? The industry is making Valve continually look retarded.

But keep defending them and their delusions. Keep believing that it's pointless to make money and that they made a smart decision badmouthing the PS3 for 3 years. Meanwhile, every other developer can throw their money in Valve's face