Hmmm..... Maybe I should have used a different title....

no. just no.. grant it R2 and K2 will. Gears isnt even the same genre. Halo is just generic. HL2EP2 > HL2EP1 > HL2 so it doesnt matter if game X is better then HL2 there are two games better then it.

I'm glad they can just finally admit they don't have the skills/manpower to do a PS3 port decently, rather than dissing the PS3 like they have in the past.

"We hate different! Different sucks!" is a bad excuse. "We don't have the people or skills to do it!" is a perfectly fine excuse, and frankly, its quite courageous to just come out and state that.

They don't have the people to develop fro the PS3 because the PS3 is so different. I can also assure you that Valve is one of the few developers which probably has no lack of skills, or the ability to acquire where there is a lack if they really wanted to.

I disagree, I think HL2 is better than all those, but whatever.

Also, I think it's HL2ep2>=HL2>HL2ep1.  HL2 is such an amazing accomplishment, and I still find it thrilling to play today.  And the slower parts honestly pace the game in my opinion.  HL2 ep 2 is on the same level, possibly greater.  If there were more than 4 hours of ep2, it'd beat the original, but since it's so short it's hard to call it better than HL2.  And HL2 ep1 improved on HL2 for sure, but again it suffered from being too short with not enough interesting content.

Anyway, I'm done.

they are not smart enough to code in c++ and opengl based on parallel processing cpu.
or too lazy to get to do it.

its either one or both, but being an ass with the console then retracting its quite honorable from them.

It's because that game is done by EA.  If the updates are to come out for it... it's EA's job to port them over.

People on developer teams are trained to develop in a certain environment, and when you're asking PC developers, who've only worked on PC games, who might know what it takes to make a PS3 game but have never made one before, and who have ported only one game so far to the 360, which is a nearly identical developing environment, you don't think they need any additional training?

It would cost money to either hire PS3 developers or train their specialized developers to learn PS3 coding...either way it's money they don't want to spend, because it's not worth it.

That's why I like being a designer-- I don't give a crap what system I'm working on. 

Honestly, writing decent PS3 apps is not that hard for any decently skilled computer scientist. Lots of middleware supports it very well these days -- perhaps that's why Valve doesn't want to jump in... they don't use middleware, as I recall, or perhaps their own physics, etc. systems just don't go parallel/stream so well, as they would need to do on the on the SPUs.

Valve may just prefer to keep a very slim development staff, and therefore maximize profits in the short term. As I recall, some company (Google?) was wanting to purchase Valve recently for Steam -- they may want to keep their dev budgets low until that blows over.

Or maybe they have some wierd aversion to cool parallel architectures that no-one but they can understand.  Who knows.  Honestly, I can't think of many engineers who don't find working on cool new architectures fun.  I can think of plenty of business folks who dislike it, though.