If you're a PS3-only gamer who happens to be a fan of vintage tabletop gaming, monsters, and football, then you are probably acutely, painfully aware of the lack of Blood Bowl video games in your future. Cyanide is making an Xbox 360 version -- why not use the same assets and codebase for the PS3 like so many others? What's the deal? Does it hate the PS3 or something?

In an interview with Destructoid, the developer explained its apparent snub on the platform. "Cyanide is a small company," a representative said. "We have no previous experience on that platform [and] it would have been a bit risky and expensive for us. But, we are hoping to do a PS3 version if the game is selling well."

So, rather than a lack of faith in the platform, Cyanide has somewhat of a lack of faith in its own ability to develop for it without killing the budget. It still means no PS3 version for now, but it also means no janky, poorly ported PS3 version for now. That's ... something. And if the other versions of the game, coming out in Q2 of this year, are successful, we may see a (good) PS3 version yet.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/02/09/blood-bowl-developer-making-ps3-version-a-bit-risky-and-expens/

alt acct? Hmm..ok I guess, never heard of the game so um..oh well=/

neither had i i just find it weird that they'll put it on the pc which definately wont sell considering the piracy that goes on.

Yeah but PC and 360 are similar in architecture so it's easy and cheap..to make a PS3 version, they have to optimize it for the PS3's architecture, so it would take more time and money. A small studio, like the article says, can't really afford that. As a PS3 owner, I can't blame them. As a 360 and PC owner, I don't really care=P Even if I wanted the game, I could still get it.

I just think it would be wise for all of the companies complaining about the PS3 architecture to go ahead and deal with it now, because it's going to be very similar next gen..why not learn now so next gen you hit the ground running and not have problems with the architecture? Hopefully this company makes a little money and can make a port to PS3..I think it would benefit them greatly in the long run.

yeah you make a good point. i know the ps3 has less shovelware than the 360 and thats probably a good thing this gen. games are more expensive, so you wanta better selection for your dollars. but yeah if this game peaks my interest enough Captain Torrent will assist no doubt lol

Pfft, were third parties lazy last gen for ignoring the Gamecube? Porting a PC games to the 360 is easy, while the PS3 is much harder. The PS3 being the console with the lowest sales in both hardware and software means there are quite a few developers to which spending the time and effort to cope with the PS3 is simply not worth it.

One of the comments was pretty good:

That is the most arrogant, moronic Sony rhetoric yet. There are a lot of great indie game companies that are out there who won't even consider making their games on PS3 because of a poorly designed system, and you're going to act like that's a good thing?

Some of these developers aren't even small. How about Valve? To act as if it's a good thing that Valve refused to develop for that platform because it is unnecessarily complicated and expensive to do so, is just blind fanboyism. I think the PS3 is starting to come into its own and have some great titles, but to act as if Sony's design choice hasn't hurt the system is ludicrous.

Well, as a small dev I would love to play around with PS3 or rather with CELL, but I wouldn't want to make anything bigger for it.

that sums it up.....

Microsoft is paying them!

I don't think anyone is "acutely aware" of Blood Bowl in any sense.