By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Valve shuts out "Too Complicated" PS3

L4D is meant to be played on a PC, the 360 version is just a shitty port. I couldn't care less about this. Some genres are meant for PC and PC ONLY, FPS being one of the 3 majors.

FPS, RTS, MMO



The Halo francise is the most overrated bland game to ever hit the console market. It provides a bad name to all FPS that even showed effort at creating an original entertaining plot.

I probably have more ps3 games than you :/ 

Around the Network
mwjw696 said:
Has no one on this god forsaken post played a valve game? You all sound like a bunch of little 5 year olds that have never played anything but a PS3. Valve does amazing work on EVERY single title they publish. I would like to see any developer out there today make an engine last 5 years, and still look as beautiful as it does today. The reason they don’t even want to mess with the PS3 is not because they are paid off. Sony’s platform just does not sell the games like MS or the PC can. They are a small company so why take all the time to hire a PS3 staff, almost double the development time, double the cost, and for what less sales then 360 or the PC??? Why would anyone do that?

Which BTW "paid off" has to be sony-fanboys favorite saying of this generation, cause that’s all I hear coming out of their mouths. O NO another 360 exclusive or, O it was only on PS2 before o no MS must have paid them off. Don’t blame your problems on MS all the time why don’t you look at Sony and go HAY WTF IS UP DONT LET THIS HAPPEN DO SOMETHING!! Sony has been ignoring its fan base since this gen started where as MS is actually listening. If you want a Valve game on PS3 then tell Sony to pay Valve for the development cost. (Just please for all that is holy dont let EA take it over and do what they did to the orange box OMFG NO!

cough :CRYTEK: cough



The Halo francise is the most overrated bland game to ever hit the console market. It provides a bad name to all FPS that even showed effort at creating an original entertaining plot.

I probably have more ps3 games than you :/ 

I love Valve for the record... and I own all the Half Life games and expansions... even that shitty Blue Shift... that I bought for the high res graphics -_-



This is the same company that is releasing an expansion pack as a sequel right?



perpride said:
This is the same company that is releasing an expansion pack as a sequel right?


This is the same company that has given it's users more content than many firms have sold to their users

 



Around the Network

Reading this thread, I've seen a lot of "They are crap devs" and being responded by "Have you played Valve games?"

They aren't crap devs, because their games are great, but for them to completely shun out the PS3 because "they don't feel like sweating bullets" or "it's not worth it" is BS.

Some people have overexaggerated and said "Maybe they don't want to switch from PC code to the 'uber hard, technically difficult, hard to develop for (oh, 2007, I hear you calling), obstacle, different architecture, blah blah blah Cell' that is the PS3". Honestly, I don't want to call them crap, but their reasoning behind not developing for the PS3 IS crap. I've seen nightsurge say that their sentiments are actually shared by MANY multiplatform developers. To that I ask, who?

Square? EA? Tecmo? Ubisoft? Rockstar? Hell...D3 (Dark Sector)? Even the devs that make crappy games and are from legit "crap devs" can put games on the PS3 without complaining about it. All the great games that have come out for the PS3 this year without a single "it's too hard to code for" should show that "it's too hard" IS in fact a sign of laziness if someone wants to still use that excuse. If it "wasn't worth it", even booboo games like Blood of the Sand and Afro Samurai wouldn't have been released on it, because it was too hard to "make game experiences". But no, Capcom with SFIV and RE5, Konami with MGS4 and continued support with MGS: Rising, Ubisoft with Assassin's Creed 2, etc. have shown that "too hard to develop for" is a thing of the past. To that, I say:

Valve, you are lazy developers



"I didn’t come into this business in the 90s because of some technical fetish"

Hmmm, I'd say creating your own graphics engine is pretty technical, and so is setting up a whole system like steam, I mean if they didn't get into the business because a tech fetish, then why not simply use a licensed graphics engine form epic, or ID, hell why not also use xbox live instead of creating your own system, clearly they're full of shit.

I reckon it's damage control, they'll come off looking stupid if they admitted to making a mistake by not developing for the PS3, so they came up with this story and of course the PS3 is an easy scape goat.



Calling the developers "lazy" is an ignorant way of saying they insulted your console.

Simply put, if Valve thought that the PS3 was the best console to develop their games on, they would do it. They don't have a mysterious dislike of Sony, they just don't see developing games for their console as beneficial to Valve.




 

leo-j said:
So they are saying they are too lazy to work on the ps3? "We dont feel like sweating bullets", thats what it sounds like to me

 



ZenfoldorVGI said:
KLucifer said:
Xbot said:
2007 - orange box
2008- left 4 dead
2009 - left 4 dead 2

doesnt look lazy to me.

source engine

source engine

source engine

 

looks lazy to me....nothing wrong with using same engine over again though...they can produce another game real quickly...valve's point of view...this is good..

btw...i have nothing against valve...but that source engine is horrid...physics is good..but hitbox sucks...especially on cs:s...man i thought 1.6 hit box was off..boy was i wrong...last i played cs:s was about a week ago..hitbox was still horrid...so it seems like it hasn't been fixed..now that is another laziness...

valve needs a new engine...source engine seems so outdated now...compared to that of other engines...cuz i want to play a new version of cs with hitbox fixed...

Has Valve ever made a bad game?

You answer that. Please. I beg you. Name 1 bad Valve game.

Lazy...lol. Name some better developers. There aren't 5 in existance.

you just completely missed my point...never said anything about a bad game...they just reuse same engine...that's all....and cs:s hitbox...

i never said any of their games were bad...

i only said they are lazy in sense they overuse their engine....their engine has been out for a while now...most developers would have made a new engine by now...they've been using the same engine for about 5 years now...

UE2 to UE3 took 4 years...UE4 has been in development since only a year after UE3 came out...you see...that is not being lazy....not only the development of UE4...they are doing a revised engine of the 3rd one....so if UE4 comes out b4 a new valve engine...that's 3 engines(one of them being a revised version) that have come out in the time source engine has been out...

2 crysis engine came out during the time source engine has been out...1 is not officially out yet...but there have been some tech demos

i'm sure valve is working on a new engine right now...but they're just milking their source engine...