Valve Explains Why it Doesn't Make PS3 Games

[xophaser]

I think Atari said that too, looks like with that additude they won't be very big. I am sure adding a few programmers to do port is what others companies do anyway, but not Valve they are lazy. I don't think I ever got a Valve game. I don't play shooters on my PC.

 

[zodiacfml]

people, you have to remember that game developers are not like big companies, they're only comprised of a few people. blizzard, of course, is now exception.

 

[enforcer22]

[citation]I went through the whole thing and didn't even pick them up. I must automatically be filling in the blanks.[citation]

And people with a little common sense and no giant stick in there ass will.

On a side note. Why make games for a platform that doesnt sell? i personaly could care less if anyone makes a consol port but if i were to make one i would likely leave out ps3 also. In the end its all about making money and the ps3 still isnt really where to make it.

 

[trinix]

Funny comments. From what I read here I suspect most games on the PS3 are lacking in quality already because they can't use the cell cpu.

So a leading PC and xbox company has to learn to program for the PS3 and bring out shitty games too? Sure things will keep changing. Sure everyone will need to learn new things. But when your primary objective is making money and 2nd objective is delivering games that are fun, how bad is it to not support 2 consoles?

I'd rather have an outrage about console games not going to the PC. Because there is no technical reason to not do it, it's just about the money. Consoles are leaving soon again, being replaced by new junk. The PC should be the primary gaming "console" as it has more horsepower and far more potential. Of course, you'll have to deal with a bunch of different generations of hardware and the experience for players differs based on the amount of money they spend on their rig.

What do you think of other gaming companies. I mean, let's look at Blizzards refusal to port his MMO to consoles? What about all the old SOE games that are still only on the pc. Maybe even Sony hates it's own system.

Valve choosing to make more games rather than 1 game for more systems, is a good idea for the people who own a pc or a xbox. It will boost the sales for those systems too. Bad ports aren't that great anyway. Let them stick to the pc they know how to program and became big with anyway.

 

[p05esto]

I mentioned the other day: What's good for the XBOX is good for the PC and good for Microsoft. As PC games here at TOMS we should WANT XBOX to suceed, not PS3. PC/XBOX ports are much faster and ensure our PC gaming future to some degree.

But if PS3 was winning and XBOX failing I'd be very scared about the future of PS gaming. Just something to think about if your a big XBOX basher....and a PC gamer.

 

[p05esto]

I wish I proofread that post...sorry.

 

[deathblooms2k1]

If Valve just made games for PC and denounced the console industry Nobody here would be calling them lazy. It just happens that porting a PC game over to 360 is a simple painless process that yields profit.

I love how someone posted they are "senior developer" then sited java and php. as examples. Last time I checked web development and gaming development are slightly different learning curves.

 

[kiniku]

As a very happy PS# owner with a reliable console that has never had to been stuck in a box and shipped somewhere for 4 weeks I could care less if some developer doesn't produce a game for my console. Their loss. The PS3 has great exclusives and many more to come. Want to see how much better the PS3 looks compared to a Xbox? Check a PS3 exclusive. It's there where developers can utilize the power of a PS3 without being shackled by a co-release with a dated hardware and a 4GB storage limit.

 

[matt_b]

Had the PS3 not been such a disappointment, I am sure Valve would have dealt with the shortcomings of Sony's development kit. Having said that, Microsoft did good by making their console easy to program for with more of a PC-like architecture. With the much less console numbers out there for the PS3 camp, it doesn't make much sense for Valve to develop for it if it simply doesn't see it viable for a healthy return after all of the extra man-hours invested into each game. Plus, they don't have to if they don't want to - simple as that!

 

[1pp1k10k4m1]

Its interesting that many keep mentioning its all about money...I agree to an extent. But then I have to ask questions like "Why does Valve make games for the two most pirated platforms out?" They obviously know this because they were the first (or one of the first) to add an activation style scheme to a game. Actually I remember reading that Microsoft hired two Valve programmers to implement their Windows XP activation scheme. Of course that ended up being ultimately useless. But why would, if money is the end of the day factor, would Valve only produce games for easily pirated systems, and perhaps the most two pirated systems? Wouldn't it make alot more sense to make games for something that is much harder (and thus far hasnt really presented a blanket pirating solution for the PS3) to pirate? I buy all my games, but I keep up too. Wouldn't that make far more sense?

Someone said web development and game development are slightly different learning curves, while that is true, programming principles remain the same regardless. Once those are learned it doesn't typically take very long for a programmer to pick up a new language, as long as they are on the same architecture.

 

[tenor77]

I am a senior developer and I can say from experience that Valve is just making excuses to cover their true objective (make lots of money).

I'm not a senior developer. I have written programs for the PC and the Xbox, and they're very similar. MS's tool kit for the 360 is a PC programmers dream.
I haven't touched the PS3 so I can only take what other people have said.

Anyway Valve is a PC company. The fact that they can program for the 360 and PC with nearly identical code makes business sense. They can focus on the games, make them the way they normally would without having to make two entirely different games.

And of course Valve is out to make money. They don't nickle and dime us like some companies, but they're in this too make good games and good money. Why hate them for it?

 

[Blessedman]

Not a big fan of Gabe, he is a liar and a coward. Lets say in the next year we see more exclusive titles that push the PS3 to the top of the food chain and everyone is snatching them up like the Wii. Do they continue to put their hard work (no doubt they make great content with brilliant game play, but their engine work is sub par in comparison to epic/crytek/id) into someone else hands to possible mess up? Then what kind of wise business decision have they made? To count out a console because it's difficult to squeeze out the best from it, is not a rational decision... It's one made from a poor programmer, Gabe...

 

[1pp1k10k4m1]

@ TheFace...do a google search on openCL and ps3. Namely...http/www.khronos.org/news/permalink/sony_ps3_to_go_with_standards_to_faciliate_rapid_content_creation/

Apparently openCL and its usage were confirmed by Sony in 2005. As to when they implemented it...I don't know. But the other guy wasn't dreaming.

@ Matt B...I don't know if I would call 22.73 million consoles worldwide a disappointment. That's 8 million units fewer than xbox, but xbox has been out a year longer too. However, go read a forum or some of the comments in here. One guy on here has bought 4 xbox b/c they have all broken. So microsoft has pseudoinflated numbers there as well. Many analysts say it will surpass xbox and wii by the end of 2010. I own both, I like both for different reasons. But to call PS3 a disappointment is a statistical joke.

 

[tayb]

The PS3 is classified a disappointment, and rightly so, because of how successful the Playation 1 and 2 were. Sony was completely dominating the console market and then came out with this dud that took Sony from a commanding lead in the market to a distant third in the market. I don't know what your definition of "disappointment" is but that definitely fits mine and others.

The Playstation 3 will pass the Wii and Xbox 360 by the end of 2010? What are you smoking there pal? The Wii has sold 28 million more consoles than the PS3 and the Xbox 360 has sold 8 million more.

In order for the PS3 to pass the Wii Nintendo would have to close up shop from now until 2011 and the PS3 would have to double it's quarterly sales currently at 2.3 million to 4.7 million a quarter. For the PS3 to pass the 360 Microsoft would have to shut down it's stop for the next 13 months and Sony would have to continue with it's current pace. Neither of those have even a remote chance of happening.

 

[kiniku]

22 Million units sold, reliablity, an ever expanding list of superb exclusives, a HDTV wireless media hub built upon a Blue Ray player as HD becomes a household word as the entertianmnet sections of Walmarts grow larger and larger is far from a disappointment. I think I'd be more disappointed with the patheitc failure rates of 360s that burn up and M$'s joke and deceitful policy of sticking it in a box and shipping it to Taiwan for 4 weeks. I'll keep my "dissappointment" over rushed crap epic failed hardware anyday. Try checking what your smoking pal.

 

[1pp1k10k4m1]

@ tayb, again I don't know that you could call the Playstation a disappointment, and sony is still making games for PS2, so who says they aren't still dominating the console market. Your assertion is baseless, as you've failed to rebut my information, or even address the subject with anything more objective than your own opinion, unsupported by any data.

What am i smoking? You cant come up with anything real so you revert to ad hominem? Well, last time i checked thats what analysts were saying. Now, I concede the date has been moved to 2011 by some, and 2012 by others, and some older articles state 2010. But either way, expected to surpass even wii. http/www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/02/15/ps3_2011_domination_isuppli/ or http/www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/dfc-current-console-installed-base-to-exceed-last-gen-in-2011

Again, you have a nice attack on my person, but no actual data...except what you conjured up yourself. I have posted links to two articles I found in a very cursory google search. I think reading them may help you with the data. If you don't like the research, argue with it, don't attack me for stating the information available.

 

[tayb]

Both the articles you posted were from 2008 and both of the articles were completely wrong. One article even stated that the Playstation 3 would pass the Xbox 360 by 2009 and here we are half way into 2009 and Microsoft is EXPANDING it's lead against Sony. Through 2009 Microsoft has sold MORE UNITS THAN SONY HAS.

Don't use the phrase ad hominem if you don't know what it means or what you are talking about. You haven't given any information all you did was spout off nonsense saying the PS3 wasn't a disappoint despite being in last place this generation compared to a overwhelming first place last generation. Then you say something even more ridiculous that "analysts say the PS3 will surpass the 360 and Wii by the end of 2010" once again without any support or evidence. You also made a completely erroneous statement that Microsoft counts broken 360's that were replaced as sales. Microsoft replaces broken Xbox 360's with refurbished 360's, not brand new ones and they never have.

Data? I gave you numbers but they obviously don't support your baseless claim so you resort to more baseless claims without support or evidence. Here I will spell it out for you in even greater detail that a third grader could understand.

The Wii has sold 28 million more units than the PS3 so far. There are 2 quarters left in 2009 and 4 quarters in 2010. 2+4 =6. 6 quarters until "the end of 2010." The playstation 3 is currently selling 2.3 million units a quarter, and that number is in a DECLINE. The Wii is currently selling 5 million units a quarter. In order for the Playsation 3 to catch and surpass the Wii by 2010 (6 quarters) the Wii would have to decline to ZERO SALES A QUARTER and the Playstation 3 would have to double it's sales to 4.8 million units a quarter. If the Wii sales fell in HALF, that is they were selling 2.5 million units a quarter compared to 5 million a quarter, Sony would have to TRIPLE their current quarterly sales to 7.3 million units a quarter. Check http/www.vgchartz.com/ if you want to see the numbers for yourself.

 

[Guest]

@1pp1k10k4m1
tayb provided some real numbers for you. Did you miss the part where he (or she) explains what would be needed for the PS3 to pass the Wii or Xbox 360 ? Compared to the PS1 and PS2, the PS3 is definitely a failure. Granted, I still think it's one hell of a system. It provides more total value for what you pay than any other console (assuming Blu-Ray and the other bells and whistles are important to you). BTW, I happen to have all 3 consoles.

 

[bounty]

I can make a few more levels and skins (L4D2) and make another $150 million within the next 8 months with 2.5 mil * 40$ (steam/PC) + 2.5 mil * 20$ XBOX. [Assuming 50$ - 20$ to EA and - 10$ to Walmart]

or I can take a risk, and spend that time making a PS3 version and draw in $40 million (2 million copies * 20$)

150$ > 40$

 

[ViPr]

@ 1pp1k10k4m1

unfortunately, Google assumes you mistyped OpenGL when you try to search for OpenCL. i'm still wondering whether OpenCL applies to PS3. if it does apply then that makes Valve giant idiots, i suppose, otherwise it makes Sony giant idiots.