Valve: “Xbox 360 Head & Shoulders Above PS3”


Left 4 Dead developer Valve has condemned the PS3 and scotched any notion that the series will be appearing on the PS3, saying the Xbox 360 community is “head and shoulders above the PS3.”

In recent comments, Valve says it thinks the “community aspects” of the Xbox 360 are superior, although they generously concede the PC may not be wholly inferior:

“Right now for Left 4 Dead 2 we’re looking at PC and 360 because the community aspects really fit the game – it’s all about playing with your friends.

In hooking up with your friends and the community aspects, I think the Xbox 360 is head and shoulders above the PS3. The 360 and PC are on par, right?”

They sound worried people might hold out for a PS3 version for some reason, and so are keen to quash this:

“But that’s the short term. What we’re looking at for the long term… if it works out, it works out. Right now don’t not buy it on the 360 because you think it’s coming out on the PS3 – it’s not going to. Right? It’s coming out on the PC and 360. It’s going to be exclusive for that.”

Earlier E3 comments from Valve echoed these sentiments, but blamed the PS3’s poorer development tools:

“The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform.

I didn’t come into this business in the 90s because of some technical fetish. I came in because I wanted to give people experiences that made them have fun.”

Saying “we got a huge development subsidy from Microsoft to keep it exclusive, right?” just doesn’t sound as good…

Leave a Comment


  • That’s fine, I don’t think I’m missing a lot here, not like you’re FF13 or MW2 or GTA4. So don’t sounds like you’re a console-buying game series, nobody is buying 360 because of you, unlike Halo or GoW series.

  • Wow I wish 360/PC/Ps3 fanboys would stop bashing the shit out of each other. Hell I have all 3 and enjoy the shit out of everyone of their exclusive titles. Uncharted 2 is the shit and so is L4D2. The only people who are missing out on anything are the ones who don’t own all 3.

  • valve is garbage anyway; they release an uncompleted game (L4D, with 1/4 campaign missions playable in versus at release) and nearly a year later, they decide to release the sequel. very classy.

  • It doesn’t seem like many of these developers are saying stuff like this in a reasonable manner, but more like your average internet retard fanboy would say it. It’s like Western developers are heralding the rise of the 100% quality Western console and using the opportunity to unleash all the pent up butthurt fluids building up due to their own gaming industry inferiority complex over Japan resurrecting it.

  • Actually this “community” thing does make sense. It’s not Valve’s fault that majority of Xbox community like actions and shooters, and a lot of PS3 community like games like tactical RPG’s and other weird Japanese games (wich often require you to work instead of relax and enjoy. Like level grinding). L4D 2 just wont be this popular on PS3. Especially in Japan where PS3 blooms.

  • First thing, to all the people who are saying L4D sucks because the single-player sucks, L4D is not meant to be a single player game. If you are solely playing for that reason, you are wasting your money. Bots are stupid as hell and it’s simply not fun playing with/against bots. FPS’es, at least good ones, are all about the multiplayer experience. For example (not saying these games are uber awesome), why is Counterstrike:Source and Call of Duty series praised by a lot of people. The answer is it is because it has good multiplayer capabilities and a good community, generally. Same goes with L4D. L4D is actually unique in the FPS genre due to the survival/horror elements to it.

    Second, L4D is a PC game first, then a console game next. I may be ignorant, but I still don’t see the benefits of playing a FPS on console when a mouse and keyboard can do the job way better. Things like “auto-aim” and “auto-targeting” imo is lame and ruins the experience. I’m sure a lot of “pro-FPS” players will bag this point too. Hence, I see no point in people buying a FPS on a console if you have a computer capable of playing it. Only reason you would get it on a console is if you have a shitty computer.

    Thirdly, PS3/XBoX360 fanboys, lay off it seriously. Stuff like “Haha, my console has a better game and it’s exclusive to my console” or “Pff, that game is shit anyway. I don’t care it’s on my console” is getting really lame. Just get both consoles and play games on both. P

    Personally, I have a pretty decent PC and a PS3 so I’ve been playing good games on those. Planning to get an xbox360 this Christmas and gonna buy/play good games on those. Reasons I didn’t get an xbox360 earlier was because I couldn’t afford both consoles at the time and I was dubious about the whole RROD thing, but in practice seems to be way exaggerated. All of my friends own xbox360s and only one of them have had the ring, and they are all semi-hardcore gamers too.

  • its the cash dude.

    “In hooking up with your friends and the community aspects, I think the Xbox 360 is head and shoulders above the PS3. The 360 and PC are on par, right?”

    why in the world would they make a comment like that? do they have anything to back that up?. i officially dont like em now. all they had to say is that its xbox exclusive. not pull bs out there ass. also games that had time spent on them actually sell ****loads on the ps3. they seem really lazy.

  • “Right now for Left 4 Dead 2 we’re looking at PC and 360 because the community aspects really fit the game – it’s all about playing with your friends.”

    Apparently the PS3 community is full of loners, since when?

    • Since always.
      I don’t recall ever finding a PS3 active at a house party with 12 people trying to play Resistance 2.
      Maybe because PS3 is a console designed for japanese men who live by themselves and therefore, justify the fact that the majority of the games are single player oriented.

      Wii is a great party console. 360 is great at both parties and online. I have a hardcore ps3 fanboy friend, who bought a 360 for Modern Warfare 2 EVEN THOUGH it was coming for PS3 as well. Why is that? Maybe because 90% of his friends had it for 360. He comes over every weekend to play Cod4 on 360 anyways, so mind as well just get one himself.

  • This whole thing reminds me of the Ali G show, where Bruno and 2 critics bash celeb photos, but then Bruno points out that Paris Hilton’s family has a finger in the show’s production, and they do a 180 and say she’s not a class-less whore. It’s pretty funny.

    Honestly, if it is between me buying another 360 to play LFD2, getting the CPU version, or not playing it, I’m choosing not playing it. Non FPS action games never feel right on the computer, and the 360 is a nightmare in every regards (countless hidden fees that make the 360 the most expensive system on the market, constant worrying about the system dying should you decide to play it, constant fear of being a beta tester for new games, and not to mention the entire online player base being arrogant highschool or younger morons and drunken party-college fratboy idiots. I’d sooner pay to be sodomized and gangbanged by a herd of AIDS infected water buffalo than willingly go online and interact with these people). I like zombies, but I don’t need this game to get my zombie fix. If you haven’t notived, we are in the zombie, werewolf, and vampire golden age.

  • MusicalNote says:

    This amuses me a great deal. The Xbox is just plain good at FPS. The PS3 has its RPGs (which I envy). The Wii specializes in platformers. Each console has their strong point.

    So what if Xbox got a shooter? The odds are that if someone has an Xbox it’s for shooters, or for WRPGs. PS3 got an updated Tales game. Wii has… Aside from Rune Factory Frontier I can’t think of any interesting 3rd party games they’ve acquired that wasn’t on another console first… But I’m still a Nintendo fangirl, damn it!

  • their idea of fun is shooting everything in sight, problem is the put so little interest in architectural matters that people got bored, and found it a lot more fun to take their guns to the street and shoot people, real fun isn’t it?

  • I am aware that some PS3 owners want to play Left 4 Dead 2, but that isn’t really the reason for all the hate Valve gets from PS3 owners. Valve has two options; either develop for the PS3 or shut the fuck up. It’s comments like :

    “The PS3 is a waste of everybody’s time”
    “I don’t think they’re going to make money off their box.”
    “a total disaster on so many levels”
    “I’d say, even at this late date, they should just cancel it and do a do over”
    and most recently
    “The Xbox 360 community is “head and shoulders above the PS3.””

    If Valve just said they simply don’t want to develop for the PS3 and left it at that, all would be well. After all Epic isn’t getting any hate for not bringing Gears of War to the PS3 and neither is Ubisoft for Splinter Cell: Conviction. It is irresponsible for any sensible company, especially one of Valve’s standing to purposefully alienate a potential userbase (one growing very rapidly) with incendiary comments.

    • I too, think that Valve could’ve just said “We’re not developing for the PS3”.

      However, I can sort of understand the desire to vent, especially after spending lots of time, money and effort to code for something that, in the end, bears no fruit.

      So before jumping on the “Valve is lazy” bandwagon, I’m going to give them the benefit of the doubt. The fact that they “claim” that the PS3 is a bith to develop for, implies that they HAVE tried.

      • Try is basically a euphamism in programming for lazy. If you can learn how to program at all, you can learn how to program for anything. It’s all about effort, and most people don’t like the prospects of learning something new. Valve just thinks about having to learn something new, then says “forget it” while trying to cover up their ineptitude and fanboyism.

    • I like how you put your statement: ” any sensible company”. It’s quite obvious from their numerous ignorant statements that they are in fact, not sensible in the least. You cannot oust the PS3 userbase as 1) They own the console wars in Japan and Europe as many before me have said, and 2)the 360’s fanbase is full of bootleggers and hackers. I read a post the other day that stated that MS is “finally taking action” and trying to get rid of the prolific hacking and such. I’ve never personally played L4D, my friend says it was great when he first got it, and after that I didnt hear from him again about the game. And the last time I checked, PS3 has no reference to a box of any kind, theres only one box in the console war and its a sinking ship.

      • 360’s fanbase is full of bootleggers and hackers? Well fuck me! Here I thought I was playing CoD4 on the PS3 with it’s flying, god-mode morons. Silly Microsoft must of put a PS3 inside a 360 case.

        I wish I did own a 360. At least they clean out the shit every once in a while. Sony doesn’t give a fuck about us until it’s something that steals money from their pockets. I haven’t seen a hacker yet on CoD4 for 360, yet you can’t get away from them on the PS3 until it was updated to hell and back. As for bootleggers, give it enough time and we’ll be seeing some bootleggers when blu-ray prices drop. I’m so fucking sick of hackers on PSN that it isn’t every funny.

        • It’s not a hack, it’s an exploit from level design bugs. There is no hacking on the PS3. Their encryption technology is bananas and has yet to be cracked even all these years it’s been out with an entire scene working on it, which is why you don’t see any bootlegs on the PS3.

          Left4Dead on the 360, however, is hacked to hell. I’ve seen people the size of buildings raining down molotovs all over the place, spawn truckloads of guns, noclipping, creating flash mobs of zombies on command, carpeting the streets in tanks, etc.

        • On yes! It’s me! So, tell me Costcotaker, what button do I push to make me fly in CoD? Or how about falling through the ground? Make myself disappear? How about freezing every in fucking place while you kill them?! *Ok, that last one is a lag switch, but I just learned that 20 minutes ago and can be used on any system, even PCs.*

          Ever want a taste of my metal punk ass, hit me up in Killzone. I’ll be happy to splatter your brain bits all over the walls. Name the place and time. <3

  • And the only reason most Japanese games are PS3 exclusive is purely because the PS3 is Japanese. As if it has anything to do with anything other than that. If it was the 360 vs the PS1 they’d still prefer to put games on PS1 because “it’s Japanese”… doesn’t matter if the PS3 is a bloated mishmash of half a dozen different ideas sloppy slapped together by Sony.

  • play dragon age on the xbox360 and PS3 and then say the xbox360 version is head & shoulders above the PS3 then…

    yup dragon age is fugly on the xbox360, allot more fugly than the PS3.
    but who buys a PC game on a console anyway? it’s like people getting a valve game on a sucky console.
    as if PS3 owners don’t have enough money to have a decent pc? also online is fully free on the PC…

  • Valve is first and foremost a PC developer anyway and I wouldn’t wanna play their games on either of the consoles. Same goes for Blizzard, not like they plan to release any console games that is.

  • Mysterious Voice: “Dick move, Valve. Dick move. You’ve stabbed your most loyal fanbase in the back with this move. By not putting the game on the PS3, you remove the chance of letting more people in on this wonderful title. Consider the fact that Hideo Kojima himself enjoyed the first Left 4 Dead. Since the 360 is essentially over in Japan, the sales for the Japanese market have essentially been lost. I can’t think of one possible reason why this is a good idea.”

    To sell more Xbox 360s. When it comes down to it, 360 needs all the help it can get. Besides, I thought you were for your PC Gaming Master Race, so why are you complaining about it not being on the PS3?

    Mysterious Voice: “It’s called sales. What if people, heaven forbid, are too stupid to own a PC?”

    Then they get the 360 version, as was the plan. Are you always so pig-headed?

    Mysterious Voice: *gun fires* “That depends; are you?”

  • This is their way of saying:

    “Our code is crap and it can’t run in a good way on PS3”

    They have been ranting about how hard and difficult the PS3 is. Maybe they should take a look around on see that there are some pretty good games on PS3 so I wonder who is at fault here.

  • Translation: “We like the 360 crowd more because they are louder, more obnoxious and speak only english!!”

    Doesn’t matter anyway. The only reason they pretend to like the 360 is because it’s very similar to PC architecture.
    Valve are the worst PC fanboys out there!

  • Heh…

    After playing the first L4D, I wouldn’t touch the 2nd one with a 10ft pole. The game as shallow as a dumb blond compared to Resident Evil 5.

    I’m more looking forward to the next Half-Life if anything… Valve needs to make their next blockbuster game soon. 🙂

    • I’m kind of amazed at the people bashing L4D by comparing it to single-player games.

      It was designed to be played as a co-op experience. It’s not meant to have a deep story, it’s not meant to keep you playing for hours on end per campaign. I think the game is boring as all get-out on single player but add in a couple of friends and/or maybe join a Vs. mode server and it’s awesome.

  • Honestly I could care less about this. Valve games = shit on consoles. Valve on PC = tons of free user created stuff to download (mods n stuff), way more dlc (and a lot of it is free), and access to command console (which is awesome). So if you’re gonna play Valve games play them on PC.

  • HyperKnuckles99 says:

    My friend told me about that Valve doesn’t really like PS3, saying it was to hard for them to work with, the community problem they said is just probably bullshit and that there to lazy. Kinda wish it could come out on PS3 so I can play it, but not really a loss seeing how it was far from top proxority for me.

    • Probably on par architecturally. You can treat 360 like PC with less horsepower and less memory. On PS3, you can’t! basically the devs need to leverage the SPU to have something remotely on par with 360. So instead of handling CPU+GPU, on PS3 you must handle the CPU(PPU+SPU)+GPU. And although the SPU is part of the CPU, it must handle both the regular CPU duty and GPU duty.

    • Yeah… PC is always ahead of any console… after all, consoles are just lower end PCs made for gaming purpose that uses an ancient pointing device (analog sticks), though I think this is going to be improved soon.

  • It doesn’t matter what Valve says. I do admit that I had fun playing their games but I never think of them as one of those “legendary” developers because they are lazy. Why?

    1. All of their games are FPS
    2. They focus too much on multiplayer experience
    3. Their only game worthy of being called “innovative” is Portal IMO.
    4. The graphics of their game always look the same and average. Team Fortress 2 was definitely new but that’s just it.
    5. Their new games feels…recycled…somehow.

    To be honest, I have nothing against Valve because I really do enjoy their games. I look forward to playing L4D2 with my friends and Half-Life 2 Episode 3 but I seriously hate it when a developer bash other games/companies/consoles no matter which side I’m on.

    • Wow those are some stupid points you made there.

      Just because a company focuses on one type of game doesn’t mean they’re lazy. Companies like Blizzard only made rts'(until WoW) and Square Enix basically just made rgps so do their games suck? Companies have games they’re known for making.

      And the reason their games look the same is they all use the source engine, which I have no problem with I think its held up well this long and still looks good. Its also optimized to work on older computers.

      And just my own personal opinion here, multiplayer > single. Takes more skill to play against a human being then some AI and is a lot more exciting.

  • Why would people still buy first person shooters for consoles? FPS games are obviously meant to play in a PC with a mouse.

    Anyway, I didn’t liked L4D too much… I prefer playing against other people, not AI.

    • First Posting Idiot says:

      Playing first person shooters on consoles is sometimes like using the mouse wheel on a laptop keyboard.

      A mouse is much more accurate, and you don’t have to worry about tilting it too far and overshooting your target.

    • Strangely enough I find FPS play on PCs to be too lame. It’s way too easy to aim and shoot with a mouse and takes less manual dexterity and skill so I’ve never really cared for the sensation. Frankly both PCs and consoles make shooting too simplistic but there’s no easy way of moving closer to a realistic shooting sensation. I doubt most game players would like it anyway when they seen how ineffective they would actually be with a real firearm.

      • Yeah, I did. Don’t take me wrong, I’m a valve fanboy you can say, but I am critic. It’s not because I like most of the games they develop I’ll like them all.

        CSS is horrible, L4D was an average, not worth the price in my opinion. The others I play is TF2 sometimes and DOD:S like 2 times a semester.

        The best thing of Valve games is modding. I just love the Half-Life (Natural Selection) and Half-Life 2 (Pirates, Vikings and Knights II) mods.

  • Owning 90% of Valve’s title, I do agree with the sentiment, altho if looked closely, the PC version of their games are the best of the bunch actually. And I owned L4D, but only to revert back to the year old TF2 because it’s fun, it’s quirky, and ALL OF THE UPDATES ARE FREE by Valve. That what I love about Valve. They have a weird sense of humour that no one really can match in the world of game developemnt AND game distribution right now. The STEAM system on the PC is so awesome that people don’t bother to pirate games anymore. Just wait until they are feeling very generous and you can buy game at basically insane prices. I remember the 3 day USD2 offer of TF2 by Valve, and also cheap game weekend just because Gordon Freeman won Gamespot best game hero award. You don’t see this happening from other developers. Not to mention that Gabe Newell, valve’s head seems to have a tendency of answering every email ever sent to him. Try it.
    So when they say the PS3 community is not on par woth the 360 and PC, I don’t doubt that.

    • ChaosAngelZero says:

      What I think is almost never actually discussed, is: why is this so? why the PS3 online community is so weak, if the PSN service is free?

      Maybe it has to do with the fact that most of the ways to communicate and interact with each other (chat, voice chat, video chat, trophies, Home) weren’t included in the system firmware since its launch, unlike the 360 (which essentially inherited most of them from the original Xbox)?

      Or maybe the issue of many buyers really getting the console only for playing Blu-ray Disc movies and nothing more is bigger than most of us think it is?

    • Right. You reminded me about this rootkit Steam. Hate it. You can be sure that at least 90% of games from steam can be downloaded from the internet without this junk. Even if I would want to buy any of their games, I would put original on shelf just to play my pirated copy (So I did with Portal). If it comes to community, it’s all about money. Money they have to put into development and money they can get out of it. If the 2nd is not way, way higher than 1st they simply don’t do it. And… isn’t it lame not to release the games because it’s too hard? Come on, I can hear that from my friends but not from a GAME STUDIO.

      • Steam’s great, maybe you should try actually paying for your games sometimes instead of demonstrating your destitution.

        Much better than retail, you pick games, you give your credit card info, you download, no hassle, no discs, no delivery no boxes, everything can be reinstalled/redownloaded and transferred to other computers without any hassle at any time with no restrictions. Oh AND also it has some nifty functions as a game launcher and community features too.

        Super service and you have to be either a pirate or a technophobe to hate on it.

      • ChaosAngelZero says:

        I think it is a valid argument. What no one seems to sit down and reflect upon, is that maybe some multiplatform releases get delayed in order for the PlayStation 3 version to ship alongside the Xbox 360 one, which essentially hurts the Xbox 360 market and is pretty damn unfair. I remember many multiplatform releases showing up first for PlayStation and sometime down the line for the Sega Saturn, and that’s how it’s supposed to be, since the Saturn was a kick in the nuts to program for.

        Never heard of this Steam rootkit myself. Then again, I haven’t tried out Steam games.

  • I like how they say “It’s coming out for PC and 360. It’s going to be exclusive for that.” If they can take M$’ dick out of their mouth for a minute they can look up the definition of exclusive.

  • Azwethinkweiz says:

    L4D was fun but it got tiring rather quickly… I’ll probably just be renting the sequel. To Ps3 owners hoping the game might come to their system, your not missing too much. (its fun don’t get me wrong, just not a game worth paying 60 bucks for IMO)

  • xbox360 = PC disguised as a console

    PS3 = ACTUAL console..

    all these PCgame fag programmers always take the easy way and program for 360, then either a)do an inferior ps3 port, or b)ignore ps3 altogether…

    but whatever, there is heaps of good games out there for both

    • ChaosAngelZero says:

      Actually no, both systems’ GPUs (the Xbox 360’s Xenos and the PlayStation 3’s RSX) are based on PC video card technology, hell they’re even designed by ATi and nVIDIA themselves, respectively!

      But the main architecture of both, the CPU and mainboard, are mostly based on Power Architecture (you can read more about that here:, which has absolutely nothing to do with standard PC x86 architecture. Actually, they’d be more related with old Macs running on Motorola processors, if anything.

      So the fact is that Microsoft’s XNA really does “beat” Sony’s PS3 SDK as far as ease of porting goes.

      • You are right, Zero. The only huge difference between the two is the SPE’s vs. modified PPC triple core. If it wasn’t for that, dare I say that both systems would be the same except for graphics cards, bust speed, pipeline size, memory handling, and other small differences.

        This generation isn’t like the last ones. There are no major difference in platforms that warrant a “console war”.

  • Got to love the reaction of the PS3 fags on this site. Cheers and celebrations about a game being graphical superior to that of the 360 version. But when developers mention the fact that its hard programming for there beloved Failstation 3, they get their loli loving panties so far up their butt crack it could be mistaken for a tampon.

      • I dare you to run a ps2 emulator on your PC.
        What’s that? You can’t? Only 30FPS? Missing textures?

        Consoles exist so people can play on a medium without having to deal with bullshit like graphics cards and drivers. It’s cheaper, and more accessible. Even if you have the best hardware, you will never be able to run a PS2 game like a real PS2, or any other 3D console for that matter.

      • lol, and on your PC you won’t have to pay extra for any DLC that Valve releases, because Microsoft likes to milk it for everything its worth.

        $8 for a new level, with 2 chapters? You’re kidding… No, of course not, this is Microsoft. (When Crash Course came out and we got it for free on PC)

      • Agree

        if all game in the world can be played with PC Any of PS3, X-box 360 or any platform
        is outmatched by PC by specs

        off course you need Super Hi End PC to enjoy it to the fullest
        and it cost more money than buy console

        in adition PC is not mobile

    • Yea, personally I care very little about this at all, it’s an FPS, I have my PC for that. When I want to play action games, I have the PS3, so where Valve stands on what console works better for inferior ports of PC games doesn’t really matter to me at all.

  • the idea of “playing with friends” implies that PS3 has no online gameplay at all… which kinda makes them sound purposely ignorant to the what the PS3 can do. >.>

    I actually wouldn’t want the series on the PS3 anyway, knowing developers, they’d just half-ass it in the end, then they complain say it was too hard to do.

    I don’t know about you, but isn’t mastering difficult programming and work part of the field?

    • I do agree that they forgot about the PS3 online capabilities.

      The PS3 is not similar to a PC so programming anything for it is hard. Plus MS being a programming company to begin with is able to beat Sony in terms of coming out with development tools for games.

      But it is also because of this reason above that we know that the PS3 is way superior than the X360.

      But then again the console is just a tool. If the programmer cannot make full use of the console capabilities, then the console full capabilities have just gone down the drain. Which something MS has been quite successful in exploiting against the PS3.

      Humans are just lazy people and MS knows that fact pretty well. So giving out money to programmers to create the game based off the Xbox 360 is just a way to ensure that games don’t perform as well on the PS3.

      • Having a complex and difficult development tool doesn’t make it “Better”. Where did you get that idea?
        Why do you think there was more support for Nintendo over Sega, despite Sega always being “superior”?
        Hardware superiority doesn’t mean shit when its costing your company money and puts out unsatisfactory profit. This is why Kojima is going multiplatform, because the last metal gear just didn’t sell as well as he thought it would. Go to any gamestop or EB games and you’ll see the used section full of MGS4s.
        Microsoft supports indie developers, 3rd, 2nd and 1st party. This is the sole reason xbox has a strong library, is because they aren’t scared to bring in “last gen” type games. Sony is too anal about graphics standards and other BS and that’s why jrpgs are still coming out on the PS2 and Xbox first.

      • my friend rented it, and we played it all the way through (with 4-people, the AI are assholes)

        nothing to sell a system over in our opinion. and trust me, I’ve got no real affiliation to any system, but when I hear shit like this it makes me wonder just how hard developers are willing to try to make a good game…

        they made a decent game, just nothing to go buying 360’s over

        rent it, and let’s hope the 2nd one will be better… but I doubt that…

        • I’m kind of confused about this. What’s with all the “console-selling” comments?

          OBVIOUSLY L4D 2 isn’t going to move consoles. I’m pretty sure that’s not the point. I also suspect that if the point were to move consoles, the PC version would be coming out much, much later.

        • Err, ever considered how hard it is to make a game? And how big the risk of failure is, with millions spent just fluttering away? Team Valve just CAN’T do PS3 simple as that. Ever wondered why multi-plattform games suck way more often then exclusive-Plattform ones? They’re doing it for the PC and polish for that plattform, and they also port it down to the XBox 360 because of the similar architecture.
          And this isn’t about online capabilities, but about community. I.E. there is a lot of XBox 360 Machinima going, but not so for the PS3.

        • MechaTama31 says:

          Valve doesn’t want to work with the PS3, and the one time they let a third party handle the port, it was garbage, so now they just don’t do PS3 at all. Not that it matters, imho. Valve makes PC games. Why would you want to play them on either console?

  • Since 360 have more user base than PS3, this could work out. But if the situation is more like Xbox vs PS2, would they still insist on creating it for the PC and Xbox only or they will try harder to make the PS version good enough? or they wouldn’t make any console version at all?


    • I say “check your numbers again.”
      360 only got a bigger user base in North America.
      In Europe and Japan its PS3 that has the bigger userbase.
      But Yeah, them saying its too hard to program is just BS.

    • “Am i the only one who still prefers his zombie games to be survival horror in the strain of resident evil 1-3.”

      IMO the point of Left 4 Dead is first and foremost to provide a compelling co-op experience. Being a good zombie game is secondary.

      That’s why bots control the extra survivors if you don’t have four players, instead of there only being [1-3] players.

      • Dirty_Dingus008 says:

        Probably because those game don’t have zombies? Most of what’s in ‘Silent Hill’ are figments of an overly imaginative protagonist being ampped up by the town or what is inside it.

    • “This game isnt on my favourite console so I’m going to say it sucks. BAWWWWW”
      PS3 fanboys are epic fail. They did this with The Ballad of Gay Tony as well. Saying L4D sucks means either you haven’t played it, or you have no friends.
      I played both the PC and 360 versions and both were solid. The xbox controller is probably the best designed controller in existence (anything to the contrary is usually fueled by nostalgia and no actual merit).
      If I was a developer of any type of game, and I had to pick between “Well designed console, strong community, easy to developer and cost effective” vs “Higher space capacity, weak community, lack of incentive, difficult to develop, expensive and time consuming”, guess which one i would pick.

    • First Posting Idiot says:

      Nice dodge Valve.(sarcasm)

      Even if a developer doesn’t like the PS3, they wouldn’t give up tens of thousands of sales just because it’s a little tricky to develop on it. It’s the same with a lot of other exclusives. There are plenty of developers who released on both consoles in a timely fashion. For valve to essentially say “it’s too hard” is complete S***.

      Maybe if Microsoft stopped bribing developers, they’d have the money to keep those 5000 people they laid off.

      • It’s not worth it, porting it to PS3 that is.
        They would probably outsource or hire new personnel, and then work on it, then production, distribution and maintenance. The possible sales would be low, because the game’s fanbase is already hooked on L4D and are current 360 or PC users, PS3 users might not be so interested in a sequel.

        • You lost me at handheld. Handhelds fail so hard, its not even funny. Look at the 4 different nintendo DS or the 3 PSP. Upgrades are minimal and it’s buying the same device at the same price over and over. No customizing and not to mention small screens, bad controls and limited capabilities.

          I agree, games should be PC only, it might be costly but a $600 PC can last you 2 good years of gaming and you can always gradually update at a small price.

        • Hey, I’m actually thinking about a handheld which is oriented after the PC, with way less restrictive Firmware. But the Softwaredevelopers would have to pull on that idea too, or else it’ll end like those many Open Source Handhelds with practically no fun games.

      • “Saying “we got a huge development subsidy from Microsoft to keep it exclusive, right?” just doesn’t sound as good…

        Err, no. Its in the text, Valve doesn’t want to bother with the architectural difference of the PS3 to Xbox360/PC. This just shows how keen they are on making games for the PC (which I really apreciate).

        Also, I always burst in laugther watching Multiplayer Shooters on Console. Auto Aim, “Shields”, and you have to almost touch the enemy to get a clean shoot. It really is just a joke.

        • Actually, porting a game to another system, (Xbox 360 to PS3 and vice versa) typically only adds around 5%-10% of the development cost. This is the reason most developers are making games for both systems, the risk is relatively low compared to the potential gains.
          With this in mind, simply claiming that the PS3 is too difficult to create games for just seems unlikely. Even if we were to double the development cost to 20%, it’s still a relatively low risk to take.
          The “subsidy” comment at the end of the article is a sort of hint that there are other hidden factors to why Valve will not port the game over. Whether it’s true or not is subject to another discussion, of course…

        • i fully agree. if you’re hooked up to one platform (DirectX in this case), it’s not straightforward to port an engine to a totally different platform.
          a different company might have years of experience with opengl – for them a windows/360 port would be a huge pain in the ass.
          other companies develop their engines with a multiplatform concept in mind from the start – like the unreal 3 engine. while it still hasn’t been ported to, for example, mac os x, it supports directx and opengl targets out of the box, so it’s easy to port games to both windows, 360 and ps3 without huge differences in quality.

        • Don’t forget – most companies OUTSORUCE porting to the PS3, usually resulting in poor quality work. Valve is committed to quality, and while their statements make them sound like suits and not techs (he did say that) it does say they refuse to let their code go to another place to be ported. They’re highly protective of their property, and for good reasons.
          In the end, they know the PC, and the 360 is a direct port of that. The PS3 has a lot of technical work to get titles to be the best. It’s always fuzzed me a bit when people talk about “not being able to use the playstation hardware to its fullest” until 3-5 years after launch. Why can’t they make development simple enough so that people can put excellent games without going to all the trouble? That, IMO, is what Valve is saying here.
          Sure, MS prolly pays them, of that I don’t think anyone has doubt. But either they got a bonus for raggin the PS3, or they made a stupid move and MS knows they’re sold, and can cut their bribes in half now.
          Seeing as how little games Valve puts out, I don’t think it could possibly add any more time to development.

        • I have to agree with kamanashi, its technically possible but when you get down to it, it’s a bitch to make anything for the ps3 and have it actually use the platforms hardware to its fullest.

          Valve is in a position where they don’t have to do it, so why would they?

        • It’s not a question of “can” or “can’t”. It’s a question of not bothering because of the unnecessary extra work they would have to go through if they wanted to make games for PS3 and they (Valve) does not WANT to put that extra time & money into that.

        • The reason Valve can’t do it is because they are not true full developers. Their “own” engine is a modification on work of a true developer, you may have heard of them, it’s a little company called “id”.

          In the end we won’t see them to anything but modify “their” source engine until Carmack and his team finish the Tech 5 engine. Then Valve will probably use it to create a “new” engine and claim they did a bulk of the hard work. They did it with Half-life on the quake engine, they did it with Source with the Tech 3 and 4 engine.

          Valve makes good games, don’t get me wrong, but they get to much credit for Source when they have to rely so much of it’s core structure to another company.

          Because of this, whenever they talk trash about developing on complex hardware, I really can’t take them seriously compared to companies like Dice, Criterion, Epic, etc, who actually made their own engines in their entirety from the ground up.

        • If Square can do it, why can’t Valve? If all these other companies can produce quality games on the ps3, and valve (among others) can’t, doesn’t that just mean that valve is simply inferior to those other companies? Activision has no problem delivering to every console, for example, and the ps3 has exclusive developers even. So, the only two things that make sense are either that A) Valve is getting a boatload of money from the MS people, or B) Valve simply cannot program worth anything. Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t most graphics engines (unreal, oblivion, and others) work just as well on both platforms. And let’s not forget Bethesda here, but at least they converted….

      • Yeah, I just can’t stand FPS’s on consoles anymore…I usually play on my computer, but when I was over at a friend’s house, I tried it on his xbox…it just doesn’t have the same level of control playing with a mouse does…

        • I agree with you guys somewhat and I have one thing to say to Artefact. I own both consoles but this article definately had some butthurt reaction. All you did thar was use Vesperia as a means to say “oh well ps3 still has one up in this respect”. I’ve always favoured the 360, hey i might turn with the recent news of a chance of the ps3 finally get cross chat but until that update comes I will always say that the ps3 is inferior, pretty much for that single reason. None gives a shit about in-game chat, this goes for mostly everyone, but we want to be able to chat whenever we want with no restrictions, and ps3 certainly does fail in alot of online aspects, but I guess the ps3 fanboys can blame who was it? EA? For stopping ps3 cross-chat. The ps3 is even growing on me lately the more i play tekken 6, but i stand by my words. Until the ps3 gets cross-chat it can suck everyones dick, because as a fan of consoles in general, we, the gamers deserve all the console can offer, fact-e-mondo.