@Azures: Except the best co-op since Secret of Mana.

PsycheE

Valve have only recently made a shift in their opinion of PS3 development. We will not see the results of this shift for atleast a year.

GOD

@balls187 upside yo head: Same here Mr Balls lol. My PS3 only handles bluray and other multimedia activities. I'm definitely going to get this on PC.

Friscodude

@CockroachMan: There are people, like me, who do not have the proper mental capacity and monetary funds to fine-tune a machine to play a single game they want to play. That's why I bought a 360: easy, plug-and-play video game system which has most of the games I would want to play on the PC anyway. It's as simple as that. That, and I've grown up using console controllers, and I'm fairly comfortable with that setup.

@zanzibarlegend: "Toy soldiers." +1, my friend.

peAr nectAr

Mathematically speaking, should we have killed every single zombie infestation by now. Can someone please explain to me what the facination is with zombies? I just don't get it.

I wont' be getting this game nor will I be getting Resident Evil.

CartBlanche2

@VishusBurn: "They would sell way more copies for PS3 than they ever could for PC"

Are you high? There is no way that would happen.

homernoy

All I want is L4D PS3 + Mouse&KB support. I don't mind waiting for it either.

Regardless, this game looks dope. Looking forward to it's initial release.

00000000

@CockroachMan: @Sam Smith:

Well, you know, there are plenty of us who enjoy the console experience more so than sitting at a computer. Also (and this is the biggest point to be made) a lot of us don't own gaming rigs. In the day of laptop computers and "space saving" designs, a lot of people, including myself, prefer small and convenient computers with good battery life over something that's capable of running a game smoothly. As for desktops, all the desktops in my house are ridiculously outdated. They still run perfectly well for all basic needs, but I'm pretty sure the old radeon 9700 doesn't cut it anymore.

@EVIL_V2: what was wrong with the orange box for the 360? Sounds to me like you got the ps3 version, and thus, you own only a ps3, so reality is, they're not gonna get your money because you don't own the console they're making it for...not because they're not good developers.

aKed

@Fluffy22: Because you know Valve's resources, strengths and weaknesses better than Valve does. Gold star to you, you should be a consultant.

hahnchen

@NeVeRMoRe666: So in conclusion, stop hating on Valve, its one of the best gaming companies out there. If you want L4D, get it for PC or pick up a 360. Getting mad at having no games on your PS3 isn't going to get you anywhere.

NeVeRMoRe666

No Left 4 Dead on PS3? SHOCK!

Valve = too lazy to code for it. I mean, don't argue with me, you know it's true. Look at Newell, does it look like that man's motivated to do much more than the bare minimum? I'm sure the only thing that motivates that man out of bed in the AM is the prospect of counting more money and seeing if he can beat his previous day's best at shovelling donuts down his gullet.

HIT THE TREADMILL, FATTY!

GlibGamer

@Bishmon: Did they take into account people who wouldn't buy the game out of spite of their poor business practices? Maybe.

This is a moot point anyway, Warhammer and Force Unleashed release within 2 days of each other. That is some bullshit.

Azures

I think another reason Left 4 Dead is not on the way to the PS3 right now is because Valve have not really brought the Source Engine to the PS3 yet. After it gets made to work with the PS3 I think there should be more games from Valve to be made for the PS3 too.

Just look at Unreal Engine 3 it took some time before the Engine worked with the PS3 and now it does and you are seeing more games use that Engine on the PS3.

So think that could be an issue and when it gets worked out the PS3 should get the game too.

BlackIceJoe

@VishusBurn: I think it would not be profitable (or atleast not return a major profit) for a few reasons:

1. The PS3 port would take alot of time, resources, and additional engineering if it is to be built from the ground up- By the time the game comes out, it will have already become irrelevent as gamers have either moved on, gotten a 360, downloaded it from Steam, or be playing LBP.

2. PS3 owners would be wary of another luckluster port from Valve (see: Orange box).

3. Most anyone who would want L4D would have it by the time the PS3 port comes out. Most wouldn't buy a potentially bad port when they could have gotten it for PC, if they didn't have/want, a 360 a year earlier.

4.FPS are often seen as being better on PC.

5. They would be a late port competing against exclusive or original or new games that would be out for the PS3 at that time.

NeVeRMoRe666

@Sam Smith:

Because I hate the controls on PC, that's why. I'm not saying they aren't good, they are. I just don't care for it.

jello44

@VishusBurn:

Because many people who have a PS3 already have a 360 or PC, especially if they're interested in first-person shooters, making the PS3 version unnecessary for those people.

And of the PS3 owners who don't have a 360 or PC, I'm willing to bet the majority of them live in Japan, which is a market that has proven itself very uninterested in twitchy first-person shooters.

The problem isn't the PS3's install base. It's the small number of people who have only a PS3 that would be interested in a game like this. I'm sure Valve's done their research, and they've come to the conclusion it wouldn't be worth making a PS3 port to cater to that specific group. That doesn't seem all that crazy.

Bishmon

Why no PS3 version? Duh. It's from Valve. They have no skills nor desire to learn to develop for PS3, of course it's going to take extra time before someone else ports it over.

ara

Faliszek - "Making a ps3 version requires us to be smart, and actually learn a new bit of hardware, we dont care if there are 15 million ps3s worldwide! We are that lazy"

Valve, get with the times - you would get so many more sales releasing this for the ps3.

Fluffy22

@RaptureScientist: no this game doesnt intrest us because of the crappy orange box port. fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. thats whats going to end up happening.

EVIL_V2

Meh. Never liked playing FPS/3rdPS on console anyways. I'll get this for PC.

AokiShinya

@Katorok: Keep thinking that. How many games are multiplat again from less skilled developers than Valve? It's a matter of they not caring.

Azures

@Sam Smith: You know very well why. If not, you aren't reading anyone's comments every time a PC game article shows up here. Needless to say, those comments treat PC games like crap and then wonder when it's coming to whatever their favorite console is.

Drake Lake: Oh No You Didn't!

@Sam Smith: Not everyone has access to a decent gaming PC.

As someone with all three consoles, and a PC, my order of preference for multiplatform titles

PC (except fighting and sports),360 (XBL!),PS3, and finally the Wii.

balls187 upside yo head

@RaptureScientist: More of a Blatant idiot.

Mr.DuckSauce

Watched some of the gameplay on 360 and it looks really good.The zombies come after you no matter where you go.They climb through windows,walls.It's a impressive game.

enewtabie(wants a job at Insomniac Games in NC)

@QualityJeverage:
yeah, because, every console shooter has constant threats from behind you.... I think for most shooters, it would be the most useless button ever and a waste of button allocation.

aKed

@RaptureScientist: I'd rather they sit on their game then give us another pity port. We're good on shooters.

Azures

@Bishmon:
The PS3 install base is now more the 15 million.
How would it not be profitable to release the game for that system? They would sell way more copies for PS3 than they ever could for PC.
The truth is that it's not about laziness or that they couldn't turn a profit. The head honchos at valve are being stubborn and don't want to create a PS3 division within their company, but still wish to reap the profits from the install base.

VishusBurn

@Azures: Then it should be painfully obvious that the PS3 is a difficult console to port to...

Katorok

@Azures:

Yeah well, I'm not saying Valve ain't fanboys either.

RaptureScientist

@Nicevillin:

Give me a break, you know full well there are people who will discount games solely for the fact that there are on another console. He didn't say 'The concept of a cooperative shooter in a zombie setting doesn't appeal to me' he said 'This game does not interest me because it is not on my system'. Blatant fanboyism.

RaptureScientist

Cannot WAIT for this. Don't understand why anyone would get it on 360 though. This is a PC game, through-and-through.

Sam Smith

well i will not be getting this since the orange box was a joke. i gave valve my $60 hard earned dollars just to get a piss pore game. thanks but no thanks valve save the time and money.

EVIL_V2

I'll never understand why anyone would want to play a FPS game on a console, when they can play it on the PC using decent controls.. oh well.. love Valve's work, can't wait for this to come out :)

CockroachMan

@NeVeRMoRe666: Also by waiting for say another year for this game to come out for the PS3, it would have already become irrelevent and you would be risking a "orange-box"esque port. Think about it!

NeVeRMoRe666

@RaptureScientist: I do. And I also appreciate that lackluster enthusiasm for ps3 development at this point can be attributed to pure laziness of the developer, especially in Valve's case when they have made it painfully obvious they dislike the ps3.

Azures

@WhiteFeather: Do you think its easy to code for three different versions of a game to come out all at once? Valve has traditionally been a PC dev company, here its no different. It's not really their fault that the 360 is so like a PC, that they can port it easier than a PS3. If you really want to partake in some awesome-zombie-kill-fest on a console why wait? Get a 360 after the price cut, its so affortable, you would be silly to complain. OR the better option would be, as always, to just buy the PC version. Its not like they limited it just to the consoles. I'm sure everyone here has a PC capable of playing it (you are on kotaku after all). If you can afford a PS3, you can afford a decent PC. I don't really see a need to complain here.

NeVeRMoRe666

@NecronomiconUK:

But i still think that it's their responsibility NOT to deliver a bad port. In my opinion it's half way their fault. We as the consumers don't care who's fault it is when we get a bad game.

Schokobaer

@RaptureScientist: wow i didnt know it was a sin to not look forward to a valve game.

Nicevillin

I'm really looking forward to this game. Killing zombies: Fun. Killing zombies with friends: Way more fun.

Can't wait till November.

Daiden

@WhiteFeather:

If by "lazy" you mean "don't like throwing their money away" then I suppose you're probably right. I mean, really, will the sales from the few people that would buy a PS3 version but won't buy a 360 or PC version going to make them more money than it'd cost them to make the PS3 version from scratch?

That's not laziness. That's just business.

Bishmon

Spore, Crysis Warhead, Fallout 3, and finally: Left 4 Dead.

Huzzah! Sprinkle in the possibilities of Far Cry 2 and Dragon Age, and it's going to be a strong close for the year on the PC.

Huzzah!

Ken

@Madeira: It seems more of a reticule magnetism than it is an autoaim feature. Like, the reticule will "stick" slightly to the enemy when hovered over it, rather than have the bullets automatically fly towards the enemy even when the reticule is not directly over it's target. Or at least that's what I got from reading that up there.

Ajey

Oh man, Left 4 Dead was so much fun. I waited an hour and a half to play the 360 version at PAX and it was totally worth it. We all died pretty quick though, which sucked.

thegetupkid

looks like a great title tbh. hopefully we get a ps3 version for 09. when all else fails i will go to my friend's house to play this. console wars are for toy soldiers :D

zanzibarlegend

@Schokobaer: 'they'? Valve didn't do the crappy PS3 port. Valve has said already that Left 4 Dead may come to the PS3 if they can negociate a partner to work on it with them. I'm pretty sure they won't let the same clowns at EA deal with it.

NecronomiconUK

No PS3 version....No buy. I mean no offense to Valve but they are very lazy for such a good company.

WhiteFeather

Nothing wrong with starting from scratch...

phantomlink

For the PS3-Gamers i hope that they won't make a crappy port. Such as they did with the Orange Box...

Schokobaer

"The aiming, Valve's Chet Faliszek told me, includes a very slight auto-aim feature."

If this is anything like the 360 version of Orange Box's autoaim (that you couldn't turn off), then it's a no go for me. I couldn't believe the amount of autoaim for Orange Box, you just had to put the reticle somewhere in the vicinity of an enemy and your shots will hit. I am still incredulous that no reviews mentioned it, nobody was talking about it at all, like there wasn't a problem. Hopefully you can turn it off in L4D.

Madeira

@Azures:

Man, you really buy into the idea of the console war don't you? Just a proud little Sony soldier fighting the good ol' fight, appreciate a game for itself, not what it does for your system.

RaptureScientist

Also have to factor in the issues with the PS3 version of the Orange Box.

I'm sure Valve (especially Gabe the perfectionist) are still not happy about that.

balls187 upside yo head

I'm sure the 360 dev team for Left4Dead probably doesn't think it's *that* easy.

balls187 upside yo head

I'm still on the fence about this, with so many other games going on around the same time. Maybe with Ghostbusters looking like it will never appear before the end of the year there might be room.

NecronomiconUK

Every console shooter needs a 180 degree turn button.

QualityJeverage

don't think were losing much.

Azures

A matter of development time = porting PC games to Xbox is free cash baby.

KSPRAYDAD

OMG.. That game will rock my socks

Hellicus

worries should be worried.

Mr.DuckSauce

I cannot wait for Left 4 Dead. It has been at the top of my most wanted since it was announced.

T_Spoon_UK

Reload is B button? I dearly hope the controls are fully configurable ala The Orange Box.

Xiedo

I am definitely getting this game. The only question is should i get the PC version or the 360 version, i mean the PC has better controls but i dont't have any PC gaming 'friends', however the xbox 360 has achievements and friends, maybe the 360 version, yeah i mean spore is coming the end of this week, that will be my PC game.

BR4DL3I9H

@sushimandan: I do to, and I just don't get the backlash. Now if it didn't come to the PC, well, then we can commence with the bitch storm as that is the heart and soul of Valve (PC developer).

homernoy

@RabidZombie: Exactly, and that's why Valve seem inferior to other dev teams right now. Epic, id, Rockstar, Capcom, Square-Enix, etc are all doing multiplatform games. How can it be explained by anything else but laziness when a company as successful as Valve refuses to go multiplatform because they don't want to go through the trouble? PS3 development is different, OK. Epic swallowed their pride, worked with Insomniac and we got UT3. id took their time, learned the system and supposedly Rage is better on PS3 than 360 and they are adding a third disc to the PC version to "catch up with the PS3." GTA4 runs better on PS3, and the examples of successful PS3 development don't stop. So there goes the "PS3 is hard" argument. You're either a dev or not, and Sony had no reason to make another PC just because Microsoft did so. For your fanbase argument, PS3 outsold 360 almost every month this year, and despite the year lead of the 360 and the price difference it's already at 15 million. PS3 owners play shooters, like Resistance, Call of Duty and the anticipation of Killzone 2 show. So there goes the market share theory. The truth? Laziness, pure and simple. They are a great team, no doubt, but they are lazy and won't get out of the comfort zone. A great proof of that is Orange Box. They didn't make it for PS3, not because of exclusivity deals or anything, but just because they were too lazy for it, and they handed the port to EA. As a gamer, I think that sucks that a company is just after my dollars but isn't willing to work for it, and as a PS3 owner, I understand anyone who is harsh at Valve since we are "a waste of everybody's time" anyways. No matter how great their games can be, they will never have as much respect as Rockstar outside of the PC/360 territory because they are lazy. You can't try to give any outlandish argument that you want, but PS3 owners don't have to suck on Newell's dick because HL is a popular series. Especially with the tons of games coming in the following months.

FP_slomo788

@RaptureScientist: "I doubt Microsoft had the foresight to see that, they just got lucky they made a platform easy to program for and their competitor didn't."

Of course MS knew what they were doing, they have been providing development tools to 3rd parties quite a while now, for both desktop applications and games. They know that game developers are accustomed using DirectX and they have no doubt gained enough feedback over the years to tune their development tools more user friendly.

@Altersparck: "Newell was such a prick about PS3 development that I can't help but think that his refusal to develop for the platform is due to a lingering sense of loyalty to Microsoft."

Valve is privately owned company, they have no obligations to chase every available penny. If they don't feel like messing their development pipeline with OpenGL they are free to let purely profit seeking companies do the porting. I'm personally saddened by the fact that DirectX is gaining such monopoly, but Valve is free to keep their internal business as they see fitting.

ara

@T_Spoon_UK: Same! Its awesome in a box!

infestedDemon

@Madeira:
"If this is anything like the 360 version of Orange Box's autoaim (that you couldn't turn off), then it's a no go for me. I couldn't believe the amount of autoaim for Orange Box, you just had to put the reticle somewhere in the vicinity of an enemy and your shots will hit. I am still incredulous that no reviews mentioned it, nobody was talking about it at all, like there wasn't a problem. Hopefully you can turn it off in L4D."

No life...

DevoL

Just don't port it to the PS3. We know how you feel about the PS3, Valve. That's fine! For what you've done for the game industry, you get a pass on that.

The only problem is that if you do port it, and hand it off to a different team, and it turns out to be less then stellar, then you'll just be opening up the flood gates of shit. Better to just not bother then to risk it.

Besides, I may actually be able to play this on may lappy.

Thorax

@Glass_bomb:

Well, clearly the people making LBP are lazy. Sony, too, for making all those games and not porting any of them to the 360 or PC. It's certainly not because any of these companies have businesses to run, they're just lazy for not bringing their games to more consumers. Definitely lazy.

Bishmon

I have a PS3 and I'm not miffed about l4d not coming out on it (later or not at all). Get a job, get a PC, and stop being wannabe gamers.

sushimandan

@GlibGamer: "I mean, don't argue with me, you know it's true"

Well who can counter a statement like "HIT THE TREADMILL, FATTY!"

I read that, and I know right away that your a logical, rational human being. By the way, Valve is truly an elite game developer, and you ripping Gabe Newall is kind of like a 360 owner ripping Kojima for being lazy and not porting MGS4.

Kojima says a port is not possible, but you and I both know he and the rest of Konami are just lazy.

/sacasm

homernoy

@GlibGamer: Excellent argument. You don't expect to see a PS3 version of Left 4 Dead because Gabe Newell is rich and fat. Inspiring logic.

@Brian C.: Were you able to see any of the zombie gameplay? I'm most interested in playing as the infected. I want to eat all of your faces. OMNOMNOM!

Sandvich

@NeVeRMoRe666:
Yes; At this point it would be a delayed port if they started now, but had they done what most devs are doing these days and developed simultaneously on all platforms that they are interested in, then it wouldn't have been an issue.

And of course it would have taken additional man-hours to create a PS3 version. It would have taken less though if they had structured the development into the process from the start rather than having E.A.(or whoever they end up pushing it onto) do it later.

VishusBurn

@Bishmon: In this day and age that sounds like a mistake.

@PsycheE: Is their any way to counter that statement w/ a ps3 exclusive game and not get called a fanboy? Even if I may be right? lol.

Azures

all of you complaining, since when has someone with a 360 complained about little big planet you stupid children, even I want to get a ps3 for little big planet, I don't complain how it's not on my system.

Idiots.

Glass_bomb

@skewt:

I doubt Microsoft had the foresight to see that, they just got lucky they made a platform easy to program for and their competitor didn't.

RaptureScientist

I wish Valve, and Gabe Newell in particular, would just get over it and start developing for PS3. Newell was such a prick about PS3 development that I can't help but think that his refusal to develop for the platform is due to a lingering sense of loyalty to Microsoft. If that's the case, then all he's doing is depriving gamers.

Altersparck

@Azures:

I don't think companies ever really account for the 'irrationally spiteful' market.

Bishmon

@CartBlanche2: If you don't get it, you don't get it. The awesomeness of these games is an abstract concept that can't be explained, only felt.

sarcasmOD

@jello44:
Left4Dead on PC supports any gamepad you'll throw at it, with a bit of control scripting. A 360 controller will even work out of the box.

RabidZombie

Yeah PS3 fanboys, keep sharpening those knives. Not Valves fault that PS3 turned out to be twice as much effort for the same product as the other options. The only reason this is even coming to consoles alongside the PC version is because Microsoft was smart enough to create a machine that PC developers can feel comfortable with.

skewt

@Fluffy22: I don't think you understand. It isn't porting to the platform they're worried about. They know they're capable (they do have an ego). What they are worried about is that the HUGE ammount of time it will take to porting their engine and then the game code on top, and then optimizing it isn't going to be worth the extra sales. They haven't got a clue how popular Left4Dead on the PS3 will be (being a new IP and all) and thus, aren't willing to take the risk. As has been said, Valve are business (a relatively small one at that).

When Faliszek said the 360 version was easy to make, he isn't kidding. The PC version and the 360 version are the same code base. Obviously you have to deal with the 360 specific quirks, like Live integration, but that doesn't take nearly as long as something like porting just the graphics part of the Source engine to the PS3's architecture and OpenGL ES.

RabidZombie

Valve doesn't do ports to the PS3, with the orange box they outsourced the porting work to EA for the PS3. EA then proceeded to royally screw up their game and provide all sorts of bad press for Valve. Valve is making the smart move and not outsourcing to that company anymore. The "15 million" PS3 owners don't justify the damage to their name another poor port job would do.

Xbox gets a port because Valve is a PC dev and Xbox 360 is friendly towards PC devs.

Warskull

@FP_slomo788:Fuck that, I was about the bring up Blizzard as well but someone beat me to it. I'm pretty sure that Blizzard haven't developed for consoles JUST because they didn't want to invest time and money on it. So I guess you are calling them the same.

hahnchen

And God forbid they have to put any effort into making a game.

CheckersMcGavern

@Bishmon: Oh it's a business decision, but it's just not caused by the same reasons as an exclusivity contract. Epic did Gears exclusively for 360 because MS paid for it, and gave them many advantages. Makes perfect sense. L4D is not coming for PS3 because they don't want to put in the effort, time and money. I'm sorry if you don't really see the distinction.

FP_slomo788

@FP_slomo788:

If other devs (not every other smart guy) want to spend the resources and time to develop there game for the PS3, then that's there prerogative. All, I'm saying is, don't get mad at the developers who don't. It's there fucking business. They don't own PS3 owners anything.

If porting a PC game to the 360 wasn't as stupidly easy as "Pressing A" then I'm sure this game wouldn't be coming for it either.

Why? BECAUSE VALVE FIRST AND FOREMOST ARE PC DEVELOPERS!!!

Why is that such a hard concept to grasp?

RonCey

i love valve and left 4 dead will be awesome

Alchemy_Comrade

Some people need to stop defending Sony and start putting the blame on them. Sony is not the victim and Valve and other game makers aren't the bad guys for not wanting to make a game for the PS3. Sony just keeps developing their own proprietary operating systems, mostly to get more money out of the developers, but the only thing they are doing is screwing their own fanbase. Just like the PS2, if Sony would have went with the x86 standard programing and not their dos based out of left field operating system then games would be on the PS3 and 360 at the same time. Just look at how much better the PS3 games would look like if they used the cell processor, programmers wouldn't have to spend all their effort making tools to develope PS3 games and could spend the time on graphics and gameplay. If Sony is to ever come back as a major force then the next Playstation should be developed with the game makers who actually make the games. Sony needs to drop the ego and attitude and become partners with companys like Valve. MS understands that.

bigd7387

Yeah, kojima is one lazy motherfucker. All 360 fans know that. ::rolls eyes::

Valve hasn't seen fit to create a PS3 port team because they view it as too much effort to cater to people who only own 1 console and no PC. That doesn't make them lazy, it makes them cost effective.

skewt

@TearsandScreams:

PS3 and a decent gaming PC are not that far off from each other. If you need to budget and save money you should not be getting a PS3 in the first place, even a 360 isn't exactly wallet friendly. Saving 1000 dollars will build yourself a nice little PC with more work and gaming functionality than any console will give you. Yeah maybe I sound a bit asshole-ish but I don't make gobs of money but I didn't get all the stuff I want by bitching about little lame things like this.

sushimandan

@ara: I think he is referring to the architecture of the Cell.

homernoy

@QualityJeverage: I wholeheartedly agree.

Xylophone

@Azures:

Why does exclusivity have anything to do with this? That's a business decision, and your guys' whole arguments are dependent on business decisions being completely irrelevant.

Bishmon

@RonCey: "Instead of blaming developers why don't you point some of that anger towards Sony? "

Licensing DirectX would have been the only thing Sony could have done to get Valve develop for their platform. And at that point, PS3 would have turned into Microsoft's platform.

ara

@eqhara: Time = money.

homernoy

@muu: No its not really the same, Blizzard chose to only go for the computer gamer market. They develop for both PC and Mac, expanding their business to a much different platform in Mac. Blizz has shown their ability to expand, they just don't want the console market.

Azures

I'm amused the interview says they didn't port it because they felt time would be an issue. Yet people here have convinced themselves that the *real* reason Valve isn't porting the game is because they'd lose millions of dollars doing so, classy.

eqhara

@muu: If Blizzard did a game on 360 (or PS3) and refused to work on the other JUST because they didn't want to invest time (and money) on it, yes I'd call them the same. Last gen I owned an Xbox, and yes I felt the same way about most companies, and this is when my respect for Rockstar was really established. I didn't own a PS2.

@BallPtPenTheif: So they didn't utilize the full power of the 360 because the engine didn't "require" it. What do you call that? A business strategy?

FP_slomo788

@Altersparck: Why should he? Newell dislikes the console, and likely finds it too big an investment.

Sony made a decision in making the PS3 be a bizarre piece of engineering, relatively speaking. They have to deal with developers turning poor product (well, less so now that it's been around and people are adapting to it) or flat out refusing to.

Newell probably believes that the investment (time, money, stress) required in PS3 development isn't worth it. He probably believes that focusing that energy on the next PC/360 game will be a better option. Remember, you don't make your business decisions thinking only of if you will proft or not - you also have to take into account the opportunity cost.

I'm not sure he's a MS loyalist. He's likely to have a pro-MS attitude (he did work with them), but he also did release on the PS2, and didn't mind the OB being on PS3.

@RaptureScientist: Why do people keep the impression that the people over a microsoft are stupid?

The Xbox was designed from day one to be very similar to the PC. Same standards, same tools, same options. Heck, go get yourself some Visual C# and the program even gives you 360/PC templates for your game.

Grive

@Bishmon: That's quite a counterpoint when speaking about MULTIPLATFORM companies. If Valve was exclusive this wouldn't even come up.

Azures

@Bishmon: Is Valve doing it because they have an exclusivity deal with Microsoft? They have never hinted at that. Is Valve owned by Microsoft now? I'm not aware of that. Are they not doing L4D on PS3 because they don't want to focus their ressources on it? Absolutely. For a company as successful, I call it laziness. You could call it greed if you want.

FP_slomo788

@FP_slomo788:

At it's core, Valve is still just a PC development studio. I've read that even their Xbox 360 port of orange box didn't fully utilize the multi-threading since Orange Box itself doesn't require that much graphical firepower.

Though they make up for it with their great sense of story telling, game design, and art design, Valve's technology (the Source engine) is old and dated showing that their programmers might not have the chops to push things forward or to take full advantage of multi-threading.

Remember, Valve has always been about building games towards the most commonly owned PC spec, and unfortunately that business model isn't ideal in a console environment.

BallPtPenTheif

@NeVeRMoRe666:
Haven't read World War Z yet, but the Zombie Survival Guide by him is great too.

sushimandan

@FP_slomo788: So by your account is Blizzard, who refuses to do console ports to neither the 360, PS3 or the Wii the epitome of 'laziness?'

It makes perfect business sense to abandon a console if there is greater profitability (and potential for growth of developer skills) in trodding forward towards new IP. Where were you when Xboxes didn't release all the same third-party games the PS2 was? Or the GC? Should Squaresoft be scolded as being lazy because they won't port some versions of FF13 to the 360? If not, why do certain developers going for certain consoles have get-out-of-jail-free cards while some do not? Do you believe in double standards?

muu

@RonCey: RonCey: "It's Sony's fault for designing a system different than PC!"

You sound really smart you know? Never mind that EVERY other dev team can successfully make games on PS3 right now, it's Sony's fault for creating a machine that requires alien technology. Well I guess you just proved that the Valve guys are dumber than the other major dev teams. Either that or, you know, they are too lazy to learn to work on PS3...

FP_slomo788

@FP_slomo788:

I can't wait to read your diatribe on how PS3-exclusive developers are lazy.

Bishmon

@sushimandan: So people who don't have gaming PCs don't have jobs? Ever think they might just have better things to spend their cash on/families to support? Jesus, asshole much?

@Glass_bomb: I have a 360, and no PS3, and whilst I'm not complaining, I am sooo jealous of Little Big Planet, it looks incredible.

TearsandScreams

I think it's quite simple. Source doesn't work well on the PS3. Sure Valve could spend millions recoding the engine around the PS3 architecture, they could do the same for the Wii too I guess. Can't blame them if they believe it'll cost them more to bring their engine up to spec on the PS3 than the actual money it'll bring in.

People should just get over that fact and if you want to blame anyone go haunt Sony's engineers and upper management.

Anyway this is going on my PC just like Fallout 3 and Spore.

Jelster

Generic Fanboy #1: "This game isn't coming to the PS3 because Valve is LAZY!"

Generic Fanboy #2: "This game isn't coming to the PS3 becuase Gabe Newell is a fat fuck!"

Generic Fanboy #3: "We didn't want this game anyways!"

Instead of blaming developers why don't you point some of that anger towards Sony? Oh, that's right, they could never do anything wrong. It's not there fault they designed a system that you need to take summer classes to learn. It's the lazy developers fault! I mean WTF? It's not like there was a long documented history of developers bitching about the PS3 architect....oh wait.

Whether you think that the PS3's hard to learn architect shouldn't be a disadvantage, the fact is that it is. You knew this when you bought it. So don't get pissed when a someone decides that they don't want to go through the effort and cost of porting the game to the PS3, especially when it's a developer with a long history of PC development.

RonCey

@CartBlanche2: Do yourself a favour and rent/purchase and watch all of the "of the dead" movies by George A. Romero (no silly knock-offs!). Since you're already at your local video store, make sure to also pick up "Shaun of the Dead". Then, read Max Brooks "World War Z". Afterwards, feel free to check out Robert Kirkman's very excellent "The Walking Dead" series.

If that doesn't get your heart pumping for Left 4 Dead, well then, I guess you're already one of them...

*readies the hatchet*

NeVeRMoRe666

Love that 180 turn button, definitely looked needed for the fast paced all direction action I saw in the gameplay vids.

Pornosaur

@Jelster: Have I ever said any slur in this article (except laziness, but I can't find a better word). I remember being harsh at Newell after he called us "a waste of everybody's time" but I'm sure you see how this was called for.

FP_slomo788

@FP_slomo788:

From my understanding, LBP wasn't always a first-party title. Even the official press release regarding the exclusivity suggests that the exclusivity was agreed upon after Media Molecule started making LBP.

But hey, let's talk about any other Playstation exclusive game. How about Squeenix? Their laziness last gen was unrivaled. And how about Kojima? His pure laziness kept MGS4 away from the 360. Feel free to rant away on that one.

Bishmon

Fanboi's make me feel better about myself.

T_Spoon_UK

@Thorax:If I had no gaming PC, I would be dissapointed too. Eventually there will be a PS3 version, especially if L4D is a great success, but I most likely won't be purchasing it. Really.....who in their right mind would buy a Valve game for a console if they had a choice. Upgrading your GPU is cheaper than ever, go for it.

homernoy

@Jelster: id was on that bandwagon until they sat down, worked with the console and now Rage on PS3 looks better than 360 and they are adding a disc to the PC version to make it "catch up." Epic never bad-mouthed PS3, but they worked on it too and UT3 is an amazing achievement. Valve had a point 2 years ago when Sony didn't put out the dev tools. Now it's kind of outdated, just like "PS3 doesn't sell."

FP_slomo788

@Sandvich: @homernoy: Tongue in cheek humor > You

Do you honestly belive I would argue against GN's methods based solely on his obesity? Hah.

He's awesome at what he does, but you can't say he's been more than a little short-sighted by not moving forward with PS3 development. He's talented, I'll give him that. but if smaller, less talented companies can develop for the PS3, how does that help him validate the argument the PS3 is too difficult to work with?

It doesn't.

Now, get a sense of humor.

GlibGamer

@RaptureScientist: I didn't even want to post in this article since I made it a point to sit out of console wars but your comment was so amazing I just had to pay the proper respect :)

*epic face-palm*

okenny :) ...building bridges (to hide under)

@Grive: Well I'm sure PS3 owners would love to get into that peace and love mentality Valve seems to bring, but unfortunately they are not worth the effort.

@hahnchen: Not worth the effort? That's the definition of being lazy. Time? Orange Box came out later on PS3 but I'm sure it sold fine. Money? Valve themselves are starting to wake up with the PS3 sales. 15 million for such an expensive console is not shit, PS3 has been outselling the 360 for almost every month this year and yes, PS3 owners buy shooters. I fail to see how they are now worth less than 360 owners.

FP_slomo788

@FP_slomo788:
Valve have a point, the PS3 is a bitch to code for and they probably don't want to waste their time (read: MONEY) getting over the problem when they can make enough money on the PC/360.

PS3 owners (such as yourself) respond to this logical argument with a person slur and feel entitled to do so. That's pretty dumb and sad.

Jelster

@sushimandan: Yeah but to basically call consoles redundant is stupid. PC gaming is awesome, and I'll happily argue the merits, but not at the detriment of console gaming. It's just elitist snobbery, and is no better than fanboyism. I think anyone playing on anything this generation has it pretty damn good, it's just a shame everyone's too busy waving their flags pledging allegiance to their platform to enjoy their games.

TearsandScreams

@RonCey: I just get pissed when they bad mouth the PS3, and then hand off the Orange Box to a shoddy developer and fart out a port. And then announce an Xbox Live version of Portal, with no PSN.

Thorax

@hahnchen: "From slomo's expert analysis, they're too fucking lazy to port it to consoles"

Heh. Yeah, he's voiced his displeasure about Valve and Gabe Newell long before Left4Dead was announced.

homernoy

Hopefully there'll be the same amount of action/zombies on-screen in both versions.

Ardaihm

@Bishmon: Because LBP is a first-party title. Stop using this example because it's really stupid. You're basically asking why Sony is not putting their flagship title on a competitor's box. Quite different from "we're not doing it because we don't want to put in the effort" don't you think?

@hahnchen: Blizzard games are PC games, and they actually bring them to Macs. Your analogy fails because you can't compare console/console to console/PCs. As I said before, if Blizzard brings Diablo 3 to one console and neglects the other because they don't want to learn to work with it, then yes, the reaction will be the same.

FP_slomo788

@FP_slomo788: And everyone else is Free to call PS3 fans out for their nonsense.

Gonna make more money on the PS3 than on PC?
Newell is a lazy bastard?
Valve is unable to put effort into a game?

Seriously? C'mon. It seems people can't see past their entitlement issues and keep spouting gorram lies. It's Valve. These guys aren't two bit monkeys. Read up on the company, their philosophy, and their working method.

Grive

My PC can probably run L4D.

Amazon_Chris

@CheckersMcGavern: Yeah, it's totally an effort problem. Definitely not a time and manpower thing. Lord knows Valve is known as a quick and dirty by the numbers FPS developer. They have no history of being story in games pioneers. TF2 obviously had no effort put into character/level design, balancing, and creating free entertaining movies for all their classes. Also, all the patches were easy, they just walk in one morning and release them.

Get off your high horse and get the sand out of your vaj while you're at it too. Put some effort in at work and buy a fucking 360 or PC.

skewt

@homernoy:Wasn't talking about WoW. Diablo 3, Starcraft 2 - PC and Mac. From slomo's expert analysis, they're too fucking lazy to port it to consoles.

hahnchen

@FP_slomo788:L4D is not coming for PS3 because it's not worth the effort, time and money. Makes perfect sense.

I'm sorry if you don't see that.

hahnchen

@FP_slomo788:

The whole point of an exclusivity deal is to make as much money as possible using as few resources as possible. In other words, maximizing profit.

Valve is doing the same thing. They are trying to maximize their profit, and for them, for this game, that means making a PC and 360 version.

I mean, really, what is stopping you from saying LittleBigPlanet's developers are being lazy because instead of putting in the time, effort, and money to develop a 360 version, they instead chose to sign an exclusivity deal so they didn't have to make another version?

Is that really any better to you? Really? Honestly? Without using logic so fucking tortured it's barely recognizable anymore?

Bishmon

My point is that, if developers aren't going to create games for the PS3 because they feel it pushes back a release date for the PC/360 release, that's just a poor situation that Sony created. But this myth people have created that somehow 3rd party games aren't worth making on the PS3 solely because they're guaranteed to lose money seems to be a lot of fanboy bullshit with very little evidence.

eqhara

@hahnchen: Well Blizzard has other issues bringing WoW to the consoles. I mean, it's a MMORPG, and to have three different architectures all in the same world would have many problems.

homernoy

@RonCey: Yes, but PS3 owners have the right to complain about being left out, just like Valve have the right to keep their game off the system. If it's a free world, it's free for everyone. You can't blame PS3 owners for not giving Valve the freedom to not offer them their game but bash PS3 owoners for using their freedom of whining, especially for such solid reasons. They are first and foremost PC devs, but they develop for the 360 also. They choose to not develop for PS3 because they don't want to put in the effort. I don't understand why you get so upset about PS3 owners judging them lazy for that, it actually seems like the next logical step.

FP_slomo788

@Jelster: Exclusivity is not a new trend, and hopefully it won't die soon because it gives each platform a certain identity, and must-haves that make the thing worthwhile. I would hate to have all my PS3 games on 360 and vice versa because I own both, and one would feel pretty useless. That said, there are many reasons to keep a game exclusive to a platform, and from all those, not wanting to "put in the effort" is the shittiest one. Money is a good one, a person has to eat. Hardware differences is also a good reason, although this generation it's becoming more and more moot. I'm sorry to the Valve hardcore fans, that's how I (and most PS3 owners) see it. You can insult us all you want, but you won't convince us otherwise, especially with some of Valve's comments.

FP_slomo788

@DevoL: You're spending your time quoting someone else's comment on Kotaku with no other point other than to be a dick and I'm the one with no life?

Madeira

@Thorax: Maybe you shouldn't take something someone says about a company who doesn't give a shit about you (except maybe your money)as a personal attack. Like most reasonable human beings.

skewt

@Bishmon: But instead of pointing out all his inconsistencies and his "shitty" criticism after he refuted every argument you have presented, you're insulting him and then bowing out? Become a politician. Please.

Thorax

@WhiteFeather: By definition, EVERY company is lazy. They want to maximize profit/benefit per input dollar/effort. You might call it "lazy". In business terms, its called efficient. Being efficient is smart, its competitive, it results in the best products, and is fundamental to all dynamic natural systems.

ludwigk

@homernoy: I must admit, rereading what I wrote in my first comment, it came off completely hamfisted.

In all reality, I'm no fanboy. I own all the consoles and play them all equally. In fact I have a hard time picking which version of a game I want to buy when it's multiconsole! :D

I have the utmost respect for GN, though I do honestly disagree with excluding certain consoles. They should be bringing the love to EVERYONE!

GlibGamer

@FP_slomo788: Do you have any understanding of basic economic ideas?

Let's say it takes $5 million to retool the Source engine and create a PS3 port of L4D. Now, imagine that when the sales numbers roll in, they only made $2 million off of sales of the PS3 version. That means they lost $3 million to port a game to a platform they're not familiar with, and which was probably outsold by the PC and 360 version as well. That's core of Valve's justification for the lack of a PS3 port - they feel the sales of a port wouldn't make up for the costs to port and optimize the game for the platform.

How is it lazy that Valve chooses not develop for a platform they think won't have the sales to make up the development costs, much less turn a profit? You don't become a good business by investing in money-losing projects.

NeoChaos

@Amazon_Chris:

No, they don't. After Media Molecule formed their company, they signed an exclusivity deal to make LBP only for Sony, but that's the extent of the relationship for now.

Bishmon

How is valve being lazy for not making a ps3 version? So what if they dont want to make it? They have a valid point that it simply takes too much time for something that they dont even know would profit on the ps3. Why waste resources when they can be working on a new project for even more money? Besides, the head of Valve, Gabe Newell, has criticized Sony for the ps3's clusterf**k architecture and lack of dev tools. But not developing for the ps3, hes hoping to spread a message that the console makers need to regard the developers when making a console, and not just what convenient. So by not making the Orange Box and Left 4 Dead for the ps3, they are essentially putting their standards of quality and their beliefs in business before money. Putting one's beliefs before money takes balls (and in a materialistic world, not many people do), and anyone saying that Valve is "lazy" for doing so is insane.

Moar_pr0nz

@FP_slomo788:

I'd say laziness is slur enough. It's like me calling a developer lazy for not releasing a PC version of their new console game, it'd be totally incorrect. It's a business decision and it's pretty stupid to try and make out like Gabe functions at a fanboy level of intellect when it comes to running Valve.

Now if Valve did release L4D on the PS3 and it was a buggy pile of shite, then you'd have a point that they were lazy in their effort to bring a quality game to market.

Jelster

@skewt: Sorry we all can't be emotionless slabs of flesh like you. When an intelligent game designer takes a shit on a console I own and enjoy, after already getting drilled after a weak launch, I take slight offense.

Thorax

@FP_slomo788:

Fact is, you have a shitty criticism, and to make it worse, you're applying it inconsistently.

But you obviously believe deeply in how right your perspective is on this, so I'm done. Take care.

Bishmon

@madpowerbomber: Except enough interest to click the link, enter the thread and proclaim just how uninterested you really are.

skewt

@Madeira:

I played this at PAX and I can tell you, it's not nearly as close to the auto-aim in the Orange Box. Seriously, you will not realize it's there until somebody tells you (well, in this case, you already know). It's helpful, but in a non-intrusive way.

As for the Valve vs. the PS3 argument...honestly, it's not as if they're specifically taking YOUR and your cheerios, urinating into them and then force-feeding them to you.

If Valve doesn't want to develop for the PS3, it's their decision. At no point is it required for any freelance company to make games for all systems. It's a well known fact that Gabe Newell has a strong dislike for the PS3. Whether it's because he's a former MS guy or because he truly feels the system is unnecessarly difficult to port PC-based games to, we'll never know.

Fact is, it's Valves business decision and right or wrong, it doesn't matter how much you bitch and moan. Until you can get a substantial amount of gamers to actually boycott their product, they're going to continue with business as usual as they see fit. Instead of continously whining about it, suck it up and deal with it. After all, it's just a game.

beta_angel

@Bishmon: Sony owns Media Molecule, so of effing course LBP is PS3 only.

Amazon_Chris

@NeVeRMoRe666: Read all of those, watched all of those; love the zombie subgenre -- writing my own zombie novel is a plan of mine at some point -- and still... I've no interest in this game whatsoever.

madpowerbomber

@FP_slomo788: You make me laugh. Gabe ripping on the PS3 insulted you. Jesus could you be any more pathetic.

skewt

@Bishmon:

You're obviously new around here, let me clue you into something. There are beings of immense understanding and power that occupy this territory. Their omnipotence is beyond your ken. Feeble weapons of logic and reality will flow over them like water over a stone. It's best not to engage these eldritch powers. Better only to stand back in awe of their limitless wisdom and unbridled strength.

LanciePants

@GlibGamer: Actually I have read so many comments that mirrored yours, I thought you were completely serious. Ones that came before you have been serious as cancer. LOL.

I am a big fan of Valve and I find myself defending them a bit more than I should, especially when the word 'lazy' is used. On the PC at least, they have seemingly been endlessly at work, giving us free maps, expansions, and their games are very polished.

I will say, I am not happy about the lack of a PS3 version myself, as I have no 360, just a PS3 and a pretty darn powerful PC. In this case, I have my bases covered.

homernoy

It's a good day to be an Xbox 360 fanboy.

Gunhaver

@Bishmon: Squeenix is a bad example, since they have more games on 360 now than the PS3. Like I said, stop with the LBP nonsense. It's a Sony-published game and I still don't see how you could imagine an analogy with L4D. Kojima is the closest I can think of, and feel free to complain about him in the articles about MGS4. I think it would be out of place to complain about that in this article don't you think? Plus if you feel left out of the MGS4 party you are free to complain about it, but I hope you won't wait for PS3 owners to do it for you "for equity." I own both consoles now, but I was a PS3-only owner when Valve was shitting on it, so I still have a thing against them. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

FP_slomo788

@Jelster: You sure could say the same about Wii, DS, etc, except it would be for the sake of commenting. Just look at the title of the article. Also I took exclusivity in the most basic sense, but you're right, and this should have been part of my point. I forgot to clarify it, as I did in one of my earlier posts. But still my point remains. Legality is not a problem, money is surely not a problem (they don't even say it is), the only problem is time and effort. I think it's laziness. Pretty simple, really.

FP_slomo788

OK here's basically how it works:

1) For everyone who complains about auto-aim, get a PC.
2) For everyone who complains about being crap with a keyboard and mouse, a) you should learn and b) get it for the PC and use a 360 controller with it, works right out of the box.
3) For everyone bitching about it not being for the PS3:
a) I doubt you want to see a crappy PORT again
b) Valve is not a lazy company. If you played Half-Life 2 on a PC you would see that they set an EXTREMELY high bar for themselves - the Orange Box came out almost a year ago and they're still bringing out fresh content, which is more than I can say for most developers. It's more of a, the PS3 is so different to code for we're not sure that we can guarantee the same great experience without hiring a whole new team for it, so they outsourced it to people who SHOULD know about how to port it. Obviously, it seems like even people who know how to port to the PS3 couldn't do it up to par - well known fact, that when your base platform is not the PS3 that it is a nightmare to port to the PS3 (although I do recognize that it's not that hard to port from the PS3 as a base platform, Valve is not going to have its PC versions be ports. Simple as that. You think otherwise, you're living in a dream world.)
c) You can probably play it on your PC. Valve games are NOT like any other developer's PC games, because the Source engine works on pretty much every PC out there. It supports DX8, OK? Enough said. If you have an older PC and pretty much any kind of dedicated graphics, it runs. If you have a newer PC and integrated graphics, it runs. Perhaps on low settings, so it won't be as good looking as if there was a good PS3 port, but if I had to make that choice I sure as hell would rather play it on low settings now rather than wait a hell of a long time for it to come out on the PS3 so I could play it on high settings. And if you really can't wait that long to play it on high settings, it's $200 for a 360. Considering the fact that Valve could get away with charging $250 ($50 x 5 games) for the Orange Box since their games are very high quality and are worth a hell of a lot of play time, it's definitely worth it. I mean think about it, people paid $200 for Rock Band. How would this be any different? You're still going to get a very nice 4 player co-op experience that's going to be better than any other on the market, and I know I would get more time out of L4D than out of the songs that came with Rock Band (most of which are crap by definition, you pay for a rhythm game that has 70 songs so that there are 5 that you can play over and over again and forget the rest).

I keep hearing people say that Gears 2 is going to be GOTY, and I can't help but shake my head. Valve > Epic any day of the week, and anyone who knows how much the worth of a movie is dependent on the director will agree.

wickedpheonix

@Grandreaper999: Where in this article did Valve complain about developing for the PS3?

Valve had no intention of doing a PS3 port so EA came to them and said they wanted to do it. And that's how the PS3 Orange Box came about.

skewt

Doesn't Gabe Newell or whoever's in charge of Valve not like the Ps3 or something? I seem to remember that from an article a while back...

LastFace

@FP_slomo788:

Now you're deflecting, this is nothing to do with exclusivity.

Valve making a PS3 port would cost them money and be a financial risk. Not making the port costs them nothing and they are left with profits generated from PC/360 sales.

Your argument is flawed because I can equally apply it to Valve not making L4D available on the Wii, DS or PSP.

Jelster

Valve, one of the most most highly acclaimed developers are still complaining about developing for the PS3??? What a shame.. I'm seeing alot of PS3 ports on ps3, and ppl dont skip making a ps3 version of most multiplatform games nowadays. I heard the orange box port to Ps3 sucked too. wtf valve?

Grandreaper999

@Scaraba: "It makes sense why Valve can easily port games to the 360.
It's PC architecture basically."

If by PC architecture you mean x86/x64 you stand incorrect. Xbox360 is PPC, which were previously used in Macs. But the porting is easy, Microsoft has taken care of that for the developers.

ara

@Scaraba: "It makes sense why Valve can easily port games to the 360.
It's PC architecture basically"

Actually the 360's CPU is an IBM triple core Xenon which is NOT an X86 processor. Really it's not very much less dissimilar than the Cell is to the X86 PC architecture.

homernoy

Oh and I completely forgot why I commented on this post!

That's the first time I've seen the controls. Now I can practice my button mashing for when the zombies gnaw at me!

Good times! =D

excaliburps

Solution to not being able to play Valve game on PS3? Get a PC. Valve is a PC company first and foremost, just like Blizzard. They both have a history of putting out AAA games and if you want to enjoy them, getting a PC will guarantee that. I'm still surprised that Orange Box was ever released on consoles.

Akira119