Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 2:17 AM
Mon Nov 9
19 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us: tips@kotaku.com
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
Email | AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
Email | AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
Email | AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/07/09
Pitchford hit the nail pretty firmly on the head there. #valve
11/08/09
11/08/09
It's a 100% factual statement. Simple as that. Business is business.
You can't act butt-hurt when someone calls you out over it, though. #valve
11/07/09
11/07/09
but anyone who buys a Valve product on anything other than a PC is really harming themselves.
Valve tastes best with the PC. just like Chocolate tastes best with Peanut Butter. #valve
11/07/09
hehe, he should watch his step. #valve
11/07/09
And the claptraps I personally found annoying (except for the Sesame Street typerwriter guy impression). #twitter
11/07/09
11/08/09
Cliff isn't saying 'Borderlands is Diablo', he's saying that Borderlands is the engaging, and fun kind of game for a lot of people now that Diablo was for a lot of people when it was in its hay-day. #twitter
11/07/09
11/07/09
But of course, the game being nice does not entitle the guy spokesperson of the year. His mouth is as trashy as the Borderlands scenario. #twitter
11/07/09
And a sad one too.
But nevermind me... just put on your cool face Pitchford. #valve
11/07/09
Otherwise they could have ended up hiring a bunch of PS3 coders to take on the task in-house to maintain not just an engine of high enough quality for them to use, but for them to license to other companies. That would greatly increase the interest in licensing their engine for cross platform games, since the PS3 is a critical system for hardcore games.
Again, I don't know any of this definitively, but this is just what I'm reading into Valve's position. If the PS3 version was plagued with bugs due to foundational engine design issues and requiring way more work and time investment with significantly less profit in return, nobody could blame them for staying away from the PS3 until they are confident they can return with the same level of quality people expect from them on other platforms.
Perhaps the next version of their engine will be designed with all of this in mind (if that was the problem) and they'll return to the PS3 some day, but saying that they left the PS3 owners hanging out of greed and carelessness is a low blow and possibly ignorant. If things had worked out for them on the PS3 there would have been a number of great opportunities for profit without "other fingers in the pie".
As far as fanboyism goes, Valve might have had a bad taste in their mouth from the PS3 issues and made biased comments about the PS3, but that doesn't mean there aren't very real business reasons for the path they've taken. They wouldn't be the first well known developers to talk down the PS3 for going against the established grain. #valve
11/07/09
11/08/09
This reminds me, I recall reading an interview with Doug Lombardi where he said Vavle didn't have the capitol to invest in a dedicated coding team for the complicated PS3. That being the reason the PS3 version of Orange Box was a sub-par title. I agree that what is most cost effective for a company is usually the best. However, to talk smack about a console simply because your company doesn't have the resources to develop for it is a lame tactic. #valve
11/08/09
11/08/09
If so that would throw a basket full of wrenches in their program just to accommodate the PS3 as is, but on top of that they would need to consider the PS3 in any new improvements they make to the Source engine. You could get belligerant and call it laziness, or you could say they're spoiled by the comforts of the way their technology currently works which ferments an aversion to change.
Either way, at least they were sensible enough to realize that if they aren't going to be interested in putting their full force behind the PS3 then they shouldn't be there at all. Otherwise you might just have a string of buggy poorly ported Valve games on the PS3, which wouldn't be good for them or the players. You could then blame them that the Orange Box on the PS3 was a mistake, and they would likely agree and fully take the blame. #valve
11/08/09
Game developers like to write their engine once and then make improvements here and there for gameplay, very rarely doing full rewrites. Many companies just use 3rd party engine licenses, but some do roll their own technology. For those that roll their own or provide engine licensing, this meant that in order to keep using their existing technology across all platforms including the PS3, they would need to shake their engine designs up.
That's not something you do lightly and if your company already has a heavy investment in the current architecture then it becomes more than just a basic porting job which can result in more headaches than it's worth. In the end, I think they like where they're at and just don't feel like shaking things up too much at this point. They're the developer, it's their choice how they want to operate.
For the most part I don't think Valve is trying to be evil and talk down a system out of some elitist need, but rather out of very real frustrations reflected by many developers. Epic didn't have a choice at all whether they were going to design the Unreal Engine to support the PS3, it's practically required of them given their position in the industry. People who licensed UE3 had plenty of complaints about the issues and delays with it on the PS3. Valve actually had a choice with Source and I think they're ok with that choice for now. #valve
11/08/09
11/07/09
When Diablo 3 comes out, I will probably play it 10 hours a day for the first 6 months after it comes out.
That's all I really have to say on that. #twitter
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
That said, I can (not so fondly) recall my time spent in Borderlands as using the same gun for about 10 levels before I found one that was even remotely better. Which, without armour to collect, meant I wasn't really using the whole loot system very much unless it was for vendor trash. Kinda downplays the whole constantly looking for better equip from Diablo.
And I love Borderlands... its just not quite up to Diablo standards. #twitter
11/07/09
AI agree that Diablo is King. But as for there not being crap drops, I remember picking through junk just as much as borderlands.
The comparison is as valid as it is obvious even i the drop system was even more different. The spirit of the game is similar.
Heck amongs the million easter eggs and puns (Mad Mel anyone) is a bird you fight named Rakanishu that drops a cracked sash.
Borderlands is great and did a bit to tide me over until Diablo 3. Rather than loot system I would point out the more significant difference is no random dungeon generation. Although I can see that being rather troublesome to develop. #twitter
11/07/09
11/07/09
I never said it was. It was the loot system that has kept the game alive all these years, and the pvp that can take place with the right build+loot. #twitter
11/07/09
11/07/09
What I did, however, was make a mule character to hold all of my shit I didn't need but wanted to keep.. Hmmm...maybe I'll do the same for borderlands.... #twitter
11/07/09
Borderlands and Diablo do have some similarities but to say it's the new Diablo is a pretty far stretch. You have to look at Diablo I and II beyond just the gameplay, and how it was a phenomenon when it came out. Diablo was a title that was uniqe when it came out and is a title that many older games remember fondly years after they stop playing. Borderlands? It's looking like it'll be forgotten by the game community by next year, if it doesn't get washed out completely by the holiday releases.
And the fact that Borderlands isn't clearly "better" even though Diablo 2 came out years ago isn't a good sign. The game may look prettier, and it's a popular FPS format, but the core of the game isn't better than Diablo 2. There aren't many improvements beyond the outer sheen. For something that's supposed to be the "new" Diablo, the best people can say is that it's the same as Diablo? For it to be the new Diablo people should be saying it's BETTER than Diablo. #twitter
11/08/09
Bonus comment !
The best Diablo clone that seemed sadly over seen, especially considering it did everything right, looked great and played great was Titan Quest. If Blizzard put their name on it it would have been a mega hit. #twitter
11/07/09
Borderlands had a solid concept at it's core... surrounded by a boring plot, lackluster gameplay, and glitches galore. Even with 4 player coop and nearly limitless firearm selection, the rest of the game was just so bad I couldn't play it for more than a week.
Maybe you guys should spend some more time working on your games, and a little less time trolling Lombardi? #valve
11/07/09
11/07/09
No...Microsoft did. Judging from their comments, if it was up to Valve, the 360 version would have all of the same updates. #valve