Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 9:48 PM
Thu Nov 12
56 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.
09:19 PM
At that moment I remembered being amazed when SOCOM 2 got 7,000 people online. #xboxlive
08:50 PM
Well to all those 2 million folks who probably wont read this. GET SOME SLEEP! LOL! Don't be like me and marathon U2 for like...12 hours...
My eyes... #xboxlive
08:53 PM
09:03 PM
Well that's because you were playing a different game silly! You weren't clogging on the MW servers or whatever you online folks use!
As you can clearly see...I know dick about online games what so ever...I'm trying to get online on the PSN. I just like single player games. #xboxlive
08:50 PM
Seriously though, It kind of shocked me that the record is only 2 million. I mean, I get it, 2 million is a HUGE number, but I had always thought that there were a lot more people playing online on the Xbox. #xboxlive
08:51 PM
08:46 PM
2 million people used to be here. Now it's a ghost town. #xboxlive
11/08/09
Now it's inarguable that the PS3's online is inferior (although it's also inarguable that the 360 is as good as the PC), but I personally don't think a 4-player cooperative game like L4D needs the best online system in the world.
When it comes down to it, Valve just doesn't want to deal with the inconvenience of setting up their owns servers for the PS3 and rewriting some code for a port. No matter how they characterize it, that's really the only reason. I'm not going to come out and say their fanboys, but they're willing to give up a decent chunk of money because they really don't want to deal with the inconvenience of working with PS3 hardware. #left4dead2
11/09/09
11/08/09
I really did.
Something involving Half-Life being an overrated piece of garbage and steam being a terrible piece of software I'd never want on my computer again.
But for some reason I just can't stop loving them lately. Zombies and pissing off fanboys? Looks like I'll be giving them a second chance. #left4dead2
11/08/09
its awesome #left4dead2
11/08/09
A single company refusing to support a console is a drop in the ocean compared to that. #left4dead2
11/08/09
I am so tired of this same fucking argument. "Why don't you love our precious Sony," bemoans the stricken throng, "Why do you not bow to its superiority, neigh, even weigh it as an equal? Why do you scorn it so?"
XBox360 and Games for Windows work with the same matchmaking, you can have a single account for both. A 360 and a PC share the same fucking hardware and software architecture, and a 360 is easier to code for because it doesn't have some experimental fucking processor growling sentient rage under the hood. You can even use the same fucking controller if you so desire. Oh, and more 360's and PC's exist in the States than PS3's, by a good shit-tonne.
It's simple fucking business, period. It's why games don't often come out cross-platform to the DS and the PSP, different architecture, user base, and interface. It's why the N-Gage doesn't get good games, it's too hard to code for and unpopular (among other things).
IT'S NOT BECAUSE THE WORLD IS SHITTING ON SONY'S CHEST! It's not a grand insult to a fallen gaming god, requiring prostration and a blood sacrifice to appease, it's a fucking savvy business decision.
Dear god, the weeping and gnashing of teeth is almost audible, the moaning and wailing shaking the very core of the world--for the love of decency, let it cease. #left4dead2
11/08/09
Online is completely different too. One using XBL, the other using Steamworks.
So its not really an excuse for ease of development due to them using same software side, cos they ain't.
User base you have Steam at 20million users(Feb 09), and 360 and Ps3 at 32 and 27million respective(sept 09, pre-slim) the userbase is only separate by 4 million users. So the smaller PS3 userbase isn't an issue, if it was Valve wouldn't be bothering to release it on PC....
Network wise, latest figures Ican pull are May, but you have PSN at 17million n XBL at 20million. No info on how many are Gold (guestimates stick it at roughly half). So its not even an issues with PSN having less users either.
I'm fine that Valve don't want to develop for PS3. But the way they go about it is just a bad case of foot in mouth syndrome. One excuse they gave is because Gabe felt bad that the PS3 version of Orange Box was badly handled. Valve didn't even make the Orange Box for PS3, it was made by Ps3 friendly EA. So Valve don't want to make L4D on PS3 because they game they didn't develop for PS3 in the first place didn't come out that great. Maybe if Valve actually made it themselves it could of been better. And to add even more irnoy to that, the 360 Valve made release of OB isn't supported either, so their excuse goes completely out the window.
Of course it doesn't help matters when your founder is a Microsoft Millionaire.
Valve could get by without making their games for PS3 if they were just a bit better handled in PR dept. Theres a fair amount of 360/PC exclusive's. But when they annoucne games for PC/360 release they don't then bash the console they aren't releasing on.
In fact Valve could side step all issues and not release on 360. But it's easy to port to 360, do not pass go, collect $60.
PS3 development requires a bit more effort than they can be arsed to put in. It's not impossible to make PS3 games, there's several hundred titles that contest that fact.
All Valve need to do is either never mention the PS3 again. Or if they do mention it again, have it as a console they are releasing too. #left4dead2
11/08/09
11/08/09
Now you say you're fine with Valve not developing for the PS3 but wish they would be more up front or not mention it at all?
If they didn't mention it at all it would be bad PR because there would probably be a lot of people who didn't buy it on 360 so they could get it on PS3. Sure his statement is benefinicial to Valve because they get sales, but it's also a nice heads-up to the community.
If they were more up front, I think that would be even worse. Sure, it's probably true that part of the reason is community. But if a bigger reason is how hard it is to develop for the PS3, do you really want them making THAT statement? That would just be a kick in the nuts to all PS3 owners. I don't think the community thing is so bad, since it's pretty obvious to the world anyway. :) #left4dead2
11/08/09
Just in a discussion with a fried this morning who'd got ME in the Steam sale, he'd asked if it was ever mentioned that ME coming to PS3 or not. And it isn't, Bioware announced the game coming out for PC n 360. Was there any of the shit storm that Valve cause when they announce a PC 360 release? No.
Cos they'll of gone "ME is coming to PC and 360" Journo - "Is it coming to PS3?" Bioware- "No"
Whereas Valve go "L4D is coming to PC and 360. oh and PS3 is a shit console to work on and its online sucks. Oh yeah We've never actually developed for this console yet, but hey. We're not gonna bother cos the game we didn't make for it was shit"
Okay, hyperbole, but its not far off.
Valve just need to clean up their PR a bit.
It's like when games don't come to Europe, publisher just say "its not coming to Europe" They don't go "Its not coming to Europe cos you guys have silly currency, drive backwards n German is too hard a language to speak in" #left4dead2
11/08/09
11/08/09
I'm certain by now that I'm a part of a minority in my belief that a co-op couch experience with three other friends will always be more rewarding than an experience shared online. #left4dead2
11/08/09
With Splitscreen - 1 copy@$60
Without Splitscreen - 4 copies@$240 + 4 Gold@$200
Reduce development cost of Split Screen feature, increase profit 7 fold.
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/09/09
It just sucks having virtually no control though. If I really want a four player couch co-op zombie game (that has more substance than Zombie Apocalypse, Monster Madness, and Burn Zombie, Burn), I either go get the money and skills required to form a development talented and capable enough to create said game, or I sit around and wait (and perhaps throw out my 2 cents here and there, as I am doing right now). To make things just a teeny bit worst, there is a game that satisfied essentially everything in the list except for the four player couch co-op, so its just slightly maddening to endure such teasing. And with its success and large appeal, there seems to be little hope for four player couch co-op.
Not the end of the world of course, but yeah, I miss 4 player co-op couch gaming. I don't really get much of it with my friends outside of Castle Crashers and Halo 3.
Anyone remember how much of a blast Gauntlet was with three pals? #left4dead2
11/09/09
Something I've noticed lately is that folks want features in their game, like 4 player splitscreen, and assume they can either give up on that dream or go design it themselves.
But nah, developers have ears, rattle the cage a bit, get the games you want. #left4dead2
11/09/09
The difference with L4D though is that seems to be a lot of of hate towards the PS3, and to a far lesser degree, towards the Xbox 360, or consoles in general. I say seems, because this has only been implied to me through articles regarding Newell's statements on the PS3, uneven support towards PC iterations of games (like updates for TF2) and the above article.
It just makes the task seem harder, as if I would have to put in a lot of blood and sweat to create an epiphany inspiring collection of essays that could change their "biased" minds.
But yes, I still do have that option available to me. At the end of the day however, I need to remember that I'm still going to juggle a full time student status and a part time job for at least two and a half more years before. When you say you've noticed folks assume they could either give up on dreams or go design it themselves, I can relate. Much of what I've studied thus far in college has pertained to the increasing trends of impatience, inflated self-worth, and an "I'll do it myself," attitude. I've read about these shifts being attributed to the way the current generation of kids have been raised (influx of technology utilizing light, or even simulating light & speed, as in billboards... The advertising message being a constant barrage of, "We'll cater to you."), but I believe this doesn't apply only to the younger folks. It can be interpreted in anyone to varying degrees. #left4dead2
11/07/09
heck, the whole Steam system makes the xbox things look like one of those old people phones with the huge buttons. #left4dead2
11/08/09
"PC MATCHMAKING IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN 360 MATCHMAKING!"
I understand technically you and them have no connections so its not fair to compare each other but I think its still funny. #left4dead2
11/08/09
all's I'm sayin is that PC "match making" is better. there's more infrastructure and more freedom to do what you want to do and connect to where you want to connect to.
hell, the term "match making" is a silly xbox term they made up. PC people call it "joining a server from a list of a kabillion servers run throughout the world presented to you on your screen"
I know consoles are different, and differences make the world go around, but with PC gaming, you can set up servers, rules, clans, mods, admins, and create communities... its really superior in every way... right?
consoles just can't do that... its really only 1 guy hosting a game and everyone joining. at the very best, a developer commissions some servers you can play on. But its really not the same.
joining multiple CS, UT or TF2 servers and produce any number of fun results and getting a peek inside clan communities and distant friends playing. #left4dead2
11/07/09
To think I respected these pricks. #left4dead2
11/07/09
11/08/09
11/07/09
Guys if you recall there was an article not long ago where it was stated that while it wasn't quite up to the Xbox Live system yet the PSN was growing quite quickly and greatly improving functionality and user options. The PSN is NOT as good as Xbox Live (though I would take PSN over XBL any day due to the fact M$ charges for XBL) #left4dead2
11/07/09
The PC is way better than the 360 for social gaming though, especially thanks to steam. #left4dead2
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
The community is so split between saying "give me xx on the console!" and "Valve sucks at making console games". OB on the PS3 was relatively terrible compared to the other two and it's always been clear that Valve is PC first, and with the 360 being relatively similar compared to the PS3 it's a much easier decision. PoweredbyHentai (mmm) made a decent post arguing against Valve, but I ultimately have to disagree with what was written for 2 reasons. The first is that they are a company; and not only that, they are a mainly PC company. You wouldn't expect a huge PC company to do it's utmost to improve the community of another platform unless it fully had plans to migrate a large amount of resources to it. When I feel Valve refers to the community, it's talking about the PC and 360 community, not the PS3 community because that's their target demography. The second is that the actual amount of resources Valve has is debatable, at least from what we've seen. Take for instance the development and release of L4D2. Over the past few months we've seen large amounts of resources from their other IPs be drawn away in order to work on this. Their content, though usually high quality, comes out at the pace of a snail. The very informal nature of their company dictates that a lot of the time their leads spend is on PR. The actual manpower available in Valve has been something I've always been curious about.
Finally, note that they posted this before they even posted the interview where it was talked about ("Look out for part two of our interview soon."). It was obviously meant to ruffle some feathers by taking it out of context. Learn to read deeper than the words being spoon fed to you. I don't agree with what was said, but this comment was obviously taken out of context and reported in a way to turn heads. Valve really shouldn't even be approached about the PS3 anymore because their stance is pretty damn clear; journalists just do so in order to rack up attention.
Edit: I wrote this because I've seen a lot of Valve hate because everybody thinks that they just bash the PS3 for fun. People don't understand that they aren't exactly grabbing the microphone from people and shouting that they hate the thing. I think their stance is kind of dumb but they at some point decided it wasn't worth it. In that case I'd really prefer they just keep their hands off the PS3 instead of releasing some shitty ports that piss people off even more. Same way that I feel IW should have just not released MW2 for the PC at this rate. Which I find kind of sad that some people here who bash Valve for statements like this also praise IW for it's "improvements" to the PC version.
Edit 2: Why do people keep saying that Valve is "proud" of their inability to properly code for the PS3? In the past they've stated they don't like the architecture and they don't feel the time-cost was something they'd be willing to spend. That's pretty much all. That doesn't make them proud...? Or am I missing something here?