Valve: We're not PS3 developers, but Left 4 Dead might be on PS3 ... maybe

by Majed Athab { May 5th 2008 at 1:30PM }

Most Valve Software fans would know well enough that the company is primarily a developer for PC games and a bit of Xbox on the side. So, it's not too startling to hear Valve Marketing VP Doug Lombardi say something along the lines of "We're not PS3 developers" -- it's just a great headline. What is interesting, however, is the possibility of Left 4 Dead, currently set only for PC and Xbox 360 release, getting ported to the PS3.

Talking to CVG, Lombardi reconfirmed that Valve still sees Left 4 Dead for PC and 360 only; however, he did leave some glint of hope for a PS3 port in the future. When asked if EA would bring the game over much like what the company did with The Orange Box, Lombardi replied "Left 4 Dead doesn't have that guaranteed appeal yet - it's a new IP. If you mention a new Half-Life, people want to make as many versions of it as possible. If Left 4 Dead is big, then we may see a PS3 version later, or if and when we do a sequel, people may be more interested in that."

In short, it all comes down to financial risk for whoever wants to take on the challenge of porting. As far as Valve is concerned, they're not the ones who will do it; someone else will do it if they want to, that is. Hopefully, Left 4 Dead does well on the other platforms; we could always use a zombie shooter on the PS3.

Tags: ea, left-4-dead, orange-box, the-orange-box, valve

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

RazLeboL @ May 5th 2008 1:36PM

Even if it comes out on ps3, I'll still get it for the PC. Valve games belong on a PC.

Mikezula @ May 5th 2008 1:37PM

I'll likely be picking it up for the 360.

And hey, if they aren't PS3 developers, then more power to them.

Sony isn't exactly lacking in high profile, blockbuster developers who develop exclusively for the PS3.

ruibing @ May 5th 2008 1:43PM

If they do port to the PS3, I'm not getting it unless they get an experienced team handling the port.

Popfrogs @ May 5th 2008 2:05PM

If EA London steps up again, it's a definite no-buy.

marauder800 @ May 5th 2008 2:06PM

Hopefully it would make a decent port, but unless it ships at the same time, it will be a non-issue. None of my PS3 friends give a crap about Lost Planet, just like none of my 360 friends care about UT3. If you lag for months or years, no one cares anymore.

Kabapu @ May 5th 2008 2:06PM

I think the game looks awesome and hope it does arrive on the PS3. However, their apparent visceral distaste for the PS3 and history of ports (Orange Box [which was outsourced if I recall]) don't bode well for a release (decent or otherwise). One can hope at least.

Kris @ May 5th 2008 2:22PM

I held my tongue when EA London stepped up for the Orange Box. At the time of the announcement, I had hoped it would be a faithful port, but after spending 60 dollars I realized it was easily the saddest piece of software I've ever purchased.

I, like any Playstation owner, scoffed at Gabe Newell's take on PS3 development. I mean after all, I was playing Warhawk, Uncharted, and was looking forward to Call of Duty 4. All of these games have shown the console capable of high profile games. So all I heard from Mr. Newell was "we're not a talented enough team to develop for something that isn't PC-based".

Valve has chosen not to be a PS3 developer, and so I've chosen to not be a Valve fan. After the botched episodic attempt for HL2 and the complete disregard for how their work is ported to another console, I find myself without anything but disgust for what I had once thought to be some of the brightest minds in gaming. I stand by my philosophy that Valve would be better off and more successful as a developer if Gave Newell and Doug Lombardi were no longer involved with the studio.

Geoff Gibson @ May 5th 2008 4:50PM

So it's ok for certain PS3 developers to dislike the other consoles and refuse to develop for them, but it's not ok for a develoepr like Valve to dislike the PS3 and refuse to develop for it?

Where is your distaste for Insomniac, and Naughty Dog? Both of which are independent studios and have openly stated they wish not to develop for the other consoles.

Valve is an independent studio. They have a VERY successful PC platform with their Steam operation, which sells millions of games to PC gamers. Just like Insomniac and Naughty Dog prefer to develop for the PS3, Valve prefers to develop for the PC. The reason why they also develop for the 360 is because of the inherent similarities in the architecture between the 360 and the PC. The PS3/Wii on the other hand do not share the same architecture and therefor are not a viable source of success for Valve...

It's easy to look at a company like Valve, which openly shuns your console of choice and damn them for it. It's not so easy to look at AAA title producing PS3 developers and damn them for the same stuff... Just an observation.

Niko_Bellic @ May 6th 2008 12:14AM

@ GEOFFDude you're wrong. Naughty Dog is a Sony FIRST party developer and Insomniac is a Sony "SECOND" party developer. As such they have deals to produce games exclusively for Sony. Valve on the other hand is totally independent from Microsoft and Sony. Valve does whatever they want. Naughty Dog and Insomniac don't have that freedom.For the record: I agree with Kris.

Chris @ May 5th 2008 2:14PM

Just clicked the "Left 4 Dead" link, and suddenly felt a lot better about myself. The reason being I now have proof that X360 fanboys really are a bunch of stuck up wa****s. If you compare it with anything you see on PS3F, I've never seen the bloggers openly slur the 360.

Wrathbringer6 @ May 5th 2008 2:47PM

I agree, WTF was up with that post? I used to have respect for our fellow 360 gamers, but after that article there's no reason to have any. Stuck-up $#%&@!bags indeed.

Mr.ESC @ May 5th 2008 2:59PM

As a xbox 360 fan I thought that was pretty agressive :|

If I could I would buy it for the Pc but I will need to buy a new PC :/ The xbox 350 version of TPB have issues as well and some of them are weird like Portal erasing your progress sometimes,TF2 matches with no weapons whatsoever,Half-life 2 Gnome punching me back to the last 2 hours or so (I'm serious)

Valve never show any interest in console gaming and they aren't going to start now.Basically Valve and Crytech are the only reasons why people should upgrade their PCs.

Mikezula @ May 5th 2008 3:15PM

I knew it!

They're all walruses!

GRT @ May 5th 2008 6:03PM

Agreed. I own both systems and stopped reading 360fanboy for a long time because of crap like this. Recently I started getting their RSS feed to share select stories on my site, but stuff like that post just shows how unprofessional and deliberately inflammatory they are over there.

Gary Roberts @ May 5th 2008 2:19PM

Valve can stick this and any other game they produce up there arse

Mr.ESC @ May 5th 2008 3:02PM

Calm down guy (Here is where you say I'm not your Guy friend)

Valve are still great developers and at least they are saying it straight instead of make some unkown company port their games.

Rowdehaj @ May 6th 2008 4:11AM

I'm not your friend, buddy!

(Ahh, memes.)

XanthouS @ May 5th 2008 2:20PM

This is why I own a gaming PC.

Chris @ May 5th 2008 2:30PM

Surely Valve can afford a few PS3 programmers?

Mr.ESC @ May 5th 2008 3:03PM

I'm not sure.If you notice they are milking the hell out of the Source engine.

Sean @ May 5th 2008 2:37PM

Well at least they can admit it. I give them props for basically saying they don't want to take the effort and time to develop on a third platform because they have no experience. So many companies hide behind marketing statements trying not to offend anyone.

They should, however, be responsible for ensuring the quality of the port. I mean people who have a bad experience with their game are not going to blame the developers who port the game but the designers of the game whose name is emblazoned on the cover. That affects future sales and the reputation of your company.

I bought it for the 360 and when I saw it on my friend’s PS3, I was appalled. Games (or any software) should not ship with bugs that glaring. EA probably needed the game out for a certain quarter’s revenue numbers and decided to ship anyway.

Pathetic…

erinsvenson @ May 5th 2008 2:40PM

God, Valve is so full of themselves. Fuck those guys, really.

"We hate the PS3, but... the money, we want it.We'll make sure we use less money on porting it from 360 to PS3 this time around. But yeah, fuck PS3."

Mr.ESC @ May 5th 2008 3:06PM

Actually it was EA.If you read the statement they were going to port their games to the Xbox 360 only when EA show up and said "hey that's cool can I borrow it for a while" and they said "sure".

Basically they never showed interest in the Ps3 :(

chris.westermann @ May 5th 2008 3:11PM

I think its more like "Hey Valve, PS3 owners will not be your customers if you keep up this kind of sh*t".
Honestly, Valve is like a game development company that doesn't really like making games, at least if it becomes slightly harder then they expect.
If they bothered to properly port their Source game engine to the PS3 then new games would not be a huge issue to develop for the PS3, they just need to design the levels and model the content. But because EA probably hacked the crap out of Orange Box to get it to run on the PS3, then new games based on the platform are going to be difficult to port to the PS3. Its what you get when EA is involved.
But this is no huge loss. Honestly, there are a bunch of stellar games coming out for the PS3, and companies like Rockstar, Criterion and Infinity Ward have already proven you can have great multi-platform titles that excel on any console they are developed for. You know, when a real developer gets a hold of the PS3 they can do some great things on it. Its no longer a question these days about whether or not the PS3 is an excellent game platform, its about if your willing to bring an excellent game to the PS3 platform. it might be slightly more difficult then another platform, but I think in the end its more rewarding for the effort.
If Valve wants to be considered a second rate game developer that whines when the going gets tough then they are doing an excellent job over there. I was going to eventually buy the Orange Box, but I won't now. I don't want to give profit to a company that feels it a chore to have to bring a game to my favourite game console.

Bnugget @ May 5th 2008 7:58PM

Well, jump right in man. Port that Source Engine, if you can do it maybe valve will offer you a job.

Glen @ May 5th 2008 3:14PM

No, do not port Left 4 Dead to the PS3 if you don't want to. If Valve isn't a PS3 developer, then none of their games should be ported to the PS3.

This is what happened to the Orange Box. Valve didn't want to port to the PS3, so instead of honoring that decision, EA throws at some internal studio, and it turns out to be fraught with issues.

Of course, PS3 nay-sayers attribute this due to the PS3 being so complicated to develop for. But it's not. It's because Valve didn't do it, some EA studio did it, and therefore did not get the level of skill that Valve itself would have given it.

halfbaked{NZ} @ May 5th 2008 3:17PM

I laughed a bit when i read the xb360fb take on this, apparently its a diss? i go there and post every now and then, and i behave my very best but when the writer takes such a biased look at something ps3fb gets across without appearing to take sides it makes me wonder why the address is in my history...

Shame on you 360fanboy!

Cornerman8 @ May 5th 2008 5:57PM

I don't recall Gabe's rant entirely, but I don't think he was saying that his team was incapable of developing for the PS3, but rather they would rather not go through the hassle of learning its architecture. His argument seemed to be that any benefit pulled from the game would only be marginally better than the 360 and basically believed to the PS3 to be a complex architecture for complexity's sake. Then he just went on to make more inflammortory statements. If I remember most folks just dubbed him as being whiny and lazy, which I feel is fair. I can see where he's coming from, it'd probably be easier on developers if architectures stayed homogenous. But innnovation is good too. And if you can squeeze a little more juice out by doing things differently, well from a consumer standpoint...what's wrong with that? He seemed outraged at the time, and it seemed misplaced since he wasn't forced to make a game on the system. Its strange really. Whatever though, if the game is good, I'll welcome it onto the console. If any quality game for any other platform wants to mosey on over to our camp, I welcome it.

Vladimer Nachkebia @ May 6th 2008 3:05AM

Too bad, valve is the most creative developing company out there, my favorite indeed, very sad, but again I can buy Left 4 Dead for my xbox360, again I don`t like zombie games, though orange box 2 with new portal and extra stuff for tf2 would be most amazing!

fersis @ May 5th 2008 3:38PM

valve is DirectX based company :D
Just kidding.
But they did put some DX on the Half Life Engine.
Gabe Newell hates the PS3.

superdynamite @ May 5th 2008 6:05PM

[b]You would think that a Video Game development company would want to stay ahead of the curve. Not Valve & Gabe Newell. They are paiving a new road for themselves. The only problem is, their road leads to nowhere, then into a brick wall.[/b]

It's horrible to see a developer taking the lazy, easy way out, especially when we can see the results when a development company makes the effort to follow technology as it advances and evolves.

[b]Basically what Valve is telling us is, they refuse to advance themselves along with the technology of today. This can only result in a half-ass product for the consumer. I won't stand for it. I will not be purchasing any products made by or developed by Valve. Their philosophies are way out of date.[/b]

Superdynamite @ May 5th 2008 5:54PM

You would think that a Video Game development company would want to stay ahead of the curve. Not Valve & Gabe Newell. They are paiving a new road for themselves. The only problem is, their road leads to nowhere, then into a brick wall.

It's horrible to see a developer taking the lazy, easy way out, especially when we can see the results when a development company makes the effort to follow technology as it advances and evolves.

Basically what Valve is telling us is, they refuse to advance themselves along with the technology of today. This can only result in a half-ass product for the consumer. I won't stand for it. I will not be purchasing any products made by or developed by Valve. Their philosophies are way out of date.

iFester @ May 5th 2008 4:08PM

I'm primarily a 360 gamer as all the people I'm in contact with are playing over Live. I however own and am aware of the potential of the PS3 and know a game like Left 4 Dead would do just as well (if not better) on PS3 because it runs like a very stable PC. If they would just take the time to familiarize themselves with the architecture, I think they would find it's more versatile than what the 360 offers. I don't see my 360 lasting 10 years. ;)

dresden @ May 5th 2008 4:52PM

Hey, serious question. I picked up The Orange Box a few weeks ago, played through it, and thought it was pretty good. I never played any of the PC versions. I didn't have any problems with it. It's not as pretty as some of the newer games, but for what it was, it was really enjoyable, and I didn't notice any big frame rate issues or anything. What did I miss?

pABSO @ May 5th 2008 4:57PM

Tragic! How will I ever cope with such an outrage! Oh I know I'll play MGS4, Prototype, Resistance 2, etc.

matt @ May 5th 2008 8:30PM

I don't remember a console generation that has been this divisive among developers (as opposed to the fanboys, who have always been bitchy).

Some curse the 360 for not having mandatory hard drives, some curse the Wii for not having enough high-end hardware, and some curse the ps3 for having too much. What the hell? I understand a teenage boy who can't afford all of the systems who wants to prove that the one his parents got him is the best, but why are the developers openly hostile towards any of the markets? If they don't have the resources or don't think it makes economic sense to develop a product for one of the systems, that's one thing. But to be defensive and insulting about it? Cry me a river.

Adam @ May 5th 2008 8:41PM

I know this isn't the place to put this, but I'd like to commend your writing critique for not being openly biased and degrading. The articles on your sister site, Xbox360fanboy are saddening, to say the least.

Mike @ May 5th 2008 10:17PM

This game is a total copy of HUNTER:the reckoning

Brian @ May 5th 2008 11:12PM

The fact that Valve doesn't target PS3 is nothing shameful for them. Those guys are extremely talented and create some of the best stuff out there. It's the old 80/20 rule. Eeking out that last 20% of greatness in a game requires 80% of the total development effort. The kind of soul crushing effort that nobody ever wants to go through twice. Certainly Rock Star and others have pulled it off, but I would guess that creating an A-list game for both platforms costs as much as writing 2 separate games for a single platform. Even though you could re-use the art and other assets, the application architecture would have to be designed in a platform agnostic way, which adds a whole other level of complexity because every technical decision must be looked at from multiple angles. And optimizing for one platform screws you on the other. I don't blame Valve one bit for their decision, even though it cost me $400.