Valve: PlayStation 3 Incredibly Important to Us
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Yeah, you can play UT3 with keyboard and mouse on the PS3 for instance. Although it wouldn't be quite as good as you're describing it. Games would have to be ported over to the PS3, and seeing as it's very different to code for as opposed to a PC, it wouldn't work like this. But, like how they have Steam-play or whatever it's called that means if you buy a Valve game for PC you can also play it on Mac, they could do something similar for the PS3.JaymesFogarty said:
Wouldn't say any of this is all that likely, but one can dream.
The reason Steamworks is being brought to the PS3 and not to the 360 is because of the way LIVE is built compared to the PSN. LIVE is a closed system, tightly controlled by Microsoft and their money-scrambling ways, while the PSN has a more open system, so developers can mold the online experience however they like, within reason, and dear god I sound like a Sony/VALVe sales representative.SelectivelyEvil13 said:Count me in agreement as well, it would be downright mean to toss the 360 and all of the support from that aside like used rag.megs1120 said:
The news sounded great up until that reminder about the "waste of time." Hmmm, now that the PS3 is looking sharp, maybe themoneyfans are worthy enough? But hey, great company sharing the wealth with everybody (hopefully), that's just happiness.
Translation: "The PS3 pie has got bigger, so the size of the piece we want has grown proportionately"
I doubt that microsoft would ever allow valve to bring steamworks t the yboxlive shop, since its free and everything.megs1120 said:
It's neither a jerk move nor stupid, it's what you can do on the different platforms, xbox live is alot more restrictive then ps3 or pc, but less then wii.
This is just awesome. Really awesome. Steamworks support sounds awesome, it's a shame you Xbox guys won't get it thanks to Microsoft.
I don't care if they're lying and they don't give a shit, so long as what they do for it is good. I don't really go to Valve for soul to be honest; as fun as their games are, they've always felt quite cold and clinical, if that makes sense.
I don't care if they're lying and they don't give a shit, so long as what they do for it is good. I don't really go to Valve for soul to be honest; as fun as their games are, they've always felt quite cold and clinical, if that makes sense.
Sony has a horrible track record, as far as "openness" is concerned, even overshadowing big ol' evil Microsoft - they have outright ruined markets for themselves in the past, simply from being... "overprotective", shall we call it?
I'm sure Valve's previous position and its recent change, is all to do with Sony finally loosening their iron grip somewhat and allowing Steamworks in, although, alas, this is more likely an exception for a big player, than a policy reform. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony's US manager has put some of his goodwill with the big cheeses on the line, from convincing them to let him do this.
It is going to be interesting to see where the line is drawn - 'little doubt they don't want the full Steam in there, competing with their own so-far monopoly, even should they get to add extra "taxes" on top.
I also suspect Gabe Newell's wording at E3 had a slight barb/hint towards the equally control-mad Microsoft embedded.
There seem to be a couple of instances of movement away from the exclusive title nonsense, across the market, at the moment. This is good, very good. No reason to restrictions borne out of sequestered marketshare, built because of greed and nothing else. If any greed is good, it is the greed of developers wanting to maximise their market, by reaching as many customers as possible.
I'm sure Valve's previous position and its recent change, is all to do with Sony finally loosening their iron grip somewhat and allowing Steamworks in, although, alas, this is more likely an exception for a big player, than a policy reform. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony's US manager has put some of his goodwill with the big cheeses on the line, from convincing them to let him do this.
It is going to be interesting to see where the line is drawn - 'little doubt they don't want the full Steam in there, competing with their own so-far monopoly, even should they get to add extra "taxes" on top.
I also suspect Gabe Newell's wording at E3 had a slight barb/hint towards the equally control-mad Microsoft embedded.
There seem to be a couple of instances of movement away from the exclusive title nonsense, across the market, at the moment. This is good, very good. No reason to restrictions borne out of sequestered marketshare, built because of greed and nothing else. If any greed is good, it is the greed of developers wanting to maximise their market, by reaching as many customers as possible.
EA may disagree with you. AFAIK they had dedicated servers up for Medal of Honor: Heroes 2, and Xbox Live don't do dedicated servers.GiantRedButton said:
As a PS3 owner I can safely say, "If PS3 was so important to you why did your boss spend the last bloody two years bashing it at every chance, even when he wasn't asked about the PS3?"
"Hey Gabe what's your favorite flavor Ice Cream?"
"Chocolate Chip, the fumes caused by digesting it make PS3s fail."
"Hey Gabe what's your favorite flavor Ice Cream?"
"Chocolate Chip, the fumes caused by digesting it make PS3s fail."
I don't understand the sudden change in position of Valve about PS3 support... Maybe they managed to get a PS3 dev team?