Valve insists all Portal 2s are the same

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 10 March, 2011

But PS3 version "one to get" for co-op fans.

Valve Software has insisted that, when it comes to content, all versions of upcoming first-person puzzler Portal 2 are exactly the same.

The famed developer did, however, admit that for gamers who care about cross-platform co-op play, the PlayStation 3 version is "the one to get".

In January Valve boss Gabe Newell said: "We made a promise to gamers at E3 that Portal 2 for the PS3 would be the best console version of the product."

The PS3 version of Portal 2 supports Valve's Steam platform, facilitating quick updates and cross-platform play and chat with the PC and Mac versions.

These benefits have left some Xbox 360 owners feeling left out, but Valve said they'll get exactly the same experience as their PC and PS3 gaming cousins – when it comes to content.

"When you buy them they're all the same," Valve writer Chet Faliszek told Eurogamer. "They're all exactly the same. Content-wise, you're getting the same experience in them.

"It's just once you start looking at co-op. The Mac, PC and PS3 can all play together, they will all get updates quicker. For some people that will make a big difference.

"But the actual experience coming out of the box is going to be great. It is the most stable and solid game we've ever released.

Fellow Valve writer Erik Wolpaw went one further. "If playing cross PC and PS3 is important to you, then pretty clearly it's not even a matter of opinion. PS3 is the one to get."

So what, exactly, does the PS3 version get you?

"On PS3 you get the cross-platform play, you get the frequent updates," Faliszek explained. "The frequent updates allow a lot of things. They allow the cross-platform play to happen. You get the Steam cloud. So if you're playing a PS3 over your friend's house, and play on his PS3 the save is recorded.

"You also get the Steam copy. It's not a copy we just give away. It's attached to your PSN and Steam account. But yeah, there are some cool things you can do there."

Faliszek said Valve pushed for the extra features because, like you, they're gamers.

"That kind of stuff comes from us because we like to play games," he said. "We buy games. We do all the stuff other gamers do. We look at that stuff and go, this kinda sucks. I don't want to buy a game five times. We look at it that way."

"Also, the co-op is perfectly suited to cross-platform play in the sense that the differences between the control schemes don't factor in," Wolpaw added. "It's not competitive. It's all a bit more deliberately paced. Nobody's going to be at a disadvantage based on their controller of choice."

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (87) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • spekkeh #1 1 year ago

    I'll still buy the 360 version, but I hope [this comment/decision by Valve] hurts Microsoft.
    Edited by spekkeh at 10/03/11 @ 08:56

  • el_pollo_diablo #2 1 year ago

    Newell finally agreeing to bring games to the PS3 is great, but his huge, sudden U-turn feels a bit dirty. And weird. You can still say you don't like the thing and develop for it.

  • RipperSU #3 1 year ago

    Well, I'll most likely be getting the PS3 version of this then. Like the concept of cross platform co-op though and I think that Steam could do well by being integrated into more console games.

  • RealityCheque #4 1 year ago

    Why? Honestly, what is the point of cross-platform play for 3 of the platforms, but not the 4th? This strikes me as being incredibly shitty for no fucking reason whatsoever.

  • Harmonica #5 1 year ago

    360 will get shafted, just like Team Fortress 2. Valve are gods but it's upto everyone to decide if they're okay buying something which won't get the same support as the other platforms.

    edit: also given the low standards of players on PS3 games, I think they can do with all the competition they can get.
    Edited by Harmonica at 10/03/11 @ 08:59

  • X201 #6 1 year ago

    The fact you get the PC version with the PS3 version is brilliant.

    The only way it could get better is if Steamcloud allows you to play the PS3 version at home and the PC version on a laptop or work PC.

    Interchangeable gamesaves between console and PC is asking a lot, but I'm sure if any company is up for making it work, it would be Valve.

  • Widge #7 1 year ago

    I’d like to see much more of this sort of thing happening. A perfect universe would see Steam open up on PS3, replacing the PSN store, with one purchase on PS3 opening up a PC copy. It would be a mighty prospect then.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #8 1 year ago

    I've always thought, for some reason, that Valve's games were PC games first and foremost. But the fact that I still haven't completed Episode Two, despite getting The Orange Box at launch, teaches me that I never play on the PC anymore. So I'll be getting the 360 version (and I imagine I would even if I had a PS3, for the achievements).

    But I do like what Valve have done here, with the cross-platform play and free Steam version. I wish MS was a little more open about things like that, although I do appreciate the benefits of a closed system, and I'm aware that they're technically in competition with Steam via GfWL.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #9 1 year ago

    @RealityCheque

    MS won't allow it for a variety of reasons. It's not Valve's fault.

  • psychokitten #10 1 year ago

    RealityCheque, because MS won't allow Steamworks on 360, the other versions can all be updated by Valve through it. You can't have cross platform gaming including 1 platform that can't get the updates the others can. Way too messy.

  • HisDudness #11 1 year ago

    All portals are equal, but some are more equal than others...

  • NotSoSlim #12 1 year ago

    Don't get how Valve can be blamed for this?

    There are benefits to a closed system but not when consumer gets affected

  • RodHull #13 1 year ago

    Cloud co-op is appealing but the PS3s controller certainly isn't. It really is time Sony designed something a bit more ergonomic and less 1995. For games where quick movements are required it really is quite inferior when compared to re 360s controller, and next to useless compare to keyboard and mouse. So for that reason, it'll be the 360 version for me, regardless what Gabe Newell brought to you by Sony might say.

  • captain_Carl #14 1 year ago

    @RodHull "It really is time Sony designed something a bit more ergonomic and less 1995"

    They did, remember? Everyone pissed and whined because it looked funny.

  • AcidSnake #15 1 year ago

    Except I have a healthy friends list on 360, which is the basis for a good co-op game I think...

    But good for PC, PS3 and Mac users, it's quite a nice bonus to have...

    That said, can someone please ask Newell pretty please with sugar on top if he can make a version that includes Portal: Still Alive and Narbacular Drop?

    Oh and I still feel it should have been called "Portals"...

  • StooMonster #16 1 year ago

    Will be getting this on PC myself, as I do all Valve games, but several of my PC gaming friends are (unusually) buying the PS3 version because they also get the PC/Mac version for free. In particular the Steamworks shared saved is attractive, as is being given the option to use whatever hardware you want ... So long as it's not Xbox 360.

    Microsoft's Live rules make it a successful, consistent experience on one hand but on the other don't work with Valve's ethos of giving lots of stuff "for free" (e.g. Content updates) to gamers.

  • davisorle #17 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 20:44:35 16-04-2012

  • StolenGlory #18 1 year ago

    Right, so they're all the same.

    But they're not.

  • PixelPirate #19 1 year ago

    Well considering i have a Mac and Ps3, ill be getting the PS3 one with a free Mac version thrown in :-)

    The cross game multiplayer is also a huge bonus.

    Now if we could just get steam on PS3 as a separate store then it would be christmas and birthday rolled in to one!

  • andywilkie35 #20 1 year ago

    Will still get this on 360, because I want to play co-op and trying to play PS3 games co-op is like pulling teeth.

  • Murton #21 1 year ago

    "When you buy them they're all the same,"

    The cynic in me see exclusive DLC on the horizon, the question is, who's getting it? Makes sense for it to be PS3/PC as they have the cross platform co-op thing going on and it can be delivered through Steam, for free if Valve wish to continue that model. But equally it could be 360 exclusive because that's how MS roll and Valve have never been one to turn down MS money, could go either way.

    @ rodhull - I find the PS3 controller perfectly fine for use, you adapt to it quite quickly. I at first found the 360 controller quite clumsy with it's wierd shape, alternative analogue stick arrangement and big cheapo plastic buttons, not to mention the lack of feedback in those bumpers, but I got used to it after a while. If you want to argue ergonomics then keyboard and mice are terrible for gaming if not set up correctly with regards to height, distance from body, wrist supports etc.

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #22 1 year ago

    For 360 owners id also be worried that content that comes quicker and for free on PC, MAC and PS3 will turn up to be paid content on 360 when it does eventually arrive

  • M_of_the_sys #23 1 year ago

    And people throw the letters SDF about a lot...

  • Dizzy #24 1 year ago

    Watch PS3 players get booted out of PC games in seconds as the PC crowd doesn't like the console players.

  • Cronan #25 1 year ago

    Valve and Sony, sitting in a tree
    K I S S I N G

    Maybe I should dust off my Howard Stringer/Gabe Newell erotic furry fan-fiction.

    Also, given the news about Kaz Hirai, maybe I should make it a three-way?
    Edited by Cronan at 10/03/11 @ 09:31

  • captain_Carl #26 1 year ago

    @davisorle no, they all use steamworks, even the PS3 version. Once valve hits the button, all 3 are updated at the same time

  • Toothball #27 1 year ago

    So the PS3 version is the one to get because of cross-platform play with PC? Doesn't the same statement also apply to the PC version? Not that I mind really, giving the PC version away with the PS3 one was a great idea. I've ordered it on PC already as I don't have a PS3, but I may end up picking it up there later as I'd like to hook up my PSN account. Depends on what they do next with Steamworks versus PS3.

    I'm usually an Xbox gamer though. I informed one of my Xbox friends that I was buying it on PC, to which he commented "But you'll have no one to play with". I had a bit of a chuckle at that.

  • butler` #28 1 year ago

    "sudden U-turn feels a bit dirty. And weird. "

    there's no u-turn - it's pretty well documented that MS have sought to keep the 360 and XBL as closed and regimented is possible, maximising their revenues at the expense of innovation and the opportunity to better support MMOs etc

    i'll be getting it on PC obv, can't wait.

  • butler` #29 1 year ago

    So the PS3 version is the one to get because of cross-platform play with PC? Doesn't the same statement also apply to the PC version?

    Ignore WYP's 'wording' and read the quote, ""We made a promise to gamers at E3 that Portal 2 for the PS3 would be the best console version of the product."

    ;)
    Edited by butler` at 10/03/11 @ 09:32

  • Moz #30 1 year ago

    @el_pollo_diablo

    I get the impression that MS upset him/Valve. Valve wanted to have free DLC in L4D2 on xbox the same as the PC version and MS said NO, they wanted the same for Portal 2 and MS said NO again.
    They wanted cross-platform play for Portal 2, MS said "only if you use Games for Windows Live" Valve said "no thanx"

    Sony on the other hand said "sure do what you like (just please please start releasing games on our system again)"

  • rotmm #31 1 year ago

    @Murton, "....because that's how MS roll and Valve have never been one to turn down MS money, could go either way."

    Sorry, but do you know for a fact that MS have been lured by MS money in the past? Or is that just the Playtard imp sitting on your shoulder whispering it in your ear?

  • rotmm #32 1 year ago

    "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others"

  • X201 #33 1 year ago

    Today's EG literary reference is brought to you by the letters; R, O, T and M ;)

  • bf #34 1 year ago

    I wonder if this means that the PS3 version will be tied to Steam ie no second hand sales.

  • Murton #35 1 year ago

    @rotmm: past form for starters. While Valve maintains that the decision for 360 exclusivity in its previous games was a matter of experience rather than being bought and paid for there is the issue of DLC. PC version is free because that's how Valve wanted it, MS said that the 360 content would have be paid for and Valve agreed, though they would have us believe they were reluctant about being paid their royalties for the content.

    Personally I believe that Left4Dead's exclusivity was a matter of experience, doesn't explain why they didn't at least try L4D2 on PS3 nor does it explain them not porting it later, but they did accept payment for the DLC, they could have refused to release the content on the platform or announced that all 360 DLC revenue would go to charity or something, but they didn't.

  • kinky_mong #36 1 year ago

    Have to agree with andywilkie35, the best co-op experience will still be on the 360 for me because my PS3 refuses to have a stable wireless connection and I'll have to buy a headset for it as well.

    It's a shame MS insist on making the 360 so closed off, but I'll probably end up buying a PS3 copy later if it gets frequent free add-ons.

  • geeza2020 #37 1 year ago

    Err, so they're not all the same are they then? You can keep saying it all you want Valve, but theres no denying that the 360 version is inferior. Especially when, as someone mentioned above, you consider that MS will probably be charging 800-1200 MS points for any updates that get released on PC/PS3. I know this is not Valves fault, but its still the truth and I dont appreciate a company lying to me about the differences between versions, even Valve.

    hooray negged again for giving an honest personal opinion. Good work EG readers, bravo.

    /slow clap
    Edited by geeza2020 at 10/03/11 @ 10:16

  • aphex187 #38 1 year ago

    Imagine a fully integrated version of Steam for PS3? Jesus christ it'll probably never happen but if it does i'll be needing new boxers when i hear the news.

  • asphaltcowboy #39 1 year ago

    As long as I can still play co-op with my 360 buddies, I couldn't give a shit!

  • CaptainQuint #40 1 year ago

    Lol, what a crock of shit. I couldn't give a crap about cross-platform co-op and fast updates. Whoopy doo.

  • DozyKipper #41 1 year ago

    @RealityCheque - As far as I know, the only way to allow cross-platform gaming between Xbox and PC is to use Games for Windows Live on PC. Why would Valve peddle that **** when they have superior Steamworks? And because MS won't allow anything other than Xbox Live, the 360 is stuck on its lonesome.
    Edited by DozyKipper at 10/03/11 @ 10:19

  • des #42 1 year ago

    No Half-Life 3,no deal.

  • arcam #43 1 year ago

    I wonder if this means that the PS3 version will be tied to Steam ie no second hand sales.

    I think this is what it might mean. I'm waiting for that Eurogamer headline, because the comments thread will explode.

  • coolbritannia #44 1 year ago

    But, playing this on 360, I can play with my entire friends list!

    Seriously, I can see how cross platform play is a good thing, but Gabe is so clearly on the Sony payroll now it makes it hard to believe anything he says about the platform.

  • captain_Carl #45 1 year ago

    Not really on the sony payroll. It's just that sony let him do anything he wants in regards to Steamworks etc. Basically given him free reign on the whole patching thing too. Gabe is getting Steam into more people's hands.

  • IronGiant #46 1 year ago

    Nice to see a few bitter fanboys have chirped up.. As a Mac and PS3 owner this is great news, coolb making a suggestion that Gabe is in the Sony payroll is just plain idiotic and niave.

  • space_ace #47 1 year ago

    it's not equal, it's a sequel

  • uknortherner2000 #48 1 year ago

    Says coolbritannia who always sounds like he's on the MS payroll.

  • Spekingur #49 1 year ago

    No, the PC/Mac version is the one to get for co-op fans. Of the console versions THEN the PS3 is the one to get. I can pretty much gurantee that you will get the best experience on the PC version though.

    The header and sub-header for this article makes it look like Valve is suddenly dissing their most loyal fanbase. They aren't.

  • captain_Carl #50 1 year ago

    But you get the PC version with the PS3 version anyway ;)

  • photoboy #51 1 year ago

    Is it me, or does this sound like a bit of a "fuck you" from Valve to Microsoft just because MS wouldn't let them put Steamworks on the 360?

  • rotmm #52 1 year ago

    @Murton, "past form for starters, etc

    Again, you say that like it's a fact. What past form are you talking about? Co-marketing agreements? All console manufacturers to that. Aid toward development costs and/or resource? Again, all console companies do that.

    I'd guess that all of your proof comes from that little imp right there on your shoulder.

    And as for "there's no reason L4D2 shouldn't have been on the PS3... moneybags M$ clearly paid for exclusivity", well maybe they did. I, for one, don't actually know. What I do know is that MS got behind L4D1 in a big way, helped to ensure it was a huge hit on the 360 and those kind of things, along with a short development schedule and a engine that probably still wasn't optimised for PS3, made L4D2 on 360 console only a logical step.

    No? That doesn't ring more true to you than "MS Paid!!!!"? Really?

    Well, how about the fact that until very recently Gabe was vociferous in his dislike of the PS3, the architecture, the tools and called it a waste of time. Wouldn't that be reason enough for them not to have worked on L4D2 on the PS3?

    Ironically enough, with the obvious exception of improved Sony tools, it's the same PS3 that Valve are now evangelising and are developing the "same but better" version of their next game on. Going by your same logic, can you really say that Sony haven't chucked some bags of cash at Valve to engender such a drastic change of heart?

    Or is it truly that Valve have just realised that the same platform, the very same architecture that they have chosen to keep well away from since 2006 is... "well, it's open and we like it now".

    And I'm sure that no moneybags were thrown at Rocksteady for exclusive PS3 content in Batman, or at Ubisoft for exclusive content in Brotherhood, or at EA with a whole free game included in Dead Space.

    No, with Sony it's their history of openness, with MS it's their history of chucking cash at things.

  • spekkeh #53 1 year ago

    No, the PC/Mac version is the one to get for co-op fans.

    Because there's nothing like huddling up on two chairs behind a desk with a small screen eh?

  • coolbritannia #54 1 year ago

    How do you account for Gabe outright hating on the PS3, and then changing his mind so completely?

    edit: and by 'hating', I mean he called the PS3 'a complete waste of time for everyone', or words to that effect.
    Edited by coolbritannia at 10/03/11 @ 11:17

  • M_of_the_sys #55 1 year ago

    Seems like people preferred it when he hated the PS3. Time to call the WAAAAmbulance.

  • des #56 1 year ago

    The only thing that Gabe wants(except donuts) is to expand Steam,more $$$.Valve doesn't give a shit about PC,consoles...Steam,Steam,Steam

  • coolbritannia #57 1 year ago

    @des, that's very true. be interesting to see which version sells the most...

  • Spekingur #58 1 year ago

    @spekkeh: Online co-op. If I wanted to play couch co-op on my PC... I could just turn on my flatscreen TV and select the correct channel. I think people forget sometimes that you can actually connect your PC/Mac to a TV. Not a difficult procedure.

    @captain_Carl: Yup. PS3 version is good value, there is no doubt in that :D
    I should have worded it "The PC/Mac version is the one to play for co-op fans" - that would have been more correct. The PS3 version is more expensive though so if you were planning on only playing Portal 2 on PC then why buy the PS3 version? :/
    Support is probably also going to be easier on the PC.

  • Jolly_Armadillo #59 1 year ago

    Is there a significant difference between trophies and achievements that can sway peoples opinions between platforms or is it people don't know about trophies?

    I'm genuinely confused!

  • Jolly_Armadillo #60 1 year ago

    P.s. I've played games with achievements and games with trophies, aren't they pretty similar

  • arcam #61 1 year ago

    If you buy the PS3 version with a free PC copy, I don't think you'll be able to play those two copies as co-op together, as they'll both be tied to the same Steam account.

  • technicianTed #62 1 year ago

    If all my online buddy's weren't all going to get the 360 version, i'd buy the ps3 version instead.
    But as they are getting the 360 one, the cross platform co op seems a bit pointless(for me anyway).
    I only tend to co op with my real life buddies and family members(all have 360's).

    I can see the appeal though if you have a number of friends who own a pc and not a ps3(or the other way around).
    And the free pc version(if that's true)when you buy the ps3 version is a cool extra.

  • BillyBrush #63 1 year ago

    If Valve put out Half Life 3 and it was amazing, it would make as much money as 2 months worth of Steam income...possibly

    This is all just Valve's changing priorities, making games cannot possibly bring in as much income as Steam, so naturally it is and should be top of their agenda. I think they're a bit cheeky saying 'it's because we're gamers' when clearly it's because 'steam'

    Anyway, i would think further down the line MS would and should bend a little to allow steamworks and co - that's not going to hurt them. However they won't be interested in letting them in on their 30% cut on digital sales, and i don't think for a second Sony will either. Surely Valve are just having a little test, seeing if they can somehow get a cut of one of the platform holders digital revenues via a Steam app...I honestly think they won't get too far with that...saying our next console has Steam isn't worth giving up 10% of digital revenue even.

  • Lemming81 #64 1 year ago

    Nice one!

    I've always bought Valve games on PC, but I'll be getting the PS3 version (for the trophies) as it throws the PC version in, anyway.

    Plus it may encourage more of this sort of thing and (hopefully) some retroactive love for The Orange Box and LFD 1/2 to get the same treatment/release on PS3.

  • Mister-Wario #65 1 year ago

    "Nobody's going to be at a disadvantage based on their controller of choice"

    Well, this demonstrably isn't true. A mouse and keyboard will be more accurate than a controller. How's Move support coming along, by the way?

  • spekkeh #66 1 year ago

    I think people forget sometimes that you can actually connect your PC/Mac to a TV. Not a difficult procedure.
    No I didn't forget, but it would make "the pc version is the one to get" a bit pointless. Especially because it is more of a hassle as you have to constantly switch input devices or walk to different rooms.

  • MattyD #67 1 year ago

    Or you could just, you know, but the PC version and play with PC peeps.

  • spekkeh #68 1 year ago

    Well, this demonstrably isn't true. A mouse and keyboard will be more accurate than a controller. How's Move support coming along, by the way?

    More accurate in shooting, less accurate in walking. Theoretically this could even out (remember the bits where you had to jump through multiple portals to accelerate?). Although I also think the pc version will be at a slight advantage, it doesn't really matter for coop play anyway.

  • Mister-Wario #69 1 year ago

    MattyD: Not everyone has a decent PC for running games, or they may not want to put games on it. So I can buy a new PC or use the PS3 sat next to my TV.

  • Retro_ #70 1 year ago

    Obvious choice, I'll get the PS3 version. I also like the DS3 controller on the PS3, 1995 it may be but I've been using it since 1995 so I'm pretty much used to it.

  • geeza2020 #71 1 year ago

    Why do theads involving steam or valve or blizzard always just fall into PC gamers just saying "PC versions best anyway" "PC has best controls" blah blah blah. Yes, we fucking know this. It doesnt change anything just saying the same tired truisms over and over again ffs.

  • Toothball #72 1 year ago

    @Murton

    I'd imagine they've not ported any Left 4 Deads to the PS3 yet as their PS3 peoples have been working on Steamworks and Portal 2 here. It will be interesting to see what they do with it next though.

  • butler` #73 1 year ago

    @geeza2020

    kb/m really is better though tbfh

  • miiiguel #74 1 year ago

    Unless I have that realy special friend who only plays games on a PC I can't understand what's so special about x-platform coop.

  • HL706 #75 1 year ago

    Valve are awesome.

    Fin.

  • lavalant #76 1 year ago

    Don't forget it's free to play online on the PS3 andPC, don't buy online games for my Xbox anymore.

  • Darren #77 1 year ago

    Well I don't particularly want to play Portal 2 at 30 fps at a low resolution with jaggies on the PS3 so I think I'll buy the cheaper PC version thanks! :p

  • Cronan #78 1 year ago

    Achievements come with gamerscore, which make them more satisfying to get.

  • Murton #79 1 year ago

    @rotmm: you're misquoting me again. go back and read my second post, find the part in which is says MS paid for exclusivity of L4D. It isn't there because I didn't say it.

    What I did say though was that MS have a history of buying exclusivity, they make no secret of it, remember the 50 million USD boast for exclusive GTA4 content? I also said that Valve have accepted payments from MS in the past to change their strategy and then gave an example for that in their agreeing to charge to L4D content on the 360 while offering the same content for free on PC, at no point did I suggest that there was a history of MS paying Valve to bring things exclusively to their 360.

    Also the reason for additional content in ACB and Dead Space 2 was a matter of disc space, in the case of Dead Space a separate disc could have been required which means higher cert fees to MS which means less profit for EA, a port of Extraction to PS3 was always on the cards and its addition on the first run of DS2 discs was a strategy to improve pre-orders and early sales, nothing more. I'm sure the existence of a compatible peripheral with a substantial install base was also a factor, not sure if I've seen any "light gun" controllers for the 360 at all. I'll concede that the Batman content was likely the result of some deal, but if you've played the Joker content in Arkham Asylum you'd know it is really quite insignificant, not much more than a reskin to be honest, certainly not worth shouting about compared to extra missions or indeed entirely new stories.

    Again with the imp on the shoulder remark, it's a nice visual device and not a bad way of passing veiled insults without damaging your own credibility, but then there's not a huge amount of credibility to damage in an argument that almost entirely based on misrepresenting the person you're looking to best.

  • coolbritannia #80 1 year ago

    I always thought console versions of games were optimised for the controller input. How does the 'twitchy' pc controls and the presumably slower PS3 controller input work out in the same game?

    I'm guessing if this was versus and not co-op, the PS3 players would be at a severe disadvantage?

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #81 1 year ago

    hmmm £27 quid (or £24 is I get a mate to club together) for just the PC/Mac versions on Steam, or £32.50 to get those together with the PS3 version as well.

    If there were less than a fiver of difference, or if it weren't a mouse-and-keyboard FPS-type game, I'd probably order the PS3 version, but as it is I can't see it being worth 8 quid to me.

  • orangpelupa #82 1 year ago

    now i wait for the pricing. if the PC version is the same as PS3 version in my country. i will get the PS3 version but play on PC :D
    because i dont have PS3 due to SONY not support 16:10

  • ianegg #83 1 year ago

    Nobody's going to be at a disadvantage based on their controller of choice.

    Unless they choose Move. :(

  • Mister-Wario #84 1 year ago

    "More accurate in shooting, less accurate in walking. Theoretically this could even out (remember the bits where you had to jump through multiple portals to accelerate?). Although I also think the pc version will be at a slight advantage, it doesn't really matter for coop play anyway".

    Is it less accurate, though? I mean, if I recall correctly you can hold down Shift in the original Half-Life to slow your speed. So it's not impossible to have degrees of movement, not that Chell moves that fast anyway. And I think it does matter in co-op play: if you're playing with a PC player, who has a mouse, and you're on PS3, and have a controller, it might not gel if you have to coordinate your movements closely.

    The point is, we have this highly-vaunted controller for PS3 that would make a game like this immeasurably better. Why can't it be utilised, or at least looked into?

  • rotmm #85 1 year ago

    @Murton, "What I did say though was that MS have a history of buying exclusivity, they make no secret of it, remember the 50 million USD boast for exclusive GTA4 content?"

    Let's cover this one off first. Please find me the quote where MS 'boasted' of spending $50 million to secure exclusive GTA4 content. Actually, I'll save you the trouble... they didn't. They did boast of having the (as it later became obvious) exclusive downloadable content, but they never boasted of paying $50m for it.

    The $50m figure came out in a conference call with Take2, was said to be 2x$25m payments to cover development and... this is the bit that everyone seemed to ignore... was to be recouped by MS from sales of the final product. So effectively it was a loan to cover the development costs, paid back on completion.

    Now of couirse, if it sold 7 copies, MS would be out almost all of that $50m and given that DLC was pretty much an unproven quantity at the time of the announcement, it was a brave move by both MS and Rockstar to invest in such a largescale venture. As it happens, both packs sold millions, sold again as a disk based addon and sold again as a "complete" package. Take2/Rockstar have paid that back.

    In essence the deal was the same as Sony funding the development of Resistance, with Insomniac not making any more profit until that investment was paid back.

    As for the rest of it and your convoluted and contrived attempt to equate MS wanting to charge for L4D DLC and that somehow being a "payoff" to Valve to bring the sequel to the 360 only... well I've read through it a couple of times and it makes even less logical sense the more I read it. Maybe you mean something different from how it's written? Or maybe the imp (not a veiled insult, but rather a straight accusation of significant fanboyism) had one to many in the pub at lunchtime and it trying to hard to create something from nothing.

    Which is maybe why your assumptions as to why Extraction is on the PS3 only both make no sense and are spoken with the authority of an insider:

    "Also the reason for additional content in ACB and Dead Space 2 was a matter of disc space, in the case of Dead Space a separate disc could have been required which means higher cert fees to MS which means less profit for EA, a port of Extraction to PS3 was always on the cards...etc

    So you know for a fact that it's a matter of disc space, a seperate MS disc would mean higher cert fees (and enough so to outweigh the inherently higher cost of blu ray media, pressing and licences) and that EA were always going to port Extraction to HD consoles and give away that piece of work for free.

    You are either a Sony employee or a Sony fanboy. Either of those and you would feel qualified to speak in such absolutes. Unless it's that damnable imp again.

    Just a though about the cost issue (aside from the one about blu ray being inherently more expensive for EA anyway) - If an extra disk was an issue, EA could have offered a download code for 360 owners if there was no deal in place between Sony and EA for HD Extraction.

  • psychokitten #86 1 year ago

    Hur hur hur, Gabe is fat
    /ad nauseum

    I generally don't play coop games on the PS3, but I can't see myself getting this for co-op on 360 until the price drops, always good to play with friends.

    PC all the way for me, but since the PS3 version comes with the Steam copy anyway...

  • hiddenranbir #87 1 year ago

    Sony must feel vindicated to leave their PSN open vs MS' closed network.

    Of course, Sony must rely that others follow Valve's lead.