Valve boss Gabe Newell has called his company's assumptions over Xbox Live "such a train wreck".
Speaking to our colleagues at PC Gamer in its recently-published interview, Newell said one of Valve's failures over the years was to assume that Microsoft would improve Xbox Live so it could update its games regularly for free.
When asked if its mistake on Xbox Live was to assume Microsoft would let Valve update its games more often, Newell said:
"We thought that there would be something that would emerge, because we figured it was a sort of untenable... Oh yeah, we understand that these are the rules now, but it's such a train wreck that something will have to change.
"That's why we're really happy with the current situation with the PS3," he said. "We're solving it now in a way that is going to work for our customers, rather than assuming something is going to emerge later that will allow us to fix this."
Microsoft has a notoriously closed approach to its online service compared to PSN, with developers allowed as little as one free title update (though there are exceptions) and limitations on the amount of free game content they can release.
In fact, in its recent paid-for Red Dead Redemption add-on Rockstar included all the free-of-charge content from its previous Free Roam pack, "due to the platform network's restrictions on numbers of free packs we can give away."
Valve's Erik Johnson echoed Newell's comments: "The lack of updates on the 360, for TF2, is also a total failure," he said. "Those are the ones that sting the worst because... it got all the way through to customers. It's like a bug. If you fix a bug before it ever ships, it's pretty cheap. If you ship it and then fix it, it's really expensive. Those ones are really bad."
I must say that MS's approach to Live doesn't appear to be helping anyone, really. You can understand them wanting to make a profit from Xbox Live, but people like my self who are becoming more and more enticed by PS3 could end up giving MS a rude awakening.
I love my 360 to bits, and haven't had many previous reasons to get rid but recently, I have found myself questioning why I should continue to suscribe to gold.
In theory, I could get an average PC and still play games such as Battlefield, Bad Company 2 but for free.
FAO PC users.
What advantages do I have inkeeping my xbox over getting a full on PC for gaming? I'm finding it increasingly difficlut to justify paying £15 a quarter..
Am I right in thinking that a developer is bemoaning the fact that if they release something that's buggy and have to patch it into life then it costs them?
That sounds like a good thing for us consumers. WRITE SOMETHING THAT AIN'T BUGGY TO BEGIN WITH!!!!!!
Keep in mind that the reason this rule came in in the first place was because when Xbox Live launched on Xbox 1, everyone was worried developers would use it as an excuse to release half-finished games and patch them up later.
Am I right in thinking that a developer is bemoaning the fact that if they release something that's buggy and have to patch it into life then it costs them?
Its not just about patches, its also about free updates. look at the number of updates Team Fortress 2 has had on PC for free.
Its so funny how you guys think Sony are paying them to say all of this. Valva are just p*ssed off they can't update their games on 360, so that they can improve the player's experiences. Like with anyone that has a PC version. They are trying to deliver more for the customer and MS isn't allowing it. Keep telling yourselves its about Sony's money. Your ignorance is hilarious.
Well Xbox Live has always been a disgrace. Microsoft have always been control freaks. It's bad for developers, even worse for consumers.
Still, their downfall is coming as they are massively alienating people with Kinect.
To be fair though, they are not as bad as Apple and some of their truely appaling cusumer rights violations, but I do take your point.
I reckon Sony would do the same if they thought they could get away with it and i think they are probably kicking themselves that they didn't start charging for PSN.
I do think that MS are going to come in for a nasty suprise with Kinect, and I also think a few people (myself included) are going to start to question what exactly they are getting from xb Live gold.
Am I right in thinking that a developer is bemoaning the fact that if they release something that's buggy and have to patch it into life then it costs them?
Its not just about patches, its also about free updates. look at the number of updates Team Fortress 2 has had on PC for free.
OK, thanks for helping translate the article for me.
If Microsoft are stopping developers giving me free stuff, then yeah that sucks.
But I still think developers should be punished for releasing buggy stuff. Although in reality I suppose all it really does is stop them from bothering to fix it.
Am I right in thinking that a developer is bemoaning the fact that if they release something that's buggy and have to patch it into life then it costs them?
Its not just about patches, its also about free updates. look at the number of updates Team Fortress 2 has had on PC for free.
Free updates, that will usually contain bug fixes and / or balancing tweaks!
£15 a quarter? Last time I check it was 40 quid a year? less there is a premium price for not paying in full?
I think live is a good deal for the money, half decent policing of the service, good customer support (well for me anyway) I've had loads of freebies.
Anyway, sorry Valve but swithing from one to the other to hate opn dont do it for mee
if they have troubles or major costs trying to constantly give the player a better experience, then that is a disgrace. one free bug fix, and then incurred costs after that - fine.
but then it is MS's fault. you don't get iplayer cause they can't fleece cash out of you for it. dragons den was hilarous on it i just seen last night, big duncan... '44 countries, aye right'
Microsoft only allow one free update, Valve are constantly updating and adding things into their games. It wouldn't be worth it for Valve to pay for every class update, every new weapon and every hat and then charge customers for the updates their PC playing cousins could get for free.
Don't forget that every update has to go through Microsoft certification too, which costs and takes months.
Valve's mistake was thinking this was something Microsoft would fix. Sony doesn't have these problems, restrictions and charges.
And people say Apple are bad for being control freaks!
Ironically if Microsoft applied the xbox live update model to their own software, they'd probably get things right first time more - either that or they'll just find ways to charge the users more!
I reckon when Valve spoke out harshly against the PS3 before, they hadn't really researched properly, instead just made assumptions, (like this self confessed one where they felt Live would turn out to be great for patching and free content). Sony must have sent them on a 'How the PS3 works' seminar, for them to change their tune so distinctly, either that or installed a vending machine on tap at Valve HQ.
Valve isn't saying they hate xbox they're just bringing to light the problems and limitations Microsoft imposes on developers and consumers via live. They have a valid point and MS should seriously consider tweaking how they run live. If Valve manages to bring Steam to PSN I wouldn't be surprised if you guys are here saying that Valve are 2 faced dicks when in fact it's MS that will be to blame. This has nothing to do with Sony paying them off to say this about the Xbox, it's an actual problem and one that should be addressed.
They first diss Sony, and compliment the 360, and yet now Sony have given them money they are now bitching about the 360 community.
Just proves how money changes people. ffs.
Who said Sony has given them money?
It's all negotiation tactics anyway.
Gearbox diss Valve -> Gearbox later announce Borderlands on Steam Valve diss Sony -> Valve later announce Steam and Portal for PS3 Valve diss Microsoft -> Valve later announce......?
It's all about getting public opinion on their side to force their agenda with the other party. If it works and Microsoft relax the rules to give developers more freedom, then well done to Valve.
If Valve manages to bring Steam to PSN I wouldn't be surprised if you guys are here saying that Valve are 2 faced dicks when in fact it's MS that will be to blame.
This forum will explode if Valve give DLC content away for free to PS3 users because of Steam like they do now with Left 4 Dead on PC & Mac but charge for it on 360.
that's half the problem, it's enough space to allow for code changes, but not enough to allow for new content.
Take Burnout Paradise for example, they released a lot of new content for free, but you had to download it as seperate 'free' DLC. Of course, it was free to us, but I'm pretty sure Criterion still have to pay a 'cover charge' to Microsoft for the update for the downloads.
Valve would love to do steamworks on both PSN and Xbox Live but can't do XBL due to Microsoft being weird and not allowing anything free for silver members. Anyway, I am so looking forward to steamworks and Portal 2
Counter strike on PS3 Vs PC would be the best thing to ever happen to the gaming world.
Valve would love to do steamworks on both PSN and Xbox Live but can't do XBL due to Microsoft being weird and not allowing anything free for silver members. Anyway, I am so looking forward to steamworks and Portal 2
EXACTLY. this person knows what tere talking about.
Valve would love to do steamworks on both PSN and Xbox Live but can't do XBL due to Microsoft being weird and not allowing anything free for silver members. Anyway, I am so looking forward to steamworks and Portal 2
EXACTLY. this person knows what tere talking about.
Same reason why Live won't get things like iPlayer, 4oD etc... which doesn't ultimately matter. It would be very nice, though.
He makes a perfectly legit point imo. Live does seem to be too restrictive, especially for a company like Valve. Valve go a great job supporting their games for no cost. Few developers are so good at updating and augmenting their games post release. So yeah, the PSN is a better option for them.
However, this all doesn't really matter; the best platform for Valve products is on a PC with Steam. That's where it was born, that's where it's best.
I still find it a bit ridiculous how much XBox Live costs. I recently bought an XBox and haven't hooked up online yet because of the costs, considering how much I will play. PC, again, does multiplayer so much better. And on that format it's no coincidence that Games for Windows Live is dying a slow death.
guys keep in mind valve has steam... they don't really need to develop for consoles.... they don't even need to dev at all on consoles :p
The reason they seem to turn their coat here is because they don't want to hastle with irrelevant devloppment. PS3 was complicated, but XBL is retrospectively not at all in their mindframe... so since they want to share their games to console owners, they'll make the efforts to dev on PS3 (and sony probably eased it's PSN rules for them too).
What I find funny is that he's moaning that he can't have his service on their console, therefore alienating one of the elements of Xbox Live, where as on PS3 they're happy because they can have more control by feeding their system down Sony's customers throats.
I mean what if for example someone doesn't want to have Steam on their PS3? Tough, you're gonna have to have it. It's just like if you buy something like Portal on a retail disc you're having to install Steam just to validate it and then get the updates. Sound a bit more like malware right? Yeah, I thought so too.
I know it's successful so it must be doing something right (and it has its good points), but there are some things I don't like about Steam, and that sure is one of them; t hat and Valve's approach to world domination.
Microsoft really is starting to irritate me when it comes to their pricing. Why do they need to stuck as much money out of everything? They have such an aggressive pricing policy i mean does Plants vs Zombies need to be 1200 points? I know that there's other factors involved in the pricing like the developer but still come on bring the price down on some items
Valve just want to let off some Steam. Show us something besides Portal. People have been waiting for Half Life 3, Episode 3 and a new games engine for years.
Hey Valve I have Live and PSN and I think Live is better so I don't give two f**ks what you think, making games is your job not bowing to wherever the golden handshake is coming from so get on with it, turncoat fool.
Hey Valve I have Live and PSN and I think Live is better so I don't give two f**ks what you think.
Online is pretty poor on both Live and PSN, it would be nice if Valve could bring some of the things that make online on the PC superior in almost every way to the consoles.
Epic tried but sadly Unreal isnt that great to begin with so it never really court on. I just hope Valve try to incorporate user content, proper servers, proper ping metres and proper server lists to consoles.
Toasted- I agree mate both could be better but Live offers more options, more features and generally feels better to me hence my slight favouritism.
Live is better than PSN no doubt about that, but it just annoys me when people says Live is so good (Not directed at you BTW) when as a PC online player I know that PC online is so much better than anything either console currently offer. This silliness about which is better, PSN or Live is pointless, both PSN and Live users should be striving to get the vastly superior features the PC offers rather then bickering over which crappy online service is slightly less crappy than the other.
I do strongly disagree with the Live subscription though, I really don't like the idea of game modes and content on the disc I buy been locked out unless I pay to unlock it.
Microsoft's greed, pricing and attitude towards Live was one of the major factors which had me change to a PS3. And I've not looked back since. I've redisovered my love of gaming. I'm looking forward to Valve backing up these claims when they start to bring a few of their future games to the PS3. Incidentally, anyone who prefers the Xbox pad (stupidly it was what held me back from changes ages ago) needn't worry. You'd be surprised how soon you adapt to the Sony pad.
Microsoft's greed, pricing and attitude towards Live was one of the major factors which had me change to a PS3. And I've not looked back since. I've redisovered my love of gaming. I'm looking forward to Valve backing up these claims when they start to bring a few of their future games to the PS3. Incidentally, anyone who prefers the Xbox pad (stupidly it was what held me back from changes ages ago) needn't worry. You'd be surprised how soon you adapt to the Sony pad.
^This. Although my 360 owning mates don't like the trigger buttons much, you do get used to them though.
I was a p**sed off 360 owner. Now I'm a happy PS3 owner. My 360 is sulking in the corner hoping I don't decide to sell it. I MIGHT, 360, I MIGHT.
Microsoft's greed, pricing and attitude towards Live was one of the major factors which had me change to a PS3. And I've not looked back since. I've redisovered my love of gaming. I'm looking forward to Valve backing up these claims when they start to bring a few of their future games to the PS3. Incidentally, anyone who prefers the Xbox pad (stupidly it was what held me back from changes ages ago) needn't worry. You'd be surprised how soon you adapt to the Sony pad.
Moving away from the Sony pad was one of the things that made me abandon the PS2... that and every game released was either a sequel platformer, a GTA or Resi wannabe or a badly planned FPS that the PS2 just couldn't handle... add in their utter arrogance (as seen when they released the PS3 for the huge price they did, without games and dropping numerous functions on the boat over from the US while we waited an extra 5 months to play) and they lost any chance they ever had of getting me back.
I prefer to think for myself... Sony don't seem to like that.
@PS3UberTool - You have PS3 in your username and you haven't even played it ? I agree Sony had got very arrogant because of the huge success of the psone and PS2 but ps3 isn't as bad as your making out.
Though I prefer the Playstation controllers because there just great and dont believe the haters when they bash it, I wish the ps3 had a 360 type controller. 3 generations of the same type of controller is abit much I think.
The laughable thing is that Sony charge developers for things to be downloaded through PSN. A year ago developers were complaining that it cost them to put demos on PSN.
What exactly is Gage's point here? It costs them on both platforms. I really do dislike Gage at the moment. Stick to your guns it's pretty obvious that he is gaining something from Sony for this sudden change of attitude towards the platform.
I can understand why they are annoyed regards updating and being able to progress their games, I've eventually bought L4d2 on Steam as I can customize it with my own skins, sound mods, add new campaigns and all for free, something that MS won't allow, Its extended the life of the game no end. Unfortunately all MS are interested in is how much they can make from DLC, Even "The Passing" add-on was free for PC users, yet cost 360 users which is cobblers. I've got some 25 free campaigns along side the developed ones which on Live would probably cost something in excess of 15,000 ms points!!!!
I do think its a little funny to see them bad-mouthing the 360 after what they said about the PS3, but they are not exactly saying anything controversial, its just the truth...I can see that and i've owned a 360 since launch....Although for how much longer is debatable..
I think this stinks. going from singing the xbox's praises and calling the ps3 a waste of time, to saying the ps3s the nuts and that xbl is a train wreck the minute they get steamworks onto the ps3? it feels really shallow and immature. Thing is I wouldnt care, or be suprised if it was said by some PR guy for a publisher or developer that had just made a deal with one of the platform folders. but from gabe newell and valve, love those guys, its a real shame
Why is he so keen these days to put Steam on Mac, Wii, PS3 and 360? PC not bringing in the big bucks no more?
Valve are part of the games industry, which makes them more than hungry for more profit. It's the reason, I believe, Valve love Sony so much. With Steam on the Playstation they will have an opportunity to make more money, and keep an eye on their customers too. Perhaps one day Valve will have the money to invest in a new game engine instead that ancient thing they keep using!
The laughable thing is that Sony charge developers for things to be downloaded through PSN. A year ago developers were complaining that it cost them to put demos on PSN.
What exactly is Gage's point here? It costs them on both platforms. I really do dislike Gage at the moment. Stick to your guns it's pretty obvious that he is gaining something from Sony for this sudden change of attitude towards the platform.
Bet you loved Gabe though when he said the PS3 should be scrapped. Funny that.
lol at ppl saying about Valve being money whores, especially as they update all their games free of charge and continually support their games in this way.
The only ppl that are the money grabbing c*cks are Micro$oft, they charge xbox users for free dlc and updates like Valve give us pc gamers.
Cant blame Valve for wanting to try psn if XBL is so restricting as they only want their games supplyied how they intended.
Sooo you have to pay for game patches on Xbox 360? WOW haha. Forget ever buying one of those, then.
You don't have to play for game patches, games are constantly updated on Live for free in downloads that take about five seconds. It's adding new content that Microsoft want to charge for, though if Valve start giving it away for free on the PS3 it can only be a good thing as that should force Microsoft's hand into relaxing their regulations on the service.
What advantages do I have inkeeping my xbox over getting a full on PC for gaming? I'm finding it increasingly difficlut to justify paying £15 a quarter..
Advantage 1 - an Xbox is a lot cheaper than a gaming pc, and you won't feel pressured to upgrade your hardware every year. A 5 year old Xbox plays the latest games just as well as a new one.
Nobody should pay the monthly subscription for Gold, you will pay far too much. Shop around the net for 12 month subscriptions, like this: http://www.live-codes.com/ £35 for 12 months, or keep paying £60? Easy choice.
All you people moaning about Valve have absolutley no idea what you are talking about. Microsoft are the money grabbing bastards not Valve. TF2 has had over 120 free updates on PC and counting. I could count the amount of updates on Xbox on 1 hand because Microsoft being the greedy people that they are want to charge for everything. If you want to see how a real game developer works look at Valve, they have never charged for extra content on the PC (the best platform) and never will. So stop moaning and go and ask your mum's to give you their credit card to pay more of Microsofts extortionate charges.
What I find funny is that he's moaning that he can't have his service on their console, therefore alienating one of the elements of Xbox Live, where as on PS3 they're happy because they can have more control by feeding their system down Sony's customers throats.
I mean what if for example someone doesn't want to have Steam on their PS3? Tough, you're gonna have to have it. It's just like if you buy something like Portal on a retail disc you're having to install Steam just to validate it and then get the updates. Sound a bit more like malware right? Yeah, I thought so too.
I know it's successful so it must be doing something right (and it has its good points), but there are some things I don't like about Steam, and that sure is one of them; t hat and Valve's approach to world domination.
He's talking about Steamworks not Steam, completely different feature.
Valve are part of the games industry, which makes them more than hungry for more profit. It's the reason, I believe, Valve love Sony so much. With Steam on the Playstation they will have an opportunity to make more money, and keep an eye on their customers too. Perhaps one day Valve will have the money to invest in a new game engine instead that ancient thing they keep using!
There's already many reaspn why console's can't play vs PC's whilst its perfectly possible too. And CS just would not work with controllers.
Here's the real issue, I have both PSN and XBL as well as some of the other posters. ALL OF MY FRIENDS HAVE XBL THAT I WANT TO PLAY GAMES WITH. They got that system because it came out so much earlier. Some of them have dabbled with playing PS3 games and have enjoyed them but when it came time to play a game like MW2, BFBC2, etc...they got the game on 360 and that is the system of choice. That is the real issue, if all of "our" friends had purchased a PS3 instead than we would all be singing a different tune. Sony was really hurt by the demographic getting a hold of the 360 before the PS3 came out. Now if the PS3 can just get some sort of cross-chat system similar to what the 360 has achieved and a way to chat other than the crappy bluetooth setup they would probably be able to convert a lot more of the 360 crowd over. I personally own a lot of the blu-ray movies which makes the system more of a fit for me though too. I dunno, the 360 was just an insurmountable obstacle by the time the PS3 came out and that to me was/is the biggest problem for Sony to be as successful this go 'round...MS has gone money crazy lately though on all DLC and XBL Gold pricing. Did anyone send them the memo that most people are still struggling out there financially?
@PS3UberTool - You have PS3 in your username and you haven't even played it ? I agree Sony had got very arrogant because of the huge success of the psone and PS2 but ps3 isn't as bad as your making out.
Though I prefer the Playstation controllers because there just great and dont believe the haters when they bash it, I wish the ps3 had a 360 type controller. 3 generations of the same type of controller is abit much I think.
Who says I never tried it? I even went so far as to borrow one for a fortnight from a gadget freak mate (owns all 3 consoles... uses his PC for MMO's) and tried to get passed the pad and failed.
I've never got on with the Dualshock... when we first bought a PlayStation the bundle included a 3rd party pad (Nugen, blue, looked hideous) and it was used way more than the Dualshock2 that came with the console, only person who used the official pad was our 7 years old as it was the perfect size.
Thus far there's nothing on the PS3 that really appeals, I don't do God of War type games, generally hate FPS's (aside from Deus Ex) but I love RPG's which the 360 has in spades... when Last Guardian comes out I'll no doubt try the PS3 again... if I can find a good 3rd party pad, with the left thumb stick in the right place (opposite the face buttons) and a proper, adult, size then I'm in there.
As soon as Valve start putting out quality games on PS3 complete with free updates and dev support (looking at L4D with user created levels playable via flash drives) my PS3 stops becoming the dust collector it has been for the last 2 years and actually gets used for something other than a BluRay player
doesnt he know how many banned boxes there are out there? he could effectively sell steam xbla titles to those gamers.
Microsoft banning the systems means basically we abandon you, right? allow players to host their own games through steam servers. I am only dreaming i guess, but hey, cater to the people that need it.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
)
