Slashdot Mirror
Orange Box Dysfunctional on the PS3?
Via Next Generation, a preview of the PS3 version of the Orange Box . 1up is the site running the piece, and it's notable because it's so incredibly negative. PS3 fans may have some frustrations in store when the game pack releases soon: "After spending a significant amount of time with a near final version of the PS3 game, it's apparent that this version suffers from a number of technical flaws, which at best merely hinder game play and at worst make the experience downright unplayable. Framerate is a consistent issue throughout the Half-Life series of games included in The Orange Box. One moment you'll be cruising through the game at 30 frames per second and the next you'll be enjoying a slideshow of series protagonist Gordon Freeman cruising down the river. "
Aha! There's the problem!
Why people spend any money on a proprietary system is a mystery to me.
...
Go open, build a PC, Install Linux, go to town
Beggars can't be choosers.
What part of pre-release do they not understand.
I get EA are funing today. I also expect 1UP to be precluded from ever seeing unfinished code again.. Talk about killing your buisness..
Slate it, if it hits the shelves like this, but lets at least wait until then, before passing judgement!
I was playing games like that on my PCs over five years ago! They're far worse than what I have on the PS3 and those I've seen on friends' 360s.
Meanwhile, Infinity Ward managed to put out a rock solid multi-platform FPS- COD4. If they can make it look and play so great on the PS3, why can't Valve?
Some commenters on the blogs I've read are quick to write this off as Gabe Newell hating on the PS3. I really don't think that's it. It's just that EA couldn't code for a non-Microsoft platform if it's life depended on it. Everything they put out for the PSP had bugs (two Maddens, NCAA Football, Sims 2), and now bugs on HL for the PS3. I've decided that EA couldn't code themselves out of a black box.
Fault lays about 90% on EA and about 10% on Valve for trusting EA's coders. If this actually is the case, then it definitely will tarnish Valve's reputation which has been pretty good (barring initial Steam issues) to this point.
But I thought this generation of consoles was going to totally pwn1!! all the PC systems. How can the orange box experience be worse on the top of the line console than a medium level PC?
No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
"How is that port of whatever those dorks from Bellevue sent us going?"
"Well, we've gotten it to load and we even played through the game once."
"Yeah, whatever, excellent, I assume you will have finished play testing by noon. After that slap another Medal of Honor together, Bob, VP of Interior Design thinks it should be modeled after Hogan's Heroes and personally, I think any man who drives a Miata; well he just has fine taste. Oh, and before I forget, we fired everyone on your team. We know you can handle it or..... Well you know what I mean."
Technically, there is no reason why Orange Box should have turned out the way it did. Not when games like COD 4, Drake's Fortune and Ratchet and Clank have shown what the PS3 is capable of in the hands of a conscientious development team.
Financially is another matter. It seems EA just didn't want to allocate the assets necessary to produce a top notch game, and that shows.
I hope two things result from this fiasco:
1. That sales of Orange Box for the PS3 absolutely tank. Resulting in...
2. EA never again produces another PS3 title, leaving a sizable void for a better, smarter studio to fill in the gap. Personally, I wouldn't shed a single tear if EA announced that they will never develop for the PS3 again.
Something tells me that as word spreads of just how bad Orange Box is the former is likely to happen, while the latter will not and this time next year everyone will have the same conversation about the disconnect between the quality of EA titles and those produced by everyone else.
So, no cake for PS3 owners? I find this whole thing mildly amusing, having been playing TF2 without framerate issues on my two year old PC since the beta came out what, two months ago? (Demoman FTW!)
#include <signature.h>
It a controversial issue, since GameSpot claim the PS3 version performs better whilst IGN say exactly the opposite. (Having played neither version I have no idea who is correct.)
This is not just a dupe it's a dupe of a preview that is over a month old!!11!
I know it's probably not going to change much in the next month or so, but I think the team probably heard the complaints the first time...
If they really made this piece of crap, then why are they still working for EA? This must be one of the worst games I've ever played; easily worse than E.T. on the 2600.
It's more of a light beige, unfortunately. Looks dirty next to my shiny white Wii :-(
That's what Infinity Ward actually said: They had their top programmers working on the PS3 version.
The best part, of course, is that the 360 version still looks better than the PS3 version.
Frankly, I don't quite understand why cross-platform games look worse on the PS3. I own both consoles, and I do think that the new R&C and Uncharted look better than anything I've seen on the 360. Yet all developers who create games also running on the 360 screw up their PS3 versions, even if they have "the best devs" working on the PS3 version. Why is this?
You're kidding. Nethack? You mean the hunger management game? The one disguised as an ASCII dungeon hack? The one that loves to take away your progress randomly? I stopped playing that after realizing the only thing that provides any tension in the game at all is the fact that you may die of hunger at any time. Your character, for some unexplained reason, gets hungry 5 moves after eating an elephant corpse? No. I'd love to explore the dungeon, but I can't because I have to continuously hunt down food. Search for secret doors? Sorry, can't spare the time. Hunger's coming! But don't count on any particular food, it could also kill you or FUBAR your character just by eating it! In a game that deletes your character immediately upon death, that's an unforgivable paradigm. You didn't mention that in Nethack there is no saving and restoring your game. Kind of an important point. Sorry, but most people play games that reward the player with fun, not punish them with frustration.
I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here by misinterpreting what I said (mindblowing, huh), but let me try this again by slightly rephrasing my question:
"Given that the best PS3 games look better than the best 360 games, how come all teams who create cross-platform games make games which look worse on the PS3, even if their best devs are working on the PS3 version?"
You say that the PS3 is harder to program for and has an inflexible memory structure. That is obviously true, but does not by itself explain why the PS3 versions of games look worse. You then say that the PS3 and 360 are not equally powerful; I guess you mean to imply that the 360 is more powerful than the PS3. If that is true, then how come GT Prologue looks so much better than Forza 2? How come that there's nothing on the 360 which looks anything like R&C? Given the games available today, it's obvious that the PS3 is capable of graphics on par with the 360.
My suspicion is that publishers simply put less money into PS3 versions of their games, since they will inevitably sell less than 360 versions. I also suspect that the "we have the best devs working on PS3" claims are BS.
Usual disclaimer required in all console discussions: I own all three current-gen consoles and both current-gen portables. I'm neither a Sony nor a Microsoft fanboy, although I admit to being a bit of a Nintendo fanboy.