310

PS3 version of The Orange Box is "downright unplayable" ?

Gothic Girl | November 23, 2007 | News | Playstation 3 
While PC and 360 owners already have their hands on "The Orange Box", PS3 owners have had to wait for a delayed December release. But even with a longer wait, it doesn't seem like it was worth it.
Why?
Apparently Half-Life 2 is suffering from some "technical issues", the biggest problem being the framerates that can sometimes be so slow that, instead of cruising easily through a scene on a fast-paced vehicle at 30 frames a second, you'll be forced to watch your character struggle at a painfully slow single-digits crawl or even worse - the framerate completely halting the game.
In an interview earlier this year, Valve Software founder Gabe Newell referred to PlayStation 3 as "a waste of everybody's time." This attitude shows in the development structure of The Orange Box. While the PC and Xbox 360 versions were handled by Valve, the PS3 port was handed off to an internal team at EA. Originally scheduled to be released day and date with the PC and 360 versions, the PS3 Orange Box has been delayed until December. PS3 owners, forced to watch from the sidelines as their gaming kindred inundates them with tales of Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2 and Portal, continue to wait patiently for their chance to take a stroll through Valve's universe.

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. However, Portal suffers from no such technical hiccups and is on its way to being a pitch-perfect port of the spatial reasoning exercise. Due to a server connection issue, we were unable to get any time with Team Fortress 2.

With the clock ticking, EA has a limited amount of time to fix the glaring issues which plague this port of The Orange Box. Unfortunately, it seems that, once again, PlayStation 3 owners are doomed to suffer through another substandard version of a multiplatform game.

Get used to still images. The framerate often grinds to a halt during the vehicular portions of the Half-Life games.

News Story attached to:
23 comments | go to source (www.1up.com) | Add to favorites! favourite this article | send to friend
Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 0 thumbs!
    Cruxis Mana | November 23, 2007
    Even though it may have some problems, I really doubt whether they'll be as serious as 1UP says - 1UP just downright hates the PS3 and tries to crush it with every story they publish ... Its getting a bit old now

    ... and if the problems are really that bad, I'm sure they'll just delay it slightly rather than publish an unplayable game ^^
    • 0 thumbs!
      Krunal | November 24, 2007
      No that would be GameSpot not 1Up, i've personally not heard much PS3 slagging from them, like I have from GameSpot.
  • -1 thumbs!
    Existenz | November 23, 2007
    Framerate issues points to the developer now cause games that look graphically superior to it have no issues on the PS3...
  • 0 thumbs!
    Red 9 | November 23, 2007
    1Up said the same thing about the PS3 version of Assassin's Creed, and what they said turned out to be bogus.
  • 1 thumbs!
    Mnmfan | November 23, 2007
    I don't see why they are blaming the PS3. If COD can run perfectly without any framerate issues then Halflife should have no trouble either.
    Stop blaming the PS3. It's the lazy ass developers at EA that are to blame.
    • -1 thumbs!
      Final Blade | November 23, 2007
      Oh just so you know COD is actually superior than the 360 counter part cause Infinite Ward gave the PS3 the best coders compared to the 360 version. Story is here

      EDIT:Don't know why i got thumbs down i was only replying to Mnmfan and besides its not like i said COD was superior to 360 i said the Infinite Ward head Honcho claimed it and directed a link for you all to see it. My intention wasn't to bash the 360 only to get more people insights on the article, just something i needed to clarify before this message gets out of view.
      • -2 thumbs!
        Donnelly | November 24, 2007
        And how do you know that the best coder's weren't put on there due to the fact it's harder to make games for?

        (Not saying it is, but just thought I'd raise the idea)
        • 0 thumbs!
          VeGiTAX2 | November 24, 2007
          Actually a loud-mouth exec in Infinity Ward just made that slam on the dev teams, claiming his best coding members were moved to the PS3 version.

          If the shift of talent makes the game superior or not is an entirely different story though.
        • 0 thumbs!
          Donnelly | November 25, 2007
          @ VeGiTAX2:
          That's what I meant. Although I'm guessing a lot of people haven't taken it that way.
  • 0 thumbs!
    Sgt Uricchio | November 23, 2007
    not to sound bias, but i dont think the Playstation is known for putting out top seeling games, unless it happens to be a sports game. I think this is just a beginning sign of PS not being able to keep up with the compitition. Whether EA is to blame or not, the big people at PS are the ones who hired them.
    • 1 thumbs!
      VeGiTAX2 | November 24, 2007
      Sony didn't hire EA for a port, the days of the authorized software for the consoles are pretty much dead.

      EA decided to port the Orange Box, they assigned their Dev teams to the task. In this case the ability to do that was quite a failure.

      This isn't a sign of hardware being unable to keep up, it's a sign of continued SDK problems and companies still trying to get it all together a year later.
  • -2 thumbs!
    Seeker X | November 23, 2007
    Framerate issues?

    Heavenly Sword and Lair...that's all I got to say, 1000 people on one screen or super gynormous maps

    Then again, this is EA, and Valve doesn't like the PS3 at all...so I'm not surprised.

    PS: INCOGNITO BEATS YOUR ASS!
    • 2 thumbs!
      VeGiTAX2 | November 24, 2007
      Wow, nice slam on Valve.

      Who handled the port? a UK EA Team? Yeah they're like right next door to Seattle.

      A little less hate spam would be great.
      • -2 thumbs!
        Seeker X | November 24, 2007
        You actually say it like I didn't acknowledge that, let me put it up again:

        quote
        Then again, this is EA
        Now, read it again to see if it makes sense.

        And just in case you still don't get the message, this is it:

        Incognito > EA
        • 1 thumbs!
          VeGiTAX2 | November 24, 2007
          Sure when you edit out your slam it's what I pointed out already.

          The point is your original jab goes at EA and then tries to drag Valve in as if they intentionally coded source to fail with the Cell processor and RSX. Had you left that out then it would have been fine, the point is you didn't. In case you forgot you wrote it here it is again.

          "Then again, this is EA, and Valve doesn't like the PS3 at all...so I'm not surprised."

          Amazing what a FULL quote looks like.

          You're comparing a publisher that thrives on console wrappers for their code to a dedicated group of coders for an individual title. I'm pretty sure anyone can dig up a better group of individuals than pretty much 99% of the teams on EA.

          Your attempt at being clever would better be left as,

          Most developers in the world > EA's teams.
        • -1 thumbs!
          Seeker X | November 24, 2007
          Makes no difference, if my purpose was to totally slam Valve, I would've tried something harsher...and you can't really say that Valve doesn't have it's preference because the Co-founder, as outspoken as he is, sent his message loud and clear.

          Why they didn't have part on the PS3 production? I don't know, but we all know it was a bad move when EA was involved.
        • 1 thumbs!
          VeGiTAX2 | November 24, 2007
          True, the only difference it makes is that your original statement come off as uninformed rambling lumping a company that has nothing to do with a port in with the party responsible. If that was your aim then bravo.

          CEO's CFO's and other executive bodies round off their hatred or love of things all the time, does it stop them from supporting them to some level? No. They do it anyway because the industry is going to move ahead regardless. Gabe Newell could hate lemons, it's not going to mean that Valve employee's are going to stop drinking lemonade.

          In the end what drives the company is a profit margin, if they were so hateful of the PS3 they wouldn't have allowed it to be ported to the PS3, it's that simple. EA doesn't own the HL series, they merely publish discs and in this instance they were allowed to port the code to the PS3, as such Valve makes the final call on what happens with their property.

          No one will know for sure why they didn't, one easy guess could be production cost and investment in something that is essentially a short term venture to them, they wouldn't be back porting their entire catalog and they do not turn out enough games a year to warrant the research into development on the Cell whereas EA has some experience (although they're proving that to be worth nothing at all really) and the capital to go through with the venture.
  • 0 thumbs!
    iLLmatic | November 24, 2007
    I wish everyone would show me their programming degrees so I could agree with their "lazy developer" comments. How many of you actually have even the slightest idea of coding for games, let alone coding for an 8 core processor with a non-shared gfx card? Who are you to call these people lazy? The PS3 is a tough platform to develop for, its a fact. Do you honestly believe that they simply do no like the PS3 and want it to fail, so they put out an inferior product with their name on it just to spite Sony? Some of you are smoking that good shit.
    • -2 thumbs!
      Final Blade | November 24, 2007
      Its pretty much fact that if the devs are really intent on making the PS3 title good they will do so. Hell look at Ninja Gaiden Sigma That games kicks majory ass for a revamped port from a xbox 1 game. I bet they actually wanted to make the game great, thus not being lazy. We get these lazy(yes that word again) ass developers say hey we will slack off hype the game up and we will make loads and true enough they do but never gets the scores it should. It has nothing to do with with our degrees in coding, EA has always made shit games for PS systems(Well Hockey games is what i mean really), NHL 08 is the only hockey i would consider awesome, other than that they really don't like the PS3. Oh and i could have sworn there was an article i posted 45 days ago about how Gabe Newell bashing the PS3 saying its a shit system and too hard and such yet we get devs like Infinite Ward and such who has nothing but praise and claim the PS3 version of Call of Duty 4 is way better than 360. I mean seriously its not hard to see if devs are not doing there work. Some developers have no passion for there jobs just looking to make less work as possible just to get Money.

      Tell why do you think the PS3 multiplayer games are bad its cause porting games make the game on one system suck hence in this occasion PS3 version. If people have two different teams working for the respected consoles both games regardless of multiplayer will be awesome, just another example of laziness taking the easy way to get both games out quicker. Another reason for many gamers to say i would rather wait and have the game to be delayed for a polished up version than a rushed up sucky version. It seems thats why the PS3 have shity multi-player games, Porting. Stop porting your only going to make the game worse.
  • 0 thumbs!
    Supernouva | November 24, 2007
    In the end, isn't it up to the devs that comprise the team how the games function on each console? So what if you have two separate teams working on a single game for two different consoles; it doesn't make a bit of difference if either one of the teams sux or slacks off, or just can't get the job done right.
    • -1 thumbs!
      Final Blade | November 26, 2007
      Yes it does matter. Think about it like this When two different team work on the same game on the respected console and making it as an exclusive it brings in more Multi-player games that actually are deserving to play on both consoles. the PS3 multi-player games sucks, and you know that. Porting games just destroys the game for one of the consoles and in this case, PS3.

      It goes to show you that if people like Tecmo who made Ninja Gaiden Sigma the best Action game on the PS3 as good as it did, its not impossible to make the games on the PS3 own. But people are either lazy or in fact short on people to make to give two different teams to work on two systems at once. I think people need to make the PS3 game as if its an exclusive even though its multi and it gets better reviews and a better game over-all and everyone wins.
      • 0 thumbs!
        iLLmatic | November 27, 2007
        You continue to stay on this subject as if you know what you are saying. Just STOP. You have NO idea about how businesses work and you have NO idea what you are talking about.
        • 0 thumbs!
          Ameer | November 27, 2007
          Not to mention that you're actually talking about multiplatform games.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.

Submit Newshelp
(0.1743/d/aeon)