• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

IGN's The Orange Box Review (ps3)

urk said:
Not just EA. All developers. What do they have to gain? The market share Microsoft and Nintendo are wrenching away from them.

Nintendo is going it's own way, the way of mini-games. Sony is not interested in competing with that (at least not primarily), and for that I'm grateful. The consoles are going for completely different markets so it's hard to compare them, especially given the price difference. MS is what Sony should be concerned with, and I think is. It just doesn't make sense for Sony to help EA out with this, it makes more sense for them to help EA out with their sports franchises that sell millions.
 
IronicallyTwisted said:
The PS3 version of Assassins Creed has significant slowdown as is definately the inferior version of the game. COD4 is the only port I can think of, along with Dirt, that can claim equality with its 360 brethren.

Have you played both? Online reviews have been conflicted, nitpicking minor differences that don't favor either version definitively.

I am aware of memory leaks causing the PS3 version to crash during extended play sessions, but yesterday's patch addressed this.
 
Blablurn said:
i wanted to buy this game so hard but after reading the review i guess i'll pass this one. what a pity >_<.

If you've never played it, at least rent it. I have it on PC, so it's not worth it for me. I believe the game is still playable and is most definitely still a great experience. If you don't have any other way of playing it, get this version at least.
 
Could people stop bashing "EA" for this, the team responsible are a highly talented group of people (Being derived from Critereon mostly), and it's hard to blame them for the technical issues the PS3 version of OB has, after all, it even took Valve the best part of 2 years to get Source running to spec on PC, lest we forget the infamous stutter bug, with that in mind I'm amazed they got it out this fast.

Anywho, as much as I would love to defend EA/Valve for this, I have to ask why anyone is complaining about it in the first place, HL2 (And thus, the OB) is a PC IP through and through, and if you haven't owned/played it on PC yet, you're a tool, a big fat tool, get it on PC already.
 
I'm not anal about framerate drops like so many people these days, I know what it's like to play and enjoy a game in less than ideal conditions being a longtime PC user.

That said, load times suck, though they were awful on the original PC HL2 so I kind of expected that. And as it stands, PS3 is my only option to play this great adventure.

I'll be buying this, and enjoying it. It's a port, not a game designed from the ground up for the PS3, so I wasn't expecting perfection. I preordered already, so I should have my copy soon. I look forward to experiencing all of the Half-Life 2 storyline, I know I'll enjoy the experience.
 
Stop It said:
Could people stop bashing "EA" for this, the team responsible are a highly talented group of people (Being derived from Critereon mostly), and it's hard to blame them for the technical issues the PS3 version of OB has, after all, it even took Valve the best part of 2 years to get Source running to spec on PC, lest we forget the infamous stutter bug, with that in mind I'm amazed they got it out this fast.

Anywho, as much as I would love to defend EA/Valve for this, I have to ask why anyone is complaining about it in the first place, HL2 (And thus, the OB) is a PC IP through and through, and if you haven't owned/played it on PC yet, you're a tool, a big fat tool, get it on PC already.
I'm a Mac user. Yeah, I know.
 
IronicallyTwisted said:
The PS3 version of Assassins Creed has significant slowdown as is definately the inferior version of the game. COD4 is the only port I can think of, along with Dirt, that can claim equality with its 360 brethren.

Oblivion says "**** you."
 
A port that doesn't use the SPEs, and can't stream textures to cope with the low memory conditions on the PS3?

How.. exciting.
 
theBishop said:
Have you played both? Online reviews have been conflicted, nitpicking minor differences that don't favor either version definitively.

I am aware of memory leaks causing the PS3 version to crash during extended play sessions, but yesterday's patch addressed this.
your talking about AC? i tried it with the patch, its still utter crap
 
theBishop said:
I'm more concerned about performance, and how the community takes to it. The 360 version doesn't use dedicated servers either, so I wouldn't expect it to be any different.



I run Ubuntu, and have no interest in dual-booting. If Valve didn't hate open technologies as much as they hate the Cell, maybe it would be an option.


See, and actually, I think the same reason you've never seen HL2 on linux is the same reason that EA had such a difficult time porting this code. Source is an incredibly complex engine that took more than 5 years to develop (and which has been constantly, and not always elegantly, upgraded), and it's always been exclusively a DirectX/Direct3D engine. While ports from the PC to 360 are relatively pain free due to the Direct3D basis of the 360's dev tools, the PS3 is using openGL just like Linux.

EA had 20 months to take an engine that took Valve 5 years to create, and port it to both a different graphics standard, and a completely unique architecture, and to make it work across 5 different games. It was a shitty thankless task, and the fact that they got it out this year is actually moderately impressive.
 
Speevy said:
Isn't Call of Duty 4 like 2 PC generations ahead of Half-Life 2, and it runs great on the PS3?

I think it has a lot to do with the engine. The COD4 engine should be somewhat built with PS3 in mind.
 
andycapps said:
360 has a much larger install base, so the comparison is not completely valid. Yes it's a catch 22, developers don't see the need to spend more time on PS3 ports, but I don't see a reason to spend my hard earned money on a lazy port when I can get a much better experience with a game that the developers had enough time/money to create a polished experience.
Why should Valve and EA care? They already made tons of money. The only person you're not hurting by buying Orange Box is yourself by missing out on a great gaming experience.
 
antiloop said:
I think it has a lot to do with the engine. The COD4 engine should be somewhat built with PS3 in mind.

I believe the COD4 engine is a modified version of the Call of Duty 2 engine. From the latest interviews with IW, it sounds like they had a good amount of time to go in and tweak just about everything for each platform.
 
Unfortunately, our complaints don't stop there. The remainder of our criticisms are to blame for the discrepancy in scores between the PlayStation 3 version of the game and the 360 version (the PS3 version, after all, wasn't handled entirely by Valve). The PlayStation 3 Orange Box performs far worse, and this fact just isn't up for debate. While framerate issues aren't as problematic in Half-Life 2 and Episode One, Episode Two suffers a great deal, especially during the episode's larger battles. We regret to say that some sections border on being unplayable because of the stutters, which often cause your aim to be thrown off and timing shots to be very difficult. The problem isn't persistent throughout, but when it hits, it hits hard.

More troubling still is the difference in load times. Almost all the PS3 load times are at least five seconds more than the 360, but loading a saved game/loading after death is particularly awful. These clock in at about two to three times as long as the 360 version, which slows down the gameplay considerably. Even though the PS3 Orange Box sports a quicksave feature, any benefit of this option is lost considering the overall abundance of loading.

Even in Portal, a short title that often requires a little trial and error, this problem is massive. The 360 version takes about three seconds to load your last checkpoint if you die. The PS3 version takes seventeen. It hurts.

We must also mention that during all of our Team Fortress 2 play sessions, there was a very startling delay when using explosive weapons like the Soldier's rocket launcher or the Demoman's grenade launcher. When you pull the trigger to fire, there's a very brief but noticeable delay between the recoil of the weapon and the actual delivery of the explosive. This can seriously screw up your timing when trying to lead a rocket shot, or similar attacks.

this is not petty graphic whoring, these affect ACTUAL GAMEPLAY and overall experiance

not getting it Not cuz "i wanna punish EA", thats a waste if time. i dont wanna spend $60 on meh.

i'll wait for price drop, or get the PC version next year
 
No Means Nomad said:
Why should Valve and EA care? They already made tons of money. The only person you're not hurting by buying Orange Box is yourself by missing out on a great gaming experience.

Pretty much. I can't wait to buy this for PS3, despite me owning it on PC already.
 
nelsonroyale said:
Ill skip it...could probably play HL2 fine on my old pc anyway

I don't care how you do it: JUST PLAY THE DAMN PORTAL GAME.

It's awesome even at 640x480, 20fps (ask Crushed).
 
steve said:
I'm not anal about framerate drops like so many people these days, I know what it's like to play and enjoy a game in less than ideal conditions being a longtime PC user.

That said, load times suck, though they were awful on the original PC HL2 so I kind of expected that. And as it stands, PS3 is my only option to play this great adventure.

I'll be buying this, and enjoying it. It's a port, not a game designed from the ground up for the PS3, so I wasn't expecting perfection. I preordered already, so I should have my copy soon. I look forward to experiencing all of the Half-Life 2 storyline, I know I'll enjoy the experience.
Yeah, I think those who have never played the game and only own a PS3 should still give it a shot. I know Borys will flip for another mention, but the ORIGINAL PC experience was pretty bad with serious loading issues, tons of stuttering, and less than perfect performance. It sounds like the PS3 experience is at least smoother than that, though far from optimal.

If you have a nice PC, the PC version remains the best choice (provided your system doesn't suffer from Source Stuttering). Otherwise, the XBOX version is rock solid.

The PS3 version should only be touched if you have no other option.
 
theBishop said:
I run Ubuntu, and have no interest in dual-booting. If Valve didn't hate open technologies, maybe it would be an option.
I agree that Valve is losing out on a lot of goodwill by not supporting Linux and/or Mac platforms, but on the other hand right now it probably wouldn't be cost-effective.

Anyway, Steam runs nicely under Wine. Give it a go, maybe that's enough for your gaming needs. Look through the Appdb to see how good/bad the game of your liking runs.

Refer to this page to get information on how to install it. The Ubuntu packagse always lag behind the official Winehq releases, and a minor revision can alter compatibility drastically, but you can choose whatever way of installing you like. It's pretty easy, really.
 
Has anyone seen the newer gameplay videos IGN put up with the review? It seems like most of the problems are in Episode 2 and Portal. It seems as if the original Half Life 2 runs pretty well, and seriously, that alone makes me want to pick it up on PS3. Half Life 2 is one of my favorite fps of all time, I love the game. I have a reference point for bad framerate playing Half Life 2 (the X-box version). That version, especially the later parts of the game, were a perfect example of the term "slide show". I find it hard to imagine the PS3 version will run worse than that. You can see what they mean about Episode 2 not running quite as well. The few clips I saw definitely had some issues with the framerate. What worries me even more were their impressions of TF2. Supposedly it was because the game was being played on European servers but IGN says the lag got pretty bad. Ouch. That said, I still plan on picking this up, just later. I only have so much money to spend, and I'm picking up UT3 today....
 
what a shame. I would of rather had Valve/EA delay the game to make it better. Oh well another potential killer game on ps3 down the drain. It might not be much but still like WTF?!

Also wouldnt Valve feel concerned that their game is not running at its best on the PS3? Wouldnt they want their game to be played properly or are they just pure 360 lovers?
 
Should I wait for other reviews on this game before picking up UT III? I'm not a framerate whore, but I don't want a broken game.

As for all those claiming for boycotts, etc., in the end, all your doing is hurting yourself.
 
Any HD videos of the PS3 version available? Blim?


Also, Would the FOV issue that happens on the PC affect me while playing this on a HDTV. Don't feel like making myself sick again playing HL2.
 
Cruzader said:
Also wouldnt Valve feel concerned that their game is not running at its best on the PS3? Wouldnt they want their game to be played properly or are they just pure 360 lovers?
No, Valves Gabe Newell couldn´t care less.

In nearly every interview over the last two years Gabe has repeated that the PS3 is a waste of everybodys time and that "the Cell is the Evil".

Gabe is basically a PC guy and an old one too, you can make your owns conclusions.

Old dogs......
 
I'm wondering how helpful Valve was in the creation of this version?

I mean, it almost seems as if they simply left this EA team out to dry and offered minimal aid. Of course, I don't know that for a fact, but the way they've acted suggests that to be the case.
 
dark10x said:
I'm wondering how helpful Valve was in the creation of this version?

I mean, it almost seems as if they simply left this EA team out to dry and offered minimal aid. Of course, I don't know that for a fact, but the way they've acted suggests that to be the case.

Didn't Valve handle the other two versions? It sounds like they farmed out the PS3 version due to differences in the hardware. Once they learned that EA wasn't going to meet the deadline, they were probably too deep into development on the other two to spare much in the way of resources and instead of delaying all three titles, they delayed the one.
 
sphinx said:
The 360 version of this game game received 9.5 and it's considered by many the game of the year.

this is yet one more case of PS3 just getting a lazy port, isn't it?[/QUOTE]

Bingo. Care of Electronic Arts.
 
painful fart said:
No, Valves Gabe Newell couldn´t care less.

In nearly every interview over the last two years Gabe has repeated that the PS3 is a waste of everybodys time and that "the Cell is the Evil".

Gabe is basically a PC guy and an old one too, you can make your owns conclusions.

Old dogs......

Well, I know it's not necessarily damning for him, but he is an old Microsoft guy you know... I don't think that has too much to do with it, it's more that he's a PC guy through and through and he doesn't see the need in messing with consoles. Gears of War says hi to him.
 
urk said:
Didn't Valve handle the other two versions? It sounds like they farmed out the PS3 version due to differences in the hardware. Once they learned that EA wasn't going to meet the deadline, they were probably too deep into development on the other two to spare much in the way of resources and instead of delaying all three titles, they delayed the one.
Well, yes, they did handle the 360 and PC versions. They wanted nothing to do with the PS3 version from the beginning and, based on Gabe's statements, I can assume that they were of little help to the team working on porting the game.
 
DangerStepp said:
sphinx said:
The 360 version of this game game received 9.5 and it's considered by many the game of the year.

this is yet one more case of PS3 just getting a lazy port, isn't it?[/QUOTE]

Bingo. Care of Electronic Arts.


Care of Valve for not developing it along with the 360 and PC versions and not giving a damn about about said ps3 version. It's also obvious that they don't care and that's why it's sloppy from the ps3 being a waste of time quote from awhile back.
 
Dark Locke said:
The score itself isn't bad. But the difference between the two scores (8.4 and 9.5) is just... scary

Yeah, that's really the point. It's all relative. Just like how people can be thrilled with an 8.5 with some games but go absolutely nuts when Zelda got an 8.8. The reaction to scores all has to do with which game it is.
 
After seeing all the videos on IGN... maybe the review over reacted a little? I don't know what to think anymore!
 
so torn.

can i play half life 2 without having played the original half life? i'd probably be missing out a lot of story right?
 
snorggy said:
so torn.

can i play half life 2 without having played the original half life? i'd probably be missing out a lot of story right?
Half-Life 1 won't answer any of the questions you have about the story of Half-Life 2. In Half-Life, your a scientist at the Black Mesa research facility who survives an alien invasion. You are put into stasis by a weird guy who talks strangely at the end of Half-Life 1.

Half-Life 2 picks up years later when he takes you out of stasis. You wouldn't know much more than that, even if you did play HL1.
 
Slavik81 said:
Half-Life 1 won't answer any of the questions you have about the story of Half-Life 2. In Half-Life, your a scientist at the Black Mesa research facility who survives an alien invasion. You are put into stasis by a weird guy who talks strangely at the end of Half-Life 1.

Half-Life 2 picks up years later when he takes you out of stasis. You wouldn't know much more than that, even if you did play HL1.
don't forget
the lambda satellite gordon launches, also microwaved casserole

HL1 was more about experiencing the black mesa collapse instead of all the plot twists you see in HL2
 
I'd take IGN's word with a pinch of salt if I was you.

They gave damning verdicts of frame rate issues with other PS3 games such as with the NHL 08 and Assassins Creed reviews, when the truth is, the issues were no where near as bad as IGN made out and not game play effecting at all. Yet when a game like Mass Effect gets reviewed, which has arguably the worst frame rate issues I've ever witnessed in a video game, they are shunned over and not given near the same damning.
 
Top Bottom