The Orange Box Review

By Richard Leadbetter Published 14 December, 2007

We pit EA's port against PC and 360.

Version tested: PlayStation 3

Google "Valve's Gabe Newell and PS3" and you'll see why I approached this review with some trepidation.

Valve's Gabe Newell comes down hard on PS3

Valve: PS3 a "total disaster on so many levels"

PS3 is "a waste of everyone's time"

Valve's Gabe Newell trashes the PS3... again

You get the idea. Suffice to say that one of the world's foremost developers doesn't have much love for Sony's latest console offering, to the point where development work for the PlayStation 3 version of the excellent Orange Box was off-loaded to a UK-based internal EA studio, working closely with Valve's original code.

It's no exaggeration to say that Valve's work on PC and Xbox 360 is sensational, and a definite Game of the Year candidate. The Orange Box combines one of gaming's most celebrated first-person shooters with two excellent sequels, along with one of the finest slices of online gameplay we've seen all year and a 'bonus' puzzle game that by itself would score extremely highly were it released as a standalone PSN or XBLA download.

'The Orange Box' Screenshot HL2

In short, there's no doubt that the raw DNA is all there for what could easily have been the best PlayStation 3 game of the year, and it's not as if Sony's hardware hasn't already proven its worth when it comes to first-person shooters and 3D action games: Resistance is a fine hors d'oeuvre, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is a stunning technical showcase and Killzone 2 looks wonderful. But as regular readers of Eurogamer will know, the PS3 is often the victim of shoddy conversion work with cross-platform ports that rarely match the quality of the original Xbox 360 code, and the unfortunate reality is that the Orange Box is yet another squandered opportunity and a technical disappointment for owners of the Sony console.

Console Compromises

Contrary to popular opinion, I must admit that my initial impressions of the Xbox 360 conversion of The Orange Box were not that favourable. The Source Engine that powers Valve's games is simply untouchable on PC; its ability to scale the 3D to match the power of the graphics hardware running it is phenomenal, to the point where even a low-power computer runs Half-Life 2 extremely well. The Xbox 360, by contrast, is pegged at a maximum frame rate of 30 frames-per-second at 720p, without any form of anti-aliasing to smooth off the visuals. The notion that my three-year-old PC ran the game better than the 360 (at 1920x1200 to boot) just seems wrong - I expected more from an engine that performed so well on its original platform.

However, it seems that Valve's aim with their console version was to produce a consistent experience across all three Half-Life games in the pack. On 360 at least, the engine's performance doesn't radically alter from game to game, with The Orange Box acquitting itself well even with the intense detail inherent in Episode Two's outdoor environments. In short, while the PC version ekes out every last frame from your graphics card, Valve has opted to make the older Half-Life 2 'feel' the same as the more visually demanding later episodes.

'The Orange Box' Screenshot EP1

It's this notion of consistency that ultimately sinks the PlayStation 3 rendition of The Orange Box, because frankly there isn't any. But first impressions of the conversion are actually rather favourable. Half-Life 2 kicks off and it's virtually identical performance-wise to the Xbox 360 game, to the point where I was ready to dismiss out of hand the early reports of the PS3 version's inadequacies. There's the odd dropped frame here and there, but then, the Xbox 360 version performed in a very similar manner - a touch of lag just before a whopper explosion kicked off, the occasional loss of smoothness as you pan around the scenery - all par for the course when playing Half-Life 2 on console. But the further you get into the game on PS3, the more scenarios crop up that hint that the Source Engine is struggling, even with a three-year-old game.

Cross-Platform Consequences

Dipping into the graphically more challenging Episode One, the game initially still manages to impress, matching the 720p/30 performance of Xbox 360 seemingly with few problems. However, the deeper you move into the game, the more the frame rate issues intrude on the experience. Catching falling debris with the gravity gun becomes an exercise in anticipating lag as the frame rate dives dramatically. Fierce firefights can become a slideshow. Death is your constant companion not necessarily because of your lack of gaming ability but because you literally can't see what's going on - the PlayStation 3 is simply not giving you enough visual information to work with.

But while Episode One is decent enough and just about bearable even when things go pear-shaped, its sequel is essentially a complete write-off. The Source Engine is pushed to its limits in Episode Two, rendering scenes far more complex than any seen in the previous Half-Life games. It looks absolutely gorgeous, but on PlayStation 3, the drop in frame rate is always with you, kicking in right from the beginning and rarely letting up.

Team Fortress 2 may well feature significantly less detailed graphics than the Half-Life 2 sequels, but it's still hit with frame rate issues compared to the 360 game, although thankfully they have far less of an impact on the gameplay than I feared, and crucially the online experience is still immense fun, despite the odd problem with lag - delayed responses on weapon fire and seemingly warping through doorways being the main gotchas, but nothing you don't automatically compensate for and nothing that fundamentally affects the superbly executed concept.

'The Orange Box' Screenshot POR

One slight irritation is that system link LAN games are not supported on PS3, whereas they are on both PC and Xbox 360. However, my main worry for PS3 owners is whether or not the patches for improved performance and the additional maps Valve are creating will make it to the Sony platform.

The experience of playing Portal is pretty much consistent cross-platform, but this is not necessarily such a good thing. You get the idea that the Xbox 360 version didn't get the same level of optimisation as the core Half-Life games and despite what must surely be a far lower level of detail compared to Episode Two, it doesn't seem to run as smoothly. Thankfully, Portal isn't the kind of game where its appeal is directly linked to a smooth update or ultra-precise response from the joypad, but it is interesting to see that both 360 and PlayStation 3 versions essentially perform as well as each other here.

Regardless, concept is king and Portal is quite unlike any other game released on console. What Valve saw as a bonus title to be bundled into the Orange Box has caught the imagination of gamers and hopefully the core idea will be spun out into an even better, more ambitious mainstream release.

Screenshot Face-Off

So, onto the face-off screenshots then - and this time we've really pushed out the boat with comparison screens encompassing all versions: PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. The PC version was running on a 2GB Quad Core system with a 512MB Radeon 1900XTX, resolution set to 1280x720 and all settings on maximum: in short, the yardstick the console conversions need to measure up to.

The first thing to note is that the console games are a total match for the original PC release in terms of geometry and textures and from what I could see, absolutely nothing is missing despite the RAM disadvantages of the Sony and Microsoft hardware. The fact that the game is pegged at 720p definitely helps here as it automatically limits the amount of texture memory the visuals require. However, there are variations in lighting and tone-mapping cross-platform, as you would expect.

Xbox 360 is a very close match for the complete balls-out PC experience, but the notable omission of anti-aliasing makes game considerably more 'jaggy' than any of the other versions. PlayStation 3 - frame rate issues apart - matches the PC game and is even anti-aliased.

'The Orange Box' Screenshot EP2

Unfortunately, someone somewhere within EA decided that the PS3 game should be afflicted with an all-pervading blur that masks much of the fine graphical detail. Its inclusion is completely inexplicable and the game looks a lot worse on a decent LCD panel. It's rather baffling as the same effect could have been achieved by lowering the resolution (thus increasing frame rate) then scaling it back up to 720p. Call of Duty 4 does this. Halo 3 does this. But weirdly, EA has opted for full-fat 720p and then blurred the whole screen anyway. Also, it appears that someone got rather carried away with the HDR lighting effects at certain parts of the game. Subtle and muted in most cases on PC, they've been ramped up a touch in places on 360, and occasionally pushed beyond the limits of taste on PlayStation 3. Again, very puzzling and utterly pointless.

Scores on the Doors

In putting together the face-off, one thing is supremely obvious. These are PC games that work best on the original platform. Get the game running on a decent LCD or Plasma, kit yourself out with a decent graphics card and you're going to get an experience that utterly annihilates both console versions. Indeed, even my lowly 1.5GHz dual core laptop with a low-power 128MB nVidia 8400M GS ran the resource draining Episode 2 fairly well once the video settings had been appropriately tweaked - astonishingly it actually performed better than the same game running on PlayStation 3. Also, having worked with the console versions for some weeks, returning to the PC version was a revelation; the level of precision afforded by the mouse and keyboard combo is untouchable and this is definitely the way the games were meant to be played.

'The Orange Box' Screenshot TF2

The Xbox 360 game is inherently a compromise, but crucially it works. You never feel held back by the technology or the technical quality of the conversion, and the astonishing amount of content on offer is hugely impressive. Also worthy of note are the cunningly engineered Achievements. I've completed Half-Life 2 on both PC and original Xbox, but I did it again on 360 simply for the lure of the gamerscore, posing as it does an excellent array of additional challenges you simply wouldn't be bothered taking on if there weren't points at stake. On PC, only Team Fortress 2 and Portal have their own Achievements and disappointingly there are none at all on PlayStation 3.

Coming to an overall score for The Orange Box for PS3 is difficult. In terms of game content, everything (bar the Achievements) is there. Half-Life 2 is still an excellent game, even if it does feel overly long and a touch dated graphically. Episodes One and Two feel much more 'modern', faster-paced and more attractive, but the compromises in the PS3 version are simply unforgivable; Episode Two in particular is a savage testament of all that is wrong with cross-platform development - one of the worst examples as yet of developers simply not bothering to properly make use of the hardware available to them. Portal and Team Fortress are superb games, but the latter in particular emphasises that even the less technically challenging environments found in The Orange Box lack the polish found in the 360 game, and are lightyears away from the standards set by the original PC code.

So, an 'eight' it is for PS3 Orange Box then, but with it, the stark reality that most of that score is attributable to the superb quality of the core Valve games rather than the shoddy conversion work which sees one game out of the five ruined, and another badly compromised. That being the case, if you own a PC, even a relatively lightweight one, that version will almost certainly be the better - and definitely cheaper - purchase.

8 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Richard.

About Richard Leadbetter

Rich has been a games journalist since the days of 16-bit and specialises in technical analysis. Commonly known around Eurogamer as the Blacksmith of the Future.

Read more articles from Richard by visiting the Richard Leadbetter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (358) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RedPanda #1 4 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • Tonka #2 4 years ago

    I justr played Portal on the Xbox 360. Bit short innit?

  • Carpathian #3 4 years ago

    Yep, but damn good though !

  • Mugwum Verified Operations Director, Eurogamer Network #4 4 years ago

    The screenshots should be up any second - our system takes a little while longer to pump them out than it does the words.

  • kissthestick #5 4 years ago

    good score

  • Steroyd #6 4 years ago

    TRAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIN WREEEEEEEECCCCCKKKKKK

  • Dizzy #7 4 years ago

    " its ability to scale the 3D to match the power of the graphics hardware running it is phenomenal"

    True... but not on Cell apparently. Gabe was right?

    " its sequel is essentially a complete write-off"

    Pity since EP2 is the star of the HL2 show IMHO.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 13:27

  • Garulon #8 4 years ago

    Are the load times as bad as IGN say on the PS3 OB?

  • Dizzy #9 4 years ago

    >Are the load times as bad as IGN say on the PS3 OB?

    There is a video on gametrailers... they seem to be 2x to 4x slower than 360.

  • Steroyd #10 4 years ago

    True... but not on Cell apparently. Gabe was right?

    Gabe couldn't be arsed, that's why he let EA do it.

    If he really cared about this port he would have done what he did for the Xbox 360.

  • robg #11 4 years ago

    Incidentally, the PC version of Episode 2 also has achievements...

  • Der_tolle_Emil #12 4 years ago

    The PC version was running on a 2GB Quad Core system

    2ghz or 2gb ram?

  • haubitzer #13 4 years ago

    I heard talk of awful load times in Portal on the PS3 contra the 360-version. Any truth to this or just an unlucky sod with a shitty drive?

    edit: er look yea all them wonderers
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 13:30

  • UncleLou #14 4 years ago

    It's a tricky situation. Of course PS3 owners have all the right to get an equally good version. And there can't be much doubt that the PS3 is more than capable to handle the games.

    On the other hand, I really wouldn't want Valve to spend an unduly amount of time on porting it - and that was, as how I understood his rants, the problem - that it would haven taken them a lot more time and effort than any other version, due to the less than ideal architecture of the PS3. I for one, selfishly, would rather see Valve spend their time on something new.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 13:32

  • ParanoidZombie #15 4 years ago

    Embarrassing: Orange Box is a GOTY nominee... on every platform but the ps3.

  • monkie_king #16 4 years ago

    lolrange box?

  • bioreit #17 4 years ago

    Have to say, haven't played TF2 in ages. Even after the 'lag' patch, 8 out of 10 games were laggy to the point of being unplayable (and I kept testing my line in between matches - full 7 meg connection, so it wasn't that) and the smooth games were always cut short when the host killed the connection.

    On topic:

    Just waiting for all of the "OMGZ!! Hooray for teh power of teh Cellz!" and "Eurogamer in bias against PS3 shocker" comments to spew forth from both camps.

  • UncleLou #18 4 years ago

    Don't forget the clever "Newell is lazy because he's fat" comments.

  • monkie_king #19 4 years ago

    hmm, are we sure the PS3 renders at 720p, antialiased, and then applies a blur filter? It's not that the AA is accomplished with the blur? Seems kind of a weird thing to do.

    and surely "Newell is fat because he's lazy" would be closer to the truth?
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 13:38

  • ED209 #20 4 years ago

    @ bioreit

    What version's that then?

    And it can't be that long since you last played it cos it's not been out long innit.

  • manic_mouse #21 4 years ago

    This is a result of the poor conversion done by some random EA studio. But was anyone expecting it to be spectacular?

  • Darren #22 4 years ago

    EG - "Contrary to popular opinion, I must admit that my initial impressions of the Xbox 360 conversion of The Orange Box were not that favourable. The Source Engine that powers Valve's games is simply untouchable on PC; its ability to scale the 3D to match the power of the graphics hardware running it is phenomenal, to the point where even a low-power computer runs Half-Life 2 extremely well. The Xbox 360, by contrast, is pegged at a maximum frame rate of 30 frames-per-second at 720p, without any form of anti-aliasing to smooth off the visuals. The notion that my three-year-old PC ran the game better than the 360 (at 1920x1200 to boot) just seems wrong - I expected more from an engine that performed so well on its original platform."

    Exactly my thoughts too. Half-Life 2 looks OK on the 360 but it's visually underwhelming compared with games like BioShock or The Darkness for example. That such an old engine doesn't even use AA makes the games look even more dated and not that much better than Xbox HL2 running upscaled on the 360 IMO. Yeah, the framerate is better and it supports widescreen at 720p but then so it should, the 360 is a lot more powerful than the Xbox.

  • DB2k #23 4 years ago

    so the crux is Valve didn't write Source for the PS3.. big whoop ;)

    Really good 360 pack of games this package. Only thing that stopped me playing HL2 was COD4.. and Mario Galaxy
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 13:39

  • mowgli #24 4 years ago

    I have noticed a turn in these comments- from vile fanboyism to actual sympathy. As much i hate 12 year old fanboys, feeling sorry for PS3 owners just looks kinda embarrassing.

  • Darren #25 4 years ago

    Having looked at the screenshots, the PS3 version does admittedly look blurrier/softer but I actually prefer that as it masks the jagged edges so evidently apparent in the 360 shots above it. I guess it's a personal taste thing but I'd rather have a softer less jaggy image than a sharp, jagged one.

  • Steroyd #26 4 years ago

    Don't forget the clever "Newell is lazy because he's fat" comments.

    Isn't this case the exception because he actually came out and said he couldn't be arsed doing the port and letting EA of all people handle it. :)

  • UncleLou #27 4 years ago

    so the crux is Valve didn't write Source for the PS3.. big whoop ;)

    No, they outsourced it.

    /HEV suit

  • Kilo_Two_Three_ #28 4 years ago

    Well, who didn't see this coming?

    Poor PS3.

  • morriss #29 4 years ago

    I don't understand this. The PS3 is the most powerful console around bar none but all multiplatform games are rubbish compared to the breakbox-noHD-nowireless 360.

    How is this possible? I think it's because devs simply can't control the PS3's power. Like in Akira.

  • space_ace #30 4 years ago

    * smooth framerate not included

  • bioreit #31 4 years ago

    @ ED209

    360 version, received day before launch (Gawd bless ya, Gameplay) and according to my gamercard, the last time I fired up The Orange Box was 21st November 2007, but I know the last few times I played, it was HL2 and Portal, so let's say I haven't played TF2 since mid-November. Has there been another patch since then?

  • Slim #32 4 years ago

    What utterly useless tiny screenshots.

  • tonynibbles #33 4 years ago

    It's a PC game.

    However UTIII gives two-fingers up to shoddy PC ports.

  • oreillymj #34 4 years ago

    Will be giving this a miss. Too many other decent games about to waste my money on a shoddy port.

  • Lurks #35 4 years ago

    "I don't understand this. The PS3 is the most powerful console around bar none but all multiplatform games are rubbish compared to the breakbox-noHD-nowireless 360."

    That's not true. It's never been true. I've always been baffled by the way that it became to be a kind of popular lore. The systems are fairly equivalent. The graphics part in the 360 is unquestionably more powerful. The PS3's processor is theoretically more powerful with the caveat that you need to figure out how to make your game massively parallel. More than anything else though, it's just that the dev tools on the 360 are head and shoulders above PS3 and it's easier to write for a powerful graphics part and just a few well-rounded CPU cores.

    I'd have been really interested to see the screenshots but they're so small they're meaningless eh?

  • tonynibbles #36 4 years ago

    Why does it not have achievements FFS!?!

    PC and 360 do!?

    The achievements in Uncharted were great...

  • Pooley #37 4 years ago

    Some of the videos I've seen on Gametrailers that compare the 360 and PS3 versions of HL2, show terrible frame rates on the PS3 version. Bad enough to put me off buying this game altogether.

    What a wasted opportunity.

    The recent Valve interview in Edge was a good read. It really made them out to be a studio that cares about supplying a product that everyone can enjoy. So why are they so against the PS3? With the number of decent titles on the PS3 still in single figures, surely they could have made the effort with this game and gone on to sell bucketloads.

    Does not compute!

  • Dizzy #38 4 years ago

    "That's not true. It's never been true. I've always been baffled by the way that it became to be a kind of popular lore"

    I think he was being sarcastic m8.

    "So why are they so against the PS3?"

    Like someone has said before. They think it is a waste of time. Letting EA do the porting also gets them some easy $$$ without the effort.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 14:01

  • muscleblade #39 4 years ago

    I cant believe why people still buy PS3. AC also did a lot better on 360 and it was origially PS3 exclusive. Lets see how Burnout Paradise turns out. It maybe the first cross platform game that will be at least as good on the PS3. But i doubt it.

  • Dizzy #40 4 years ago

    "It maybe the first cross platform game that will be at least as good on the PS3. But i doubt it. "

    They will be similar... but will they sell similar?

  • Lurks #41 4 years ago

    "It's a PC game. However UTIII gives two-fingers up to shoddy PC ports."

    The irony. Instead PC users had to suffer the god-awful consolified interface for the game rather than the brilliant menus/interface of previous UT games.

    FPS games are PC games to be frank. Controllers are just a rubbish way to play FPS games. Well at least controllers handicap everyone to the level of a drooling spaztard without prejudice.

  • bioreit #42 4 years ago

    @ muscleblade

    May I refer you to Oblvion - just off the top of my head as a multiplatform that's superior on PS3 to 360. And that was started on PC...

  • badgerc82 #43 4 years ago

    @Lurks

    Yeah good comment. Its always going to be the problem with ports on the PS3 as you just cannot get the same kind of graphics throughput. So a lot of the time the port is only sloppy because they didn't try and tone things back a little in the graphics department.

    IMO the PS3 will only ever really interesting for the 1st party games and I will be purchasing a PS3 for them alone. Most multi platform games I will just buy for my 360 or Wii.

  • cawley1 #44 4 years ago

    Having bought a PS3 I read these multiformat reviews and feel a bit cheated - I would like to get Orange Box, but it is unlikely I will do so now as it sounds a shadow of the other versions (mind you I have a dual core PC, so I could just get the PC version!).

    I think it is clear there is a bigger problem here in that some devs are finding it difficult (read that as can't be bothered) when it comes to multiformat releases, apparently COD4 does not suffer from this and obviously with the likes of exclusives such as Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted when people put the time in it is capable of so much more - part of my thinking was to buy a system that was more future proof and I think (hope!) over the coming years we will not see these problems.

    For those who can remember we have been here before, the more I see of this it is the same as the ST/Amiga days when the ST had the upper hand and the Amiga just got substandard ports from the Atari machine, it was not for a couple of years that the tide turned (after a price cut!) and we started to see stuff programmed on the Amiga and an inferior port on the ST.
    Then the ST dropped out of favour and the Amiga took the top spot, still something I think is likely in the current MS/Sony war, especially when you add the Japanese equation into the mix.

  • presbyterrorion #45 4 years ago

    It's not Valve's fault that Sony made the PS3 mind-bendingly difficult to develop for. They could get away with that with the PS2, because game companies were forced to develop for it, but the situation is very different now.

  • LeD #46 4 years ago

    PS3 reeling from the blow!

  • Hamflank #47 4 years ago

    At least it's 'infinitely more fun' than the other versions.

  • NickJD #48 4 years ago

    It's time you people opened your eyes and stopped making excuses for PS3 ports or PS3 game sales. Developers don't give two fucks about PS3. BECAUSE PS3 OWNERS DON'T BUY GAMES.

    Look at Uncharted sales in NPD, nowhere, PS3 games sell less than half that of the same game on 360. PS3 is the next Gamecube, yeah it can do pretty graphics for exclusives, but no one buys the games and no one gives a shit about it as it's in third place and will always be dragging it's feet behing 360 and Wii.

    Why waste your time making ports for a flop console that can't sell shit for you, when you could be making games for 360 or Wii. Epic and Konami must be ready to hang themselves after putting games like MGS4 and UT3 on PS3 before 360. They've slashed their profits in half with that stupid move. It's time developers dump PS3 and back 360 and Wii, that's where the money is for them.

    Loyalty to a dead brand (playstation) will see them sink like a stone.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 14:11

  • dadrester #49 4 years ago

    quick question... I'm running on an SDTV. Is there a marked increase in framerate when not running in HD?

  • manic_mouse #50 4 years ago

    "Why waste your time making ports for a flop console that can't sell shit for you, when you could be making games for 360 or Wii"

    A quick look at the Play.com games chart shows that PS3 owners do buy games. And that there isn't a single Wii game in the top 10. Good thing you aren't a publisher!

  • badgerc82 #51 4 years ago

    @NickJD

    Does it not only sell half the copies because there are probably only about half the PS3's at the moment?

  • Darren #52 4 years ago

    Seems odd that the PS3 version blurs the image to (presumably) hide the jaggies yet suffers from more framerate issues than the 360 version. I mean the 360 version doesn't use AA at all and might that be because it, too, might cause the framerate to drop?

    Just a thought but it would seem to me that the framerate issues on the PS3 might be partially or wholly caused by this blurring in the first place. I accept I might be wrong as I'm no games programmer. :?

  • badgerc82 #53 4 years ago

    @ Darren

    Yeah I really don't understand that either. Why turn that on when you probably could have had a much better framerate and had it look like the 360's *shrug*

  • Derblington #54 4 years ago

    "PS3 mind-bendingly difficult to develop for."

    It's not, it just requires a different approach that most studios, it seems, aren't willing to use. Any that do will see great results - it all depends on the dev team.

  • Apologie #55 4 years ago

    I had no interest in these box... however it's a shame, such a very unprofessional port and an enormous disrespect for the fans.
    Gabe Newel lost all my respect (Ps: thouse comments regarding Ps3 make him look like a retard, just look at Uncharted, Call of Duty 4, Ratchet&Clank:TOD, Warhawk etc...) high profile games, some of the best ever made, that run smooth, and perform great on the machine. Well, maybe he is outdated.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 14:26

  • smurphs #56 4 years ago

    "Valve has opted to make the older Half-Life 2 'feel' the same as the more visually demanding later episodes"

    good choice that. I remember the GTA III & Vice City conversions on the xbox - GTA III was looked great and I was very disappointed that Vice City didn't look nearly as nice (due to the increased complexity I guess).

  • Eighthours #57 4 years ago

    That's not true. It's never been true.

    It could be true, we just haven't seen any evidence of it yet!

    I've always been baffled by the way that it became to be a kind of popular lore. The systems are fairly equivalent. The graphics part in the 360 is unquestionably more powerful. The PS3's processor is theoretically more powerful with the caveat that you need to figure out how to make your game massively parallel.

    And it remains to be seen whether devs will figure out how to make the processing advantage tell.

  • Lurks #58 4 years ago

    " (mind you I have a dual core PC, so I could just get the PC version!)."

    Good grief, do so!

    "I think it is clear there is a bigger problem here in that some devs are finding it "difficult (read that as can't be bothered) when it comes to multiformat releases, "

    Honestly, this isn't true. I don't want to write monster posts in a tiny text box on a gaming web site... but really, the job in hand is proper genuinely difficult and often it just can't be done without changing the graphics. And that's a critical issue. Do you make the screenshots look the same as 360 (web/print etc) and lower the framerate or do you change the graphics and have it run as fast?

    "apparently COD4 does not suffer from this"

    It'd be very surprised if COD4 looked the same. It's a notch above Source when it comes to graphics complexity and tricks.

    "For those who can remember we have been here before, the more I see of this it is the same as the ST/Amiga days when the ST had the upper hand and the Amiga just got substandard ports from the Atari machine, it was not for a couple of years that the tide turned (after a price cut!) and we started to see stuff programmed on the Amiga and an inferior port on the ST."

    That's correct although the comparison isn't really warranted with what we're seeing today. On the ST to Amiga conversion, basically the ST didn't have much of the Amiga's fancy graphics modes and hardware so you wrote for that and ported it to the Amiga. Until the Amiga's installed market was larger, then you had to do rubbish ports to ST of Amiga games. When you did the latter, you didn't slag off ST game developers for being lazy and doing a crap conversion. It was pretty evident what the platforms were capable of.

    That's not what we're seeing now. Games have generally been written where you write all your game code in a chunk and then talk to a graphics sub-system to crank it all out. I'm grossly oversimplifying but that's the basic idea. The PS2 was proper mentalist since you needed to basically write tiny bits of specialised machine language to run on very oddball chips to do some of the regular bits that generally gone done for you in other hardware prior and after that platform.

    The PS3 repeats the same design philosophy, something which I think is a mistake and you'll find others to back up the same view. You've got this game code but now you need to split it up into all these little jobs and at the end of the day the system is massively powerful on floating point maths and a fair bit weaker on actual graphics hardware. And I defy anyone to tell me what, exactly, games need with the FP power in the PS3 but to tell me the PS3 couldn't do with a better graphics part.

    So how do you port from the PC to that? Realistically the PS3 ought to have it's own games where it's doing some crazy maths to create this amazing geometry being fed out to the graphics hardware because that's the sort of thing it can do very well. But you're not, you're asking it to render exactly the same game as a PC. It's loaded, just like the Amiga/ST example you came up with.

    Someone mentioned Burnout earlier. Developed, incidentally, on the PS3 first. So they're going to play to the platform strengths of that so I'd expect to see the 360 version the same or even weaker. Draw your own conclusions about what it would have been like on 360 if it was developed there first.

    A significant problem the PS3 faces is that Xbox 360 and PC game development are hand in hand, with the same sorts of ways you do things. Hell, EVERY way games have been made with the exception of the PS2 has been like that. Multiple general purposes CPUs, really powerful monolithic graphics hardware parts. You convert from there (and it's a logical place to develop on because, as I said earlier, the dev tools are just way better to start with) to the PS3 and you're not going to get a great result.

    If you bought a PS3 to play the same games as exist on 360/PC then that was a bad move because it's never going to happen. Seriously, don't go looking for game developers to stop being 'lazy' with conversions. If you bought a PS3 to play first-party and new PS3-led Japanese games etc then you're in safe hands.

  • monkeymagic #59 4 years ago

    Funny, I didn't see all this uproar when the xbox was having to put up with shoddy ps2 ports, despite it having far more power. The roles have been reversed, and Sony are having to make the games that show off there consoles power, such as Uncharted. Microsoft did the same with Halo. It's all just healthy competition.

  • Lurks #60 4 years ago

    Lol, and I said I wasn't going to do a big post :)

  • monkie_king #61 4 years ago

    Yay, Apologie is here!

  • Kryon #62 4 years ago

    TEH POWAZERZ OF TEH CELL!!!!1111!!!one!

    PS3...erm...LOL

  • drumbaby #63 4 years ago

    How do Epic make an all singing all dancing version of UT3 for PS3 then? Oh yeah, they don't any waste time moaning about the console they're working on and actually get their hands dirty with doing the conversion themselves.

    Nice one, Valve : /

  • darc #64 4 years ago

    "More than anything else though, it's just that the dev tools on the 360 are head and shoulders above PS3 and it's easier to write for a powerful graphics part and just a few well-rounded CPU cores."

    Agree w/ follow up that the initial post was sarcastic, but your point about parallelism is interesting. I'm also amazed that, given all the high-cost h/w Sony did wedge into the PS3, they skimped on the most obvious, and relatively cost-effective commodity available: RAM. The memory split comes up again and again as a bottleneck for PS3, and I just have to shake my head. Every hack who's ever built a gaming PC can tell you a little extra RAM never hurts. And I have to imagine Sony gets a pretty good deal on memory chips.

  • statix101 #65 4 years ago

    Its not surprising the Source engine runs better on the ATI powered 360, as Valve chose ATI as its preferred graphics card to develop for in 2004.

    Half Life 2 ran better on ATI cards when released on Pc, than it did on the equivalent Nvidia Pc card, and seeing as Nvidia powers the PS3, it shouldnt be a surprise to see poorer performance.

    Both the 360 and PS3 use gfx cards that are no more powerful than the high end PC gfx cards from 2005.

  • tonynibbles #66 4 years ago

    Seeing as PS3 hardware sales are roughly the same as 360 (from day 1), and it's still young in it's lifespan, if there are any developers who 'dont give two fucks about PS3' then it's gonna be their loss if they ignore it as a platform.

    Burnout looks like a clear example of when developers lead on PS3, they can see the benefits. They recently said that the 360 game is actually *better* because PS3 is the lead platform. It looks great on PS3, as I am sure it does on 360.
    COD4 - great multplatform title, UTIII - same again.

    The tide is turning. The initial wave of multiplatform titles that run 'like shite' on PS3 is subsiding and slowly we'll see less and less of it.

    First party titles like SingStar, EoJ, LBP (even mini games like Tori Emaki, Loco Roco, Creature Feature, flOw) are all doing fresh new things with the hardware and technology which is one of the reasons I choose the PS3 as my console.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 14:45

  • UncleLou #67 4 years ago

    How do Epic make an all singing all dancing version of UT3 for PS3 then? Oh yeah, they don't any waste time moaning about the console they're working on and actually get their hands dirty with doing the conversion themselves.

    Nice one, Valve : /


    To be fair, Epic are selling an engine with UT3, not a game, first and foremost.

  • BBIAJ #68 4 years ago

    Except that Oblivion was only "better" (sharper texture + lack of AA doesn't make it better IMO!), because they spent longer on it.

    Nothing at all to do with the supposed (read: non-existant), extra power of the PStriple.

    One of the devs actually posted on EG admitting as much.

    Oh, and ApologieLOL!

  • bioreit #69 4 years ago

    @ NickJD

    As others have quite rightly pointed out, the install base for the PS3 is lower than that of 360, so of course total numbers of copies sold for multiplatfor titles will be lower on PS3.

    Having said that, the fool has made me think about something:

    Yes, the 360 has a larger install base than PS3 because it launched earlier, so that is the main reason for games selling more on 360. However, from a developer point of view, would you make games primarily for the system that has 10 million plus users *now*, or the one that will have 10 million plus users in a year or so's time?

    And consider that by the time the PS3 base catches up (and even overtakes) that of the 360, said theoretical developer would be working on the next big game and not really fussed about a title from last year.

    From the point of view of the scary men with suits and briefcases full of money, surely it makes more sense to lead development on the platform that provides the greater return on investment, i.e. the one that will give you more sales?

  • Lemming81 #70 4 years ago

    "It's not, it just requires a different approach that most studios, it seems, aren't willing to use. Any that do will see great results - it all depends on the dev team."

    And indeed, why should they be willing to use it? Especially when it isn't a market leader. It makes financial sense to ignore it altogether in that respect. Being willing to code for the PS3 does not make a dev better. No dev is obliged to do anything, surely? Least of all an independent company like Valve.

  • manic_mouse #71 4 years ago

    @disc

    Totally agree. RAM is cheap and cheerful and is nearly always the thing that holds consoles back, why Sony decided to hold their expensive processors back with isolated and minimal amounts of RAM is beyond me. But they did the same with the PS2, giving it a tiny amount of v-ram that made AA impossible on the machine.

  • monkie_king #72 4 years ago

    also, I agree with everything Lurks just said. The PS2 Linux coding community used to have a contest to write demos using only one of the Vector Units (kind of equivalent to the Cell's SPUs). People did some amazing stuff with the 8kb it had, but the code was insanely esoteric. Exploiting that power in a general 3D engine isn't at all straightforward, and means you really have to bend over backwards to accomodate the architecture.

    The Cell just magnifies the situation by giving devs 5 SPUs to play with and a relatively weak GPU. Effectively the way you design your game is dictated by the hardware to a far greater extend than a more traditional CPU, and often you can't exploit the power in a useful way.

    Of course, it can be done, as Burnout Paradise proves, but it undoubtedly required more development effort. Ubi reckon more than 70% of their engine dev time for AC was spent on the PS3, for instance. So then you get into this whole other economic argument about spending money to target a smaller installed base.

    I'm pretty sure the PS3 will survive though, and will probably be worth getting for its exclusives. That's kind of a reversal frmo the last-gen, though, where PS2 was the lowest common denominator platform for 3rd party, multiplatform games, and you got a 'Cube or an XBox for the exclusives.

  • Lurks #73 4 years ago

    "How do Epic make an all singing all dancing version of UT3 for PS3 then? Oh yeah, they don't any waste time moaning about the console they're working on and actually get their hands dirty with doing the conversion themselves. "

    Heh. The frame rate issues getting UT3 working on PS3 were really quite legendary and well publicised. Sony had to step in to help.

    "Half Life 2 ran better on ATI cards when released on Pc, than it did on the equivalent Nvidia Pc card, and seeing as Nvidia powers the PS3, it shouldnt be a surprise to see poorer performance."

    You're right but today Valve stuff runs way better on Nvidia because Nvidia just plain has better hardware. The real reason, if you want to purely look at graphics, is because the PS3 is based on an older generation of graphics part, equivalent to a PC 7800 graphics card basically. The 360's 'Xenos' is based on a newer generation of unified shader graphics hardware, a work-inprogress version of the R600 ATI hardware.

    It's not really down to Valve's preference any more.

  • Garulon #74 4 years ago

    "And consider that by the time the PS3 base catches up (and even overtakes) that of the 360, said theoretical developer would be working on the next big game and not really fussed about a title from last year."

    Except of course the 360 has widened the gap between it and the PS3 - it was 10m vs 0 at PS3 launch, now it's something like 15m vs 3m, and this is after everything Sony could throw at the PS3 has been thrown at it.

  • Kryon #75 4 years ago

    When will people stop making excuses? LISTEN, a games console is only as good as it's games. The average consumer doesn't give a toss about whether it's because of lazy devs or any other excuse you people come out with, they just want good games at a fair price. Apart from the 8 hour Tomb Raider rip-off, Sony do not offer this, there is NOTHING of real interest on the PS3 that the 360 doesn't do better and cheaper. The system is a lumbering cripple of a console, GET OVER IT. I honestly am starting to feel sorry for people who can't see this...

  • afghan_jones #76 4 years ago

    Orange Box wasnt ever worth more than 8/10 anyway on any platform.

    HL2 was a painful chore, horribly dated both visually and gameplay-wise with appalling vehicle controls, a grating central 'character' and weird floaty physics.

    Team Fortress 2 was full of lovely ideas, had some great class/weapon balance, cool visuals but was utterly unplayable most of the time, had horrendously old fashioned matchmaking and crippling lag.

    Portal was the saving grace to be honest. 8/10 is about right for the 360 version, if the PS3 one is worse then drop it down a notch or two. Certainly not GOTY by any stretch of the imagination.

  • chudders #77 4 years ago

    Oh Apologie I knew you'd come! I'm so glad you're here with your mighty list powers (Resistance, Warhawk, Ratchet, etc), otherwise I fear that the PS3 would be left for dead in a ditch by now.




  • monkie_king #78 4 years ago

    darc: doesn't the PS3 use rambus ram, which is bloody expensive, relatively? if so, that might explain why.

  • darc #79 4 years ago

    "FPS games are PC games to be frank. Controllers are just a rubbish way to play FPS games."

    Strongly agree. Even FPS that are controller-oriented, ie. Gears of War, are completely unplayable to someone who's been using a mouse for years and years. I'm sure with a serious commitment I could adapt, but I simply don't see the appeal. It's just not intuitive, and therefore not fun. (Bad news for me since at least 50% of the titles available for 360 are essentially FPS.)

    What's ironic is that there is long history of gaming peripherals (controllers, enhanced keyboards, etc) for the PC, meant to replace or improve upon the QWERTY and mouse combo, where the thing plainly wasn't broken to begin with. But on consoles, no one's ever intelligently addressed the complaint that aiming wasn't fast/accurate enough. Instead s/w devs have given us lock-on, assisted aiming etc all of which make me wonder, "Am I really playing this game??"

    I know a lot of people think that FPS on consoles are fine (ie. also not broken) but playing something like Metroid on Wii makes me think, why hasn't a good point-and-shoot peripheral been introduced for the heavy-hitting consoles (XBox, PS3) where the FPS genre flourishes? It seems like a perfect, and obvious, match.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 14:59

  • darc #80 4 years ago

    "darc: doesn't the PS3 use rambus ram, which is bloody expensive, relatively? if so, that might explain why."

    LOL I wasn't aware of that, but if I'd been in the boardroom, I could have offered a solution to that problem as well. :)

    ("Doctor, it hurts when I do this...";)

  • SeesThroughAll #81 4 years ago

    360 owners with complexes over their penis rejoicing from a shoddy PS3 port shocker.

    Very, very predictable.

    Oh, well...


    /plays Uncharted

  • monkie_king #82 4 years ago

    'Oh, well...

    /plays uncharted
    /cries self to sleep'

    Fixed!

  • bioreit #83 4 years ago

    @ darc

    "Even FPS that are controller-oriented, ie. Gears of War, are completely unplayable to someone who's been using a mouse for years and years. I'm sure with a serious commitment I could adapt, but I simply don't see the appeal. It's just not intuitive, and therefore not fun."

    I really have to disagree with you. Played FPS on pc right from Wolfenstein 3D and I'm quite able to easily play FPS on my Xbox and now on my 360. The mouse/keyboard combination is also not intuitive in any sense - it's just that more people have used that control method from a younger age, having used computers at school/work.

    And speaking of fun, which is more: playing straight-backed, in a chair, trying to hold your wrists in a way to stop the onslaught of RSI and praying to not get Quake-claw, or sitting slumped in a beanbag?

    I guess what I'm saying is - people are different. All you PC-owning snobs need to stop being so bloody elitist and realise that sometimes, people can like different ways of doing things.

  • bioreit #84 4 years ago

    @ SeesThroughAll

    PS3 owners with inferiority complex in 'blame single individual in company for shoddy work of lazy outsourced dev team' shocker.

  • Kenshin001 #85 4 years ago

    In the US Orange Box in October sold less on the 360 (240,000) than COD4 did on the PS3 last month (444,000). No-one complained about shitty ports with Infinity Ward, they got a good product and they bought it.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 15:11

  • Katsumoto #86 4 years ago

    The same can be said in reverse - I can't count how many times my views have been dismissed because i'm a LOL PC NERD. Sits at desk = nerd who can't speak to girls without crying. Sits on armchair = amazing jock who reads FHM and has 4 mistresses.

  • bioreit #87 4 years ago

    @ Katsumoto

    Me too. But I don't 'spread the pain' by bullying the others.

    And would like to clarify that I did say "pc-owning snobs" and was not saying all pc owners are like that.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 15:08

  • Katsumoto #88 4 years ago

    :) No, I agree. Snobbery of any sort is bad.

  • Lurks #89 4 years ago

    @bioreit: Oh I agree with you. It's only an issue if you have a choice between them really. If you've got mouse/keyboard, you aren't going to go play on a controller - it just makes you... bad. But of course it's often more ergo and comfortable to play on your couch!

    But you have to see it from a PC perspective. There you are playing FPS games on consoles. With rubbish frame rates. With really bad online, no dedicated servers. Game controller rather than a keyboard and mouse.

    Ultimately if you're an affecionado of the genre, they're better on PC. You might think you're doing okay on that controller but how do you think you'd do in the same game of, for example, TF2 versus people with mice?

    I've always wondered if there isn't SOME sort of better controller. Little trackball on the side or something?

  • monkie_king #90 4 years ago

    @Katsumoto: what is 'girls'?

  • Garulon #91 4 years ago

    "/plays Uncharted"

    Oh your the one! Could you buy another thirty thousand copies?

  • darc #92 4 years ago

    Woah, woah, Bioret, the "snob" thing is uncalled for. Your post is legit to that point and I admit my position is subjective... and then you go all psycho in your last sentence.

    Anyway...

    Yes, no doubt, sitting back on an armchair looking at a big TV is much more like entertainment than sitting at my desk with the same pile of hardware I spend most of my time repairing. It was only recently that I came to this obvious conclusion and started paying attention to consoles, which largely explains why I am (admittedly) completely incompetent aiming with a controller.

    On the other hand - and this is not subjective - the mouse as an input device simply provides more information from the user to the game by way of a single gesture. There is a range of motion that allows the aiming process to be more immediately quantitative. This is what it is. You're right about the intuitive/fun vs not intuitive/not fun part, though - that's all me.

    But I'm not a snob (about this anyway) so please take it easy.

  • Garulon #93 4 years ago

    "But you have to see it from a PC perspective. There you are playing FPS games on consoles. With rubbish frame rates. With really bad online, no dedicated servers. Game controller rather than a keyboard and mouse."

    But equally from a console perspective, there you are hunched over a tiny monitor with a completely bonkers dead control system, remapping the thirty or so keys until they suit, and working out if changing your "trilinear filtering" (whatever the fuck that is) will make the game run without a hard lock sixteen minutes in, or if that'll be fixed by the two hundred megabyte patch in a months time. Meanwhile the "copy protection" now on your PC lets russian pirates use your hard disk to store kiddie porn.

  • bioreit #94 4 years ago

    @ Lurks

    I see your point, but to be frank, I've historically had greater online issues when playing on PCs, as the specifications are totally different from machine to machine and people tend to do things like forget to switch off their firewalls or stop their scheduled av scan. Or leave their torrents downloading.

    I agree with you on the dedicated servers though. But then again, PC games are far more susceptible to hackery, especially when some 1337 skript-kiddeh gets annoyed at losing and decides to bring the server down.

    I have played FPS on PCs for well over 13 years now and I have to say, playing them on my consoles has been such a relief. I'm just too old to carry on faffing around with everything to make sure it works properly, to keep up to date with the hardware, to pore over gfx card reviews to make sure I get the best fps rate for my money, to find ways to tweak the running to get a bit more stability.

    I'm more than willing to swap a little precise control for a more relaxed gaming experience.

    Although when I finally get my copy of Half Life 1 back off my boss, I will be getting back into Natural Selection. After an absence of three years :-|

  • darc #95 4 years ago

    "I've always wondered if there isn't SOME sort of better controller. Little trackball on the side or something?"

    Yes, coming back to my original point. Isn't it strange that mfrs. have tried to improve the "problem" on PC (more to make a profit than to fix anything, of course) but never on consoles, where at least *some* people see a deficiency? I think the motion sensing of the Wii, or a light gun, or even something as simple as a mouse that sits on one leg and a keypad on the other, could be a nice alternative...

    ... for people who'd like both benefits: a comfy chair and precision aiming.

    Of course, the games would have to properly support the peripheral(s) for it to help any.

  • darc #96 4 years ago

    "And would like to clarify that I did say "pc-owning snobs" and was not saying all pc owners are like that."

    Actually, you said "all you PC owning snobs". Which does sorta connote that all pc owners are like that. And more distinctly that *we're* like that. No biggie, but since you quoted yourself and all... :)

  • bioreit #97 4 years ago

    @ darc

    Hmm, maybe it's differences in how to interpret non-emphasised language, but in my head, that was "all you pc-owning snobs", meaning all of you PC-owners who are snobs. Ah well.

    But seriously, I only said it because so many times PC-owners have harped on about the superiority of the PC compared to consoles, when they have either never played on a console in their lives or forget that they use PCs for much, much longer than they use a controller, and that is where the difference lies.

    As far as I'm concerned, the range of motions provided by an analogue stick is equal to that provided by a mouse (obviously not for the extreme twitcher shooters, but you tend not to get those on consoles) and the other controls are superior to a keyboard, especially for games that have vehicles in. The ability to precisely control speed of movement through force applied to the left analogue stick is far better than pressing keys, and triggers are much better than mouse buttons.

    Edit 1: I'm sorry, but it's the Grammar Maid's day off.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 15:27

  • drxym #98 4 years ago

    My take on the port is that it looks adequate but horribly conservative. It's like the EA programmers could not or would not optimize for the PS3 by offloading stuff onto the SPUs so the game is running entirely on the PPU. For the most part it works fine, but it sometimes chugs because the game is being run on a single core as opposed to the 360's 3. I would hope that EA would support the title and fix its faults, but as this is EA we're talking about I doubt it will happen.

  • darc #99 4 years ago

    @Garulon & Bioret:

    Excellent points re: the unbelievable hassles of PC gaming. Which is why I don't mean to pose this as a PC FPS vs. Console FPS fight. On the contrary, I'm completely fed up w/ PC gaming, and would be more than happy to abandon it altogether, except that for this particular genre, I still vastly prefer the mouse.

    That's why, when I played a (sorta) FPS on Wii for the first time, I got very excited. A control scheme that might be as rewarding (or maybe moreso) than the mouse! And I'm sitting in a nice chair looking at my TV! And I didn't have to download 3 patches! Or install a new OS, or send my firstborn to Newegg, or...

    Too bad that graphically the Wii isn't the right machine to play FPS on either... it seems like we're so close... it's just a matter of bringing these ideas together. And an XBox 360 lightgun is a whole lot more probable than a graphics upgrade for the Wii. (Excluding buying a "Wii 2", that is.)

    But I digress.

  • fightman2 #100 4 years ago

    its time for the cocksucking sony morons to finally admit that the ps3 is an underpowered, overhyped turd. its so funny that the pc-in-a-box 360 pisses all over the supposed mighty cell lol

    sony - the ps1 was great, the ps2 was pig ugly but had a good choice of playable games...the p3s is not quite so ugly, but underpowerd and has no good exclusive games - where did it all go wrong you jap bastards.

    sort it for the ps4 or we'll nuke you all over again so you get the message fuckwits

  • afghan_jones #101 4 years ago

    Pads are better for the following:

    Rumble,
    Ergonomics,
    Analogue sensitivity,
    Triggers what actually feel like triggers not buttons,
    The fact that when playing with a pad, I NEVER have to look down to make sure Im pressing the right key to open my inventory/get the shotgun/whatever.

    Mice have the precision of aiming but keyboards lack the precision of movement that analogue sticks have. Its up to devs to make sure any assist or autoaim on console games arent obtrusive or awkward.

    Oh, and PC online gaming is a laggy, horrible ping-laden minefield. Compared to the sublime friends list-matchmaking of Halo 3, PC online gaming can just fuck off and die.

  • Apologie #102 4 years ago

    PlayStation 3 have dedicated VRAM. The Xbox 360 is actually the one that has to ALWAYS share RAM. The Xbox 360 relies on 512MB of GDDR3 RAM for all its memory. On the other hand, the PlayStation 3 uses 256MB of XDR DRAM and and 256MB of GDDR3 RAM, used by the Cell and RSX respectively.

    bOTHof the processors have their strong points, but the physics and AI processing aspects of the Cell is superior to the Xenon.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 15:42

  • bioreit #103 4 years ago

    @ darc

    Fair enough,mate. Trust me, though - stick with the controller and it should all start to come together. But don't take this to mean that my stance is one of "This is good enough - why change it?" because if someone can come up with an awesome method, then count me in!

    And "But I digress" - hey, it's what happens around here.

  • Katsumoto #104 4 years ago

    re: Cell debate

    /facetious mode on

    I got to pick the processor in my gaming system!

    /facetious mode off

    :D. As for the pc v consoles thing, I don't know if I see the point in the debate, now that I think about it. People will play on what they are used to and what they feel comfortable with. I've been pc gaming all my life and have no problem with sitting at a desk, plus I like being able to chat via IM at the same time, so I have no reason to switch. I do see why some people would prefer to game in their living rooms though.

    The "hassle over hardware" argument, however, I dont think is an exclusively pc problem. it used to be more so, but nowadays console games get all the fun of tearing and bad framerates too. I had my 360 5 days before it bust. Anyway, as I say, depends what you're used to.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 15:36

  • UncleLou #105 4 years ago

    Oh, and PC online gaming is a laggy, horrible ping-laden minefield. Compared to the sublime friends list-matchmaking of Halo 3, PC online gaming can just fuck off and die.


    Yeah, because peer-to-peer is so much better than dedicated servers...

  • fightman3b #106 4 years ago

    its time for the cocksucking sony morons to finally admit that the ps3 is an underpowered, overhyped turd. its so funny that the pc-in-a-box 360 pisses all over the supposed mighty cell lol

    sony - the ps1 was great, the ps2 was pig ugly but had a good choice of playable games...the p3s is not quite so ugly, but underpowered and has no good exclusive games - where did it all go wrong you stupid jap bastards.

    sort it for the ps4 or we'll nuke you all over again so you get the message you fuckwits. we have the bomb, you dont, and we WILL use it on you if you fuck us around with the next-next gen machine.

    you've been warned you little cunts.

    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 15:43

  • septimus #107 4 years ago

    I bought it on 360 as I thought my MPB wouldn't run it as well. More fool me. The review is right, it looks though it's running on my PC from 2 years ago. Still, Portal makes it all better. Still not GOTY material, there is nothing new in the rest of it.

    Only reason the PS3 versions sucks is it's a crappy port. But the XBots here will still go off on one.

  • kangarootoo #108 4 years ago

    @fightman3b

    You are the geeky muppet who previously actually bragged about having some IP address related way of not getting banned from this forum, right?

    Have merry xmas with your hexidecimal friends that you made yourself won't you.

  • Apologie #109 4 years ago

    fightman3b

    sort it for the ps4 or we'll nuke you all over again so you get the message fuckwits.

    how can you make a joke about that??? very sad of you.

    by the way, as i said PlayStation 3 have dedicated VRAM. The Xbox 360 is actually the one that has to ALWAYS share RAM. The Xbox 360 relies on 512MB of GDDR3 RAM for all its memory. On the other hand, the PlayStation 3 uses 256MB of XDR DRAM and and 256MB of GDDR3 RAM, used by the Cell and RSX respectively, so, playstation is not weaker then X360 in terms of memory as someone here claimed.

    bOTHof the processors have their strong points, but the physics and AI processing aspects of the Cell is superior to the Xenon.

  • fightman3b #110 4 years ago

    kangarootoo - thats right cunt, fightman can always bypass ip related bans and will do if necessary

    oh, and apologie - eat shit on toast hahahaha


    (fightman will return, shitheads)
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 15:48

  • bioreit #111 4 years ago

    @ septimus

    No doubt the fanboys will, but looking at the issue a bit more objectively:

    Look at things from the developer's point of view - there are two main consoles to develop for.

    One has a larger install base and by most accounts is far easier to develop for, if you're used to coding on PCs, seeing as it's just a PC in a box. The second has a smaller install base and is harder to program for if you're unfamiliar with it.

    Should the developer pour lots of time and money and effort (that could be going into making games) into learning how to get the best out of the less-popular system?

    Arguably yes, from a perfect-world point of view. Speaking realistically, not really. Why should they bend over backwards to accomodate a system that is possibly going to offer a lower return on investment? Which is perhaps why Sony have started to send out dev support, as in the case with Epic and UTIII.

  • Putty-Man #112 4 years ago

    Guys dont forget, its..


    ..better than Gears of War then!

  • Darren #113 4 years ago

    @ fightman3b - "its time for the cocksucking sony morons to finally admit that the ps3 is an underpowered, overhyped turd. its so funny that the pc-in-a-box 360 pisses all over the supposed mighty cell lol"

    Yeah, that'll explain why it has technically great games like MotorStorm, Resistance (my opinion admittedly), Ratchet & Clank: ToD and Uncharted then, and why Oblivion turned out so well. It also goes some way toward clarifying why Metal Gear Solid 4 and White Knight Story look so good and why multiformat titles like Call of Duty 4 and Burnout Paradise (demo) are as good as the 360 versions.

    Of course, it's got nothing to do with the fact that the hardware might be powerful but overcomplex and that some developers are having problems tapping that potential. Oh no, that would be far too obvious. :p

  • Muddtallica #114 4 years ago

    OMG!! fightman can replicate himself, bypass IP bans, vanish off the grid and generally circumnavigate all the laws that bind existence together! He's like Agent Smith! He has absolute and total control!!!

    ...within the confines of the Eurogamer.net comments page.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 15:52

  • bioreit #115 4 years ago

    "Oh no, that would be far too obvious."

    And also sane.

  • Qbert2k #116 4 years ago

    "its time for the cocksucking sony morons to finally admit that the ps3 is an underpowered, overhyped turd. its so funny that the pc-in-a-box 360 pisses all over the supposed mighty cell lol

    sony - the ps1 was great, the ps2 was pig ugly but had a good choice of playable games...the p3s is not quite so ugly, but underpowered and has no good exclusive games - where did it all go wrong you stupid jap bastards.

    sort it for the ps4 or we'll nuke you all over again so you get the message you fuckwits. we have the bomb, you dont, and we WILL use it on you if you fuck us around with the next-next gen machine.

    you've been warned you little cunts. "

    Not bad at all. It just needed a few racist jabs like 'nip' or 'chink' or something.

  • Darren #117 4 years ago

    @Apologie - Remember that the PS3 has less free memory for developers to use because its operating systems uses more resources, plus the Xbox 360 has an additional 10 MB of RAM which acts as a framebuffer, bringing its total RAM upto 522 MB vs. the 512 MB of the PS3. Graphics require more memory than game code so the system the 360 uses is far more flexible and popular with developers as they can allocate most of the 512 MB of unified RAM to the visuals if they choose.

  • Skeletor #118 4 years ago

    @bioreit
    "Why should they bend over backwards to accomodate a system that is possibly going to offer a lower return on investment? "

    Because the FPS market on the PS3 is not so crowded yet as it is on the 360. That's why Epic will make A LOT of money with UT3 on the PS3 while EA and Valve will just piss people off. If you spend 70 Euro on a game and end up being dissapointed, you will keep that in mind next time you're looking for a game...
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 15:56

  • Dizzy #119 4 years ago

    "Of course, it's got nothing to do with the fact that the hardware might be powerful but overcomplex and that some developers are having problems tapping that potential"

    That is the main problem... as a (games) dev I hated the PS2 and the PS3 is just as shitty from a software point of view. I am glad the PS3 is going down in flames... serves them right ignoring the people like me that actually write software for their overly complex junk. We want to make games... no fiddle with hardware. We did that in the 80s and 90s and we have had enough.

    >That's why Epic will make A LOT of money with UT3 on the PS3

    ORLY? Watch the 360 sales numbers when UT3 comes out on 360.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 15:57

  • Garulon #120 4 years ago

    @apologie

    "by the way, as i said PlayStation 3 have dedicated VRAM. The Xbox 360 is actually the one that has to ALWAYS share RAM. The Xbox 360 relies on 512MB of GDDR3 RAM for all its memory."

    This is a bit pointless, but the 360 has 10MB of "intelligent" embedded RAM living right next to it's GPU at 256GB/sec effective bandwidth, meaning overdraw costs are basically bugger all. It can also do async texture fetches out of main RAM and balance pixel/vertex shader load dynamically according to this.

    The PS3 GPU is a dated five year old peice of crap design, nVidia must have laughed themselves silly after handing over that museum peice to a desperate Sony. Luckily like most PS3 fanbois you can synthesize your own reality...

  • Skeletor #121 4 years ago

    @Dizzy
    I'm afraid the only thing that's going to go down in flames are the products of devs who are unwilling to adjust or just unable to come up with proper code.
    Btw, fiddling around with the hardware in the 80s and 90s resulted in some really impressive games without the need to update constantly.

  • darc #122 4 years ago

    "The ability to precisely control speed of movement through force applied to the left analogue stick is far better than pressing keys, and triggers are much better than mouse buttons."

    Yes, I agree 100% with all of that, actually.

    "Fair enough,mate. Trust me, though - stick with the controller and it should all start to come together."

    I hope that's true, and I'll take the encouragement for what it's worth. I haven't returned Gears of War yet. :)

    @fightman3b - that's all slightly creepy, man. Why so angry - did you buy an entire pallette of PS3's on launch or something???

  • VMerken #123 4 years ago

    From Kryon:
    "The average consumer doesn't give a toss about whether it's because of lazy devs or any other excuse you people come out with, they just want good games at a fair price."

    That's certainly something flying through my head when seeing titles like Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction or Uncharted: Drake's Fortune waiting to be sold for 65-70 Euros in the shops. "Fair" doesn't quite combine with "price" at that moment.

  • Kenshin001 #124 4 years ago

    Dizzy, don't be such a crybaby. The PS3 is not going down in flames. It is selling fine in Japan and Europe. Devs at Epic, Infinity Ward and Criterion can handle the PS3's architecture fine, just because you lack the ability doesn't mean you have to be spiteful.


  • fightman2 #125 4 years ago

    motherfuckers that think the ps3 is good would probably eat a gift wrapped turd from sonys chairman.

    either that or they wank off every night over a photo of him above their bed.

    or maybe both; it is christmas after all.

  • BM #126 4 years ago

    fightman2...

    I don't own a PS3 (i'm actually a 360/Wii owner) but still think the PS3 is OK. Where does that place me in the wanking list?
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 16:22

  • darc #127 4 years ago

    "by the way, as i said PlayStation 3 have dedicated VRAM. The Xbox 360 is actually the one that has to ALWAYS share RAM. The Xbox 360 relies on 512MB of GDDR3 RAM for all its memory. On the other hand, the PlayStation 3 uses 256MB of XDR DRAM and and 256MB of GDDR3 RAM, used by the Cell and RSX respectively, so, playstation is not weaker then X360 in terms of memory as someone here claimed. "

    Interesting, I admit I am not clear on the details. But I will say this much regardless of the details - 512M is a pretty small number in 2007 (OK, lets say 2005, to be fair to the designers.) All matters of allocation and optimization aside, bumping this figure, and even skimping elsewhere to accomodate cost, should have been a no-brainer. And now developers repeatedly indicate as much in interviews by citing memory limitations on the PS3.

    For the record, I think the jury is still out on the PS3. I think it's a really cool piece of HW, and was really on the fence as to whether I'd rather have a PS3 or 360. Its still relatively early in the lifespans of all the "next-gen" consoles, so we should see vast improvements in sw quality across the board in the next couple of years. If Sony manages to address 3rd party complaints re: development kits, etc. things could definitely turn around. A widespread embrace of Blu-Ray would help too, especially given the cost difference between PS3 and 360.

    As for Sony exclusive titles, it boils down to whether their Cell+SPU architecture ever made sense in the first place. They're the ones who should know best how to use it, but the question is: do games really need this sort of parallelism? Do small, fast, independent, physics calculations trump the ready availability of self-managing SMP horsepower? Or is it just a neat solution to the wrong problem?

    P.S. @BM - I don't actually think fightman is the least bit serious. :) He just has a typing problem.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 16:38

  • BM #128 4 years ago

    I just like the idea of fightman2 having some form of console-based tossing heirarchy

  • fightman2 #129 4 years ago

    apparently some of the sony sycophants enjoy eating the shit from any senior sony executive....

    ....but the grade-a motherfuckers insist on the semi-solid stream straight out of the chairmans cock-loosened hole. and thats before they jet their jism over the soggy photo of sony-san over their bed.

  • deepmenace #130 4 years ago

    stop the press. the ps3 requires a different approach when it comes to coding.

    does that end up being a help or a hindrance? we'll soon see.

    please move along.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 16:35

  • Lurks #131 4 years ago

    You're kinda amusing for a troll. Can I take you home?

  • squeakyg #132 4 years ago

    Your Burnout Paradise ads are making my Firefox spaz out, and making my CPU run at 100%. This often happens here :-(

  • murphy245 #133 4 years ago

    im bitterly dissapointed by this -_- il have to buy it for 360 but i realy wanted it for my ps triple U_U

  • stepneg #134 4 years ago

    Lol, great reading for a Friday afternoon.

    @squeakyg

    Install Flashblock add-on, makes EG a much easier site to read ;)

  • messiahtj #135 4 years ago

    Hahahaha, with games like Uncharted, GT 5, FFXIII, Unreal Tournament III, Killzone 2 and MGS 4 running smootly with that superb graphics in PS3 what xbots continue to saying that kind of shit like the microsoft's official dick sucker Newell? "Valve: PS3 a "total disaster on so many levels", PS3 is "a waste of everyone's time" Yes??? Uncharted kick the shit out of any game of Valve so you, your lazziness and your shitty orange box can simply fuckk off.

  • Kryon #136 4 years ago

    I honestly don't understand PS3 (only) owners, if you've got multiple platforms then fine, but how and why would anyone own the PS3 over the 360? It's clear that the vast majority of software is inferior on the Sony machine, PS3 is also more expensive, so all I can think of is that you are either brand loyal fools who care nothing for the quality of your games or you just wanted a cheapo BluRay player.

  • AcidSnake #137 4 years ago

    Is it a full moon tonight?

  • peterfll #138 4 years ago

    In terms of blame then:

    Valve: For not caring enough to put in the effort to provide decent console conversions. Even the 360 version is not optimised. Clearly consoles are inferior beasts to them.

    EA: For still not getting their arse in gear with conversions to PS3. Still.

    Sony: For not doing more to support developers with conversions.

  • Kryon #139 4 years ago

    Sony: For designing a shite console.

  • smelly #140 4 years ago

    Good to see the 360 fanboys (kryon et al) out in full force in this thread.

    Man that kryon is insecure about his console purchase isnt he? It's almost as if he loses sleep each evening worrying that the ps3 and wii are going to outsell his machine.

    The only other explanation i can come up with is that kryon is actually bill gates.

  • Dizzy #141 4 years ago

    "Btw, fiddling around with the hardware in the 80s and 90s resulted in some really impressive games without the need to update constantly. "

    Oh yeah sure... and we had a lot of fun.

    But remember our games used to be 64Kb FFS... doing this for 1GB asset heavy stuff nowadays is NOT fun.

    Then again that is evolution I guess.... PS3 will fail compared to PS2 and Sony will learn a lesson and make a much better PS4 (like the PS1). We should all be happy that Wii and 360 are eating them alive. Next gen will be awesome!

    " just because you lack the ability doesn't mean you have to be spiteful. "

    Hahahaha... the classic old "you suck" internet reply. Nothing to do with ability I just do not have the TIME... just like Valve. Nowadays we like to play around to see what we can do in software... not fight the hardware. That age is gone. Seriously... Sony are bloody idiots for making a machine like the PS3. A typical hardware engineer stunt... next time ask the software guys what they want.
    Edited by 6 at 14/12/07 @ 17:09

  • smelly #142 4 years ago

    (ok cant resist)

    @Kryon: (quote) "LISTEN, a games console is only as good as it's games. "


    And link:
    [link url=http://www. gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/features/article.jsp?releaseId=20 060314115917309058&articleId=2007121019380531079§ionId=1 003&pageId=2007121192757578099
    ]http://ww w.gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/fe...[/link]

    LOL


  • Muddtallica #143 4 years ago

    Kryon: I'm going to be wildly presumptious here, but perhaps those users who own PS3s and not 360s do so because they are genuinely and personally more interested in playing PS3 exclusives such as MGS4, FFXIII, GT5, Killzone, Tekken, Uncharted, God of War and so forth than they are in playing 360 exclusives like Halo 3, Gears of War, Dead or Alive, Fable, Forza, Banjo-Kazooie, and Mass Effect. It's what like to call "Not All Other People Are You" syndrome.

    Of course, it could also be that they are blindly brand-loyal, Sony-chairman's-faeces-ingesting drone-bots. In which case you and your esteemed colleague(s) fightman2/3b are quite correct.

  • smelly #144 4 years ago

    @Muddtallica: Personally (if i had the money) i'd choose a ps3 over the 360 for the ps3 exclusives.. as i have a pc.

    Pretty much all the half decent 360 exclusives are available on pc at better framerates, higher definition, etc. And control with mouse/keyboard (which is essential imho for pretty much 99.99% of 360 games worth playing).

    The ps3 exclusives (like the wii exclusives) will be unlikely to come out on any other platform. And as kryon himself points out - it's all about the games.

    Personally you wouldn't catch me playing any of the orange box games on joypad of all things.

    I'm interested in spending money on a games console for the types of experiences i cant get on the pc (or other platforms), otherwise it makes the price of a console (and the games) redundant (imho).

    So therefor, yes the ps3 has had a slow start.. But give me ratchet & clank/mgs/gran tourismo/littlebigplanet/etc over generic first person games I can play on pc any day of the week.

  • oerhoert #145 4 years ago

    "one of the worst examples as yet of developers simply not bothering to properly make use of the hardware available to them"

    How can we be sure of this? Perhaps the PS3 isn't actually as powerful as Sony would like us to believe? Perhaps the architecture of Source just doesn't gel very well with the architecture of PS3? Perhaps the developers did a fabulous job with the possibilities they had?

    Just askin'.

  • Machiavellian #146 4 years ago

    The problem with the "developer Lazy" comment when it comes to ports of 360 games to the PS3 is that I do not think it's more on how lazy the developers are but instead the unique challenge of porting a game over to the PS3. In an interview with one of the uncharted developers, he was asked a question along the lines of what he least like about the development for uncharted. The developer responded that he didn't like all the time spent on the uncharted engine which I believe he stated it was 3 years or more. This got me to thinking about Gabe's comment and feelings towards the PS3.

    We all should know by now that the PS3 is just as powerful if not more then the 360. We have heard from countless developers on the complexity of the PS3 hardware to develop for. Even if you take the comments from the COD4 developers you see that the learning curve needed for the PS3 demands your best people, especally if you are doing a crossplatform game. You look at Assasin Creed and you here they needed most of their resources to get the PS3 version to a acceptable level. The point I am trying to make is that most like to blame developers for the crossplatform woes of the PS3 but the blame really goes to the PS3 as a development platform. If resources were limitless as well as time then I am sure we would see PS3 ports that perform the same or better than the 360, the problem is that those things are in short supply. Game code that is done on the PC and 360 do not translate well over to the PS3 so that means parts of the engine has to be rewritten, tested QA for bugs etc. If you are a big time developer like IW, you can put your best team on a system that will not return you near the same return as the incumbent leader or you can be like Gabe who feels that the time spent getting the PS3 to work would already delay a delayed product, cost more to make and may not return the amount invested.

  • smelly #147 4 years ago

    "Perhaps the architecture of Source just doesn't gel very well with the architecture of PS3? "

    That's likely.

    Source was written for a pc. A 360 is a pc in a box. So porting from one to the other requires little talent/effort.

    Ps3 is a different architecture. So we dont know whether the team which did the port were just shit - or the ps3 itself isnt capable.

    My money is on the 3rd option : the team doing the job were okay, but didnt know enough about how to optimise for ps3 and/or werent given all the required tools they needed to do the job properly. As seen on the ps2 with the performance analyzer coming out late(ish) in the ps2's lifespan

  • Machiavellian #148 4 years ago

    @Apologie

    I do not know why you keep put AI as a strong point for the PS3 because it's one of the major weakness of the console. This was a big issue for the Assassin Creed developers and it has been stated time and again. The main Proc within the Cell architecture does not do any branch predictions. Instead it does branch hints which are no where close. Anyway, there are some things you can do with Cell to help it not having branch predictions but they are all weak methods. In a game where AI is heavenly relied upon, the PS3 will be at a very big disadvantage

  • IronCladChicken #149 4 years ago

    smelly wrote;
    My money is on the 3rd option : the team doing the job were okay, but didnt know enough about how to optimise for ps3 and/or werent given all the required tools they needed to do the job properly. As seen on the ps2 with the performance analyzer coming out late(ish) in the ps2's lifespan

    They probably wernt given a lot of time either - EAwould want them to get the port out of the door as close to the PC & 360 release dates as possible - & definitly before Christmas passed them by.

    Essentially I guess spending their whole time following Valves lead?

  • fightman2 #150 4 years ago

    apparently some of the sony sycophants enjoy eating the shit from any senior sony executive....

    ....but the grade-a motherfuckers insist on the semi-solid stream straight out of the chairmans cock-loosened hole. and thats before they jet their jism over the soggy photo of sony-san above their bed.


    [this is NOT made up; the relevant material is widely available on youtube and other popular services]

  • fightman3b #151 4 years ago

    fairplay, i fucking hate sony's chairman - what a nob to allow the ps3 to be released in its crappy state - he'd obviously been spilling too much of his shit into the fanboys orifices, must've shat out some of his brain at the same time.

    thats the logical explanation anyway, but who knows with sony

  • badgerc82 #152 4 years ago

    The power of the cell processor isnt really an issue for AI, physics or general game code. In fact, written properly it will process information faster than a 360.

    The problem is how the SPU cores ( 8 chips, 7 are in use, 1 redundant ) process data. Ideally each core is looking for a large chunk of data which it can churn away at and this just isn't the way game code is normally written, it's more suited to research or large problems. Game developers can get around this but it is where the tools and general support for the system falls down. It's very difficult to write vast amounts of code in what is pretty much C/Assembly compared to higher C or C++.

    This combined with the lack of shiny's due to an underpowered GPU and I couldn't blame developers for shying away from it.... Though I love that shit :)

  • Apologie #153 4 years ago

    The Cell Broadband Engine provides a "1 + 8" multi-core processing environment, enabling optimized code to function at a superior level of performance over traditional single or dual core CPUs. With all 8 cores on a single chip, the code processes do not lose performance by dropping down to the memory bus as with historic, multiple CPU configurations.
    Graphics, Physics, Animation, Sound. are the CPU intensive tasks in gaming. In all of these listed tasks, the CELL outperforms all other CPUs currently in existence for game related calcuations.
    CELL has been benchmarked to exceed all Current General Purpose CPUs at Real-time Graphics rendering, Physics and Sound Processing. This does include the Triple Core Unit from the xbox 360.

    Ps3 is definatelly superior... the question is basically: will the dev's learn how to take the most out of it??? time will tell... but for now, i'm very excited, games are coming, and i can't wait for 2007 big exclusives.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 17:51

  • Kryon #154 4 years ago

    @smelly

    A - I thought you had me on ignore? Or was that just you playing hard to get?

    B - Your link is meaningless, The Wii sells well, it does not have as many good games as the 360 or even the PS3, this is a fact you can not deny.

    C - Get back to playing Cooking Mama and crying like a bitch over how shit the latest Donkey Kong game is.

  • Kryon #155 4 years ago

    @Apolol

    "Ps3 is definatelly superior"

    Definitely eh? Funny, no one else seems to think so...and the games certainly don't indicate that, so technically superior or not, the PS3 is the inferior GAMES machine at present. I doubt this will ever change.

  • DFawkes #156 4 years ago

    Maybe it's just me, but even as a 360 fanboy I'd still love Portal, and recommend the Orange Box just for it. I've never even touched the Episodes yet, I usually go to play more HL2 and just play Portal again instead.

    Portal is awesome.

  • symbiote #157 4 years ago

    "one of the worst examples as yet of developers simply not bothering to properly make use of the hardware available to them."

    PS3lol? No. Never.

    Developerlol? Always.

    /gives the birdie to Valve who can kiss £40 goodbye
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 18:03

  • cawley1 #158 4 years ago

    "EA HAVE FUCKED UP EVERY 360 > PS3 PORT THEY HAVE RELEASED TO DATE.

    Whats worse, is that EA's stuff is far from the most technically advanced and demanding out there. They are just really incompetent/sloppy ports... end of story."

    While using my old-skool analogies, does anyone remember when the SNES went stateside and EA started to convert all their Megadrive output? The first year or so the ports were shit - Madden, Fifa and NHL all got an absolute drubbing.
    Bottom line is despite the differences, it is more than likely down to developer understanding of the different systems.

  • Kryon #159 4 years ago

    I love this, you all blame EA as much as you want but they are certainly not the only ones who put out shit PS3 ports. Infact every single PS3 port has been worse (bar Oblivion which had an extra years dev time, and even still there really wasn't a major improvement)...But no, it's nothing to do with the fact that the PS3 was poorly designed...no, no, it's all the devs fault ...Yeah..Ok then...

  • Pablo2k5 #160 4 years ago

    tonynibbles said... "However UTIII gives two-fingers up to shoddy PC ports."

    Wow, have you even played the PC version???

    It is exactly the same as the PS3 version... so if the PC version is shoddy erm then so is the PS3 version?!!?

  • Feanor #161 4 years ago

    'Don't forget the clever "Newell is lazy because he's fat" comments.'


    I think it's the other way around. :)

  • Drpwnage #162 4 years ago

    This has nothing to do with developers. Third party support is important for any console to succeed but Sony have made games development on the PS3 a costly pain in the arse for many companies who they rely on for support.

    The PS3 is undoubtedly a great piece of kit that has plenty of head room, however it seems developers would have preferred easier to use hardware (did Sony not run any Voice of Customer when they were designing the PS3?). With an extra year under it's belt Sony could have taken a faster multi-core processor than the 360 and the GeForce 8 series GPU from Nvidia. That combination would deliver far more than the Cell+RSX will do and from right out the blocks.

    Valve were one of the early investors and pioneers of multi-threaded code on the PC, that work has to be thrown in the bin for the PS3, why should they waste their time on learning the cell?
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 18:32

  • captainrentboy #163 4 years ago

    Apologie..... Apologie... You're a cunt!
    That will be all.

  • J.C #164 4 years ago

    There being generous, i would have given it a 7.
    PS3 can do better.

  • symbiote #165 4 years ago

    @Kryon

    Oblivion isn't the only one - DiRT on PS3 pisses all over the 360 version for framerate. And the PS3 isn't poorly designed, it's just a unique design that's throwing devs and highlighting those without the will to master it's unique architecture.

    Stick a shit driver in a powerful car with unique handling and you'll get a shit performance. That's the car's fault is it?

    Only a narrow minded cock with nothing better to do with his life like you would insist it's an incapable machine in light of quality graphical showcases like COD4 and UT3.

  • Drpwnage #166 4 years ago

    "Stick a shit driver in a powerful car with unique handling and you'll get a shit performance. That's the car's fault is it?"

    Forgive me for stretching your analogy!: It's the manufacturers fault! and why should 'drivers' tolerate it when they didn't want unique handling? and the same speed can be achieved in a simplified design :>.
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 18:45

  • fightman2 #167 4 years ago

    apparently some of the sony sycophants enjoy eating the shit from any senior sony executive....

    ....but the grade-a motherfuckers insist on the semi-solid stream straight out of the chairmans cock-loosened hole. and thats before they jet their jism over the soggy photo of sony-san above their bed.

  • fightman3b #168 4 years ago

    fairplay, i fucking hate sony's chairman - what a nob to allow the ps3 to be released in its crappy state - he'd obviously been spilling too much of his shit into the fanboys orifices, must've shat out some of his brain at the same time.

    thats the logical explanation anyway, but who knows with sony

  • onyxbox #169 4 years ago

    i feel sorry for the guys who did the port... i think they will have struggled to get this running because:

    a) wasn't their code
    b) the libraries would have been built for PC architecture
    c) the memory allocation in the PS3 is different
    d) all the tools for optimisation would probably have been for PC / XBox

    it's like porting a PC game to a Unix box with less ram and totally different graphics and processor architecture & libraries

    i bet they were just glad to get it out of the door.

    as for the argument that PS3 is doomed etc.... neither console is going anywhere this gen, and both systems are going to have some amazing games the only issue at the moment is 360 to PS3 ports and I'm sure developers will get their middleware to sort those issues out over time, it just a shame it hasn't happened sooner.

  • symbiote #170 4 years ago

    @drpwnage

    It's the manufacturers fault for pushing the envelope and doing something original?

    It's clear that, with talented 'drivers' the PS3 can equal the graphical perfomance of the 360 - a machine that has more VRAM availbale, a better graphics processor and an extremely user friendly and familiar structure. Fact. There's a good chance it will surpass it once 'drivers' truly master it. Factor in the things the Cell can do that the 360 simply cannot and the ludicrously big storage capacity of Bluray and, for my money, you've got an infinitely more inspiring and promising machine.

    Not to mention the fact it's near 100% RELIABLE and NOT akin to playing games in a fucking wind tunnel.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 19:00

  • patchbox360 #171 4 years ago



    so this game is as good as Gears of War hahaha oh dear

    lolreviews

  • BBIAJ #172 4 years ago

    @ symbiote:

    That's about the only thing that is better.

    You forgot to mention that there is also less geometary/geography, worse lighting effects, less fauna such as roadside grass etc.

    Yeah, really pissing all over the 360 version of DiRT is the PStriple version, I don't think...

  • fightman3b #173 4 years ago

    warzin: "Why do people use shit analogies constantly on gaming websites?"

    answer: its the best language to describe these cunts.

  • symbiote #174 4 years ago

    @BBIAJ

    "less fauna such as roadside grass etc"

    Dude, you can keep your fucking flowers - I'll take the framerate thankyou very much!

  • symbiote #175 4 years ago

    warzin: "Why do people use shit analogies constantly on gaming websites?

    Hm..I used a shit analogy? Er...oh yeah! I did describe Kryon as a turd a while back! Sorry, my bad.
    Edited by 3 at 14/12/07 @ 19:06

  • Drpwnage #176 4 years ago

    @Symbiote, I agree with your second paragraph, although the GPU is unlikely to be better than the 360 GPU.

    In response to your first, yes it is entirely Sony's fault if their hardware strategy and design choices for the PS3 has resulted in it being:

    i) a nightmare for their development partners to work with
    ii) increases development costs, reducing margin and ROI.

    The hardware performance could have been achieved in a more developer friendly configuration.

  • manic_mouse #177 4 years ago

    smelly - "A 360 is a pc in a box."

    How is it any moreso than than the PS3? They both run custom, out of order powerPC based processors, which last time I checked aren't in any PC.

    Just because it's from Microsoft doesn't mean it's a PC you know!

  • symbiote #178 4 years ago

    "GPU is unlikely to be better than the 360 GPU"

    Er, I know. That's, like, what I said!

    "The hardware performance could have been achieved in a more developer friendly configuration."

    Perhaps. Perhaps not. Maybe there's an easy way of creating an asymmetrical mulit-thread processor (I think I got that right) and maybe there isn't.

    The PS2 was also lambasted for being an arse to code for, but at the end of the day a challenge is not bad thing for a designer - quite the opposite I'd wager. At least PS3 owners can look forward to a steady increase in quality for years to come. For my money the 360's peaked already.

  • symbiote #179 4 years ago

    "smelly - "A 360 is a pc in a box."

    Er, aren't ALL consoles just PCs in a box?

  • Apologie #180 4 years ago

    The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, will be slightly inferior to the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC, but you've got much more processing power in the box so you're going to see a lot more physics, a lot more generated geometry. With water ripples, for example - they're pretty much algorithms, you have a flat plane of triangles and you run some sort of mathematical algorithm over it to generate a surface rippling effect - well, you will have the processing power to do these sorts of generated geometry effects On PS3. You could actually put one chip aside just to do that...

    First of all, as with Killzone developer Guerrilla in a recent online Q&A sesh, they were happy to point out that PS3 is not as complicated to write for as we've all been led to believe. Apparently, the machine's use of Open GL as its graphics API means that anyone who's ever written games for the PC will be intimately familiar with the set-up. In fact, PS3 employs a cut-down version named Open GL ES, which is even simpler .

    VERY IMPORTANT: "One last thing. Volatile reckon PS3 is going to be much better for HD cinematics than Xbox 360, thanks to its Blu-Ray storage medium. 20 minutes of HD-TV footage takes up around 4.7GB, so an Xbox 360 game would quickly run out of space. This is going to matter more in the coming years as movies and games merge and we see more film elements being brought across to games."

    It's only a matter of commitment..., and i apreciate the way Sony embraced the future in the console industry, they bet on the Cell with its revolutionary design, when they could just go the easy way.

    [link url=http://blogs .guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2006/01/27/possession_and_the _art_of_ps3_programming.html
    ]http://bl ogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archiv...[/link]
    Edited by 4 at 14/12/07 @ 19:46

  • smoothn00dle #181 4 years ago

    @Apologie

    Helloooo

    Love to see 360 fanboy get their arse kick *v*

  • Drpwnage #182 4 years ago

    "Perhaps. Perhaps not. Maybe there's an easy way of creating an asymmetrical mulit-thread processor (I think I got that right) and maybe there isn't."

    What does that mean though? why not cut the Cell back and put a FO big mean GPU in instead and achieve the same result for games.

    Development costs scale hugely with each generation, the harder something is to work with the more risk is involved. There are plenty of challenges for dev's in shoehorning there ideas into consoles anyway.

    I hope we start to see the best out of the PS3 shortly so I can buy one before PC's are too far off over the horizon and I lose interest in consoles.

  • symbiote #183 4 years ago

    @Apologie

    "The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, be slightly above the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC"

    Now as much as I like my PS3 and will defend it against ignorant, short-sighted fools, I think you're talking utter shite old bean.

  • wayn3h #184 4 years ago

    Consoles are PC's in a box? Where do you people get this drivel from? Seriously.

    The only console (that I'm aware of) that came close to being a PC in a box was XBOX. (And by PC I mean the literal meaning of PC being an x86 compatible device.)

  • GamesConnoisseur #185 4 years ago

    Few months ago, people commented on whether PS3 port of The Orange Box would be good etc, I believe that no one aside from rabid Xbots would believe that its got that bad (especially on Ep 2). I think the rest is playable enough and you would need to have the patience of saint for The Portal reloads after deaths.

    This game was supposed to be the highlight to close the year (after delays of Haze and UT3 in Europe), instead the reality is different to the previous expectation and the issues of coding for PS3 HW come back up again and again, and one more for the effect, goddamn again.

    People would be rightly be cautious of the multi ports games for PS3, especially as to if it would not be rendered unplayable in parts rather than just having lesser visual quality compared to X360 or PC.

    However to close PS3 owners is indeed correct to point to COD4, Dirt and The Oblivion as where PS3 can shine, there is one more game to give PS3 hope for 2008... Burnout Paradise!

    I have compared Burnout demo on both platform and indeed PS3 version shine even better than X360, as it should be, having been the lead platform. For the first time I m seriously leaning to get the PS3 version over X360.

    I expect in 2008 to have more balanced game library where either is better version to own.

  • Drpwnage #186 4 years ago

    Apologie you do talk some bollocks.

    The top PC cards are already miles ahead of the PS3. RSX is Nvidia's 2005 technology of which they are already 1.5 generations past.

    In addition don't forget the huge memory available on a PC Graphics card that allows beautiful effects smooth, sharp graphics.

  • captainrentboy #187 4 years ago

    ''VERY IMPORTANT: "One last thing. Volatile reckon PS3 is going to be much better for HD cinematics than Xbox 360, thanks to its Blu-Ray storage medium. 20 minutes of HD-TV footage takes up around 4.7GB, so an Xbox 360 game would quickly run out of space. This is going to matter more in the coming years as movies and games merge and we see more film elements being brought across to games."
    Again Apologie, that might be VERY IMPORTANT (not sure the caps were entirely necessary) for you, although for most people the necessity of having an HD cutscene rather than making do with an SD one in a console game probably comes waaaay waaaaay behind the importance of having amazing Gameplay, Impressive AI, Good story, Good graphics, Good Multi-player, Meaty set pieces, so on and so forth.
    So you see, once again you're talking utter fucking drivel :)
    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 19:39

  • TRUTH #188 4 years ago

    Urm Call Of Duty 4 was better on 360...I've noticed the lighing and textures and framerate (there's the odd drop on PS3 version) are better on 360.

    So Crysis can be done on a PS3 'APOLOGIE' - you continue to make a joke of yourself.



    Edited by 1 at 14/12/07 @ 19:53

  • Darren #189 4 years ago

    symbiote - "@BBIAJ

    "less fauna such as roadside grass etc"

    Dude, you can keep your fucking flowers - I'll take the framerate thankyou very much!"

    Well said!

    All the things BBIAJ said are barely noticeable when comparing the two demos directly. What is noticeable though is that the PS3 has a better framerate and far less tearing. That is an example of a developer compromising the visuals slightly to get better performance and I wish they'd all do that instead of making the game look uber-pretty for the game box but have it run like a dog, e.g. Mass Effect!

  • George-Roper #190 4 years ago

    My my my. Where are the 'urbans', 'JYM60s' and 'ElNino9s' of the world, right now?

    Oh yeah, that's right, they're probably in the 'Oh well, Half Life 2 wasn't my cup of tea anyway' camp, aren't they.

    However, I can see a lesser spotted 'cthulhu_steev' over there. Hey 'steev. What do you reckon to this shambles then, eh?

  • TRUTH #191 4 years ago

    [link url=http://www.gameplayer.com.au/Home/PREVIEWS/ PREVIEWGAME/tabid/1484/Default.aspx?CID=bb1443ed-30f8-4eb2-b 212-8926111caf49&v7Pager=3
    ]http://ww w.gameplayer.com.au/Home/PREVIE...[/link]

    Why Splinter Cell Convection won't be hitting the PS3.

  • Scimarad #192 4 years ago

    If they can't be arsed do a proper game just because Gabe Newell is a twat then I can't be arsed to buy it.

  • NotSoSlim #193 4 years ago

    @Truth

    Its a developers opinion. Other developr say similar things about 360

    Who cares?????

  • George-Roper #194 4 years ago

    @NotSoSlim

    "Its a developers opinion. Other developr say similar things about 360

    Who cares?????"

    Maybe PS3 owners who wanted to buy the game? Maybe?

  • AOFanboi #195 4 years ago

    Why do all the hateful X-bots spend their "waiting for the last RRoD replacement" time in this thread when they should be lambasting Microsoft instead?

    Oh, that's right, brainwash.

  • smelly #196 4 years ago

    @AOFanboi.. To be fair.. it's no worse than the people in this thread:

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article_discussion.php? article_id=89350
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article_discuss...[/link]

  • Vic #197 4 years ago

    PS3 couldnt handle the AI in the new Splinter Cell game

    What a load of bollocks - and you call yourself the TRUTH!


    EDIT: Gran Turismo Prologue is graphically more impressive than any other console game on the market. I think that puts the PS3 inferiority claims from fanboys like Kyron and Garulon to bed.

  • NickNack #198 4 years ago

    Ubisfot did actually say Splinter cell was not possible on PS3 in its current form so you may want to chill out.

    People get so angry over video games, it's sad to see grown men act like fucking ten year old girls arguing over their favourite Spice girl.

  • Dizzy #199 4 years ago

    "Gran Turismo Prologue is graphically more impressive than any other console game on the market"

    As is every new PS3 game. Incredible that the PS3 has the most amazing game on the market every month. It is not gonna happen guys... let it go. Just enjoy the exclusives and stop the whining. Sony got you (and your money)... but you still have a good Bluray player and a console that plays games just as good as a 360. You just have a few less games.
    Edited by 2 at 14/12/07 @ 21:11

  • Vic #200 4 years ago

    But we know its bullshit PR by Ubisoft.

  • TRUTH #201 4 years ago

    Vic

    Hardly any interaction with the scenery, no damage to cars, and PGR4 still looks as good. Hope they improve the robot and basic A.I from previous GT.

  • fightman3b #202 4 years ago

    apparently some of the sony sycophants enjoy eating the shit from any senior sony executive....

    ....but the grade-a motherfuckers insist on the semi-solid stream straight out of the chairmans cock-loosened hole. and thats before they jet their jism over the soggy photo of sony-san above their bed.

  • Kryon #203 4 years ago

    @symbiote

    I like the way you use games like COD4 as examples of the PS3s amazing power, perhaps you should read EG's opinion on the subject, You'll find that once again it is an inferior port compared to the 360 version. I know you have a primate mind but again dirt had a good few months extra dev time on PS3 so again this is not an equal comparison, ofcourse games released on either system will be refined if the developers are given extra time.

    "And the PS3 isn't poorly designed, it's just a unique design that's throwing devs"

    Just like a Porsche with the steering wheel located in the boot, yes, it's still a car and may have a powerful engine but it is difficult to drive for obvious reasons...Is this a well designed car? ...No it isn't you fucking cripple.

  • Vic #204 4 years ago

    'PGR4 still looks as good'

    Dont make me laugh. Have you even seen it in motion?

    @ Kyron

    Please dont try to bluff us into thinking COD4 is better on 360. Its virtually identical, though the PS3 version has better lighting and also runs a bit smoother.

    You hate PS3. We get it.

  • Kryon #205 4 years ago

    @Vic

    I don't need to 'bluff' you into anything regarding COD4, read the EG comparison or check GameRankings.... Don't cry mate.

  • Vic #206 4 years ago

    I've seen the Gamtrailers video review, they didnt seem to notice this 'inferiority'.

    My bet is that you've never even played the PS3 version, or many of the PS3 games you are so quick to 'diss'.


    EDIT: Why am I arguing with rabid MS cock-jockey?

  • Kryon #207 4 years ago

    @Victoria (I call you that because you whine like a bitch)

    GameRankings is a cumulative review site, not the view of one single person, if you don't like the facts then shut your mouth, it seems you've just been pwned...

  • convercide #208 4 years ago

    As good as Halo then...

    Sorry, couldn't refuse.

  • Vic #209 4 years ago

    But Kyron, you like to claim that PS3 is underpowered, yet Uncharted and GT Prologue suggest that is nonsense. Take your dick out of your hand for a second, and think about that.

    Didnt want to start a comparison war, but one year on from Gears' and it still hasnt been surpassed on 360.

  • Apologie #210 4 years ago

    symbiote

    "@Apologie

    "The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, be slightly above the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC"

    Now as much as I like my PS3 and will defend it against ignorant, short-sighted fools, I think you're talking utter shite old bean."

    -------------------------------------------

    Ps3 with GranTurismo5, Uncharted:Drakes Fortune, Killzone 2, Metal GEar Solid 4 etc.. are only competing with the top-end graphics cards on the Pc's. (graphics wise the X360 have distant 3rd place)

    Just as an example, have you guy's seen videos and pictures of GT5, it's the most realistic graphics and videography to date, simply amazing. I can't even imagine what other suprises will appear in 2008.

    PS: i'm not saying that X360 is shit (i love Gears of War, it's a very impressive game "visually the best seen on the system";) but in the end, x360 is unquestionably inferior to both Pc's and Ps3... i know many of you will come with guns blazing, but not too far from now, will get to the same conclusion.
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 00:19

  • Drpwnage #211 4 years ago

    Apologie your talking bollocks again be quiet.

  • Isere #212 4 years ago

    Thread summary:

    ''My scraps are better than your scraps''

  • viper_h #213 4 years ago

    fuck this, i couldn't be bothered reading all this shit.

    ps3lol.

    In summary, get a decent PC and a Wii. Everything good that's on the 360 is done better on the PC and the Wii has unique decent games and a good control system.
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 06:25

  • monkey-ken-wizard #214 4 years ago

    Its not a good day to be a Sony fanboy

  • Amoebalove #215 4 years ago

    @Apologie


    Ps3 with GranTurismo5, Uncharted:Drakes Fortune, Killzone 2, Metal GEar Solid 4 etc.. are only competing with the top-end graphics cards on the Pc's. (graphics wise the X360 have distant 3rd place)

    NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God you talk some crap!!!!!

  • symbiote #216 4 years ago

    "Consoles are PC's in a box? Where do you people get this drivel from? Seriously."

    Ok, maybe if we're going to get anal, they're not. But when I see a hard drive, motherboard, GPU, CPU, USB, Ethernet, disc drive etc. I see a PC.

    And Kryon, it's become monotously predictable to see you resorting to swearing and bad-mouhing when the discussion gets tough for you. I ask how can the PS3 equal the 360s graphics (as it has in certain cases) when it has an inferior graphics card and less RAM and you call me a "fucking cripple".

    Have you any idea how much you come across like an angry, spoilt little boy who uses personal insults as a desperate attempt to wind people up when all else fails?
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 10:39

  • Apologie #217 4 years ago

    Some of you can be really stupid: "The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, be slightly above the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC"... these is the opinion of a Dev, not mine assholes... but i do think that Ps3 and Pc's are both above the Xbox360 in terms of graphics capabilities...

  • BBIAJ #218 4 years ago

    Apologie in "not my own opinion, I C+P'd it from elsewhere on the web!" shocker LOL!

  • wayn3h #219 4 years ago

    Apologie; I have been following your posts for a while now and have come to the solid conclusion that you are a complete and utter idiot. I really do mean that.

    I really have not read so much bile from one person in my entire life.

  • DjFlex52 #220 4 years ago

    Damn, Apologie, do you bleed Sony blood?
    Someone has to think of a new description for your kind because "fanboy" isnt a strong enough name.

    Comparing a PS3 to a 2008 high end PC is just utterly ridiculous. You do know that the PS3 only has a tweaked 7800 graphics card, right?

  • TRUTH #221 4 years ago

    VIC:

    I am lucky to have a PS3 & 360...COD 4 is BETTER on 360. Uncharted is probably the best graphics on PS3 - but it's not a game that has surpassed GOW - The textures, action onscreen, animation, lighting is still ahead. Uncharted is a quiet a small game, fairly liner and does not throw the same amount of effects and action as GOW.

    Virtua Fighter 5 looks better on 360...and remember Sony claimed it's only possible on PS3. The fact is some of the best games released have been a 2nd choice on PS3 - The Orange Box, Ghost Recon 2, Rainbow Six Vegas, Virtua Fighter 5, COD 3 & 4, Assassin Creed (360 looks better & fluid frame rate), Sega Rally...etc.

    The fact is one of the best games of the last 5yrs The Orange Box is a 2nd rate game on PS3. If I didn't have a 360 too, I'll be a little pissed off by know that this continues to happen - frequently!
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 11:40

  • Kryon #222 4 years ago

    @Vic

    "But Kyron, you like to claim that PS3 is underpowered"

    Hmm, so you lose the argument and try to move the goal posts while fabricating things I haven't said... Clever boy..The problem is that I never called the PS3 'underpowered'. I called it poorly designed, and for gaming purposes it is. You use Uncharted as an example of the PS3s 'incredible' power, fair play, it's the only game that makes me even slightly interested in the system BUT lets not forget that Naughty Dog had dev kits well over two years ago now and their 'amazing' Tomb Raider rip off is still not technically as impressive as Gears of War, you may prefer the artistic direction but that's another issue all together. If you're going to be a Sony zealot, at least take a leaf from Apologies book, i.e. don't pretend to be smart, at least I believe Apologie believes what he says (even though no one else does). I don't think you even believe your own bullshit...sad

  • Kryon #223 4 years ago

    @Apolol

    "The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, be slightly above the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC"

    You see, I have no retort for Apolol and his primitive intellect, he is clearly deranged and hence deserves our compassion and understanding ...Poor, poor guy :'(

  • Apologie #224 4 years ago

    @TRUTH @Kryon

    You belong to the worst kind of fanboy.... GOW are not better then Uncharted, on the contrary, Uncharted have some of the most detailed graphics ever seen, you don't find better foliage or water in a console game (it shimmers realistically, and when Nathan comes out from the water, his clothes are actually shiny and wet), excelent body animations (lip-sync and facial animations are top notch too) features realistic shadows, the scenery is full of life, grass and trees move with the wind, birds flying, waterfalls etc... everything is dynamic, Uncharted's environments are huge too, nothing like Gears of war. Gameplay wise, in uncharted you have the perfect balance between exploration/puzzle solving and action, you can actually swim and jump... (something Gears didn't offer). Overall, Uncharted is way more impressive then Gears, both artistically and technically... only a small minded fool like you can continue to live in denial.

    And Uncharted is just a glimpse of what we can expect from future games.
    Edited by 2 at 15/12/07 @ 12:35

  • Apologie #225 4 years ago

    ParanoidZombie

    GOW is +/- 8hrs as well... but that's not even the point, i'm not discussing multiplayer or a co-op feature here, (i can alway's trow at you that the achivements Uncharted offer are more satisfactory and result in much more replay value then GOW ever offered, or that the game don't have loading times etc...), but for now i'm just looking at the graphics/gameplay (from a technicall point of view) so, again... why are ou running away from the issue???

  • Dizzy #226 4 years ago

    >You see, I have no retort for Apolol and his primitive intellect

    Just put him on ignore... I did ages ago and it feels more sane in here. If everybody just ignores him life would be sooooo much more peaceful. He is a total nutcase anyway.
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 13:02

  • Apologie #227 4 years ago

    Dizzy

    "Just put him on ignore... I did ages ago and it feels more sane in here. If everybody just ignores him life would be sooooo much more peaceful."

    that's the most ignorant comment i ever seen... "let's put on ignore all people that dont agree with us".... lol, very impressive. If i were just as retarded, Kryon, Turth etc... would be on that list long ago, but unfortunally, i'm just human, not all mighty good like some Dizzy's seem to think about themselfes. (and as strange as that may sound to you, i actually like to discuss things with people that don't agree with me, it's more intresting that way).
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 13:28

  • Rich72 #228 4 years ago

    apologie..... is that your name in fact a statement? do you not understand the concept of the ignore feature? i don't think Dizzy heard you!

  • Kryon #229 4 years ago

    Dizzy mate, I know you're right, but I treat Apolol like my court jester. You must admit that his attempts at conversation are kinda funny ;)

  • Garulon #230 4 years ago

    @GamesConnesur
    "I have compared Burnout demo on both platform and indeed PS3 version shine even better than X360, as it should be, having been the lead platform. For the first time I m seriously leaning to get the PS3 version over X360. "

    Are you mental? They look identical!

  • dryden555 #231 4 years ago

    The notion that console games will always look and play better than PC games is a huge misconception that game publishers want to make sure continues. Console games cost more than PC games. Of course console games are fun but I'm also seeing lots of cruddy framerates and no anti-aliasing in "next-gen" console games . If you want to play HL2, play it on a PC to get the most out of it. And you even get to use a mouse -- no auto-aiming as one gets using console controllers.

  • Kryon #232 4 years ago

    OK, listen, I'm what idiots call an 'XBot' and yes I believe (infact I Know) that the 360 is the best console FOR GAMES at present but I'm still not spasticated enough to try and convince people that consoles will ever outdo PCs. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE PCs will always have the edge as they are subject to constant upgrades, FACT! Anyone who disputes this is an utter cretin (i.e. Apolol and his irk)

  • BBIAJ #233 4 years ago

    Apolilol: "and when Nathan comes out from the water, his clothes are actually shiny and wet"

    Erm, Tomb Raider: Legend much?

    I thought so...

  • BBIAJ #234 4 years ago

    @ Darren:

    I like how deficiencies in PStriple games are fine when it suits you, but were they apparent in a 360 game, then all of a sudden it's teh worst thing evarz!

  • fightman3b #235 4 years ago

    all you that still claim the ps3 is great - go and suck out the shit from the arsehole of sony's chairman, you know you want to.

    chew on it. taste it. swallow it. eat that sony chairman's shit you cunts.
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 15:09

  • andromeda #236 4 years ago

    @fightman3b

    good lord i hope i never meet you.

  • Vic #237 4 years ago

    I'm not changing anything mate. Virtually all PS3 owners will be happy with their version of COD4. Your attempts of belittling a perfect port are embarrassing.

    'Uncharted not technically as impressive as Gears of War'

    Do me a favour. Gears' is virtually all brown, has typical UE3 textures, and is uncreative in terms of art. Compare that with Uncharted which is beautiful to look at, and doesnt get boring despite the setting. In fact, didnt its reviewer on this very site, question whether it could even be done on 360? I bet that must have sent you into a rage after you had finished crying...Halo 3 and Mass Effect come out a year after Gears' yet despite the odd nice touch, they cant even surpas it. Instead, they are outshone by Heavenly Sword, Ratchet, Uncharted, COD 4, Assassins Creed, GT Prologue...Speaking of Mass Effect, the frame rate is laughable!

    Lol, the only reason you prefer Apologie is because he's your PS3 equivalent! Your little contests are an embarassment to this forum. Dont pretend to be smart? You post the same thing over-and-over again!

  • miiiguel #238 4 years ago

    Why ppl continue to nit-pick stuff to claim 360 can't do PS3 stuff (or vice-versa?). I thought everybody would know by now that the games when made proprely are virtual identical. Like:
    "look! look! look that 3 pixels shadow moving just after I did that 32-hit combo! Did you see that? 360 can't do that shit!!! ha ha! I knew it! I got the power!"

    Uncharted eventually couldn't be perform this good on a 360...? Why do you always pick exclusives for such claims? There are plenty of multi-plat games around to do such comparisions.

    Yet speaking again about Halo 3 (all mighty Halo, everyone speaks about thee!): I would like to know where did Halo 3 failed?
    - Superlative a plenty critics allover? Check!
    - Financial Success? Check!
    - Gamers with no "political/esoteric" problem towards MS/360/Halo had/have, in fact, a hell of great time playing it? Check!
    - Push a few thousands 360's (yeh, even in Japan) ? Check!
    - Millions of Live hours ? check!
    - Dozens of merchandising contracts with major companies? Check!

    Did it fail because some ppl who long, long time before it came out said it sux? How could anyone change that? In which way Halo could please those fellows video-gamers? I bet no way but to be released in other platform.


    PS3 owners continue to claim they're machine is the technological god Sony suits said... and the future is looking bright each morning... for a while now...
    Meanwhile 360'ers do play games, Wiiers buy loads and loads of those boxes.
    Edited by 2 at 15/12/07 @ 16:04

  • Apologie #239 4 years ago

    Some of you can be really stupid: "The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, be slightly above the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC"... these is the opinion of a Dev, not mine assholes... but i do think that Ps3 and Pc's are both above the Xbox360 in terms of graphics capabilities...

    Kryon an fightman3b... both of you are nuts.

    Rich72

    apologie..... is that your name in fact a statement? do you not understand the concept of the ignore feature? i don't think Dizzy heard you!

    yes i do, but i alway's answer no matter what...

    Ps3 is much more then just a gaming system, it will include "DVR capabilities," media center-like functionality "high def movie and TV episode downloads over the online service are a definite, kind of like the iTunes Music Store.", commercial content tie-ins, and HOME.
    high dynamic range lighting can be done on the Cell rather than the RSX
    graphics chip. This demonstrates that although the Cell chip will be
    extremely useful for complex physics and A.I., it will also be capable
    of powering hardcore mathmatical graphics problems itself, sending
    results to the render hardware... you see, it's new technologie (nothing like the common technologie used in X360) Ps3 opens many many possibilities that can and will be explored in order to produce even more astonishing results... X360 is predictable in technical terms, and for now on, it will only rely on the artistic concept of dev's to impress, because graphically speaking, there is not much room to improve after what gears showed to us.
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 16:09

  • miiiguel #240 4 years ago

    Every now and then (last time was two days ago when I bought an Elite), I think about getting a PS3, but then I remember some of its segregational crowd.
    Some do seem blinded or doped with Sony PR BS..., kinda scary.

  • Trane #241 4 years ago

    "that's the most ignorant comment i ever seen... "let's put on ignore all people that dont agree with us".... lol, very impressive. If i were just as retarded, Kryon, Turth etc... would be on that list long ago, but unfortunally, i'm just human, not all mighty good like some Dizzy's seem to think about themselfes. (and as strange as that may sound to you, i actually like to discuss things with people that don't agree with me, it's more intresting that way)."

    Apologie, you have to be the single most deluded and idiotic person whose words I have ever had the misfortue of reading. The other guys you have mentioned there do spout some crap but are not impossible to reason with, and actually make some decent points and comparisons.

    Go and crawl in a hole and don't come out you spanner.
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 16:10

  • Amoebalove #242 4 years ago

    @ apologie

    'i actually like to discuss things with people that don't agree with me'

    no you don't! you try to force your misguided opinions down everyone else's throat, you lie about things then when you get found out you try to change the subject completely or disappear off the thread altogether!

    if i were a gentleman i'd say 'you sir are a cad' but i'm not so i'll stick to what most people seem to be saying you, apologie you are a CUNT!

  • Vic #243 4 years ago

    'Some do seem blinded or doped with Sony PR BS..., kinda scary.'

    But all YOU do Miguel, is slate the PS3 and talk (at great length) about how great the 360 is in comparison. So you are the broken-English MS equivalent.

  • evilboo #244 4 years ago

    apologie is ok. wash your mouth out!

  • George-Roper #245 4 years ago

    @Apologie

    "Ps3 is much more then just a gaming system, it will include "DVR capabilities," media center-like functionality "high def movie and TV episode downloads over the online service are a definite, kind of like the iTunes Music Store.", commercial content tie-ins, and HOME.
    high dynamic range lighting can be done on the Cell rather than the RSX
    graphics chip. This demonstrates that although the Cell chip will be
    extremely useful for complex physics and A.I., it will also be capable
    of powering hardcore mathmatical graphics problems itself, sending
    results to the render hardware... you see, it's new technologie (nothing like the common technologie used in X360) Ps3 opens many many possibilities that can and will be explored in order to produce even more astonishing results... X360 is predictable in technical terms, and for now on, it will only rely on the artistic concept of dev's to impress, because graphically speaking, there is not much room to improve after what gears showed to us."

    And yet again, you change the subject. The subject is, PS3 version of Orangebox is shite compared against the X360 and PC versions.

    I really don't give a flying fuck about how great the PS3 'will be'. I want greatness now. Not in 12 months time.

  • captainrentboy #246 4 years ago

    ''I'd say let's put Apologie, Kryon, captainrentboy, Garulon, TRUTH and smelly in room and watch what happens. Whoever comes out alive has won the console war and gets a lolipop. ''
    They're all fucking dead men, I will fight to the death for Mr Gates' honour/penis any time any where, and I'm also a big fan of lollipops.
    Bring it on!!!!

  • UncleLou #247 4 years ago

    It's like an arena for the intellectually callenged, and they're all there.

  • captainrentboy #248 4 years ago

    Intellectually callenged huh? I fucking love it :)

  • Yeevle #249 4 years ago

    Bugger, I forgot me popcorn again.

  • Apologie #250 4 years ago

    "And yet again, you change the subject. The subject is, PS3 version of Orangebox is shite compared against the X360 and PC versions."

    that's not surprising at all, as i mentioned before the arquitechture of the ps3 is completely different from anything available in the industry... it's not only evolutionary but also "revolutionary" wich makes games like the orange box harder to port... they must be developed in a different way, basically from scratch, otherwise we can expect a pretty lame job, like we all know. On the other hand, if you maximise your code in order to take advantage of the ps3 capabilities, then you will have incredible games like Uncharted, GT5, Ratchet&Clank etc... (i will not mention Metal GEar Solid 4, Killzone 2, God of war 3 etc.., because they are not out yet, but we all can already predict how amazing they will be).

    fact is that most of you "in time" will buy the damn thing so why all the hate twards a system that will give everyone the chance to play amazing games??? it's not PR bullshit, it's the truth...
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 18:05

  • mike_mgoblue #251 4 years ago

    Playstation 3 is simply a disappointing system.

    Purchasing a Playstation 3 for $399 is a poor decision, because it doesn't even play PS2 games.

    And the $499 version is still not compatible with all PS2 games.

    Playstation 3 really is such a big disappointment.

    Comparisons:

    (1) TIME Magazine recently gave Halo 3 the "Best Game of the Year" Award.

    (2) TIME Magazine and USA Today said the Playstation 3 was "The Biggest Disappointment of the Year."

    *** Just look at how ALL of the magazines and websites give much more positive reviews to the overwhelming majority of Xbox 360 games.

    *** Bottom Line: Xbox 360 will ALWAYS be a year ahead of the Playstation 3...Xbox 360 will ALWAYS be easier to develop games for...Xbox 360 will ALWAYS have a bigger and better library of games!

  • George-Roper #252 4 years ago

    @Apologie

    All you ever bang on about is 'how good it will be'. Do you realise how long the console has actually been out?

    Has it not dawned on you yet that if devs can't get their heads around the power of teh Cell, by now, they just may not be able to do it at all?

    How is it in Sonys interest to keep all this wonderful knowledge held back? Wouldn't they be bending over backwards to get devs up to speed sooner rather than later?

  • Apologie #253 4 years ago

    George Roper

    As you know, X360 didn't had any major game until the end of it's first year (with the arrival of GEars of War).. well, Ps3 at the the end of the first year have Uncharted:DrakesFortune, Ratchet&Clank:TOD, Warhawk, REsistance Fall of Man, unreal Tourment 3, Heavenly Sword, Folklore and Motorstorm, good ports like, Oblivion, Dirt, Fight Night 3, COD4... and if we look forward to 2008, it can only be better, Metal GEar Solid 4, GT5, Killzone2, Haze, Little Big Planet Resistance:FOM 2, "HOME" etc...
    iam pleased with that catalogue of games, and will be even more with the arrival of all thouse amazing titles in the upcoming year so..., ps3, if you think seriously about it, have plenty to play right now, and will have even more in the future.

  • captainrentboy #254 4 years ago

    Once again Apologie, in YOUR opinion the 360 only had one top title in its first year. Judging by what you were willing to class as a TOP title on the PS3 this year it would seem you've clearly forgotten what came out on the 360 in its first 12 months.
    You do realise that YOUR opinion doesn't actually make something 100% scientific fact, yes?

  • DjFlex52 #255 4 years ago

    As you know, X360 didn't had any major game until the end of it's first year (with the arrival of GEars of War).. well, Ps3 at the the end of the first year have Uncharted:DrakesFortune, Ratchet&Clank:TOD, Warhawk, REsistance Fall of Man, unreal Tourment 3, Heavenly Sword, Folklore and Motorstorm, good ports like, Oblivion, Dirt, Fight Night 3, COD4... and if we look forward to 2008, it can only be better, Metal GEar Solid 4, GT5, Killzone2, Haze, Little Big Planet Resistance:FOM 2, "HOME" etc...
    iam pleased with that catalogue of games, and will be even more with the arrival of all thouse amazing titles in the upcoming year so..., ps3, if you think seriously about it, have plenty to play right now, and will have even more in the future.

    @Apologie

    Hate to burst your bubble but 360 had at least 4 games selling 1 million in the first year while its been a tough year for Sony in sellling a million games. You must have forgotten Oblivion, Saints' Row, Dead Rising, PGR3, GRAW, Call Of Duty 2, FN3, Burnout Revenge, NFS Most Wanted, Just Cause etc. And I even left out a bunch of games so you wouldnt feel too pwned ;)

  • TRUTH #256 4 years ago

    APOLOGIE:

    Half those games you list are multiformat. The exclusives you list are nothing ahead on 360. You keep claiming the futures bright, but so far Sony seems to be losing ground...Why do you keep going on about Killzone 2; The 1st was tripe, KZ2 looks like much of the same from the footage but with improved graphics...Metal Gear Solid 4 - come on! 2 & 3 wasn't exactly really that great. I actually prefer to play a game, not watch endless cut scenes. The reason i prefer my stealth games with Splinter Cell.

    I said it before and I'll say it again...The 360 has the best exclusives, best multiformat games, best PC/360 conversions, larger exclusive IP, better online gaming and still better graphics!...Why would I feel the PS3 is better for gaming as I haven't seen or played a game that has convinced me.

    Also now the backward capabilities is now removed from PS3 - it's sort of another reason NOT to buy a PS3. Just finished Rachet 7 Clank - not really a change from PS2 versions - nice graphics - but again nothing to surpass a 360. Didn't sell that well did it!
    Edited by 1 at 15/12/07 @ 20:07

  • GamesConnoisseur #257 4 years ago

    Gaurlon

    "@GamesConnesur
    "I have compared Burnout demo on both platform and indeed PS3 version shine even better than X360, as it should be, having been the lead platform. For the first time I m seriously leaning to get the PS3 version over X360. "

    Are you mental? They look identical! "


    Please do not consider me anywhere close to some of Sony apologists (no names mentioned!) but as I said this is the only one game for the blasted first time I thought does look a bit better on Ps3 as I DID ran them side by side. I posted comment in the Burnout thread about this.

    They play the same yes, X360 controller is better than DS3, the ebrake was a bit too sensitive on DS3. What was interesting is that on X360 the same section of road had less reflections and lightening effects compared to PS3 version on the very same stretch. Though I thought billboard textures do look a little less jaggies on X360.

    But the lightening and cool tones made PS3 version more visually pretty but X360 is only close behind (using warm orange tones instead of cool bluish for some puzzling reason).

    At first glance they both do looked identical I agree, but I did give both versions a good 30 minutes (maybe not scientific enough!).

    If I m proven wrong, quite happy to be corrected. But it was clear to me from my sessions with both that PS3 do have an edge. Admittingly very rare and I know the advantages are disputed on Oblivion and Dirt but the minor advantages of quicker loads and smoother frame rates for respective games are something to be considered as pluses. Not that they have persuaded me I should get PS3 over X360 for multi plat games. Only one game so far that is... Burnout.

    Hell I really need to build up my pitiful PS3 game library against towering X360 collection!
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 12:50

  • darkphoenix #258 4 years ago

    Thank you Belenenses!!

  • Apologie #259 4 years ago

    darkphoenix

    "Thank you Belenenses!!"

    don't celebrate yet seu tripeiro..., still a long way to go.

    Benfica will be the champion...;)
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 00:13

  • foamy #260 4 years ago

    foda-se, só podia ser português. Pqtp pá, só dás má imagem ao país :|

  • fightman3b #261 4 years ago

    take out the sony chairmans stinky nob from his trousers and suck on it, you ps3 lovers. and dont forget to lick out all the cheesy smeg from under his fucking foreskin.

    once you've done that, to show your love of his crap-system, he will require you all to lie under his shitty arse while he dumps his lunchtime curry out of his gapey hole all over your fucking faces.

    you will wash your ps3-faces in his runny shit and then pop the latest ps3 game into the console in front of him.

    oh, and while his liquidised turd drips down the side of your face and onto the dualshock3 dont forget that the ps3 also plays blu-ray discs (so everything is ok really you fucking cunts)

    that is all

  • mkreku #262 4 years ago

    I'm so glad I read through all those 290 comments in this thread... Or not.

    I've lost all hope for mankind now :(

  • gourry #263 4 years ago

    lordy - its the whole speccy and c64 fights all over again!

    my bollocks are larger than yours! - nuff said

  • Kryon #264 4 years ago

    ''I'd say let's put Apologie, Kryon, ''I'd say let's put Apologie, Kryon, captainrentboy, Garulon, TRUTH and smelly in room and watch what happens. Whoever comes out alive has won the console war and gets a lolipop. ''

    Hmm, this would not turn out well, theoretically captainrentboy, Garulon, TRUTH and my good self would all be on the same side hence would easily win but in actual fact I think Apolol would kill us all, he has the conviction of a suicide bomber on his side. In his primate-like monkey brain he knows Sony is God and he answers to no higher power. Also, I personally have weaknesses that could be exploited like the fact I have a family and wife to look after, these are things I value more than my consoles, Apolol will never have such weaknesses because girls don't like him. The reason I've not yet mentioned smelly is because he's a Cooking Mama playing pussy who would cry like a biatch at the thought of really going up against me or anyone else, even a six year old girl would make him tremble in fear and wet his Mario panties.

  • Kryon #265 4 years ago

    @Vic

    "I'm not changing anything mate. Virtually all PS3 owners will be happy with their version of COD4. Your attempts of belittling a perfect port are embarrassing. "

    There you go again, fabricating nonsense! I have made no attempt to belittle anything. All I said was that the majority of reviewers think the 360 version of COD4 to be marginally better than the PS3 version. This is not belittlement, this is a cold hard fact, EG knows it, GameRankings knows it and so do you! If the truth upsets you then that's your problem, isn't it.

    However I agree that PS3 fans will be happy with their version of the game, lets be honest, you guys are used to getting inferior ports the vast majority of the time so I assume it's just something you either except or (the more tarded of you) choose to ignore/deny. Again this is a fact so don't start crying again.

  • Kryon #266 4 years ago

    @symbiote

    Hmm, first you call me "a narrow minded cock with nothing better to do with his life"

    Baring in mind that before this comment, I had made no personal insult towards you.

    Then you say this: And Kryon, it's become monotously predictable to see you resorting to swearing and bad-mouhing when the discussion gets tough for you

    You see, that's why I like chatting on here because fools like you seem to forget that everyone can read and re-read the conversation hence they can see what a contradictory fucking cripple you are. By the way it's spelt 'monotonously' ..

  • captainrentboy #267 4 years ago

    I guess it was only me that was furiously wanking off to fightman3b's post then?...... That was some erotic shit.

  • symbiote #268 4 years ago

    @Kryon

    I never said I was perfect, I just save the trash-talking for the truly deserving unlike you who seems to use it as standard practice.

    By the way it's spelt 'Bearing'..

  • Kryon #269 4 years ago

    Missing a single letter from a word that is otherwise spelt correctly is usually put down to a 'typo' rather then being a spelling mistake. That's why I didn't pull you up on the phrase 'bad-mouhing'. When a word is spelt like this 'monotously' though it does make you look like a fucking cripple.

  • symbiote #270 4 years ago

    And speaking about being able to re-read things:

    "All I said was that the majority of reviewers think the 360 version of COD4 to be marginally better than the PS3 version. This is not belittlement, this is a cold hard fact, EG knows it, GameRankings knows it and so do you! If the truth upsets you then that's your problem, isn't it."

    The ‘truth’ eh? Let’s see what EG actually did say:

    "There's the occasional better-looking texture on 360, offset by some more accomplished effects (like the rain in the cargo ship mission) and less blocky shadows on the PlayStation 3 rendition of the game"

    This is conclusive evidence that = 360 COD4 > PS3? Perhaps in the eyes of an Xbot I guess…

    And from what I can see on Gamerankings, the sites that reviewed both versions gave the PS3 the exact same score as the 360 version and the rest don't appear in each others list. Indeed, the 360 has nearly twice the number of reviews. Clearly your mathematical and statistical skills need work if you're going to use the average of two unequal quantities as the basis for a solid argument whilst ignoring the similar and equal entries in each list.

  • Kryon #271 4 years ago

    "mE naim are teh symbiote, I are wonking ova ME own tytteez, Mi fynd it monotous bot Mee liek it booga booga ruff ruff. PEE-HYess FREEE MUU GRAGHur RUFF"



  • symbiote #272 4 years ago

    LMFAO!

    So you can miss a single letter out and still remain the oracle of all things yet I miss out two and I'm a fucking cripple! This shit needs printing and framing for posterity!

    /falls of chair in stitches

  • symbiote #273 4 years ago

    ""mE naim are teh symbiote, I are wonking ova ME own tytteez, Mi fynd it monotous bot Mee liek it booga booga ruff ruff. PEE-HYess FREEE MUU GRAGHur RUFF"

    Will someone please pass Kryon his crayons before he has a seizure...

  • Kryon #274 4 years ago

    @symbiote

    Why did you just cut and paste that EG snippet while forgetting to leave in the part about online? Hmmm, I wonder?

  • Yaz #275 4 years ago

    Hmmm, I'm tempted to jump in.

    But do I have the time?

    Decisions, decisions. ;)

  • Kryon #276 4 years ago

    "Of slightly more consequence is that the loading times on the PS3 game are noticeably longer: anything from 10 to 15 seconds longer compared to the same data being streamed in on Xbox 360."

    Forget that bit aswell eh?

    "the lure of Achievements potentially offering further replay value for owners of the Microsoft console"

    Oh, and that bit?

    So basically the games visuals can be argued to be better on either system but 360 has much better load times and more features hence is the better product. Don't cry mate.

  • Kryon #277 4 years ago

    @symbiote

    Well, I'll take your silence as admittance of you being severely pwned.

    /coat

  • robo_1 #278 4 years ago

    From Infinity Ward themselves:

    "We had our best programmers on the PS3 [version of Call of Duty] and it shows," Infinity Ward studio head Vince Zampella has bellowed. He's been explaining why Sony's edition has a bigger online capacity (24 max players vs 360's 18) and, according to those with cyborg-eyes, improved visuals."

    "http://ww w.gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/ne...

    Although I don't think it matters a toss. It's a great game on either format, and anyone wasting their Sunday, bursting blood vessels over minutia needs to get out more.

    If you're really into your games, then you'll own both consoles eventually, if you've picked one and you're sticking to it - enjoy it, but getting wound up about what other people enjoy, is truly pathetic.

    It's sad to see Eurogamers comments section continually spiral into fan boy bull shit every time there's even the slightest hint of a difference between the two formats though, I wish the trolls could give it a rest just once.


  • Amoebalove #279 4 years ago

    @ apologie, you said

    'As you know, X360 didn't had any major game until the end of it's first year (with the arrival of GEars of War).. well, Ps3 at the the end of the first year have Uncharted:DrakesFortune, Ratchet&Clank:TOD, Warhawk, REsistance Fall of Man, unreal Tourment 3, Heavenly Sword, Folklore and Motorstorm, good ports like, Oblivion, Dirt, Fight Night 3, COD4...'

    No we don't know this and you’ve contradicted yourself, you say the 360 didn’t have any major games in its first year then use examples of games (FN3 & Oblivion) that also came in the 360s first year to prove how, in your opinion, the ps3 has a better line up of games! You also fail to mention that the 360 had dead rising, pgr3, cod 2&3 (both better than resistance), condemned and fear, amongst others. Also will you stop using average games like resistance, heavenly sword and folklore in your attempts to prove the ps3s superiority. For the love of god will please take your head out of your arse and stop being such a fanboy!!!!
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 13:05

  • Amoebalove #280 4 years ago

    @ Yaz

    We could do with a voice of reason on this thread and after robo_1s comment maybe you should jump in but then again you've already had the exact same discussion elsewhere with that idiot apologie!!

  • Yaz #281 4 years ago

    Tsk, tsk, tsk Apologie. An observation;

    You wrote : "Some of you can be really stupid: "The graphics capabilities of PS3 will, I think, be slightly above the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC"... these is the opinion of a Dev, not mine assholes... but i do think that Ps3 and Pc's are both above the Xbox360 in terms of graphics capabilities..."

    Where you provided the link; [link url=http://blogs .guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2006/01/27/possession_and_the _art_of_ps3_programming.html
    ]http://bl ogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archiv...[/link]

    But that was January 2006 Apologie, and it is clear that his interview with the developer Volatile took place the previous year (probably November or December 2005).

    Hence that was said TWO YEARS ago, one year BEFORE the release of the PS3, at a time when the GeForce 7800 series was nVidia's top GPU for the PC, followed later by the 7900 (G71) which RSX was based upon.

    So of course TWO YEAR'S AGO when the developer said that, NVidia's G71 based RSX was *slightly* better than the currently available G70 GPUs, but that's all changed now, since PC GPUs have long since overtaken the GPUs of both the 360 and PS3.

    So please don't quote from devs as if it still applies today, because you know it doesn't. :)

    BTW, that dev doesn't seem to consider anything revolutionary about the PS3, just different. :|

    Anyway....that's all from me for the moment.
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 13:24

  • rumrum4444 #282 4 years ago

    Is anyone surprised ? NOT ME !!!!

  • VMerken #283 4 years ago

    Damn, out of popcorn.

  • symbiote #284 4 years ago

    @Krayons

    I believe the context of this WHOLE discussion was graphical performance, in which case, there's no difference at all with COD4. Online? Smooth as a baby on both platforms, except I get to play it for free. Load times? I use the extra few seconds to relax in silence without having to listen to the fans on my console working overtime. And achievements? Fucking hell dude - next you're going to tell me you collect stickers.
    Edited by 2 at 16/12/07 @ 13:44

  • Kryon #285 4 years ago

    @Simpleton

    I didn't mention graphics at all, I merely stated that the 360 version is a marginally better product. Which it is, end of.

  • symbiote #286 4 years ago

    Except that, as I already pointed out, the sites that reviewed BOTH versions DON'T reflect that conclusion in their scores, do they?

  • Kryon #287 4 years ago

    "Load times? I use the extra few seconds to relax in silence"

    LOL, I love it, only the most retarded fanboy could try and turn long grinding load times into a plus!

    Comedy gold mate, keep it up!

  • Kryon #288 4 years ago

    "Except that, as I already pointed out, the sites that reviewed BOTH versions DON'T reflect that conclusion in their scores, do they?"

    Oh so you're ignoring the EG comparison then (which was specifically written to deal with this exact subject)?

  • symbiote #289 4 years ago

    "long grinding load times"

    Except they're not long, Krayon, are they? They're just a wee bit longER.

    "Oh so you're ignoring the EG comparison then (which was specifically written to deal with this exact subject)?"

    Not at all. I just don't equate their evaluations to a different score. Neither did they. In fact EG said "the point is that the core experience and all the things that make this game great are identical on both Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3"

    Again, only an Xbot could translate this to 360>PS3

    Look, we get it: you prefer the 360. Bully for you. I prefer the PS3. You, however, CONSTANTLY bitch and whine like a child, twisting facts and slanging mud to suit your 'die PS3 and all who own it' agenda. I, on the other hand, stand happy and content on my side of the fence and only react when tards such as yourself get all excited and giddy like they're hiding some deep rooted fear that they bought the wrong console.

    It's like you've got homophobia, but with consumer electronics. Creepy.

  • Kryon #290 4 years ago

    @symbiote

    "Not at all. I just don't equate their evaluations to a different score."

    Nope neither do I, I don't think the shortfallings of the PS3 version (worse load times etc) should necessarily mean that it should loose review score points, I'm sure the PS3 version still just about deserves the 9/10 that the 360 version received as the 360 versions advantages are quite minor (but advantages, all the same). I deal in facts, nothing more, nothing less. You claim I try and twist things yet you are the one who just cut and pasted half of the EG comparison while leaving out important things like poorer load times and less features. The PS3 version is not as good, I know this makes you upset but don't take it out on me son.

    Just admit it, you've been pwned soooo many times, it's about time you just gave it up, retire, move away to pwnland, buy yourself a pwny and change your name to Al Capwn

  • Kryon #291 4 years ago

    PS, I can't remember me ever 'slanging mud' ...Perhaps you mean 'slinging'? If so, I'll remind you once again that it was you who started the personal insults...

  • convercide #292 4 years ago

    Y'know, console wars have gone on for years. The most prominent when I was growing up was SEGA vs Nintendo. Some of my friends would bitch and whine about which was better and which had the better games. Now I had a Master System and the guy across the street from me had a NES. Then I had a Mega Drive, he a SNES. When the PS came out he bought one, I got an N64. We used to go round to each others houses and play on either because both had excellent games on them.

    I currently own a 360 and a Wii. The reason for me not picking up a PS3 yet is due to the fact it doesn't have any games I want for it yet. If the price for the decent version of it drops below £300 I may consider it but I wouldn't mind MGS4 and SOCOM (stop laughing at the back but I can't wait to mine up the fishmarket in Crossroads once more). There's nothing wrong with the PS3 per se. It's more Sony's attitude toward loyal customers. They are, like M$ have done with the 360, learning from their mistakes. M$ did a great job handling their RRoD fiasco and gave everyone a 3 year warranty if they bought the original batch of consoles. Sony are listening to their customers now and adding rumble etc.

    Stop defending consoles. It's the games we're bothered about. If it's a good game, I'll play it.

  • Apologie #293 4 years ago

    foamy

    no comments....

    Kryon, you are such an ordinary individual... (and i say that in a bad way), why do you feel the need to talk crap all the time??? why do you ofend people withought any purpose or justification??? you are indeed a very very sad person... i pitty you my friend, you and fightman3b. (altough i must admit that fightman3b is very comical)
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 15:16

  • Kryon #294 4 years ago

    Apolol, the problem is that no one (not even the other Sony zealots) gives a shit about what you say or think. In fact other Sony fans repeatedly disrespect you and beg others not to tar them with the same brush as they do you. Your opinions are useless, you are that guy who people ignore, that guy who never gets invited to the party, that poor sad lonely guy.... It's probably better if you don't address me in the future as you're a total idiot and I really can't be bothered with your nonsense anymore...

  • fightman3b #295 4 years ago

    you disgust me, sony cunts - you fucking disgust me.

    go eat that sony chairman's shit right now fuckwits.
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 15:42

  • captainrentboy #296 4 years ago

    Apologie, it's all true, you must realise it's a sad state of affairs when even your fellow PS3 defenders want absolutely nothing to do with you.
    Why don't you do yourself a favour and tone it down ever so slightly, you never know, one day someone might actuallly acknowledge one of your posts as being worthwhile, but whilst you're doing things like posting interviews, to back up one of your silly claims, that are two years old, hoping no-one will notice, you're coming across as quite mental.

  • symbiote #297 4 years ago

    @Krayon

    "move away to pwnland, buy yourself a pwny and change your name to Al Capwn"

    /scratches head

    Why on earth would I want to live next door to you?

  • Kryon #298 4 years ago

    @Cyndy

    "Why on earth would I want to live next door to you?"

    C-mon mate, you can do better than that, surely? That's gotta be the worst come back ever! Even Apolol could probably do better!

    E - Must try harder ;-)

  • Amoebalove #299 4 years ago

    @ apologie

    why do you never answer people when they prove you wrong?

  • symbiote #300 4 years ago

    @Krayon

    "C-mon mate, you can do better than that, surely? That's gotta be the worst come back ever! Even Apolol could probably do better!"

    C-mon mate, you can do better than that, surely? That's gotta be the worst come back ever! Even fightman could probably do better!

    E - you've clearly had too many ;)

  • Kryon #301 4 years ago

    Hmm, repeating everything I say in an attempt to rile me, yes, I think my five year old niece does that too, well done! What next, are you going to call me a 'poopy pants' or something?

  • Amoebalove #302 4 years ago

    @ kryon

    poopy pants

    sorry mate i could'nt resist! :)

  • Kryon #303 4 years ago

    ;-)

  • Amoebalove #304 4 years ago

    I would never suggest that the ps3 is a bad console in fact I think it’s an extremely good machine with a couple of pretty good exclusive games; it’s just that overall it’s a bit of a disappointment. My main problem with it is that it has so far failed to live up to its hype. Look back to some of the statements that Sony made when they first announced the ps3. Since then we’ve been fed one lie after another and I feel a mug for being suckered into believing it. I was promised a machine that was at least twice as powerful as the 360, double 1080p displays and the list goes on yet it has failed to deliver. Sony said the next gen doesn’t start till we say it does and now apparently that’s not going to be for another 4 to 5 yrs when the ps3 will allegedly start to show it real power. The six axis is a piss poor attempt to beat Nintendo at their own game that has resulted in some god-awful tilt controls being implemented where standard controls would have worked (lair) or do work (R&C) better.

    The 360 on the other hand has exceeded all expectations and continues to do so. It’s been a full year since the release of the ps3 and the 360 is still holding its own and in most cases coming out on top. Not bad for a machine that was pretty much, thanks to Sony’s hype, written off before it was even released. I don’t regret buying my ps3 and there is a lot to like about it but its not the wonder machine that i was promised and anyone who claims it has lived up to its hype is clearly delusional.

  • symbiote #305 4 years ago

    Couldn't agree more about the bollocks that Sony spout. It was the same with the PS2. When will their marketing department learn? Mind you, I seem to remember the 360 launch party being pretty cringeworthy...

    "Working together we will turn thought leadership into market leadership"

    Right. Way to go with those buzzwords Allard.

    I would never claim the PS3's 'lived up to it's hype' (seeing as so much of hype in general was, is and will be utter bollocks) but I really couldn't give a shit. It's still a great piece of kit that provides me with hours of fun.

    Oh and Kryon: poopy pants?! Give me some credit will you! I was thinking more of, erm, oh I don't know, maybe...babface?

  • Garulon #306 4 years ago

    @GameConeseur:

    "But the lightening and cool tones made PS3 version more visually pretty but X360 is only close behind (using warm orange tones instead of cool bluish for some puzzling reason).

    At first glance they both do looked identical I agree, but I did give both versions a good 30 minutes (maybe not scientific enough!). "

    Hmm. still looks and plays identical to me. I mean you buy what you want (Obv :) ) but that sounds more like your telly than the systems. Are they both hooked up to the same connection, is the 360 doing the scaling and your telly doing the scaling for the PS3?

  • Tiel #307 4 years ago

    Get a grip all.

    I own a 360 and ps3 and they are...similar. Some games look better on one than the other, but it's not such an obvious divide as the ps2/xbox was.

    This is good for the industry. Less good for me personally is that the under-powered wii outsells them both (I habve a wii too)

    I don't want the manufacturers to stop pushing technology forward.

    I prefer playing games on ps3 because it is quite and online is free, but I like the rumble of a 360 pad and the fact that it has had some quality exclusives.

    TBH 50% of the best next gen games will probably be platform exclusive to one company or another, so it's worth getting each machine and loving them for what they are.

    If MS can make a silent 360 I might even upgrade.

  • Tiel #308 4 years ago

    I think the anti-sony feeling is often because they have underdelivered on their promises.

    But don't be bitter. The machine is similar to a 360..and that's a pretty fine piece of kit for a good few years yet.

    When devs get over the technology and start to make artistically interesting games like Okami and Ico we should see some visual splendour.

  • symbiote #309 4 years ago

    Tiel + 1

  • symbiote #310 4 years ago

    Apologie...FFS...you changed 'superior' to inferior' in your post about PS3 vs PC graphics...I'm...speechless

  • Apologie #311 4 years ago

    symbiote

    "Apologie...FFS...you changed 'superior' to inferior' in your post about PS3 vs PC graphics...I'm...speechless "

    ---------------------------

    I did it because most of you were thinking that thouse were my thought's... and they'r not "it's a dev talking, not me... i even copied the link," but i do think that the Ps3 can deliver amazing graphics, so, given the confusion, i changed to "slightly inferior to the absolutely top-end graphics cards on the PC) as simples as that.

    Kryon, i don't care if people support me or not, these is not an election for the "most popular", it's a comment section about games, so i comment, i don't intend to have "allies here", and i don't take these as seriously as you seem to.

    If anyone ever thought that the Ps3 would be something out of these world (as some addmited to), that's they'r problem... i never thought that (altough curiously many of you accuse me of eating PR Sony bullshit), i'am very pleased with playstation3 first year and the games released (specially Ratchet, Uncharted, Warhawk, Resistance, Motorstorm, Ut3 and HS, i must include the COD 4, altough not exclusive, is a great version and i play it on-line all the time)... 2008 will be even better, but the point is that it's not a disapointment for me because i didn't eated that Pr thing of it beign the best system ever, and much more powerfull then anythinng on the market nowday's "as many of you did". Don't blame the system, blame yourselfes.

    Ps: i can't wait for killzone 2 and MGS 4.
    Edited by 1 at 16/12/07 @ 23:39

  • klixman #312 4 years ago

    And a merry Christmas to you all!

  • Kryon #313 4 years ago

    Apolol, you are just unbelievable, no really, you're a joke! At least others here have a sense of humour and can debate lightheartedly about their favourite console. You edit your posts when you realise what an idiot you sound like(even though we've all already read them). As for you not swallowing the Sony PR, don't make me laugh kid, you have on many occasions stated how the PS3 is three times more powerful than the 360 and that Cell and BluRay saved mankind. You also seem to believe the whole 'untapped' power crap because you keep on stating how the PS3 will somehow become something incredible next year -

    what i would say is that it's potentially much better then X360. "but next year there will be no doubt about that"....

    Funny, but that's what Sony fanboys said last year isn't it...As for this not being a popularity contest, I agree, it's not but it is still pretty sad that even people who love the same console as you can't stomach your utter bullshit and lies...

  • Apologie #314 4 years ago

    @Kryon

    "You edit your posts when you realise what an idiot you sound like(even though we've all already read them)"

    "but it is still pretty sad that even people who love the same console as you can't stomach your utter bullshit and lies..."

    I personally know many X360 owners that dislike Halo3... on the other hand, you seem to adore that game... where does that lead us??? both have the same system and yet disagree about something related "and consequentially dont support each other opinion's", that's what happens here... i have an opinion about Ps3, and other owners have they'r own, we don't have to agree all the time just because we have the same console, but (using a little of you agressive behavior) maybe you are too much retarded to see that.
    Edited by 2 at 17/12/07 @ 02:06

  • quantumsheep #315 4 years ago

    It's kinda sad how these comment pages deteriorate so fast, isn't it?

    I'm looking forward to Xmas when, for one day only, the trolls and fanboys come out of their trenches and have a friendly game of footy in the mud*.





    *mud provided by motorstorm. Online matchmaking provided by Xbox Live. Special moves provided by wii-mote jiggery pokery etc...


  • Kryon #316 4 years ago

    @Apolol

    "I personally know many X360 owners that dislike Halo3... on the other hand, you seem to adore that game"

    You see, you just blatantly lie to suit your own agenda! I have many MANY times stated that I don't personally like Halo FFS! Here is a comment I made weeks ago in the Uncharted thread -

    Kryon
    14-Nov-07 18:04:21

    I'm actually not a Halo fan, but I do recognise it as an important game. I've read Kristan's reviews for years and his tastes seem to be similar to my own (i.e. not the biggest Halo fan)

    You see Apolol, this is the difference between you and I! If I don't like a game, I'll say so regardless of what system it's on. If H3 was a PS3 exclusive you would be singing it's praises from the frickin rooftops and you bloody know it! STOP MAKING UP RUBBISH, STOP LYING!

    If you have to lie to try and make a point, is that point really worth making? Very sad...

  • Kryon #317 4 years ago

    If I wanted to troll like you, I could easily say H3 pisses on anything the PS3 has to offer and to be fair the review scores reinforce that claim but I haven't done so because it would be childish and I don't back games I don't like just to make a point on a forum (unlike you)

  • Kryon #318 4 years ago

    @retrend

    I don't really think 'defending' is the right word, If people like Apolol and his irk decide to post utter nonsense then I dispute it, I don't see what's wrong with that... To be fair, you are also posting on a site that is about "plastic and silicon" (in your words)...So I don't really get your point...

  • Amoebalove #319 4 years ago

    @ apologie

    How can you say you haven’t bought into the hype surrounding the ps3 when you post utter nonsense about the ps3s ‘apparently limitless processing power’. These are your words and to me they sound like the words of someone who not only bought into the hype but still believes it. Or how about your many posts where you cut and paste in all these great ‘facts’ about how powerful the cell is and how uncharted only uses 30% of the cells power.

    Don’t ever try to pretend you haven’t been suckered in by all the PR bullshit surrounding the ps3 when all you do is spout utter crap about how amazing it is! You wouldn’t know what objectivity was if it stood in front of you waving a banner saying I’m objectivity here’s my definition! You keep telling us how its full potential will be unleashed next year which to me suggests that despite the facts that suggest that both consoles are fairly even you still believe what sony said about its alleged power. Now that’s buying the bullshit!

  • Garulon #320 4 years ago

    "but you do post repeatedly defending what is basically plastic and silicon"

    Seems the PS3 is the one getting defended for it's shoddy ports and low sales here more than anything.

  • symbiote #321 4 years ago

    Sure, I'll 'defend' it against shoddy ports as I know that when it's coded properly for it performs just as well as the 360. As for sales: I couldn't give a flying fuck how many units it sells. I have mine and great games are being and will continue to be be made for it: why on earth should I care if it 'wins' the 'war'? It's not like the sucessor to a 220 million selling franchise is suddenly going to be dropped by society or by the industry so what do I have to worry about?

  • Kryon #322 4 years ago

    @retard

    I've mainly bean discussing the comparison of COD4 and putting Apolol right on a few fabricated claims he's made. What exactly has been your amazing contribution to this discussion? It's a comments section, it's meant for people to y-know, comment. OMG, it's a comparison review and SHOCK HORROR "there's people in the comments sections COMPARING SYSTEMS AND GAMES! Boohoo!" perhaps you should dismount your high horse because I don't see anything of interest in any of your posts.

  • Kryon #323 4 years ago

    @retard

    If conversation surrounding comparisons of games upset you and make you cry like a little girl, what the f*** are you doing in the comments section of a COMPARISON review? Jeez, not too smart are you...Or maybe you just dropped in to let us all know how much more superior and mature you are, well you've done that now, well done, don't let the door hit you on the way out eh...

  • AllMetal #324 4 years ago

    This is more about lazy developers rather than the machine. The PS3 version of Colin McRae Dirt is far superior to the PC and 360 versions. Its seems to me that smaller developers are using the technology better - the games themselves might not be the best but Conan and Jericho shipped for both consoles the same day and play pretty much the same.

    To date I believe the best looking game out is on PS3 (Uncharted), but different developers are beginning to get better from both machines. In the case of the Orange Box its simply a case of rushing the release and lazy development.

  • Dizzy #325 4 years ago

    >The PS3 version of Colin McRae Dirt is far superior to the PC and 360 versions

    As stated many times before. That version is only "better" because they removed objects from the game to improve the framerate.

    ATM the best looking games on both machines are totally equal and will be for the whole of this generation.

    Also it is not about devs being lazy on PS3.. it is about devs not liking the PS3 to make games on.
    Edited by 1 at 17/12/07 @ 13:02

  • Apologie #326 4 years ago

    farticusmaximus

    "Uncharted does look nice, but no better than gears, and suffers from a lot of tearing. Uncharted also happens to be an extremely turgid game but that's beside the point."

    ----------

    Don't be a fanboy "like many people around here" and at least admit what is obvious: Uncharted is the most beautifull game (graphics wise) ever seen in a console. GOW are not better then Uncharted, on the contrary, Uncharted have some of the most detailed graphics ever seen, you don't find better foliage or water in a console game (it shimmers realistically, and when Nathan comes out from the water, his clothes are actually shiny and wet), excelent body animations (lip-sync and facial animations are top notch too) features realistic shadows, the scenery is full of life, grass and trees move with the wind, birds flying, waterfalls etc... everything is dynamic, Uncharted's environments are huge too, nothing like Gears of war. Gameplay wise, in uncharted you have the perfect balance between exploration/puzzle solving and action, you can actually swim and jump... (something Gears didn't offer). Overall, Uncharted is way more impressive then Gears, both artistically and technically

    ---------

    "As for multiplatform titles and performance, well CoD4 and Burnout Paradise both apparently had considerably more resource poured into them to create the PS3 engine than the X360 engine, and the end result is that CoD4 is virtually identical and Burnout is completely identical (besides a slightly altered pallette) on both platforms"

    We all know that multiplatform games will not push Ps3 to it's limit, but some exclusives will. Do you see games as pretty as Gears all the time for the X360??? no...

  • chudders #327 4 years ago

    This is the best comments thread I've read all morning. Keep up the good work.

    Meanwhile, in other news, thousands starve to death in Africa and global warming kills polar bears.

  • Garulon #328 4 years ago

    "Sure, I'll 'defend' it against shoddy ports as I know that when it's coded properly for it performs just as well as the 360. "

    But you'll readily admit "coding properly" for it is harder than the 360, right? Which means longer dev times or more devs, both of which cost more money. And that's when low sales kick in. WTF should EA spend a bundle on the Orange box when even excellent titles like Uncharted are, well, uncharted?

  • Yaz #329 4 years ago

    Hmmm.....

  • symbiote #330 4 years ago

    "But you'll readily admit "coding properly" for it is harder than the 360, right? Which means longer dev times or more devs, both of which cost more money"

    Sure. So what. My heart fucking bleeds for them. How many billions is the games industry worth? How much do I spend on it each year? Big fat hairy fucking deal if they have to jump through a few more hoops. A challenge is a good thing for a designer. Rise to it and stop fucking moaning like Valve. If you can't and put out shoddy ports, don't expect it to sell. False economy.

  • Trane #331 4 years ago

    "you can actually swim and jump... (something Gears didn't offer). "

    Christ I just laughed so hard I may have coughed up my pancreas.

    While playing GoW all I could think about was 'wow, this game is great, BUT IMAGINE HOW GOOD IT COULD BE IF MARCUS COULD SWIM AND JUMP AND DOMS CLOTHES WERE SHINY AND WET'

    hahahaha, keep going apologie!

  • Apologie #332 4 years ago

    Combat AI: Frankly this is the worst aspect of the game. I though the AI was supposed to be good? It was terrible! Enemies just stood out in the open and let me stand there and pop them in the head over and over.

    lol... you say so much nonsense that i actually wonder if you have really played UNCHARTED (like you claim). Enemies do flush you with grenades, try to flank you etc... they are not better or worse then gears , it's a pretty decent A.I actually.
    As for the frame rate issues, they never detract you from the experience, and generally the game run's very, verrrry smooth... (but gears also had some frame drops, even in cutscenes if you remember properly, be honest ok).

    Graphics wise, i will not repeat myself, i already posted the reasons why Uncharted is in my opinion technically and artistically the best game ever seen on a console, (and many many people including reviewrs "remember eurogamer??" seem to think that way too).

    PS: "No taking cover, no flanking moves, they couldnt even kill me when I just stood still in the open."

    these one was particullary comical
    Edited by 5 at 17/12/07 @ 14:06

  • Garulon #333 4 years ago

    "Big fat hairy fucking deal if they have to jump through a few more hoops. A challenge is a good thing for a designer."

    Wow, commercial reality is... ...it's not something you're taking into account much for your argument, are you? "I don't care if my low selling console takes longer to program than the popular one, I want my games to be just as good!"

    Why should they spend more for lower return?

  • Kryon #334 4 years ago

    Lots of games look better then Uncharted imho, Assassins Creed, COD4, Mass Effect... Uncharted does look nice no doubt but it did nothing to amaze me at all visually...

  • GamesConnoisseur #335 4 years ago

    Want to put this on record, I had decided to give the comparsion of PS3 and 360 Burnout Paradise another go and was puzzled when I could not again find the warm/cool palette and the lightening effects difference at my second go.

    With me able to prove my own credibility as being in a serious question! Was distubed with my possibility of my eyesights being faulty but solved the issue after I reset PS3 to menu and checked the settings then reboot the demo. Presto PS3 as having only just re-started from the begining was now the one in the warm tone and 360 which was running the demo for a good while was in cool tone palette. This was a reversal of what I had posted earlier, thos concludes that colours/lightening changes are software rather than platform related as I had supposed. Obviously as was running PS3 demo for a while then booted X360 to compare and noted the mistaken differences!

    I disagreed that Uncharted is a bore, I have enjoyed the game but have to say it is pretty but not that 'goddamn its so heart breaking' as a whole but does have its great moments.

    Have to say that when my mates came round for Gears of War this time last year, its was more of 'f**k me that is great!', still two of them said they ll rather hold out for PS3 as its gonna be evar so better and they cant imagine what its ll look like!

    Now we know better!

  • Garulon #336 4 years ago

    @GamesConneseir
    "With me able to prove my own credibility as being in a serious question! Was distubed with my possibility of my eyesights being faulty "

    Thanks for the update, it's a million billion times better having balanced people like you post than nutters like TRUTH and apologie.

    And me, apparently, although I'm a bit confused about that :p

  • Apologie #337 4 years ago

    farticusmaximus

    Gears of war (by that prepective) was even more linear... given the fact that the beserker encounter was based on the same gameplay mechanic's that were aplied over and over again... in uncharted you have the jeep and (water)bike section, unlockables/achivements that make you want to explore even more the scenery, you have plataform sections etc... that add depth and variety to the game, plus, you have a strong argument/story, Gears story was awkward's, very poor.... Uncharted is overall better, no doubt. better graphics, gameplay, story etc... (altough i really like Gears of War)

    By the way, take a look at these http://ww w.computerandvideogames.com/art... GT5 is nothing but class.
    Edited by 5 at 17/12/07 @ 16:28

  • Trane #338 4 years ago

    So in this (an orange box) thread about a shitty port you have managed to tell us that uncharted is great (SHINY WATER LOL), GoW has an awkward story and is linear (and generally shit) and the cherry on the already iced cake is that GT5 is going to be amazing.

    Job done I guess?

    You sir, are a toilet.

  • Apologie #339 4 years ago

    @Trane

    I never said Gears of War was shit... if you remember proprely i even mentioned how much i apreciate that game. And yes, Forza2 is great, i play it all the time, but GT5 looks much more promising.... (features: more cars per race, bigger career, much better graphics, more cars available, replay mode (something i couldn't belive FOrza 2 didn't had) etc.. for now, Forza 2 rules, but when Gt5 get's out, thing's will be different..., most of the strongest PS titles are aimed for 2008, GT5 is no exception.
    Edited by 4 at 17/12/07 @ 16:59

  • Kryon #340 4 years ago

    LOL @ Uninterested: Drake's Boredom

  • TRUTH #341 4 years ago

    APOLOGIE: Average score for GOW is 9/10 for Uncharted 8/10...Look you seem to be the only one defending Uncharted as if it's the greatest game ever - IT' NOT GET OVER IT...most people consider it a good to very good game.

    Another bit of sad news for you is it only entered and left the EU/UK multiformat chart at 27 and then dropped straight out - Did not sell to well in US of A too. Mass Effect has just sold over 1m in 3 weeks...

    [link url=http://w ww.cinemablend.com/games/Mass-Effect-Sales-Rocket-To-1M-Micr osoft-Inspects-Roof-Damage-7714.html
    ]http://ww w.cinemablend.com/games/Mass-Ef...[/link]

    Rachet & Clank under sold too - I bought my 2nd hand for less then half the price.
    Edited by 1 at 17/12/07 @ 18:05

  • Apologie #342 4 years ago

    @ApoIogie

    that's really original...

  • symbiote #343 4 years ago

    "The enemy AI in Uncharted was truly terrible and genuinely made me laugh. I just couldnt die!"

    Then crank it up, sucker! As someone who's finished both GoW and Drake on their hardest settings, I found the AI and therefore the skirmishes (particulalry set-pieces) much more dynamic and varied on Drake. The fact you're saying you couldn't die means you weren't playing it on a hard enough setting. I'm good at shooters and it kicks my arse at times on Crushing.
    Edited by 2 at 17/12/07 @ 18:06

  • symbiote #344 4 years ago

    "The difficulty of developing for the PS3 is actually taking away developer effort and budget that could be put to better use, and in doing so is harming the console industry in general"

    LMFAO! Harming the industry in general! You fucking muppet!

    /cries with laughter

  • Garulon #345 4 years ago

    "*Sits back and waits for the inevitable cut-and-paste PR dump as to why GT5 is going to be the bestest game in the whole of christendom* "

    I've see it. It's alright, bit sterile, still no car damage in Prologue, looks great in Reply, kinda meh during actual "racing", driver AI still copied from Pac-Man as far as I can tell. 8/10. 750K WW week 1 I reckon, not a system seller, December 2008.

    Prologue's a fucking rip-off though.

  • Apologie #346 4 years ago

    @ApoIogie

    I know that the 'harming the industry' thing was perhaps going a bit far but honestly when you hear companies admitting that they had to use their best devs to get the PS3 versions up to par with the 360, doesn't it kinda make you wonder what we'd have if the best devs worked on the 360 instead? It's an honest question, I'm not trying to bait you or anything, but imo it stands to reason that in some cases the PS3 is holding the 360 back. Surely if the better devs had worked on the 360 versions, they would be, well..better?

    --------------------------------------

    Ps3, given it's original and revolutionizing architecture represents a bigger challenge for the Dev's... it's not like the Ps3 can't handle thouse games, the thing is that the code must be adapted and that takes time and talent.... naturally the best dev's are sent to work with the new system, the one they don't dominate so well. Ps3 is not only capable of doing thing's with same quality seen in x360, but even surpasse it.

    by the way @ApoIogie... is that your notion of comedy??? i didn't knew i was your role model.
    Edited by 1 at 17/12/07 @ 19:09

  • Trane #347 4 years ago

    "Ps3, given it's original and revolutionizing architecture represents a bigger challenge for the Dev's... it's not like the Ps3 can't handle thouse games, the thing is that the code must be adapted and that takes time and talent.... naturally the best dev's are sent to work with the new system, the one they don't dominate so well. Ps3 is not only capable of doing thing's with same quality seen in x360, but even surpasse it. "

    Yeah, the original revolutionary architechture is what's challenging the devs - I'd say the big pile of junk is challenging their patience more than their talent.

    Who gives a crap about whether 'one day maybe' it surpases the 360 graphically, have you still not grasped it's the games themselves that count?

  • Yaz #348 4 years ago

    (.) (.)
    <
    \___/

  • symbiote #349 4 years ago

    "If COD4 on the 360 was created by the best devs, it stands to reason it would have come out better than COD4 on 360 that was created by the less talented devs, doesn't it? "

    Perhaps. Perhaps not. It hardly looks like COD4 suffered on the 360 if you ask me though - one of the best looking games of the year and it runs at 60fps. Look, all this whinging about how hard it is to code for and what a drain on resources it is, is a flawed response: they've only got to master it once, right?! It's not like it's going to change any time soon!! The more they use it, the easier it gets!!

    We ALL moan at work when something new and challenging comes along but hey-fucking-ho: welcome to real life.

    Look at it this way: the Wii can't be hard to code for (what with it being rather dated in terms of hardware), the 360 is familiar territory as it's effectively a mid-range PC and the PC continues to progress along a fairly swift but predicatble path. Were it not for the PS3, who would be making devs think 'outside the box'?

    I say again: a challenge is what good designers thrive upon. Those that are whinging are either a) not as good as they think they are or b) only interested in making as much profit as possible.
    Edited by 1 at 17/12/07 @ 20:22

  • Amoebalove #350 4 years ago

    I know this is completely off topic but lets face it this thread has gone to hell!!

    I’ve just finished drakes and I can honestly say it was ok and at some points it was even pretty good but certainly nothing spectacular and not a patch on Gears. The graphics are, in places, fantastic despite the many glitches that hamper their overall impact. It’s a tough one on which game looks the best out of this and Gears and I think I prefer the destroyed beauty of Gears (its also less glitchy). I think I missed a lot of these massive wide open spaces that apolo mentioned but perhaps that’s just down to a difference in what we class as massive wide open spaces.

    It’s fairly short (just over 8hrs for me) and not really that much of a challenge. The few puzzles that pop up from time to time are insultingly simplistic although this does not really distract from the experience in general. The combat is good but again not a patch on Gears and the platform/exploration is a tad simplistic but ultimately fun. One thing I did like that I hated in the demo was the hand to hand combat which, once you get used to it, is fairly good even though it turns the fighting into glorified quick time events. Overall it’s a good game but not really a system seller. 8/10

  • TRUTH #351 4 years ago

    APOLOGIE:

    The PS3 is bottlenecked by it's ram which is half of 360 and PS3's bandwidth 48 GB/s of total memory system bandwidth, 360 has major advantage of with 278.4 GB/s of memory system bandwidth...Also remember the PS3 has existed the same time as the 360, but only came later due manufacturing problems...The dev kit on the other hand where sent out back in early/before 2005 for PS3...You can remember those great FMVs Sony showed of Motor Storm, and even Uncharted and Rachet & Clank, also Heavenly Sword way back in 2005...Over 2ys in development and still nothing ahead of the 360.

    Both Uncharted & Rachet & Clank have had sloppy sales by the way.

  • Apologie #352 4 years ago

    TRUTH

    Comparing both consoles when it comes to memory is pretty simple. There are minimal differences between the two, both come with 512 MB of memory. The PlayStation 3 has 256 MB of XDR memory for the system, and 256 MB of GDDR3 dedicated to the graphics, 360 uses shared ram, shaders, and even online (peer to peer) The shared ram is why 360 needs 10 MB of edram "PS3 uses split dedicated ram"... so, i don't see the RAM beign a problem, the truth is that we are already seeing a big leap in what people are able to do with the PS3 now compared to a year ago, and we're going to see just as big a leap between now and the end of 2008.

  • Yaz #353 4 years ago

    *Sigh*

    TRUTH and Apologie, you're both talking absolute nonsense about the console specs, where both of you are simply twisting the facts to favour your console of choice.

    Get back to talking about the games please. :)

  • onyxbox #354 4 years ago

    I have a 360 and a PS3 and Uncharted looks better than anything I've played on 360... Gears Of War looks about as good as UT3 on PS3 (which I've got on import).

    I'm not a fanboy; for most cross platform games I can also see that 360 performs better.

    I personally hope that this so called 'war' will die off once the argument of 'better system' gets diluted further by an increase in quality middle-ware and AAA games on both sides of the fence.

  • DrDamn #355 4 years ago

    @Farticusmaximus
    I tend to agree aside from the last point about the PS3 struggling this generation. It's clearly not going to dominate like the last generation, but there are signs of sales picking up. Despite the 360 having a far superior catalogue of games, better online service and cheaper price the PS3 is now starting to make in-roads in Europe (based on the slightly dodgey but all we have vgcharts). Wii aside (different beast for this comparison) 360 is still king in the US, PS3 was always going to win in Japan, but in Europe/Other the PS3 is catching up. What would happen if Sony actually managed to produce some killer titles? (Aside from hell freezing over :-).

  • Jheronimus #356 4 years ago

    @ Onyxbox

    I wonder how you did get UTIII on PS3... Isn't it delayed because Epic couldn't finish it at the moment. They did release the PC-version, and the 360-version has been finished 6 months ago (which means we could've played it if the PS3 an easier to code for machine) as far as I know, but UTIII was delayed until february, last thing I read.

    If I'm wrong, please correct me!

    And to the fanbois around here, get a life...

  • DrDamn #357 4 years ago

    UT3 has been out in the US since 11th Dec according to GameFAQs. Only delayed here in Europe. One of the few advantages of the PS3 over the 360 is that it is properly region free.

    The 360 version finished 6 months ago? Where did you get that idea. They stopped work on it maybe - they said recently they would restart work in the new year.

    Little search on this very site ...

    Out already

    Working on all three platforms 6 months ago but certainly not finished
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/07 @ 12:03

  • onyxbox #358 4 years ago

    I got an imported American version... works a treat.

    I got it from a local game store that stocks import titles but I think you can get it from ebay... such as <a href='http://cgi.ebay.co .uk/UNREAL-TOURNAMENT-III-PS3-BRAND-NEW-SEALED-STOCK_W0QQite mZ110206029421QQihZ001QQcategoryZ117562QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrd Z1QQcmdZViewItem'>here</a>



  • Jheronimus #359 4 years ago

    @ Dr. Damm

    A gamesmag wrote it. The only thing was that Sony was given some exclusivity for three months or something like that and the Sony version wasn't finished. It will come out in february as far as I know.

  • DrDamn #360 4 years ago

    If you read the links you could see where maybe a bit of a dodgey 360 mag could fashion that idea. Not really true though is it?

    The exclusivity deal was always known about in some form.

  • Apologie #361 4 years ago

    Bioware Confirms Mass Effect for the PS3

    "The developers Bioware come to put an end to rumors and leaks in recent days, confirming that they were actually at work on a port of the inevitable Mass Effect for the PS3 Sony. The studio, who were willing excellent performance on Xbox (Jade Empire, Kotor), has also given that the possibilities of Sixaxis would include solicited for the use of grenades." Ps: some rumors say that EA is developing the PS3 version themselves.
    "In other news's Gears Of War 2 will be available as well for PS3"

    A good piece of advice, don't fuck with Sony ;)
    Edited by 2 at 18/12/07 @ 13:50

  • Trane #362 4 years ago

    "A good piece of advice, don't fuck with Sony ;) "

    How is that good advice? Please explain.

  • Jheronimus #363 4 years ago

    @ Apolol

    Is there, except form you imagination, a source for that news? Because a Bioware exec stated on their forum a couple of days ago that the game wasn't coming for PS3 anytime soon. And GoW2 on PS3... Get a life...

    Besides, wouldn't it be great when EA does another port? Look at the review where discussing in, the're pretty good at it *sigh*

    @ DrDamn

    It was a independent mag, but nevermind, it could've interpreted it wrong.

    @ all

    I really don't know what there is to whine about who's console is more 133tz0rs than the other's... It's not about the size, it's what you do with it. I prefer playing games and I couldn't give a flying f*** if it's on PS, XBOX or Ninty, all platforms have their strengths and appeal.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/07 @ 14:27

  • DrDamn #364 4 years ago

    "Ps: some rumors say that EA is developing the PS3 version themselves."

    And we come full circle - cos they did such a good job with the Orange Box didn't they? Maybe with more time and if they get some help from Criterion.

    You got some links for this info btw?

  • Apologie #365 4 years ago

    http://ww w.psu.com/Does-Mass-Effect-have...

    This month will garnish what is widely regarded as a 2007 Game of the Year candidate. Developed by Bioware, Mass Effect is said to be a spectacular new vision of the future set in a bright universe, with a dark secret. What made this game truly special, at-least to Microsoft is that Bioware had plans to develop this title as an exclusive trilogy with all three games spanning the life span of the Xbox 360 console.

    To Microsoft, Mass Effect was, and still possibly is, the bread and butter for the Xbox 360, especially since the Halo trilogy has came to a successful end. However, recent industry transactions have created clouds of doubt over Mass Effect and it’s future of the IP still staying 100% exclusive to the Xbox 360. This could lead to the possibility of Mass Effect and Mass Effect 3 coming to the PlayStation 3 console in the future.

    The day was October 11th, 2007 when it all went down. Videogames giant, Electronic Arts, purchased the holding company that owns Bioware and Pandemic for USD 800 million.

    "We are truly excited by John Riccitiello's new vision for EA," said Ray Muzyka, Co-founder and CEO of BioWare Corp. in a news release Thursday. "This vision is consistent with BioWare's focus on crafting the highest quality story-driven games in the world. It will enable us to further the careers of the passionate, creative and hard working teams at BioWare Edmonton and BioWare Austin."

    Now, let us back up for a moment here and comprehend what is going on. Everyone who has followed the gaming industry for at-least the past five years or so would tell you that Electronic Arts is not akin to console specific games. Indeed, they even came out and publicly stated that they are for one universal gaming console, eliminating the three-way or sometimes two-way console wars t hat we are all used to today.

    "We want an open, standard platform which is much easier than having five which are not compatible," EA's Gerhard Florin said to BBC News.

    This means that they like to share their creations and not have it confined to just one demographic. Just take a look at their track record as most, if not all, of the Electronic Arts games from 2001 to present was multiplatform. The last time Electronic Arts decided not to release a major game on a specific platform was in 1999 with the Sega Dreamcast. Electronic Arts did not believe that the lifespan of the Dreamcast would last that long and was not worth putting time and effort into; hence, they withheld Madden 2000 from the console. Since then, EA has made it their best efforts to have their games developed on as many platforms as possible, from PS3, to PC, to Mobile phones. Let us not forget now, Electronic Arts is an industry giant that is constantly seeking profit.

    Now with that out of the way, it is pretty apparent that given the opportunity, Electronic Arts will not withhold any game back from any console unless there is a clear definitive reason. Back to Bioware and Mass Effect, which is where the real meat is. As previously stated, Mass Effect was planned as an exclusive trilogy for the Xbox 360, but now given the fact that EA now owns Bioware, Electronic Arts, not Microsoft will publish and distribute Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3.

  • Yaz #366 4 years ago

    That's old news Apologie.

    Bioware have since stated that the recent changes have no effect on the Mass Effect games being 360 exclusive. Hence since then, we have had the following;

    BioWare says no Mass Effect for PS3:
    [link url=http://www.gamernode.com/News/4 613-BioWare-says-no-Mass-Effect-for-PS3/index.html
    ]http://ww w.gamernode.com/News/4613-BioWa...[/link]

    BioWare: No plans to pursue Mass Effect on PS3:
    [link url=http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=17 3602
    ]http://ww w.computerandvideogames.com/art...[/link]

    It comes from the interview found here (see page 2);

    http://ww w.gamedaily.com/articles/featur...

  • beastmaster #367 4 years ago

    Wouln't mind joining this thread, but I think I'm a bit too late.

  • Kryon #368 4 years ago

    LOL, Apwnolol , just be quiet, you make yourself look so silly.

  • Amoebalove #369 4 years ago

    @ apologie

    Man what planet are you on and why did you even bother posting such a pointless comment? I read psu daily and at no point has mass effect let alone gears been confirmed for the ps3. You are such a fucking idiot it makes my head hurt!!!

  • TRUTH #370 4 years ago

    DrDramn:

    What do you mean the PS3 is picking up in Europe!...It's sales are still fairly behind the 360 and esp Wii - this global count was taken after the PS3 price drop (1)1.3m - Wii (2) 775,000 - XB360 (3) 400,000 - PS3...It's 2 biggest releases Uncharted / Rachet & Clank did not even make an impact in the top 25 multiformat chart.

    Apologie: We're all having a laugh at you - keep it up.


    Edited by 2 at 18/12/07 @ 22:11

  • Trikk #371 4 years ago

    After putting the retarded posters here on my ignore list, there's only 252 of the 412 comments left.

  • Freekmeister #372 4 years ago

    THOSE COMPARISON SCREENSHOTS R RIDICULOUSLY SMALL

    What were you thinking (nothing is the right answer)

  • onyxbox #373 4 years ago

    I've had Orange Box on 360 and I swapped it for PS3 just to see how bad the framerate is...

    Episode 2 dips quite a lot but far from game breaking and everything else is silky smooth and looks the same as 360

    After all the bad press I was expecting something much much worse than what EA actually delivered. I feel sorry for the dev team, they did a pretty fine job of it if you ask me and yes... perhaps with a little more time they could have nailed Ep2 too. But the results are very promising for PS3, trust me it seems to run ok.

  • JamieR #374 4 years ago

    I don't know why developers are been lazy with the ps3 but it shows a lack of respect for ps3 customers from valve if you ask me they can stick there orange box up there butt ... that what i should be saying :( i have to buy it

  • m0thr4 #375 4 years ago

    I bought, played and sold the Xbox 360 version of Orange Box months ago, so today when I felt like having another go, I threw caution to the wind and bought the PS3 version to see just how bad it really is. To be honest, either the 1.10 patch has fixed everything or Richard Leadbetter was tripping when he wrote this article because I'll be damned if I can see any significant differences, even in Episode 2. The PS3 version seems to be anti-aliased and uses a (pretty cool looking) motion blur when you turn very quickly but this doesn't look like it's masking dropped frames at all. The load times are longer than I would like, but then they were intrusive in the 360 version too. I'm really not sure what all the fuss is about.