Uh-oh. PS3 'Orange Box' fails.

Almost every multiplatform game has been delayed on the PS3 with 'harder to code' problems cited; the Orange Box being the latest.
Almost every multiplatform game looks worse than it's 360 counterpart.
Rockstar has already released a 360 game ~ Table Tennis
Every build we've seen has been confirmed to be running on the 360
Nokkon has heard that it's the PS3 version holding things up.
Pratcher has heard that it's the PS3 version holding things up.

Ockhams razor.

It's the PS3 that's holding GTA IV up.
 
Almost every multiplatform game has been delayed on the PS3 with 'harder to code' problems cited; the Orange Box being the latest.
Almost every multiplatform game looks worse than it's 360 counterpart.
Rockstar has already released a 360 game ~ Table Tennis
Every build we've seen has been confirmed to be running on the 360
Nokkon has heard that it's the PS3 version holding things up.
Pratcher has heard that it's the PS3 version holding things up.

Ockhams razor.

It's the PS3 that's holding GTA IV up.

It's been suggested that the 360 is holding up development.
It's not in Rockstars interest to admit this.
Almost every other developer is blaming the PS3 as being difficult to code for.
If other developers can do this, so can Rockstar
In fact I've even heard the 360 version is holding up development of GTA4 (see previous posts)

Just keeping it simple - do you not think that sometimes you are being lied to and you are accepting 'facts' because they seem to fit in with what, say, 99% of other people have readily accepted, without going to the source for proof?
 
Some multiplatform games are better on the ps3 also (or at the very least as good) so this proves it IS possible

There will always be lazy companies not willing to put in that extra 10% (no doubt there are multi-platofrm games on the X360 that deserved that extra 10% but didnt get it)

It happens in every generation on every format - until the coders get used to the dev kits etc
 
That's not a good example though is it. He said 'are better on the ps3' and that says it's a perfect port, i.e. as good as.

Either way, so it should be. Is it not shocking that we celebrate a console equalling the release quality of a console that's 12 months older than it 12 months down the line?

I think Abooie hit the nail on the head. Often the term Ockhams Razor is banded about out of context, but I think on this one, he's spot on.
 
That's not a good example though is it. He said 'are better on the ps3' and that says it's a perfect port, i.e. as good as.

Either way, so it should be. Is it not shocking that we celebrate a console equalling the release quality of a console that's 12 months older than it 12 months down the line?

I think Abooie hit the nail on the head. Often the term Ockhams Razor is banded about out of context, but I think on this one, he's spot on.

Or just as validly the PS3 is as good after its release as the X360 is at the same time after release - its seemingly easier to develope for the X360 which means by default its being utilised more, which also means the PS3 has a lot further to grow (as its producing the same scenarios at an identical stage of ITS developement

can be argued either way
 
Almost every multiplatform game has been delayed on the PS3 with 'harder to code' problems cited; the Orange Box being the latest.
Almost every multiplatform game looks worse than it's 360 counterpart.
Rockstar has already released a 360 game ~ Table Tennis
Every build we've seen has been confirmed to be running on the 360
Nokkon has heard that it's the PS3 version holding things up.
Pratcher has heard that it's the PS3 version holding things up.

Ockhams razor.

It's the PS3 that's holding GTA IV up.

i'll try not to be baited into responding to a blatant troll post but applying Occam's razor to hearsay and unsubstantiated rumours is stupid.

Also i think everyone and their grandmother realises that titles that are initally coded on the pc/360 are obviously going to face delay when ported to the ps3. Why? because the developer is trying to apply/port code from a completely different beast of a machine!
 
Okay, it's trolling.... IF trolling is pointing out obvious flaws. PS3 so far has done all the negative publicity all by itself.
I take the word of my friends as they have no reason to lie, they don't need to try and sound good by saying stuff, they don't act like kids (like a lot of people on here) and it's not like it's hear-say. They're all in the industry so they know a whole lot more than you, or even me for that matter.

But I'm hardly trolling by reporting back what's happening. Of course, as I've said, a lot of people are happy putting fingers in their ears and ignoring the obvious.

I would say it's trolling IF, people go out of their way to find, and critisize any point regarding the object in question, be it a PS3/360/Atari ST/Amiga/C64/Spectrum.

In this case, the trolling is even more obvious, as the pointing out of these "flaws" is about a game which this thread isn't even about.

Just because you may have overheard a bloke down the pub, who's aunties half brothers stepson, once farted near the sister of one of the barmen who once served somebody who lived near Rockstar, who left the window open while having a discussion about it, doesn't constitute proof of any kind, and further more, doesn't explain what on Earth that has to do with the Orange box anyway.

I think it's plain for all to see, that coding for the PS3 architechture is obviously different than the standard, symmetrical cores to be found in PCs and the XBOX cpu, than coding for various SPUs on the Cell CPU.

It would ideally involve planning, from a pre-programming stage, to allow for the various bits of code, to utilize the SPUs, to vastly improve efficiency and performance, and not simply to take a piece of currently existing code, and "shoehorning" it in, until it runs, as-is.

I'm sure, had they taken extra time with The Orange Box, to rework the code to run more efficiently on the PS3, it would have run every bit as good as the XBOX360 version, maybe even better, who knows? They obviously didn't want to take the extra time, to optimize it for a completely different platform, so just got it running as hastily as possible, to get it out of the door, and suck in the money.

I thought it was obvious by now that it is not a lack of power on the PS3s part that leaves ports like The Orange Box wanting, but a lack of effort (ie time/money) that would have to be spent, optimizing it for a different architecture. Once devs do learn how to better code their games to offload various codes to different SPUs, I'm sure we'll witness a much better class of game. It's not so hard to believe. The PS2 was also said to be hard to code for, but, look at the quality of titles that came out in 2000, compared to 2005/2006.

Fanboys, and indeed, trolls can't resist but to jump into every PS3 thread however, and just post some negativity, into whatever the subject, even if their comments and negativity have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

I don't really understand why people are like this. If you had a massive amount of shares in Microsoft it would make some kind of sense, but otherwise, it's just a games console!

As for the comments on the Orange Box being worse on the PS3. It makes no difference to me personally, as I got the PC version. If I owned both consoles, I'd be glad to read the reviews, so I could decide which version to purchase. Blaming the PS3 is stupid however. Blame EA for being lazy. Blame Valve for not giving them time to do it properly. Stop having a go at each other, it's not our fault... I remember the forums used to be a more friendly place, and you didn't have to think about posting something positive about the PS3, about any subject, and then get some idiot drop in, and post something negative about a totally different subject.

I'm not talking about this thread in particular of course, but blimey, even this turned into a discussion about the Orange Box, to a speculation-fest about GTA IV, which to be honest, none of us know about with any certainty anyway.

If people don't believe that the PS3 is capable of running a game like Half Life 2, which ran on the PC on a single core CPU at <3Ghz, on a GeForce 6, with no problems, then they're obviously deluding themselves of the fact that it just wasn't written very well on the PS3.

Sorry to derail the thread again, but some of the people in here just make me wonder what the hell is the matter with them. Are they the same with everything else? Hey man, your kettle is carp, 'cos mine boils water in 4.2 seconds faster than yours, and makes the worktop rumble?

V1N.
 
Just because you may have overheard a bloke down the pub, who's aunties half brothers stepson, once farted near the sister of one of the barmen who once served somebody who lived near Rockstar, who left the window open while having a discussion about it, doesn't constitute proof of any kind, and further more, doesn't explain what on Earth that has to do with the Orange box anyway.
Yeah... not quite. All my friends work in the Industry, so it's not just a random guy is it. It's a very good friend who knows what he's talking about. And he's not heard from someone who heard from someone, he's heard from someone who works there. So I would definitely say my friends (note plural, 2 friends, 2 different friends of friends, yet 2 identical answers...) are more informed than either me or you in this situation.

I think it's plain for all to see, that coding for the PS3 architechture is obviously different than the standard, symmetrical cores to be found in PCs and the XBOX cpu, than coding for various SPUs on the Cell CPU.
Didn't say it wasn't. I think it would be stupid if I claimed it was.

It would ideally involve planning, from a pre-programming stage, to allow for the various bits of code, to utilize the SPUs, to vastly improve efficiency and performance, and not simply to take a piece of currently existing code, and "shoehorning" it in, until it runs, as-is.
Okay.

I'm sure, had they taken extra time with The Orange Box, to rework the code to run more efficiently on the PS3, it would have run every bit as good as the XBOX360 version, maybe even better, who knows? They obviously didn't want to take the extra time, to optimize it for a completely different platform, so just got it running as hastily as possible, to get it out of the door, and suck in the money.
They did take extra time, it's been out over a month on the other formats already, and over 3 years on PC.

I thought it was obvious by now that it is not a lack of power on the PS3s part that leaves ports like The Orange Box wanting, but a lack of effort (ie time/money) that would have to be spent, optimizing it for a different architecture. Once devs do learn how to better code their games to offload various codes to different SPUs, I'm sure we'll witness a much better class of game. It's not so hard to believe. The PS2 was also said to be hard to code for, but, look at the quality of titles that came out in 2000, compared to 2005/2006.
Did I say it was a lack of power? I think you'll find I never.

Fanboys, and indeed, trolls can't resist but to jump into every PS3 thread however, and just post some negativity, into whatever the subject, even if their comments and negativity have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
Indeed, but likewise you always get people such as yourself assuming I mean something negative or am doing so for attention. I merely posted a comment on what I heard. You have yourself believing that I called the PS3 inferior, less powerful etc... when I never.
So who's worse, me for reporting what I heard or you for making stuff up that I said?

I don't really understand why people are like this. If you had a massive amount of shares in Microsoft it would make some kind of sense, but otherwise, it's just a games console!
I am like what? An avid follower of all 5 consoles? Nothing wrong with that. I own them all, I am honest in every single comment I make.

As for the comments on the Orange Box being worse on the PS3. It makes no difference to me personally, as I got the PC version. If I owned both consoles, I'd be glad to read the reviews, so I could decide which version to purchase. Blaming the PS3 is stupid however. Blame EA for being lazy. Blame Valve for not giving them time to do it properly. Stop having a go at each other, it's not our fault... I remember the forums used to be a more friendly place, and you didn't have to think about posting something positive about the PS3, about any subject, and then get some idiot drop in, and post something negative about a totally different subject.
I think blaming the PS3 as being awkward to work for as for being the reason for another poor port is better than blaming EA. After all, EA haven't made EVERY port of EVERY game on the PS3 have they. I love how people are so quick to blame EA. Lets blame EA for The Darkness and GRAW2 eh? They weren't involved in them in anyway, but what the hell, we're on a roll here. Down with EA for poor ports.
The forums are still a friendly place when people aren't making stuff up or trying to put someone in a negative light. I post negatives about everything and positives about everything that deserve to be judged as such. As I said last night to a member of these forums on MSN, I had a rant at Forza Motorsport 2 but it was accepted, yet when I have a rant at say, Heavenly Sword I am being anti-Sony. It's annoying and tiresome. People like to believe what they want to believe.

If people don't believe that the PS3 is capable of running a game like Half Life 2, which ran on the PC on a single core CPU at <3Ghz, on a GeForce 6, with no problems, then they're obviously deluding themselves of the fact that it just wasn't written very well on the PS3.
I don't believe that's the case. I believe the PS3 is more than capable, however had the development of games for the PS3 been a lot better (note a LOT better) then we wouldn't have so many poor ports would we? It's known that the development of games is more expensive, time consuming and difficult on the PS3 than any of the others. Tell me, who do we blame for that? EA again?

Sorry to derail the thread again, but some of the people in here just make me wonder what the hell is the matter with them. Are they the same with everything else? Hey man, your kettle is carp, 'cos mine boils water in 4.2 seconds faster than yours, and makes the worktop rumble?
Your analogy is poor, I think it's fairly obvious why people are posting what they are in this thread. This was a thread about a poor port on the PS3, but some people aren't happy when conversation continues on the topic of this. Lets all ignore negatives and just talk positives from now on?
Wouldn't make much of a discussion board now would it?
 
Last edited:
Like all your posts praising it to high heaven despite it's flaws :rolleyes:

Stop posting sensible comments. It does not suit you :eek:

Seriously though, works both ways, I think people are just annoyed with people posting repetitve comments (from both sides). Something you definitely can not be accused of doing in the past :D.

that is all


rp2000
 
Seriously though, works both ways, I think people are just annoyed with people posting repetitve comments (from both sides). Something you definitely can not be accused of doing in the past :D.

Exactly I own all the consoles and have no interest in getting involved in any of these my box of electronics is better than your box of electronics arguments but it gets really annoying reading thread after thread and seeing the same people saying the same thing over and over again multiple times.
 
No but when ever single post you make is negativity of the ps3, it does get a little tiresome.

Every comment I make about the PS3 isn't negative at all. I've always said as a console it's better, but it's OS, games and controller let it down (which they do).
It's up to Sony to change my views, not the other way around.
I'm critical about everything, Xbox360, Wii or PS3, but 2 of the 3 consoles have delivered multiple AAA titles, that's the difference.

I'm sick of people being happy with what is being offered, it's not good enough and we shouldn't settle for it. I certainly won't after paying £425 for it as well as enough for another controller and several games. My comments are not negative for the sake of being negative, they are honest, just as I am about games on the Xbox360 or the Xbox360 console itself.
 
Every comment I make about the PS3 isn't negative at all. I've always said as a console it's better, but it's OS, games and controller let it down (which they do).

In your opinion.. you make it sound like this a fact, plenty of people here are happy with the PS3, including me.
I am also happy with my 360 :)
 
Back
Top Bottom