HL2: Orange Box Thread

Then why bother releasing it in the first place? If the game garners 7/10 or 6/10 reviews, they'll have lost money on the port anyway.

Atleast if they had worked on getting Source running properly on PS3 they could make a profit when they release Episode 3.

I don't think that the reviews are going to have much effect on sells, because the PC and 360 version has been getting so much praise any one that is waiting on it will probably just pick it up thinking they took the extra time to do every thing right

I willing to bet Valve made most of there money off the PC version and the only reason they probably did the ports in the first place is part of the distribution deal with EA because it would suck for EA only making money off retail boxes for the PC
 
Hang on, blame Valve for something they didn't do and aren't publishing?

Also, how do you know the developers were lazy? You think they turned up for work late and sat looking at the internet instead of developing? You have any proof of this kind of thing?

It is really sad to see how so many reach and get to new lows with this "lazy dev" stuff, it is ridicolous but to blame Vavle for something they are not developing....tssss *shakes head* :rolleyes:
 
Then why bother releasing it in the first place? If the game garners 7/10 or 6/10 reviews, they'll have lost money on the port anyway.
Atleast if they had worked on getting Source running properly on PS3 they could make a profit when they release Episode 3.
it could be that EA was spending more and more money on the port and it started to get to the point where it was going to be more than it would make in profit so they just wanted to get it out the door. Like others have said, it wasn't designed around PC CPUs so that was likely the bottleneck in this case.
 
It is really sad to see how so many reach and get to new lows with this "lazy dev" stuff, it is ridicolous but to blame Vavle for something they are not developing....tssss *shakes head* :rolleyes:

I reinterate, Valve decided who they wanted to do the port. They went with EA, a company somewhat notorious for cutting corners and forcing things out the door half-finished to satisfy the bottom line. Perhaps if Valve had gone to another company, the game would've turned out better?
 
I reinterate, Valve decided who they wanted to do the port. They went with EA, a company somewhat notorious for cutting corners and forcing things out the door half-finished to satisfy the bottom line. Perhaps if Valve had gone to another company, the game would've turned out better?

Or perhaps not. Perhaps it would have just been canceled.

I think the point is you really don't have a clue how much effort was put into the port and you really just don't know what you're talking about.

At some point tho publishers just come down to the numbers, and they apparently reached a point where they believed more effort (cost) was going to outweigh the benefit. I don't doubt they could have done a better job given more time and resources but that doesn't mean it becomes more profitable. And it most certainly is not evidence that the developers were 'lazy'.

Using the word lazy suggests effort when the real cause is most likely money.
 
Or perhaps not. Perhaps it would have just been canceled.

Judging from the current preview for the game...

1up said:
After spending a significant amount of time with a near final version of the PS3 game, it's apparent that this version suffers from a number of technical flaws, which at best merely hinder game play and at worst make the experience downright unplayable.

I don't think it'd be a loss at all if it was canceled.
 
the same was said about assassin's creed on the PS3 but many people that I know that played it think it's just as good as the 360 version

Aside from the host of horrible gamebreaking bugs in it, of course.

The constant freezing and graphical glitches.
 
Aside from the host of horrible gamebreaking bugs in it, of course.

The constant freezing and graphical glitches.

I've seen from various places that the 360 version has had it's share of freezes and whatnot as well, so I don't think it's contained to only one platform.
 
Kisuke, I guess every developer who is lazy who has, on the PS3, either had

- Title delays
- Inferior Day&Date Releases
- Title Cancellations

At this point this consists of < 50% of MP developers to this point who have released PS3 products. I think arch's comment is something you need to re-read 10 times.

Of course, if you are stubburn and want to keep insulting the devs here, you should ask yourself this: Sony knew the abilities and potentials of the market. Why would they develop a system that a huge segment of developers would fail to properly execute on? Where does any of the Valve/EA blame fall toward Sony?
 
Judging from the current preview for the game...



I don't think it'd be a loss at all if it was canceled.

Would be good to see them skip the PS3 version if they knew they wouldn't be able to optimize it fully or simply the PS3 could not keep up with same stuff as the other platforms (due to different architecture).
Then there would be more money to put on the xbox360 and PC version for more/better content instead for making a game for ungrateful people!
 
Kisuke, I guess every developer who is lazy who has, on the PS3, either had

- Title delays
- Inferior Day&Date Releases
- Title Cancellations

At this point this consists of < 50% of MP developers to this point who have released PS3 products. I think arch's comment is something you need to re-read 10 times.

Of course, if you are stubburn and want to keep insulting the devs here, you should ask yourself this: Sony knew the abilities and potentials of the market. Why would they develop a system that a huge segment of developers would fail to properly execute on? Where does any of the Valve/EA blame fall toward Sony?
Propagating Valve's case to other multiplatform games is a bit stretching IMO. Most likely it was decided by EA to port it to PS3 when they became the publisher and it was an afterthought at best. EA delayed the release of the already complete PC/360 versions and created the PS3 version at their outsourced studio.
Would be good to see them skip the PS3 version if they knew they wouldn't be able to optimize it fully or simply the PS3 could not keep up with same stuff as the other platforms (due to different architecture).
Then there would be more money to put on the xbox360 and PC version for more/better content instead for making a game for ungrateful people!
Who wants to pay a full price to a bug-ridden game and be grateful?
 
I remember when the debate on these forums was how much MORE powerful the PS3 would be than X360, and comments of 120 fps, etc... Oh how things have changed...
 
You have the 360 version and it performs flawless?
Perhaps I've been extraordinarily lucky, but I've been playing for about 3-4 hours now at a fairly pedestrian pace (I've only been in Damascus 30-40 mins) but thus far, on a European 60gb PS3 on firmware 2.0 (not 2.01), I've not had a single freeze or crash.

A friend with the 360 (Premium) who is much further along in the game (MB 4) tells me he's had several freeze ups.

DS
 
Perhaps I've been extraordinarily lucky, but I've been playing for about 3-4 hours now at a fairly pedestrian pace (I've only been in Damascus 30-40 mins) but thus far, on a European 60gb PS3 on firmware 2.0 (not 2.01), I've not had a single freeze or crash.

A friend with the 360 (Premium) who is much further along in the game (MB 4) tells me he's had several freeze ups.

DS

Well so far i've had severe freezes to the point where I got RRoD & my 360 was bricked... :cry:

Have to send it off for repair now which means I wont be able to try ME which just arrived y'day for another 20 days.. :cry:
 
Conversely, I played through Assassin's Creed twice on my 360 Elite without a single hiccup or even slowdown in the areas it's been noted by others and my brother has played most of the way through on my Premium and hasn't noted any problems to me, which he is usually pretty vocal about.

Perhaps we should leave it as different people on both platforms having different experiences and get back to HL2?
 
Well so far i've had severe freezes to the point where I got RRoD & my 360 was bricked... :cry:

Have to send it off for repair now which means I wont be able to try ME which just arrived y'day for another 20 days.. :cry:
Which to me suggests that this isn't a platform issue but more an issue with the game itself. The only issue I can fault AC for is the occasional screen tearing but I've only noticed it when looking for it unlike Heavenly Sword where it was difficult to overlook in some stages.

In terms of frame rate generally I have been quite impressed so far, particularly in Damascus where there can be dozens of folks on screen going about there business and everything is still smooth.

With regard to the 360 specifically, I wonder if Assassin's Creed is this year's Dead Rising? Is it pushing the hardware to the point of stress? Could it also be pushing some PS3s to the limit as well which is why some folks are getting multiple issues and others getting none or few?

DS
 
I find it interesting that so far I haven't encountered any problems with screen tearing on either AC (for the time i got to play it until my console died) or Heavenly sword..

Could it be due to the fact that I game on monitors?
 
Back
Top