Agreed. The lower-res textures in CoD4 (compared to 360) had me worried until UT3 showed higher res textures...though I've no idea just how many total textures either one uses in a level.
HL2: Orange Box Thread
- Thread starter RobertR1
- Start date
Agreed. The lower-res textures in CoD4 (compared to 360) had me worried until UT3 showed higher res textures...though I've no idea just how many total textures either one uses in a level.
A GAFfer emailed Gabe asking when the TF2 lag headaches were going to be fixed... and he got a response. There's another patch going through certification now, which deals with bug fixing and netcode.
The whole response is at http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=216022
This is good news - I've had about four or five perfect matches, but lots more terrible ones. A pity, since I love the concept, but its execution is struggling in my mind due to the laggy performance.
The whole response is at http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=216022
This is good news - I've had about four or five perfect matches, but lots more terrible ones. A pity, since I love the concept, but its execution is struggling in my mind due to the laggy performance.
Gabe DOESN'T care to much for the PS3. He said it himself. He doesn't think it's necessarily unpowerful, he just hates how much of a pain the PS3 is as compared to the 360 or PC where they can easily cross platform games between each which equals easier money. Who can blame them, making games isn't just about making good games, but making money too. Like I said earlier I'm surprised he didn't jump on the Cell more enthusiastically, considering it's great FLOPS performance.
You repeated me. Though I can tell you exactly why Valve doesn't much care about Cell's performance; the system is still harder to develop for. Their platform of choice is still the PC as well, so going from PC to Xbox 360 and vice versa is easier on them, which allows greater focus on the game. Valve lead the way with physics, but as a whole their games are much more focused on what enhances the story telling and imagery than technological bullet points.
How soon we forget the UE3 issues and delays on the PS3 and how Sony dedicated a bit of staff to help out... I didn't hear about Sony air dropping Cell Ninja's into Valve's Washington campus
How soon we forget the UE3 issues and delays on the PS3 and how Sony dedicated a bit of staff to help out... I didn't hear about Sony air dropping Cell Ninja's into Valve's Washington campus
I hear about that all the time from other friends in the biz, where Sony sends people over to help. They tend not to help companies they compete with though or outright hate...like us
It's overstated sometimes as well. I remember reading about Sony sending over a crack team to help company 'X' when in reality they just sent one person over.Still though, something is amiss here. All the Half Life games are relatively old. I remember running them at 60fps at 1920x1200 with just about full detail on a 7900gt, so RSX should be able to eat the game alive at 1280x720. So unless they dramatically improved the shaders/textures/vertcount, rendering shouldn't be the issue. CPU side it used to run fairly well on relatively old PC cpu's as well. The PPU should be able to handle the basic gameplay and scripting. The only thing I can guess is that Valve's physics engine either doesn't port well to Cell, or they are running everything on the PPU.
None of that explains load times which are bizarre as well. It really doesn't make sense that it should load that much slower than the 360 version. I mean, 3 seconds to reload in Portal 360 compared to 17 seconds on PS3? There is no way the difference should be that pronounced. Sounds like they ran out of time and did a basic "dump everything and reload everything from scratch" type loading system.
It's definitely puzzling that it runs this way on PS3. Mind you, it's also puzzling to me that it only runs at 30fps on 360. Seems like Half Life 2 should be able to run at 60fps on both machines.
Admittedly, but load times?
http://download.gamevideos.com/16649/gv.com.OrangeBoxHalfLife2Comparo_1280x720.wmv
Comparison vid is finally out.
Comparison vid is finally out.
djskribbles
Legend
^^ i'm guessing the chugging is caused by the auto-saving (it doesn't auto save on the 360 version). i remember when HL2 was first released, it chugged like that during auto-saves.
i think they should post a comparison video with HL2 EP2 instead.
i think they should post a comparison video with HL2 EP2 instead.
cloudscapes
Regular
You forgot to mention the memory, which is the most significant difference between your PC and a PS3. Bandwidth and quantity is far less on the PS3, so there's so much more fetching going on.
It's been a while but I believe Half Life 2 ran fine on 512MB pc's no?
Not at max detail, and Half Life 2: Episode 2 is much more demanding than HL2. Not that the game should perform this bad, but you seem to ignore that this is about EP2's performance much more so than HL2.
djskribbles
Legend
you also have to consider that consoles are not the same as PC (console being far more optimized for gaming). you also have to consider that it would be running at a lower resolution than most PC gamers would be running it at. the textures even in EP2 shouldn't be much of a problem for RSX. the available memory for Cell? i dunno. but i think we can all agree that with more optimization, the game could run much better than it does (on both consoles for that matter, but especially on PS3).
It's very simple EA suck and are only using the PPU...they aren't even touching the SPU's.
Uncharted and GT5 look 5 times better than Half Life 2 so all this talk is quite frankly white noise.
BTW that chug is an autosave feature...that's what I read at neogaf.
It's being over exaggerated.