PS3 vesrion of The Orange Box will be craper...

I stopped reading your post here. You know this...how? You don't, you made it up, because it sounds good with the rest of your fantasies. You don't have a clue what Valve did. Not once have they said "we've never touched the ps3, we just spend our time *****ing about it for no reason", and the fact that you seriously think this is their thought process is the worst part. Your mind is so bent towards this idea of the PS3 being an ok development platform and there's just a massive conspiracy of laziness keeping it down that you're prepared to make up absurd **** just to support an argument that shouldn't even exist.

I didn't say that at all. That just shows that you didn't even take the time to read what I said.

Fact, Gabe Newell said the Playstation 3 was a waste of time. That means that he and Valve touched it, looked at it, then *****ed about it and handed The Orange Box port to Electronic Arts to butcher.

Instead of trying getting his team to work with the Playstation 3, they took a look at it, and ignored it and the result is a pathetic job on The Orange Box for the Playstation 3. Valve took the easy way because developing for the Playstation 3 is not like developing PC, which they are used to.

UbiSoft, Infinity Ward, Team Ninja, and Epic Games put this man to shame for the very reason that they looked at it just like Valve, and wait, take a guess, they took the time to learn how to develop with it. Infinity Ward even made sure that they had the manpower to work on both the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. Considering that Valve has the backing of Electronic Arts, they could have done the same. And when developers say that when they took the time to learn about developing for the Playstation 3, it's not the pain in the ass like some developers say. It makes them look lazy and pathetic.
 
I didn't say that at all. That just shows that you didn't even take the time to read what I said.

Gabe Newell said that the Playstation 3 is a waste of time, they didn't even bother with a Playstation 3 version and simply gave it to EA to do it for them instead of even trying to figure out the system's capabilities.
You did say that. I mean, it's your quote, I didn't edit it or anything. It's what you said. Right there. See? :dry:

Fact, Gabe Newell said the Playstation 3 was a waste of time. That means that he and Valve touched it, looked at it, then *****ed about it and handed The Orange Box port to Electronic Arts to butcher.

Instead of trying getting his team to work with the Playstation 3, they took a look at it, and ignored it and the result is a pathetic job on The Orange Box for the Playstation 3. Valve took the easy way because developing for the Playstation 3 is not like developing PC, which they are used to.
Ok, you're living in the past first of all. The Xbox one was just like a PC, not the 360. Totally different architectures. So no, before we even begin, it's not an issue of them being unable to move off their PC environment. Valve didn't take the easy way out, they took the sane, profitable way out, by not wasting time on a marginalized platform that's comparable to pulling teeth. Valve looked at it and said "not worth my time" because it was difficult to develop for, which seems to be what you're arguing against, in case you aren't aware anymore.


UbiSoft, Infinity Ward, Team Ninja, and Epic Games put this man to shame for the very reason that they looked at it just like Valve, and wait, take a guess, they took the time to learn how to develop with it. Infinity Ward even made sure that they had the manpower to work on both the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. Considering that Valve has the backing of Electronic Arts, they could have done the same. And when developers say that when they took the time to learn about developing for the Playstation 3, it's not the pain in the ass like some developers say. It makes them look lazy and pathetic.
How did they do that? Ubi Soft recently delivered a game (Assassin's Creed) that's filled with graphical and performance errors and is, according to most, markedly inferior to the 360 version. Infinity Ward talked about the PS3 needing more personnel and effort, and desperate people tried to spin that into something else, so you've basically got Team Ninja and Epic (which I haven't seen Epic saying anything pro-PS3, but you've got nothing else, so I'll just go ahead and give it to you) saying "it can be done". Congrats. That totally disproves Valve's point that it just isn't worth the time. Or not.
 
You did say that. I mean, it's your quote, I didn't edit it or anything. It's what you said. Right there. See? :dry:
I figured you'd have the idea that the phrase "it's a waste of time" means that someone looked at it and didn't like it. Newell looked at it and didn't like it. I mean unless you're a complete fanboy that has never touched the thing and refuses to, a waste of time usually means that.

Ok, you're living in the past first of all. The Xbox one was just like a PC, not the 360. Totally different architectures. So no, before we even begin, it's not an issue of them being unable to move off their PC environment. Valve didn't take the easy way out, they took the sane, profitable way out, by not wasting time on a marginalized platform that's comparable to pulling teeth. Valve looked at it and said "not worth my time" because it was difficult to develop for, which seems to be what you're arguing against, in case you aren't aware anymore.

Morten Heiberg of IO Interactive said:
The Xbox and the PC are very similar. They are just two very powerful CPUs and you can make it through your threads and be sure that it's going to run reasonably OK. The PS3 doesn't have many general purpose CPUs like a multi core system has on the PC side. It has a CELL processor which is itself a pretty powerful processor, but if you're really going to get something out of it you're going to have to utilise the SPUs on it, which are small special purpose units that you write little programs for doing whatever you need to get done.

He's refering to the Xbox 360 in that quote, not the original Xbox. It was an interview over the development of Kane and Lynch. So apparently, developers do see the Xbox 360 and PC to be similar.

So basically, Valve took the easy way, ignoring the Playstation 3 after looking it, instead of trying to deliver a quality product like Infinity Ward did.

How did they do that? Ubi Soft recently delivered a game (Assassin's Creed) that's filled with graphical and performance errors and is, according to most, markedly inferior to the 360 version. Infinity Ward talked about the PS3 needing more personnel and effort, and desperate people tried to spin that into something else, so you've basically got Team Ninja and Epic (which I haven't seen Epic saying anything pro-PS3, but you've got nothing else, so I'll just go ahead and give it to you) saying "it can be done". Congrats. That totally disproves Valve's point that it just isn't worth the time. Or not.
Infinity Ward put in more effort because they wanted to deliver a quality product to the Playstation 3, Valve didn't. That's why Call of Duty 4 is identical and praised on the Playstation 3. And haven't most reviews stated that Assassin's Creed is pretty much the same on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 and this video seems to agree with me:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/28006.html?type=flv
 
So the point of all this is still that we're getting the uber-awesome version of The Orange Box and you're getting the uber-crappy one, eh? :dry:
 
Infinity Ward put in more effort because they wanted to deliver a quality product to the Playstation 3, Valve didn't. That's why Call of Duty 4 is identical and praised on the Playstation 3. And haven't most reviews stated that Assassin's Creed is pretty much the same on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 and this video seems to agree with me:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/28006.html?type=flv

If Infinity Ward put their best team on the Playstation 3 version and it's still only identical to the Xbox 360 version, that's telling you something. If you have to put more effort forward to get the same result, that would imply that on one it is harder to accomplish the same thing than on the other.

And.. Assassin's Creed has weird quirks and bugs on the Playstation 3 version that don't appear on the 360 version. That's what he's referencing. They look the same, pretty much, but one is buggier than the other.
 
He's not attached to Sony's power-hungry phallus! He's a witch!

Burn 'im!
 
I figured you'd have the idea that the phrase "it's a waste of time" means that someone looked at it and didn't like it. Newell looked at it and didn't like it. I mean unless you're a complete fanboy that has never touched the thing and refuses to, a waste of time usually means that.
Yeah, that really has no bearing on anything you said. I quoted you, you said "I didn't say that!', and then I quoted you again, and here we are. :huh:



He's refering to the Xbox 360 in that quote, not the original Xbox. It was an interview over the development of Kane and Lynch. So apparently, developers do see the Xbox 360 and PC to be similar.

So basically, Valve took the easy way, ignoring the Playstation 3 after looking it, instead of trying to deliver a quality product like Infinity Ward did.
Rofl, no, they're not. You really need to stop this "spin 3 words out of a paragraph" stuff, you did it with CoD4 too, which we'll get too in a minute. He's not saying that the two are architecturally similar or that the 360 is essentially a PC like the Xbox was. He's saying that the 360 and PC don't require the kind of meticulous hand-holding programming to split your program across multiple threads. Here is the interview if you want to read it in more detail. All the quote really expresses is "multi-threaded programming on a CELL is markedly more complex than it is on the 360 or PC", which is a far cry from the two being architecturally similar.

What Valve really did was choose to deliver a quality experience on the PC and Xbox 360 instead of working on a port-down development structure like Infinity Ward used on CoD4, choosing to take advantage of the two platform's abilities rather than choosing to cripple them in favor of a slightly more streamlined development process for the PS3 version. It was simply in Valve's interests to not waste their time on a version of their game for a console that requires a disproportionate amount of effort to achieve results when EA was willing to do it for them. And while you ***** and whine about Valve, you still refuse to see that a lot of games, including one which was made by a company you held up as a standard, have flaws in the PS3 version that aren't present in the other versions. It's a problem with the console, not the developers. If it were one game or one developer, maybe you'd have a case, but it's not, so all you've got is a lot of misplaced anger and spin.


Infinity Ward put in more effort because they wanted to deliver a quality product to the Playstation 3, Valve didn't. That's why Call of Duty 4 is identical and praised on the Playstation 3. And haven't most reviews stated that Assassin's Creed is pretty much the same on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 and this video seems to agree with me:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/28006.html?type=flv
This has already been explained to you, but what Infinity Ward did was give the PS3 a disproportionate amount of manpower to achieve similar results, while also developing their content totally independent of any one platform so they could port down to each one, circumventing a few of the problems present in PS3 games development. And they said as much. Saying "PS3 development isn't so bad for the studios that have the people to throw at the problem" isn't exactly the same as "oh, yay for ps3, it's teh bestest ever, so easy if you just aren't lazy, yay!". You're so desperate for something, anything to come along and validate this belief you have that everyone is just being lazy with the playstation that you're grasping at straws and taking things that don't really mean what you want them too and holding them up as evidence that you were right all along. It's tiresome.

Let's look at This link. See all that stuff about how great the PS3 is? See how it's not in quotations? That's because it is editorial opinion, not coming from Infinity Wards mouth. Let's look at what they actually said here.

"There’s obviously some problem with all the delays we’re witnessing. I think it’s just down to allocation of resources. I think maybe people feel that they’re resource strapped and feel a little bit more comfortable working on the Xbox 360 as it’s been out a little longer [than the PS3]"

So they also seem to think there's an obvious problem. And they also seem to think that it's down to resource allocation, that if you aren't strapped for resources, you can just throw a lot of people at the PS3 and make it perform at the same level as anything else. So basically what I've been saying the whole time. And this is what you're holding up as evidence that Infinity Ward just swooped in and *bam* a little bit of effort later they're having no trouble with ps3 development? Come on.
 
Infinity Ward put in more effort because they wanted to deliver a quality product to the Playstation 3, Valve didn't. That's why Call of Duty 4 is identical and praised on the Playstation 3. And haven't most reviews stated that Assassin's Creed is pretty much the same on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 and this video seems to agree with me:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/28006.html?type=flv

I think IGN did one of their head to head things with Assasin's Creed on 360 and PS3 and the 360 turned out better. I don't know the exact details because I don't feel like paying to read articles online, but I think someone on these boards has read it. *waits for the inevitable comment from PS3 fanboy that IGN is biased or full of ***** even though if I would have said Gamespot or any other site they would say the same thing*
 
Lol this thread is too funny - You guys ability to argue online doesnt make you cool in the real world, remember that.
 
I think IGN did one of their head to head things with Assasin's Creed on 360 and PS3 and the 360 turned out better. I don't know the exact details because I don't feel like paying to read articles online, but I think someone on these boards has read it. *waits for the inevitable comment from PS3 fanboy that IGN is biased or full of ***** even though if I would have said Gamespot or any other site they would say the same thing*
And Gamespot who has been accused of being biased against the PS3, said that the PS3 version has a better framerate than the 360 version. Both sites contradict each other right there
 
Lol this thread is too funny - You guys ability to argue online doesnt make you cool in the real world, remember that.

:wow: Thank you Paul! I must rush out into this real world and start social activity at once!















:o
 
Lol this thread is too funny - You guys ability to argue online doesnt make you cool in the real world, remember that.
Going out of your way to assure everyone of how cool your are in the "real world" is usually a pretty good indicator that you aren't cool in the "real world", you know it, and you're insecure about the fact that everyone else might know it too :o
 
Going out of your way to assure everyone of how cool your are in the "real world" is usually a pretty good indicator that you aren't cool in the "real world", you know it, and you're insecure about the fact that everyone else might know it too :o

I'm cool in the real world! I play video games, read comics, and this month I had a letter prinited in the Playstation magazine that I'm subscribed to! 3 great indicators of my popularity.
 
One day I'm going to win a woman's heart by arguing that Cyclops deserves more screen time. Just you people wait.
 
Going out of your way to assure everyone of how cool your are in the "real world" is usually a pretty good indicator that you aren't cool in the "real world", you know it, and you're insecure about the fact that everyone else might know it too :o

It's of no use, he has branded us all "losers". We are inevitably locked securely into the Lame Zone, guarded by the Hip Hop Happening Sentries of the Cool Kidz Oververse. This surely means we will never be able to cross those ancient, pearly gates into the promised land and be known, once and for all, as "in".

:csad:
 
Going out of your way to assure everyone of how cool your are in the "real world" is usually a pretty good indicator that you aren't cool in the "real world", you know it, and you're insecure about the fact that everyone else might know it too :o

LOL!
 
:woot: I'm sure your years of studying human behaviour patterns have led you to this amazing conclusion....haha!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

  • C. Lee
    Superherohype Administrator

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,771
Messages
21,808,655
Members
45,627
Latest member
WolverineHunt01
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"