Today's most comparative video: Orange Box PS3 vs. Xbox 360
Curious how the two Orange Box versions stack up? GameVideos have put the PS3 and Xbox 360 next to each other side-by-side - literally, it's a pretty impressive split-screen effort - of Portal and Half-Life 2. In fact, the visuals look very similar.The major difference, where one might consider the PS3 version "downright unplayable," is the load times. For video HL2, the loading difference shown is not as great, but Portal's comparative load time shown is rather drastic. See for yourself after the break.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Mark @ Dec 14th 2007 1:07AM
Ouch. I'm glad I don't have a PS3.
Yuccadude @ Dec 14th 2007 1:13AM
Aren't we all...aren't we all.
Oh wait. Aren't most of us...aren't most of us...
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Dec 14th 2007 1:25AM
I have a ps3 :'(
But I also have a pc :-P
plyx @ Dec 14th 2007 1:31AM
I'm glad I do.
Morgyn @ Dec 14th 2007 8:46AM
OMG 7 seconds of my life I'll not get back!
Really if that's all there is to complain about, get a life, seriously.
Anonim @ Dec 14th 2007 9:13AM
The problem is that MOST muultiplatform games are BAD CRAPPY ports from X360.
http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?p=6223952
NATO_Duke @ Dec 14th 2007 10:03AM
I'm surely not too glad I have one right now. It does great at gathering dust most days, and playing the occassional blu ray. Otherwise I rather play the games on the 360.
Damn waste of money for the time being. (Cue flame attacks)
Jerk Face @ Dec 14th 2007 10:24AM
@ gonk
Holy f*ck LOL
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Dec 14th 2007 10:50AM
Anonim: Just like Xbox and Gamecube got last generation, sloppy ports of PS2 titles.
NATO_Duke @ Dec 14th 2007 11:00AM
WTF plyx - later in this thread you offer to buy someones PS3, and here you say you are glad you have one. So which post has the lie.
Your credibility just went to sh*t. You're just a fanboy who says anything to fluff Sony.
Raikage (ROFLBERRY PWNCAKES Defence Force) @ Dec 14th 2007 2:19PM
No, no, no Crono, the Xbox's multiplatform games were much better. See: Splinter Cell, Burnout 3, Madden, etc. etc. etc. They ran faster, less loading, looked better, and had XBL
I stand behind this because that's why I had an Xbox.
Bucket @ Dec 14th 2007 1:10AM
Looks like the only framerate issue is when the game auto-saves. Which the 360 version doesn't do. I wonder if you can turn it off. Other than that, 5 seconds longer to load isn't a big deal.
Not that I'll be buying it; I have the superior PC version.
Mr.Nitemare @ Dec 14th 2007 1:18AM
Actually if you think about it it is somewhat of a big deal, because a more powerful machine is supposed to load and process information faster than a less powerful one would the same information...not longer, for instance a 1.0 ghz computer should not load the same material faster than a 2.0...and so on and so forth .. with the PS3 being more powerful it is supposed to load identical information MUCH faster than it competition not the same or longer.
Bucket @ Dec 14th 2007 1:32AM
I would agree with you, except for the fact that HL2 was also made for the XBox. Not the 360, but the original XBox. Which the PS3 outperforms by leaps and bounds. Granted, it's in HD and there are added post-processing effects, but still. The fundamentals should be there, so I find it difficult to blame the hardware.
plyx @ Dec 14th 2007 1:35AM
That is the fault of the developer, Mr.Nitemare. It's already been proven that in the hands of capable devs the PS3 easily goes toe-to-toe with anything the 360 can do.
Ramifications @ Dec 14th 2007 2:04AM
No one ever said it goes "EASILY" toe to toe with the xbox360. It may match the 360's performance, but clearly dev's don't think it's easy to do.
plyx @ Dec 14th 2007 2:15AM
@Ramifications:
http://www.psu.com/PS3-development-was-easy,-says-COD4-developer-News--a0001806-p0.php
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/08/17/graw-developer-ps3-not-harder-to-code-for-than-360/
There's a couple right off the top of my head.
Shignami @ Dec 14th 2007 3:58AM
I think that the main issue here, the real reason it may be "Unplayable" on the ps3 is not because of crap load times or slightly different colors and textures, but because the friggin dualshock fucking sucks when it comes to first person shooters.
Alex K. @ Dec 14th 2007 8:40AM
What this proves is not that the ps3 is weaker, but it exemplifies two things:
1. Microsoft is much better at making systems that are easy to develop for. Porting PC games is nearly effortless on the Xbox platform, and the fact that HL2 was on Xbox 1 really shows that. PS2 could never handle that game.
It's obvious that it's easier for developers to optimize for the 360. Also, being the more popular platform, it makes more sense to spend more time on the 360 ports.
2. The Blu-ray drive in the PS3 is in some way slower than the 360's DVD drive. I don't remember if it's seek times or data rate, or both, but I remember that being an issue in Oblivion.
Load times have more to do with optimization and the disc drive as well as amount of RAM the system can use (the 360 has 512mb of shared memory, while the PS3 has more difficult memory management, splitting 256/256mb of system/graphics memory)
B1gC72 @ Dec 14th 2007 9:08AM
it doesnt matter how powerful the PS3 is if the developers dont write code that utilizes the power of the PS3. this is because Sony likes to change the architecture of their systems every cycle while the 360 is arguably a more powerful xbox 1 in regards to programming architecture (and arguably then, an optimized PC). as a Sony fan, i can confidently say that it was Sony's arrogance that caused all this. ok they made a powerful console, but developers are generally lazy, they are going to work harder on the console that is easier to program for. i mean it does make sense, wouldnt you as a developer want to program for the 360? you can essentially make one 360 game and easily port it to PC and maximize profits with minimal effort.
now on the subject, i dont think the differences between these games make the PS3 version "unplayable" but i can see it getting a little annoying though. but seriously, just about everyone that wanted this game has already bought it on 360 or PC. we can thank EA, Valve, and the delay for that.
bm @ Dec 14th 2007 9:14AM
Developers say that for actual game applications, the 360 is faster, no matter how hard you code for it. The only thing the PS3 is better at, is protein folding. And the 360 has a faster GPU.
Trev (Completely Normal Human Defense Force) @ Dec 14th 2007 10:17AM
It's not an autosave, it's a quicksave. It's user-initiated.
To quicksave, you need to hold the start button. The reason the PS3 is quicksaving is because they told it to. The reason the 360 version isn't quicksaving is because they DIDN'T tell it to.
Its just a bad comparison. Lets see how they both run while saving or both not saving, because you'll notice when the quicksave(s) stop on the PS3, which is about the same time the machinegun fire starts, the framerate is just as good as the 360 version.
Jason @ Dec 14th 2007 10:27AM
It's not the hardware's fault that it doesn't run as well. It the fault of the shit team that did a half-ass port of the game. If they really wanted it to run well they could have done it. I mean, all PS3's have HDD to cache to. If the game was ported in a way that took advantage of this it would load much faster. Look at Oblivion, it's a more taxing game and also runs better (also a port, but a good one).
Trinh @ Dec 18th 2007 10:10PM
@Bucket
I have the Xbox 360 version. And it does autosaves, in fact, you can't turn off autosaves at all. Most of the time when it autosaves, there was no stutter in the frame except for about 1 autosave out of every 10.
nxtiak @ Dec 14th 2007 1:10AM
The visually simple, small maps game of Portal takes a long time to load on a PS3? gawd, I wonder how other games are... Hope MGS4 isn't bad.
WTangoFoxtrot @ Dec 14th 2007 1:47AM
thats blu-ray for you. it reads at less than half the speed of a DVD-9 if im correct. how long the game would take would then depend on the designers....
plyx @ Dec 14th 2007 2:32AM
http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=6060
Blu-ray reads just fine compared to DVD read times.
Boss Tempo @ Dec 14th 2007 8:18AM
The dips in framerate are more than obvious. Not just you at all. Anyone whos says otherwise is just another wishful fanboy.
Bryan @ Dec 15th 2007 4:42PM
@WTangoFoxtrot
The 12x DVD drive in the Xbox 360 reads at 16.2 Mb/s.
The 2x Blu-ray drive in the PS3 reads at 72 Mb/s.
72 > 16.2.
ridestowe @ Dec 14th 2007 1:13AM
is it just me or does the framerate skip around alot on the ps3 one, at least in the ep.2 video?
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Dec 14th 2007 1:24AM
it's not just you
Ramifications @ Dec 14th 2007 1:58AM
You're right. The framerate is very choppy on the PS3 version of the riverboat chapter.
Cabcru @ Dec 14th 2007 6:08AM
I wish I could tell. Someone should take Gamevideos.com out into a field and shoot it.
B3astofthe3ast @ Dec 14th 2007 1:15AM
Is it just me, or did Portal actually look slightly better on the PS3? I think I saw more lighting work done on some of the environments on the Ps3....
ExMcloud @ Dec 14th 2007 1:22AM
I thought they looked exactly the same just like all the other games...Sigh...This wouldn't matter so much if Sony didn't say the PS3 was like 3x's as powerful as the Xbox...W/E it doesn't matter they're both great but the PS3 has to get that "it" game...It doesn't have the game that will take it over the top...I'm not talking about the proven ones either...It needs this generations "it" game like Gears of War, or Bioshock....I sure Sony is working on it though. Cuz Nintendo needs theirs too.
elmersglue @ Dec 14th 2007 1:23AM
it's definitely just you, i don't see a damn single difference graphics wise in portal between the two. What i did notice, however, is the awful framerate the ps3 version has in the river (end of 2nd video). Holy crap, is that really how it is?
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Dec 14th 2007 1:27AM
I thought I saw it too
Of course that might just be the ps3 inside my head desperately seeking something positive out of this
Negativecool @ Dec 14th 2007 1:28AM
I saw that too...load times are rediculous though.
cybereality @ Dec 14th 2007 1:40AM
Its because the PS3 outputs the full RGB color spectrum over HDMI cables. Its an option on the PS3 settings menu. 360 just outputs the standard spectrum (like cable or most dvd players). One of the only features that I'll admit PS3 has an advantage.
plyx @ Dec 14th 2007 1:50AM
@cybereality:
What the hell are you talking about? Component cables give the "full RGB color spectrum" same as HDMI. If you believe that tech BS concerning 10-bit color that hardly any televisions can display, then you need some A/V education.
phihexy27 @ Dec 14th 2007 3:26AM
I thought it looked a little shinier on the PS3, but the difference seems minor.
Poisoned Al @ Dec 14th 2007 3:56AM
Who cares, the PC version beats both of them :p
superaktieboy @ Dec 14th 2007 4:09AM
Well it looked rather the same than either being better, the only difference i noticed was in the second video with the frame rate issue on the PS3, and the loading times but thats it!!
ColossalHat @ Dec 14th 2007 1:29AM
Well, at least there's a difference we can easily see between these two games, unlike most games.
meinside99 @ Dec 14th 2007 1:30AM
Other than the auto save skipping I see no problems whats so ever.
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Dec 14th 2007 1:31AM
you don't see the frame rate issues in the second video?
Osiris @ Dec 14th 2007 10:50AM
I'm glad you don't. Sony needs people like you!
cybereality @ Dec 14th 2007 1:33AM
Graphics look the same to me (I think the PS3 version has better color contrast), but the load time on Portal is sick. What exactly is it loading anyway? I mean, you were already playing that level, clearly all the same textures and sounds are loaded in memory. Should it really take *that* long just to respawn your character and maybe a cube or two? Alas, the power of the Cell processor.
gannon64 @ Dec 14th 2007 1:34AM
Sony's PS3 cant catch a break can he? Sony should kill off the PS3 (like Microsoft did to the XBox) and just start production on the PS4 with powerful graphics and Wii duplicated motion controls with rumble.
meinside99 @ Dec 14th 2007 1:35AM
@ The Artist
Nope see I'm a gamer that has this thing called a....drum roll....life. 80-90% of the gaming public would see these videos and see nothing except the auto save. Only techies that haven't been laid in years would care about such stupid nonsense that doesn't affect the story of the gmae not one bit!!!!!!!!!