Half Life 2 Xbox 360 Vs PS3 comparison

[Zeus]

The following video is a comparison of the graphics/gameplay in Half Life 2 on the Xbox 360 Vs the PS3...

<center><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=8,0,0,0" width="420" height="405" id="gamevideos6" align="middle"><param name="quality" value="high"><param name="play" value="true"><param name="loop" value="true"><param name="scale" value="showall"><param name="wmode" value="window"><param name="devicefont" value="false"><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000"><param name="menu" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="salign" value=""><param name="movie" value="http://gamevideos.com:80/swf/gamevideos11.swf?embedded=1&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&src=http://gamevideos.com:80/video/videoListXML%3Fid%3D16649%26ordinal%3D119747119690 4%26adPlay%3Dfalse" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /> <embed src="http://gamevideos.com:80/swf/gamevideos11.swf?embedded=1&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&src=http://gamevideos.com:80/video/videoListXML%3Fid%3D16649%26ordinal%3D119747119690 4%26adPlay%3Dfalse" quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" play="true" loop="true" scale="showall" wmode="window" devicefont="false" id="gamevideos6" bgcolor="#000000" name="gamevideos6" menu="true" allowscriptaccess="sameDomain" allowFullScreen="true" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" align="middle" height="405" width="420"/></object></center></a>

[kidman64]

ouch.. that's what i call a difference
edit: after whatching it the 2nd time i've noticed that ps3 ver had autosaving turned on, which made the whole game sluggish i wonder how it would work without it. btw 360 had faster loading time
satel: huh, wha?

[satel]

awesome comparison & just shows when Sony builds a console they build it for the future ;)

[EliteStance]

Both look not too bad overall - although the PS3 version sure suffers with the open view.

Just watching the clip reminds me HL2 is still better than most new games...

[felixm477]

they look nearly identical to me and i rarely noticed frame issues on the ps3 side but the 360 did look smoother to my eyes, also the ps3 seemed to load a few seconds more than its counterpart

[ando2k5]

the colours looks more vibrant on the ps3 thats all really not much difference

[MeijerBranTM]

the ps3 looked sluggish a lot... like frame skippage was happening... maybe my eye site is just bad

[Triggerman]

What ? Didn't you all notice the massive slowdowns after the loading screen on the water vehicle in the PS3 version ? That sucks. :( PS3 should be powerful enough by far but seems as if HL2 hasn't been ported very well for the PS3.

Actually I think those comparison videos are rubbish when you want to compare image quality or texture quality. You simply can't tell by watching low quality/res videos. Better compare it live on a HD-TV.

[rommy667]

LOL at ps3,360 is def the better version once again..........

[SSChevy2001]

The original xbox HL2 never slowdown like that at the water scene.

EA + PS3 = bad framerates -> lazy devs :D

[sigma8]

LOL at ps3,360 is def the better version once again..........

Go play Halo3 or something. Isn't that what you do?

But yeah, the PS3 version definitely sucked BAD on the first half of the boat sequence (after the load). Once it was heading towards that overpass, it looks like the framerate smoothed up quite a bit, though. You couldn't tell easily because at that point, the player of the game stopped zigzagging in the boat and was just going straight, and then before he gets to do anything that would really show off a smoother frame rate on the PS3, the clip ends.

I don't know if the PS3 choppiness was disc/disk access or what. If it had an autosave on versus it not on with the 360 (sounds unlikely?) then it wouldn't be a fair comparison I guess, but that was definitely some bad choppiness.

[breaKdown]

Well it's definitly not the PS3's fault, that the Game suffers like that. First, Valve realy don't like the PS3, as you can see on Gabe Newels comments, and they definitly chose the wrong company to port that game to that console.
To be honest, i expected something more worse...but hey, it's a port from a game that has been ported so many times already, so don't expect 120 fps.

[killplaystation]

wow, game videos sucks. I can never get a video to play well on it.

[So-Unreal]

The Half-Life 2 PC mods are vary fun.............:rolleyes:

[imprezawrx]

meh looks the same

[So-Unreal]

Well it's definitly not the PS3's fault, that the Game suffers like that. First, Valve realy don't like the PS3, as you can see on Gabe Newels comments, and they definitly chose the wrong company to port that game to that console.
To be honest, i expected something more worse...but hey, it's a port from a game that has been ported so many times already, so don't expect 120 fps.PC Game Half-Life2 ported to XBox1. Then redone for XBox 360 (not ported, in game objects have more details from what I read, and maybe re-done textures). I dont know if the ps3 Half-Life2 is the same 2004 PC game or if its new XBox 360 Half-Life2 ported to the ps3.

[Asuga]

yet another pc port that still looks much better, and plays much smoother, on the original platform.

[BJS2]

yuck the ps3 frames suck

im going to blame EA for this, they wreck everything!!

[inde]

well as far as the gfx goes looks pretty much identical, i dont notice any richer colours on either etc etc but that water scene with the slowdown on ps3 is pretty awful, shouldnt be like that on a next gen console when this game is sorta last gen.

[Soldiers On LSD]

I think Valve gave HL2 to EA hoping for a worse port so then they could sue them. And so the version came out not awful enough to ensure a proper damage compensation.

Still looks shitty enough to prove the PS3 is still sucking balls.

[.Gogeta§§J4BR.]

both lag when entering under water? that's lame

[crypysmoker]

lol.. PS3 is so powerful yet they had to slow everythign down in that version to keep up.. and the graphics and frame rate are still garbage. My 5 year old HP PC plays that game better then the PS3 does

[Spnoz]

Let's clear some things out here.

The PS3 is about as powerful as the 360, if not more, on paper. In practice, they have "similar" level of performance, if we rely on what's currently out.

The PS3 is also known to be a lot harder to code for than other systems. This is fact. I have friends working in the game industry for major developpers, and not as game testers. They're programmers and top-level game designers. And they told me themselves that most programmers out there HATE coding fot the PS3 because it's harder.

Now do the math yourself. Hard to code for + imposed deadlines. It's clear the PS3 version wasn't optimized for its hardware. The development team had to rush the product out to make it before the holiday period to satisfy the big bosses and the shareholders.

So it's not because of "lazy devs" or because the PS3 is a worst system (it isn't). This is all a result of games now being mainstream. It is now an industry as important as music or movies. It is a BUSINESS first and foremost. Decisions are taken for the best of the company, and not necessarily for the best of its clients. And yes, those two interests can diverge.

Put yourself in the shoes of a business manager. Would you spend lot more time and money on a product for a smaller market, or would you prefer to work on something that would generate a lot more sales? Your workforce is, of course, better assigned on projects that will bring you a lot more money, than spending more time perfecting a single product for a small market.

Right now, the PS3 market only represents a small % of revenues for game publishers/developpers. Of course, this could change in the future if more people buy PS3s. But right now, it makes multiplatform developpers spend less resources on PS3 development than let's say, 360 or Wii development (depending on the developper, of course).

This is the MAIN reason why many ports to PS3 are often a bit inferior than the 360 versions. It is STRICTLY a business related issue. It has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority of the hardware. If the PS3 was the market leader right now, it would probably be the 360 who would get inferior ports.

[happygg]

the ps3 had autosave during the lag, if you're going to compare at least make it identical and nothing changing during the tests.

xbox1 version loads faster than both of them :D

[Skyline34]

Yet more flame-bait... Valve even admitted they didn't like the PS3, so obviously they would do a piss poor job of porting it, all those saying "the oh so powerful PS3 can't do better than what the 360 can blah blah"... one word... GT5!

[MasterGeek]

When is it going to be released in MOROCCO ?

[dalezer]

Brutal framrate on the PS3.

360 ver is WAY better.

[powasam5000]

wow surprisingly the game looks identical. After what was said about the ps3 version, i really think they look the same. Only until the open space driving you can see the stuttering. which is easily visible. Not unplayable, but wow that would be annoying. the 360does look very smooth, which is awesome. Anyone know if mass effect has the same stuttering i was hearing about? i heard it gets a little jittery when you start a battle for a split sec. I HATE stuttering. Takes you right out of being immersed

[chucky_uk]

Yet more flame-bait... Valve even admitted they didn't like the PS3, so obviously they would do a piss poor job of porting it, all those saying "the oh so powerful PS3 can't do better than what the 360 can blah blah"... one word... GT5!

One word EA.

Before you start spouting more **** from your sony fanboy mouth at least get your facts right about a game.:cool:

EA made the game not valve. So i will expect lazy devs to be said next but in all honest truth SPNOZ has hit the nail on the head.

SPNOZ very good post mate, at last someone on these forums who speaks sense instead of blatant fanboyism

[Skyline34]

That's what I meant, Valve hated it so much they had to result to giving it to EA to publish!

[AceMilo]

Wow the water looks terrible on the ps3 version and the loading times and dropped frames would be unnacepptable to me. I bought it for pc so I can't say anything about how either console version plays since I never played them, but the ps3 version definitely looks inferior.

[Mikeyy]

That video proved blu-ray is NOT that slow, the load was only 1 second longer...

The graphics are pretty much the same, Nothing spectacular.

Sadly the PS3 version had stuttering, thanks to EA.

If Gabe wasnt an elitist prick that wouldnt be like that. Douchebag.

I'll never eeeeeeeever buy one of his games. there was no need for him to come out and diss the PS3 then deliver a 5 year old game with framerate issues. Way to embarass yourself. Even if its EAs fault, it was fattys judgement.

[Mikeyy]

Wow the water looks terrible on the ps3 version and the loading times and dropped frames would be unnacepptable to me. I bought it for pc so I can't say anything about how either console version plays since I never played them, but the ps3 version definitely looks inferior.

Oh please ace, the graphics are not leaps and bounds different.

[AceMilo]

Oh please ace, the graphics are not leaps and bounds different.

When did I say the graphics are leaps and bounds different? I said the water and lighting is better on 360. The ps3 version is inferior due to the bad frame rate and loading times.

So how is it gabe's fault that ea can't program for a damn and sony has a bad sdk? Gabe told the truth that it wasn't cost effective to program for the ps3 so they outsourced it. Why should valve spend a significant amount of money more than what it cost to port to the 360 when they can spend less money and outsource it? Oh, because he badmouthed sony so therefore he's always wrong now. Get over it, ea did a bad job plain and simple.

[sk8er_4_life_ez]

from watching this video i still say the pc version looks better. hahaha!!! well i would say that kinda sucks about the ps3 with the frame rate kills the game a bit when your like all into it. other than that i would say both versions we identical and i really see no big deal over like a 2 second diffrence in loading. im not a sony fanboy im more of a 360 fan boy but i dont give a good opinion on things i dont talk smack like all the other fan boys. i can care less i own both.

[arnold101]

a **** of porting on ps3 :mad:

[Blazeking]

Oh boy:(

Valve did the 360 version
EA did the PS3 version.

It's amazing how some devs can make top quality games by taking their time and learning the architecture of the PS3 and not complain about it but there are those devs who expect evrything to be easy. That's just like how kids are in america today. They all want things handed to them; the easy way. Well, not all, but the count is rising.

I'm starting to think some of these devs are making piss poor games for PS3 to sabotage the credability of the console, but there are devs who make games that showcase the power. Activison had no problems getting the PS3 version of COD4 right as it looks awesome.

[chazz]

ps3: I though the graphics with lighting/texture were slightly better.

360: Better fame rate, especially on the boat part.

[Rotmm]

I'm starting to think some of these devs are making piss poor games for PS3 to sabotage the credability of the console, but there are devs who make games that showcase the power. Activison had no problems getting the PS3 version of COD4 right as it looks awesome.

Yes, that makes sense. It must be the wish of the devs to invest hundreds of thousands on a PS3 version of a game in a deliberate attempt to sabotage the console and therefore further reduce the market in which they make their money.

I'm starting to think that too. You have shown me the vision and I have grasped it with both hands.

But thank god for Activision. They are the only company who really knows how to unleash the power of the PS3. Except....

Call of Duty 3 - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Tony Hawks 8 - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Spiderman 3 The Game - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Transformers The Game - better lighting, more stutter.

Damn, so even Activision are part of the evil plan to destroy Sony :mad:

[Blazeking]

Yes, that makes sense. It must be the wish of the devs to invest hundreds of thousands on a PS3 version of a game in a deliberate attempt to sabotage the console and therefore further reduce the market in which they make their money.

I'm starting to think that too. You have shown me the vision and I have grasped it with both hands.

But thank god for Activision. They are the only company who really knows how to unleash the power of the PS3. Except....

Call of Duty 3 - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Tony Hawks 8 - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Spiderman 3 The Game - poorer visuals and more stuttering than the 360
Transformers The Game - better lighting, more stutter.

Damn, so even Activision are part of the evil plan to destroy Sony :mad:

I had a hard time trying to figure out if your ading to a mature conversation or just being a sarcastic smartass.

Let me clear one thing up: Activison/Infinty Ward did a damn good job with COD4. I guess you didn't watch the VGAs.

In your first paragraph you completely took words out of context.
I basically said that some devs don't work as hard on PS3 versions than other systems that are easier to build on. How did you not get that?

And for future reference (publisher/developer)

[Rotmm]

In your first paragraph you completely took words out of context.
I basically said that some devs don't work as hard on PS3 versions than other systems that are easier to build on. How did you not get that?

Nope, you actually said, "I'm starting to think some of these devs are making piss poor games for PS3 to sabotage the credability of the console"

Big, big difference from your revisionist version.

And for future reference (publisher/developer)

So you do understand then. I wasn't sure, after you stated that "Activison had no problems getting the PS3 version of COD4 right as it looks awesome."