The Orange Box

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Oh yeah, Medics rock.

Medics, while extremely important and amazing, I just don't have fun with.

I'd rather be killing than healing. Of course, there's the Medic's amazingly epic Bonesaw for that.

Taunt with it and he'll play it like it's a violin. XD

[TriezGamer]

And the board system seems to have eaten my original post. I don't feel like re-typing all that, so I'm just going to summarize.

Omega Amen: What statement is 'inaccurate' is beyond me, since your 'correction' is still exactly what I said: Needless Software.

As to DRM's existence in operating systems, I have no choice in that matter. I need my PC and Windows for college courses that utilize software that only runs in Windows. Choosing not to buy a game because of my distaste for DRM is fine, but I'm not going to ruin my college career over it. I use an extensively (and, thanks to the DMCA, illegally) modified version of Windows to achieve that end. It's about as clean as Windows can (which, admittedly, isn't saying much). My other PCs run Linux.

DRM in consoles exists, again, purely as unneeded software -- however my primary concern with DRM is a privacy issue. If people are storing sensitive data on their XBOX 360, Wii, or PS3, they're either creative, naive or retarded -- I'm not certain which.

Privacy being my main concern, the fact that DRM in PC gaming is on the rise, and the that I am a gamer who desires to NOT resort to piracy, I realized that soon I would have little choice but to either stop gaming almost entirely, or accept a next-gen console. As what I believe is the lesser of two evils, I opted for a console, and that's where most of my gaming time goes now -- which is just as well, because as soon as I graduate I won't have Windows any more anyway.

How this is all even relevant is beyond me, however, as Steam is still unneccesary, I don't like Steam, and The Orange Box is still available in a format that DOESN'T require Steam, which is what I prefer. And apparently, with you people, this is some sort of capital sin.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

And apparently, with you people, this is some sort of capital sin.

That is the way of the PC gaming world, young Padawan. XD

Yeah, most diehard PC gamers look at console FPS games and laugh. "Lol noobz n dem dual analog stickz. Those r 4 lozerz".

Not that I dislike dual analog, I'm just a Mouse + WASD kid. More accurate and much more effective at getting faster headshots. On the same token, the same also applies to your enemies.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Both are really a matter of getting used to (as well as settings for your controls. Default look sensistivity on any given console FPS is crap) the scheme. When I actually played Shadowrun I was frequently heading up against PC only enemies and often did equal or greater death dealing.

These days I'm console out of a bit of cheapness. I can't afford to keep upgrading my computer any more and often the newer multiplayer games (MMOs excluded) demand the very latest. At least a lot of the bigger titles do.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

You need to upgrade your computer to run Orange Box? What computer are you running? A Pentium III? XD

[TriezGamer]

More accurate and much more effective at getting faster headshots. On the same token, the same also applies to your enemies.

A mouse is definately more accurate. And that's why console FPSes are so different. Analog controls do a bit better on simulating ones ability to swing around (an often times very large) weapon and fire with precision (or lack of precision). This isn't inherently good or bad, just different.

To start, I was raised on straight keyboard, without mouse control. The mouse was a nice addition shortly afterward, as the keyboard input was horrendously stiff. I recognized console shooters had potential with Perfect Dark back on the N64, even though the controls were very clunky. Over time though, as analog sticks have become more sensitive with improved response, dual-analogs have become a real contender in the FPS arena.

And then after a while it struck me. A good PC FPS gamer can swing around 180, and have a headshot basically in a fraction of a second regardless of where the opponent is standing. Yet a console FPS has a more realistic need to know your enemy -- is your opponent above or below you? How far to the side? The difference in correction time on a console is significant, and some people don't like it -- it's far less precise. I love it. It's not that it requires less or more skill than playing a PC FPS, it just requires a different kind of skill -- it has a much heavier emphasis on anticipation, knowledge of the environment and efficiency of movement. Not that these things aren't important in a PC game, but in a PC game, you have the ability to correct for a mistake almost instantly as soon as your foe comes into view (which in most games makes for a 90 degree cone of error -- that's freaking huge).

There's nothing wrong with either setup, they're simply different -- and to be honest, I don't expect many people to love them both as I do. Typically, people who have played PC FPSes forever don't want to lose the precision they have, and don't think of consoles as a different style of play, just an inferior control scheme for the same style. It's wrongheaded thinking, if you ask me.

If I have any real gripe about PC FPS controls, it's the lack of precision in movement. I have four movement speeds that apply to all 4 vectors of movement: Running, Walking, Crouching, and Crouching+Walking (and many games don't differentiate between Crouching and Crouching+Walking). And what if I don't WANT to crouch? Granted, most PC FPS have no need to go anything slower than a flat run -- which is why it's mostly a non-issue.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Interesting viewpoint. I'd like to bring up some of my own points though.

And then after a while it struck me. A good PC FPS gamer can swing around 180, and have a headshot basically in a fraction of a second regardless of where the opponent is standing. Yet a console FPS has a more realistic need to know your enemy

I can agree with that. Though I also think that control style what the opponent would do.

To use Team Fortress 2 as an example, let's say I'm a spy disguised as an enemy Soldier. In case you are not aware, Spies have the ability to backstab enemies (Instant KO) as well as sap the life out of Sentry Guns and other buildings that are made by Engineers.

Anyway, let's say I saw an engineer to the side of his Sentry Gun. He's facing away from me, is crouched, and is busy upgrading it with his wrench. Seeing that he's also a PC user as well, the chances of him turning around and smacking me with his wrench as soon as I sap his Sentry gun is highly likely. (This has happened many times. XD Many failed sap attempts). I COULD kill him first and then try to quickly sap the sentry, but the chances of getting killed by the sentry are high because I'd lose my disguise and the sentry would spot me.

Anyway. If this were on a Console. I would theorize that I'd have a more successful chance of taking out both the Sentry and the Engineer due to my opponent's delayed reaction time.But on a PC? Depending on the situation, I may just leave the sentry and engineer alone. (I have avoided doing such on numerous occasions)

So really, I think that things just balance out.

it has a much heavier emphasis on anticipation, knowledge of the environment and efficiency of movement. Not that these things aren't important in a PC game, but in a PC game, you have the ability to correct for a mistake almost instantly as soon as your foe comes into view

On a general level: True. But again, I think it depends on how well-seasoned your opponent is. With more precision, he could take you down faster and more effectively. I mean, try keep your crosshair on a moving target with dual analog while firing an automatic weapon. I find it much more difficult. (Which you didn't disagree with. XD) Usually I end up just overshooting my target by a few centimeters, thus taking it longer to make a kill. (Which does frustrate me because my target gets away, lol) I can't say the same happens with a Keyboard + Mouse setup.

I heard that in the PC version of Bioshock, enemy response was less delayed and they attacked faster as opposed to the 360 version. To me, I think this was just smart thinking for the developers because they realized that the Keyboard + Mouse setup is much faster in terms of response time. Although the 360 version did have one benefit that PC + Keyboard cannot have unless hardware peripherals are modified: Pressure-Sensitive movement. That's the only thing that I really like when it comes to Dual-Analog.

I can't say there is more emphasis on efficiency of movement, though. For me, movement in console FPS games feel restrained because of the delay in everything. It's a bit harder to circle-strafe an enemy with dual analog sticks as opposed to WASD + Mouse while keeping the crosshair on them.

Granted, most PC FPS have no need to go anything slower than a flat run -- which is why it's mostly a non-issue.

This statement I cannot agree with. They seem rather the same to me. Although certain games that I used to play a lot (DoD: Source, CS: Source, etc) put HEAVY emphasis on crouching, proning, waking, etc. Proper crouching to avoid detection in Counter-Strike was absolutely important. If you were running around a room, your enemy could easily identify that you were in that room. On the flipside, you'd have no idea that your enemy was slowly crawling towards you.

Then you have Deus Ex, which I am currently playing. Do I find myself needing to crouch and walk a lot? Absolutely. I also dislike having to press down and hold an analog button to crouch with 360-shooters (It's easy to accidentally let go). I never have a problem when holding "Ctrl".

On the flip-side: Multiplayer Halo. It's just rockets being shot everywhere, getting owned by a shotgun or a sword from behind, or people running and gunning. I rarely see tactical implication in fights, the use of different speeds of movement has no real use. Granted Halo is my only experience with Console FPS in terms of multiplayer, so I can't say the same for otherwise.

On that note, I do apologize if my post was like... poorly structured. I blame the time as well as other current distractions. XD Anyway, I don't really MIND Dual-Analog, but I do believe it is a tad bit inferior compared to Keyboard + Mouse.

[Cognitive Gear]

On the flip-side: Multiplayer Halo. It's just rockets being shot everywhere, getting owned by a shotgun or a sword from behind, or people running and gunning. I rarely see tactical implication in fights, the use of different speeds of movement has no real use. Granted Halo is my only experience with Console FPS in terms of multiplayer, so I can't say the same for otherwise.

I'm about 99% certain that you are talking about Halo 2 MP. Halo CE was much more tactical, and Halo 3 generally discourages this type of play.

Anyways: my two cents regarding Dual Analog vs. Keyboard + Mouse:

Both have their advantages. For the most part, they've been discussed.

I do prefer Dual Analog for only one reason: It places less emphasis on "twitch" style gameplay. I prefer the more tactical end of FPS.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

[quote="Cognitive Gear"]I'm about 99%]

Halo 1 and 2 were my only multiplayer experiences; moreso Halo 2 than 1.

[TriezGamer]

On a general level: True. But again, I think it depends on how well-seasoned your opponent is. With more precision, he could take you down faster and more effectively.

This is true with either control style.

I mean, try keep your crosshair on a moving target with dual analog while firing an automatic weapon. I find it much more difficult. (Which you didn't disagree with. XD) Usually I end up just overshooting my target by a few centimeters, thus taking it longer to make a kill. (Which does frustrate me because my target gets away, lol) I can't say the same happens with a Keyboard + Mouse setup.

It seems you probably have a higher difficulty than me with dual-analogs. Holding to a target isn't too difficult for me. My problem is cross-ups -- When an enemy manages to jump over me and is suddenly behind me.

I heard that in the PC version of Bioshock, enemy response was less delayed and they attacked faster as opposed to the 360 version. To me, I think this was just smart thinking for the developers because they realized that the Keyboard + Mouse setup is much faster in terms of response time. Although the 360 version did have one benefit that PC + Keyboard cannot have unless hardware peripherals are modified: Pressure-Sensitive movement. That's the only thing that I really like when it comes to Dual-Analog.

I'm not familiar with the PC version of Bioshock, so I can't really say, but it didn't really feel like the response time was delayed. I'll have to try the PC version at some point to be sure, but it ain't gonna be on my PC...

I can't say there is more emphasis on efficiency of movement, though. For me, movement in console FPS games feel restrained because of the delay in everything. It's a bit harder to circle-strafe an enemy with dual analog sticks as opposed to WASD + Mouse while keeping the crosshair on them.

I find circle strafing to be massively easier on a console. Strafe with left or right on the left stick, and tilt the right stick in the opposite direction (with the angle based on how far away the opponent is). It's a static position compared to the need to constantly scroll with a mouse (which reaches the end of one's mousepad shortly).

This statement I cannot agree with. They seem rather the same to me. Although certain games that I used to play a lot (DoD: Source, CS: Source, etc) put HEAVY emphasis on crouching, proning, waking, etc. Proper crouching to avoid detection in Counter-Strike was absolutely important. If you were running around a room, your enemy could easily identify that you were in that room. On the flipside, you'd have no idea that your enemy was slowly crawling towards you.

In hindsight, that was a rather biased statement -- I find I don't much like the more realistic shooters (realism gets boring fast), and I loathe CS in general, so that was mostly the result of the fact that I usually play fast-paced FPS on the PC like UT.

Then you have Deus Ex, which I am currently playing. Do I find myself needing to crouch and walk a lot? Absolutely. I also dislike having to press down and hold an analog button to crouch with 360-shooters (It's easy to accidentally let go). I never have a problem when holding "Ctrl".

Most newer console FPS have the option to use a crouch toggle now. Press to crouch, press again to stand. Bioshock I believe has this by default. Halo 3 has it as an option.

On the flip-side: Multiplayer Halo. It's just rockets being shot everywhere, getting owned by a shotgun or a sword from behind, or people running and gunning. I rarely see tactical implication in fights, the use of different speeds of movement has no real use. Granted Halo is my only experience with Console FPS in terms of multiplayer, so I can't say the same for otherwise.

As Cognitive mentioned, Halo 3 has a significantly better multiplayer experience. I have found that even with voice chat, the trash-talking in Halo 3 isn't nearly as bad (a large part of that probably being the Live features exclusive to the 360). Which isn't to say that it doesn't exist, it's just not nearly as prevalent. I run into a trash-talker about once every 3-4 hours as opposed to Halo 2's every other match. Foul language abounds though, which might bother a lot of people here.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I'm not familiar with the PC version of Bioshock, so I can't really say, but it didn't really feel like the response time was delayed. I'll have to try the PC version at some point to be sure, but it ain't gonna be on my PC...

Do note that this is what I heard. I don't know absolutely for certian.

In hindsight, that was a rather biased statement

My statement or yours?

I find I don't much like the more realistic shooters (realism gets boring fast), and I loathe CS in general, so that was mostly the result of the fact that I usually play fast-paced FPS on the PC like UT.

Ah I see. This is where we differ. I'm the total opposite. I cradle Counter-Strike like it were my child and I also have a strong dislike towards Unreal Tournament. It feels like it's all run-and-gunning for me.

Most newer console FPS have the option to use a crouch toggle now. Press to crouch, press again to stand. Bioshock I believe has this by default. Halo 3 has it as an option.

True. I forgot that Bioshock had it toggled. (I own it for the 360) Although, I absolutely cannot stand crouch being toggled on a PC FPS for some reason. The only reason I could think of why I'd feel this way is because I've always done it like that in the past and I just got used to it. That or holding to crouch and letting go to stand just might seem more logical to me.

[Omega Amen]

Okay, those who have not played Portal, skip this post and come back later when you have finished the game.

For those who have, prepare to have your mind blown. Portal completed in 18:05 time. Youtube links below.

Portal Speed Run Part 1
Portal Speed Run Part 2

In a lame attempt to make this post flow with the current discussion trend, this shows how mouse precision can be handy sometimes.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Ah yes, the "Use turret on GLaDOS" trick. Turns out that a single shot from a bullet can knock those orbs off GLaDOS, so people decided to try and use the turrets against her.

Anyway that was a crazy-awesome video.

[Fish and Chips]

Best Buy is currently holding a price shave for several games before the holiday Rush. Tomorrow (Friday) and Saturday only, the Orange Box can be found and sold for $25.

The "Deal of the Century" just got better.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Yup. Orange Box and Bioshock are now just 25 bucks each.

So the time to get it is now.

[Bobtheduck]

Since the PS3 version is gimped worse than FEAR and Madden (the port was handled by EA?? WTH?), I guess I'm gonna break down and get the PC version. Sad I can't share portal with anyone...

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Well, and the PC version will give you a larger network as you can group with people from PC as well as 360. ^-^

[Bobtheduck]

Well, and the PC version will give you a larger network as you can group with people from PC as well as 360. ^-^

Is that Games for Windows Live?

Because I won't pay for online...

I'd rather have splitscreen than online, when it comes down to it.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

I believe it is. I just know that a lot of the people I play 2fort against are running PC.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Actually it is not Games for Windows. It's for Steam. No way would Valve use Games for Windows when they're using their own software. That and I don't believe you can play with 360 or PS3 players.

But hey, you can play with Cognitive Gear, Mastersquirrel, and I!

Steam > Games for Windows.

[Bobtheduck]

Actually it is not Games for Windows. It's for Steam. No way would Valve use Games for Windows when they're using their own software. That and I don't believe you can play with 360 or PS3 players.

But hey, you can play with Cognitive Gear, Mastersquirrel, and I!

Steam > Games for Windows.

Is steam free? And I don't doubt pretty much everything > GfWL. Including Xbox live...

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Steam is absolutely 100% free. I also personally love it because you can purchase games over it. While I think it's cool to save money by getting Orange Box for 25 bucks at Best Buy, I personally advocate getting it via Steam so that the developers will get my money, and not EA.

But yeah, it's free. It's great. You can set up your own steam page and add people to your friends list and even join the CAA Steam Community!
Here's mine: http://steamcommunity.com/id/RicoP90

You can download Steam for free at http://www.steampowered.com

[Fish and Chips]

While I think it's cool to save money by getting Orange Box for 25 bucks at Best Buy, I personally advocate getting it via Steam so that the developers will get my money, and not EA.

We'll talk after I've paid off my college tuition.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

We'll talk after I've paid off my college tuition.

XD Don't get me wrong, saving money and getting good deals is great.

I wish I bought Orange Box off of Steam. D: *Feels Guilty* I personally would pay 50 bucks to Valve to get the game instead of 25 bucks to EA/Best Buy.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

That and I don't believe you can play with 360 or PS3 players.

I've been playing games with people that claimed to and when I tried to friend them it gave me the "not an Xbox live subscriber" message usually associated with the WL users from Shadowrun. They might have changed it, but that was at least my first night's experience. I was actually the only console player in the whole game. Hehe.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I can't see that being possible. TF2 on the 360 are games set up by an individual over the XBox Live servers. On the flipside, TF2 PC games are set by an individual's server that's running TF2. TF2 PC Cannot log into Xbox Live, and Xbox Live cannot log into any random server; only Xbox Live games.

Frankly, I hear that XBL TF2 matches are downright shoddy. Since it supports only up to 16 players (Instead of 24 or 32) and has constant lag, it doesn't sound too fun for me. Really, I find 8 vs 8 matches to be boring.

[Fish and Chips]

Frankly, I hear that XBL TF2 matches are downright shoddy. Since it supports only up to 16 players (Instead of 24 or 32) and has constant lag, it doesn't sound too fun for me. Really, I find 8 vs 8 matches to be boring.

And Xbox Live rears only the finest stock of humans for its dedicated userbase.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

And Xbox Live rears only the finest stock of humans for its dedicated userbase.

Yes it does.

Language warning. Prepare to smack your head in your desk.

[Bobtheduck]

... I missed my chance... I went to Best Buy, and it was completely sold out...

[Etoh*the*Greato]

I can't see that being possible. TF2 on the 360 are games set up by an individual over the XBox Live servers. On the flipside, TF2 PC games are set by an individual's server that's running TF2. TF2 PC Cannot log into Xbox Live, and Xbox Live cannot log into any random server; only Xbox Live games.

Frankly, I hear that XBL TF2 matches are downright shoddy. Since it supports only up to 16 players (Instead of 24 or 32) and has constant lag, it doesn't sound too fun for me. Really, I find 8 vs 8 matches to be boring.

The lag is only a sometimes issue, often depending entirely on the connection of the host server. As for the stock of XBL, suffice it to say yeah the creeps are out there but c'mon guys, we're gamers. Those guys are going to be everywhere. The unwashed and impolite practically thrive in our business. :p