Killzone 3 is 41.5 GB in size !!!

Yay for no compression!

What is going to be really funny is when this game gets a 20+ GB mandatory install that takes half an hour.

foxhound_fox

I guess you missed that part.

As long as the game is not affected by slow load times then this is perfectly fine, more so, many pirates will be put off by such a huge file size.abuabed

Well we are happy to announce that Killzone 3 officially has NO data install and runs perfectly!

I guess you missed that part.

Sollet

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

Got damn.

Ugh, people wanting DD next gen need to GTFO, like I feel like downloading 40 gigs of content

Raymundo_Manuel

K, but when devs aren't using blu-ray they don't have to use as much space for their games. On the PS3 you've got a bunch of repeated content to make up for a slow disk drive.

The best looking games on the PC don't even come close to 40gb downloads.

sweet. The game does have more diverse locations than the second, and then there's the 70 minutes of cutscenes, and probably none of it is compressed. :D

sweet. The game does have more diverse locations than the second, and then there's the 70 minutes of cutscenes, and probably none of it is compressed. :D

theuncharted34

[QUOTE="abuabed"]As long as the game is not affected by slow load times then this is perfectly fine, more so, many pirates will be put off by such a huge file size.foxhound_fox

Well we are happy to announce that Killzone 3 officially has NO data install and runs perfectly!

I guess you missed that part.

Sollet

God of war 3 was 35 gigs and loaded pretty dam fast. with no install.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

sweet. The game does have more diverse locations than the second, and then there's the 70 minutes of cutscenes, and probably none of it is compressed. :D

DroidPhysX

hey, I'm excited because it looks like killzone 3 will have a tightly woven story with some great voice acting, (unlike killzone 2) and I don't mind cutscenes :P

There is no mandatory install... i dunno if there is an optional install either

This is why the 360 is holding back multiplat games. Many multiplat games could be much bigger if it wasn't for the 360 limited capacity in this respect.kuraimen

So, do you think Killzone3 will be bigger than Just Cause 2, Red Dead Rdemption or Fallout 3?

Got damn.

Ugh, people wanting DD next gen need to GTFO, like I feel like downloading 40 gigs of content

This is why the 360 is holding back multiplat games. Many multiplat games could be much bigger if it wasn't for the 360 limited capacity in this respect.kuraimen

They can still be bigger, they'll just be using more than one DVD.. :?

they did this to try and stop piracy

pirates will just compress it back to 15gigs

This is why the 360 is holding back multiplat games. Many multiplat games could be much bigger if it wasn't for the 360 limited capacity in this respect.kuraimen

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]This is why the 360 is holding back multiplat games. Many multiplat games could be much bigger if it wasn't for the 360 limited capacity in this respect.foxhound_fox

hooray for made up statistics :(

the only reason why it is so big is because the ps3's bluray drive is so slow they have to repeat data on the disc so the seek times won't interrupt gameplay.

ps3 is weak

Firebird-5

The PS3 is weak because some of their games are huge?

hooray for made up statistics :(theuncharted34

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]hooray for made up statistics :(foxhound_fox

I'm sure the xbox 360 has more superior multiplats, but that doesn't change the fact that it's not that big of a difference, (95% big) or that you pulled that statistic out of nowhere.

too bad it will still be sub par like killzone 2crystos

Killzone 2 was not sub-par, and how do you know Killzone 3 is gonna be sub-par?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]This is why the 360 is holding back multiplat games. Many multiplat games could be much bigger if it wasn't for the 360 limited capacity in this respect.theuncharted34

hooray for made up statistics :(

Translates to (AKA) considering that most multiplats this gen have been better on 360

sweet. The game does have more diverse locations than the second, and then there's the 70 minutes of cutscenes, and probably none of it is compressed. :D

theuncharted34

[QUOTE="crystos"]too bad it will still be sub par like killzone 2Demonjoe93

Killzone 2 was not sub-par, and how do you know Killzone 3 is gonna be sub-par?

Nor does it point out that the Killzone 3 is goign to be some massive spectacular game based upon size of the disc. sSubZerOo

I think it's important to note, that the 360 doesn't even use the full 8.54 gb's of a dual layer dvd. It only has 6.8 gb's.

So the issue of size isn't really dvd, but more so the 360's dvd's. I'd imagine with regular sized dvd's it'd have plenty of space with a little extra compression.

Still it's pretty easy just to use a second disc.

I don't care how many gigs the game is, how much of that is duplicate data or uncompressed audio, etc. All I know and care about is that this game looks like pure top-shelf quality. From the spectacular audio, to the visuals, to the animations, to the physics... the game just looks like it is going to be a feast for the eyes and ears and just a blast to play overall. This is the only thing of relevance to me.

I think 360 does hold back multiplats. With all the space on blu-ray, devs could easily turn a normal 8GB and beef up the textures + sound and make it 16GB-20GB. Instead they keep it at the normal size so the versions are the same, and so 360 doesn't need 3 discs to play 1 game. Plus they are simply lazy (for good reason, that is a lot of work, and probably not worth the effort if the PS3 version isn't even going to sell as much). Drakan11

They're not the same.. the majority of multiplats look and perform better on 360 :lol:

[QUOTE="Drakan11"]I think 360 does hold back multiplats. With all the space on blu-ray, devs could easily turn a normal 8GB and beef up the textures + sound and make it 16GB-20GB. Instead they keep it at the normal size so the versions are the same, and so 360 doesn't need 3 discs to play 1 game. Plus they are simply lazy (for good reason, that is a lot of work, and probably not worth the effort if the PS3 version isn't even going to sell as much). waltefmoney

They're not the same.. the majority of multiplats look and perform better on 360 :lol:

I think 360 does hold back multiplats. With all the space on blu-ray, devs could easily turn a normal 8GB and beef up the textures + sound and make it 16GB-20GB. Instead they keep it at the normal size so the versions are the same, and so 360 doesn't need 3 discs to play 1 game. Plus they are simply lazy (for good reason, that is a lot of work, and probably not worth the effort if the PS3 version isn't even going to sell as much). Drakan11

Not Castlevania, Final Fantasy or Assassins Creed: Brotherhood. Drakan11

I think 360 does hold back multiplats. With all the space on blu-ray, devs could easily turn a normal 8GB and beef up the textures + sound and make it 16GB-20GB. Instead they keep it at the normal size so the versions are the same, and so 360 doesn't need 3 discs to play 1 game. Plus they are simply lazy (for good reason, that is a lot of work, and probably not worth the effort if the PS3 version isn't even going to sell as much). Drakan11

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

[QUOTE="Drakan11"]I think 360 does hold back multiplats. With all the space on blu-ray, devs could easily turn a normal 8GB and beef up the textures + sound and make it 16GB-20GB. Instead they keep it at the normal size so the versions are the same, and so 360 doesn't need 3 discs to play 1 game. Plus they are simply lazy (for good reason, that is a lot of work, and probably not worth the effort if the PS3 version isn't even going to sell as much). Drakan11

They're not the same.. the majority of multiplats look and perform better on 360 :lol:

I thought Assassins Creed Brotherhood was better on 360. :?

I thought Assassins Creed Brotherhood was better on 360. :?

waltefmoney

Lol.

That said, Brotherhood really looks the part, with a step up in the graphics department – particularly on PS3, and a massive and varied city to explore.IGN

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

I thought Assassins Creed Brotherhood was better on 360. :?

Drakan11

Lol.

That said, Brotherhood really looks the part, with a step up in the graphics department – particularly on PS3, and a massive and varied city to explore.IGN

IGN is definitely a more credible source than Lens of Truth and especially DigitalFoundry. I mean, who needs in-depth analysis when you can just quote a single line.

[QUOTE="Drakan11"]Not Castlevania, Final Fantasy or Assassins Creed: Brotherhood. foxhound_fox

no no no no.

Vanquish is the same on the ps3 and 360, BUT the 360 version has screen tearing. so the ps3 version is actually better.

Mass effect 2 is the same, the only review that I've seen that marks the ps3 version as inferior is the gamespot review. (and it wasn't because of graphics, it was just buggier) Let's wait until lens of truth.

and Just Cause 2 runs the *same* on both platforms.

How did you come to these conclusions?

Agree with RDR and bayonetta though.

The 360 definitely has the edge in terms of multiplats looking better. Especially when they are ported from the 360 to the PS3. However, when we start looking at exclusives that are built to the strengths of the hardware of each, it tells a different story. I own both consoles and I have not played one 360 exclusive yet that can touch the likes of Killzone or Uncharted on the technical level.

[QUOTE="Drakan11"]

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

Lol.

That said, Brotherhood really looks the part, with a step up in the graphics department – particularly on PS3, and a massive and varied city to explore.IGN

IGN is definitely a more credible source than Lens of Truth and especially DigitalFoundry. I mean, who needs in-depth analysis when you can just quote a single line.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="Drakan11"]Not Castlevania, Final Fantasy or Assassins Creed: Brotherhood. theuncharted34

no no no no.

Vanquish is the same on the ps3 and 360, BUT the 360 version has screen tearing. so the ps3 version is actually better.

Mass effect 2 is the same, the only review that I've seen that marks the ps3 version as inferior is the gamespot review. (and it wasn't because of graphics, it was just buggier) Let's wait until lens of truth.

and Just Cause 2 runs the *same* on both platforms.

How did you come to these conclusions?

Agree with RDR and bayonetta though.

Yeah most of the game he listed there ran the same on both systems.... I did read that vanquish was slightly better on the PS3, but I usually just see it as them being even. Not many will be able to tell the difference anyways.

[QUOTE="Drakan11"]I think 360 does hold back multiplats. With all the space on blu-ray, devs could easily turn a normal 8GB and beef up the textures + sound and make it 16GB-20GB. Instead they keep it at the normal size so the versions are the same, and so 360 doesn't need 3 discs to play 1 game. Plus they are simply lazy (for good reason, that is a lot of work, and probably not worth the effort if the PS3 version isn't even going to sell as much). foxhound_fox

no no no no.

Vanquish is the same on the ps3 and 360, BUT the 360 version has screen tearing. so the ps3 version is actually better.

Mass effect 2 is the same, the only review that I've seen that marks the ps3 version as inferior is the gamespot review. (and it wasn't because of graphics, it was just buggier) Let's wait until lens of truth.

and Just Cause 2 runs the *same* on both platforms.

How did you come to these conclusions?

Agree with RDR and bayonetta though.

theuncharted34

Just Cause 2

"There's little doubt that it's Xbox 360 owners that get a smoother, clearer game."

Mass Effect 2

"Technologically it still feels like the Xbox 360 version has the edge"

Lol. Nice argument. "Mine is credible and yours isn't". Trolling just doesn't suit you. You aren't good at it. Drakan11

I'm not trolling, I'm just showing you a more credible source that does an in-depth analysis of the games versus you quoting a single line from an IGN review.

Killzone 3 should be a monster of a game. I loved 2 and can't wait to get my hands on this!

Where did you get your degree? That isn't even close to being accurate. Drakan11

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

no no no no.

Vanquish is the same on the ps3 and 360, BUT the 360 version has screen tearing. so the ps3 version is actually better.

Mass effect 2 is the same, the only review that I've seen that marks the ps3 version as inferior is the gamespot review. (and it wasn't because of graphics, it was just buggier) Let's wait until lens of truth.

and Just Cause 2 runs the *same* on both platforms.

How did you come to these conclusions?

Agree with RDR and bayonetta though.

waltefmoney

Just Cause 2

"There's little doubt that it's Xbox 360 owners that get a smoother, clearer game."

Mass Effect 2

"Technologically it still feels like the Xbox 360 version has the edge"

Just cause 2 looks like a tie to me.

And I'll wait for lens of truth for mass effect 2.

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

Just Cause 2

"There's little doubt that it's Xbox 360 owners that get a smoother, clearer game."

Mass Effect 2

"Technologically it still feels like the Xbox 360 version has the edge"

theuncharted34

Just cause 2 looks like a tie to me.

And I'll wait for lens of truth for mass effect 2.

You can wait for whatever you wish, but you should know that DigitalFoundry are regarded as the more accurate and in-depth source.

40+ gigs of suckage.

Lol.

[QUOTE="Drakan11"]Lol. Nice argument. "Mine is credible and yours isn't". Trolling just doesn't suit you. You aren't good at it. waltefmoney

I'm not trolling, I'm just showing you a more credible source that does an in-depth analysis of the games versus you quoting a single line from an IGN review.