XXXXXX

150 results
1
2
3
4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

22814

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 22814 Posts

[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]Blue Dragon being the only game on multiple discs pretty much proves that Bluray isn't necessary. Compression is only getting better as well. Bluray isn't necessary for movies either. The differences between Bluray and DVD are minimal. It's nice to have that extra storage space but it wasn't needed by any means. purplemidgets

Maybe since it was on the last page, I'll restate this:

Games are near the limit of a DVD. It's a fact. Mass Effect "just barely" fitting on a disc proves that. The problem with constantly compressing the data on tha disc is that old DVD drives cannot read the information as fast. So as you continue compressing, load times go up, way up. You can't just rely on that one method alone. You need new drives/discs and compression.

Yep, and by the time that limit is reached (3-5 years) there will be a new generation of Consoles.

17 years ago

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#52 purplemidgets

Member since 2002 • 3103 Posts

Yep, and by the time that limit is reached (3-5 years) there will be a new generation of Consoles.
Puckhog04

I disagree that it will take that long. I see it happening in another year or two.
Anyway, you don't think it's a better idea to get the new technology out there now instead of waiting until it's abolsutely necessary?

17 years ago

22814

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 22814 Posts

[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]
Yep, and by the time that limit is reached (3-5 years) there will be a new generation of Consoles.
purplemidgets

I disagree that it will take that long. I see it happening in another year or two.
Anyway, you don't think it's a better idea to get the new technology out there now instead of waiting until it's abolsutely necessary?

I don't think it's going to be that early. As for the 2nd statement: Not if it means raising the price of a platform simply to Trojan Horse a new type of technology that probably won't be universally accepted as the medium for another couple years.

17 years ago

429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#54 orangeonxbox

Member since 2005 • 429 Posts

little round shiny disks that have digital data on them are at the end of the road; the blu ray version of oblivion has had to have data repeats all over the disk so the ps3 can grab scenery as you gallop across the landscape on your steed, otherwise the game would stop dead while it went looking for the next hill top, and the 360 version spins at such an insane speed it sounds like a 747 is waiting to taxi in your living room. I would not call either of those an ideal situation.

17 years ago

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#55 musicalmac Moderator

Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts

[QUOTE="purplemidgets"][QUOTE="Puckhog04"]
Yep, and by the time that limit is reached (3-5 years) there will be a new generation of Consoles.
Puckhog04

I disagree that it will take that long. I see it happening in another year or two.
Anyway, you don't think it's a better idea to get the new technology out there now instead of waiting until it's abolsutely necessary?

I don't think it's going to be that early. As for the 2nd statement: Not if it means raising the price of a platform simply to Trojan Horse a new type of technology that probably won't be universally accepted as the medium for another couple years.

The problem with HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is that it's not a HUGE leap in technology. Going from VHS to DVD was a vast improvement. The average consumer doesn't see high def media the same way, "It looks like a DVD". I would be willing to bed if the media looked vastly different, there would be more buzz amongst the general public. If movies came on small, clear cubes that looked futuristic, people may be more interested. DVD also gave the option of skipping to whatever point in the movie you wanted to, and got rid of flimsy tape and rewinding. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD don't offer huge new features. Sure they hold more, but what else does it really afford the average consumer?

17 years ago

22814

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 22814 Posts

[QUOTE="Puckhog04"][QUOTE="purplemidgets"][QUOTE="Puckhog04"]
Yep, and by the time that limit is reached (3-5 years) there will be a new generation of Consoles.
musicalmac

I disagree that it will take that long. I see it happening in another year or two.
Anyway, you don't think it's a better idea to get the new technology out there now instead of waiting until it's abolsutely necessary?

I don't think it's going to be that early. As for the 2nd statement: Not if it means raising the price of a platform simply to Trojan Horse a new type of technology that probably won't be universally accepted as the medium for another couple years.

The problem with HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is that it's not a HUGE leap in technology. Going from VHS to DVD was a vast improvement. The average consumer doesn't see high def media the same way, "It looks like a DVD". I would be willing to bed if the media looked vastly different, there would be more buzz amongst the general public. If movies came on small, clear cubes that looked futuristic, people may be more interested. DVD also gave the option of skipping to whatever point in the movie you wanted to, and got rid of flimsy tape and rewinding. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD don't offer huge new features. Sure they hold more, but what else does it really afford the average consumer?

I agree on every point. :)

If it were a much bigger jump in technology it would be alot easier for people to adopt Bluray and HD-DVD easier.

17 years ago

155

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 animation_imp

Member since 2005 • 155 Posts

The average consumer buys what the companies tell them to buy, and they like wat the companies tell them to like... Just watch how Lcd displays are promoted...

17 years ago

3933

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#58 Vampyronight

Member since 2002 • 3933 Posts

God of War was just under 8gb. I'd link you, but that might get me moderated. Google is your friend, though.

17 years ago

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#59 musicalmac Moderator

Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts

[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Puckhog04"][QUOTE="purplemidgets"][QUOTE="Puckhog04"]
Yep, and by the time that limit is reached (3-5 years) there will be a new generation of Consoles.
Puckhog04

I disagree that it will take that long. I see it happening in another year or two.
Anyway, you don't think it's a better idea to get the new technology out there now instead of waiting until it's abolsutely necessary?

I don't think it's going to be that early. As for the 2nd statement: Not if it means raising the price of a platform simply to Trojan Horse a new type of technology that probably won't be universally accepted as the medium for another couple years.

The problem with HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is that it's not a HUGE leap in technology. Going from VHS to DVD was a vast improvement. The average consumer doesn't see high def media the same way, "It looks like a DVD". I would be willing to bed if the media looked vastly different, there would be more buzz amongst the general public. If movies came on small, clear cubes that looked futuristic, people may be more interested. DVD also gave the option of skipping to whatever point in the movie you wanted to, and got rid of flimsy tape and rewinding. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD don't offer huge new features. Sure they hold more, but what else does it really afford the average consumer?

I agree on every point. :)

Another point to add. In order to enjoy a DVD, you needed a DVD player. Makes sense. In order to enjoy a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movie, you need the appropriate player, AND an HDTV. Because that technology relies on another, it HD media a difficult sell. A high def movie will look just like a DVD on an SDTV..

17 years ago

7786

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#60 TheSystemLord1

Member since 2006 • 7786 Posts

[QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. amcallister902

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

17 years ago

1812

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 1812 Posts

Blue RAy is not needed for Games its just a ploy for Sony to sell PS3 owners blue ray movies and save its failing business

17 years ago

6060

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62 darkmagician06

Member since 2003 • 6060 Posts

little round shiny disks that have digital data on them are at the end of the road; the blu ray version of oblivion has had to have data repeats all over the disk so the ps3 can grab scenery as you gallop across the landscape on your steed, otherwise the game would stop dead while it went looking for the next hill top, and the 360 version spins at such an insane speed it sounds like a 747 is waiting to taxi in your living room. I would not call either of those an ideal situation.orangeonxbox

lol exaggerations ftw

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#63 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

[QUOTE="amcallister902"][QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. TheSystemLord1

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

17 years ago

3933

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#64 Vampyronight

Member since 2002 • 3933 Posts

[QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"][QUOTE="amcallister902"][QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. mjarantilla

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

Right- that's why Kojima is saying that the standard Blu Ray disc isn't big enough for his game. He wants a 50gb disc. But I suppose MGS4 is just a mythical titles...you know, vaporware that'll never happen. :roll:

17 years ago

7786

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#65 TheSystemLord1

Member since 2006 • 7786 Posts

[QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"]
So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?
mjarantilla

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

EXACTLY, Blu-Ray is pointless for that reason, if it could be twice as good on the PS3 and twice as long...then I would love to play it in 2011, which would be about the time it would take to make it. People are forgetting that games take years upon years to make now, why would developers make that time even longer...

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#66 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"][QUOTE="amcallister902"][QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. Vampyronight

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

Right- that's why Kojima is saying that the standard Blu Ray disc isn't big enough for his game. He wants a 50gb disc. But I suppose MGS4 is just a mythical titles...you know, vaporware that'll never happen. :roll:

I said games that TRULY need it. Believe me, if MASS EFFECT could fit on a DVD, then ANY GAME (of this generation) can fit on a DVD. I don't work for Kojima, but I don't see how one game can fit within 8GB while another game, MUCH shorter and MUCH smaller in scope, requires over 30GBs. Kojima's just being (gasp) lazy!

17 years ago

4449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 4449 Posts

[QUOTE="TheTrueEdge"][QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. Carmilla31

From what I understood, the game Blue Dragon itself isn't on three DVD's. The game itself was on 1/2 DVD's due to cutscenes and whatnot and the remaining 1/2 DVD's were extra content. Not sure about this though.

But I can't seem to believe DVD9 holds too little capicity for this generation. At least, not for Microsoft in any way. They were suppose to announce their new machine in 2010 or so. I don't think we'll see huge amounts of games on multiple discs by that time. Infact, I think rarely any.

And if we do, really, what's the trouble of changing a disc? I never quite understood that. You are changing discs all the time because you play different games. So what's the trouble in changing a disc after 30 hours into a game? It's a weak arguement to justify Blu Ray games by saying: 'Yeah... well... we don't have to change a disc!' because you are changing discs when you want to play a different game anyway. I don't see the 'ownage' in having to change a disc somewhere in a long single player.

Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds because of its huge amount of cgi which takes up a lot of disc space. Final Fantasy is the king of cgi and would take much more then 3 discs. And sure changing discs isnt a big deal. But having it on one disc is just a little perk that most would rather have.

Having games on one disc also cuts back on development costs and overall the game will be cheaper, not to mention Blu Ray disc production is cheaper then DVD's believe it or not, I read somewhere that it costs about 25 cents to make a Blu Ray disc where its a bit more for a DVD. It all adds up though in the long run. If games with lots of CGI exist, I can guarantee they will be PS3 exclusive because of the massive storage size, putting games on multiple discs is a big pain on developers because you have to find a cutoff point in the game to switch over.

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#68 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

[QUOTE="Carmilla31"][QUOTE="TheTrueEdge"][QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. DSgamer64

From what I understood, the game Blue Dragon itself isn't on three DVD's. The game itself was on 1/2 DVD's due to cutscenes and whatnot and the remaining 1/2 DVD's were extra content. Not sure about this though.

But I can't seem to believe DVD9 holds too little capicity for this generation. At least, not for Microsoft in any way. They were suppose to announce their new machine in 2010 or so. I don't think we'll see huge amounts of games on multiple discs by that time. Infact, I think rarely any.

And if we do, really, what's the trouble of changing a disc? I never quite understood that. You are changing discs all the time because you play different games. So what's the trouble in changing a disc after 30 hours into a game? It's a weak arguement to justify Blu Ray games by saying: 'Yeah... well... we don't have to change a disc!' because you are changing discs when you want to play a different game anyway. I don't see the 'ownage' in having to change a disc somewhere in a long single player.

Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds because of its huge amount of cgi which takes up a lot of disc space. Final Fantasy is the king of cgi and would take much more then 3 discs. And sure changing discs isnt a big deal. But having it on one disc is just a little perk that most would rather have.

Having games on one disc also cuts back on development costs and overall the game will be cheaper, not to mention Blu Ray disc production is cheaper then DVD's believe it or not, I read somewhere that it costs about 25 cents to make a Blu Ray disc where its a bit more for a DVD. It all adds up though in the long run. If games with lots of CGI exist, I can guarantee they will be PS3 exclusive because of the massive storage size, putting games on multiple discs is a big pain on developers because you have to find a cutoff point in the game to switch over.

Here's the thing: games SHOULDN'T have CGI anymore. EVER. Today's game engines produce visuals that come within 90% of CGI for no additional storage costs, and it takes even LONGER and costs even MORE money to create raw CGI than to create the same scenes within a game engine. Plus, it's MUCH less jarring on players to not have to switch between CGI and gameplay.

17 years ago

7786

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#69 TheSystemLord1

Member since 2006 • 7786 Posts

CGI is quickly becoming a useless technology. Let Pixar, Dreamworks, and Square's movies use CGI. I want in game engine throughout the game, not in specific spots.

17 years ago

2816

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 2816 Posts

I've got an idea: STOP making games with HD CGI and use the best compression tools that money can buy or at least hire Casey Hudson's staff . "But, there's an art to optimizing the data that goes on a disc — plus we have a few programmers that seem to pull off magic tricks right when we need them." Seriously, with engines like UE3, why do we still need CGI full motion video?

17 years ago

1131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 1131 Posts

It's not about swapping discs. It's about developers wanting to save money by not having to go the multiple disc rout. Each extra DVD costs money to produce and hence lowers the publishers/developers profit. Do you guys think that BioWare had ME fit on one DVD9 because that's just how it happened? ME if anything is bigger than DVD9, and they had to use money and resources to get it to fit on one DVD9 -- money and resources that could have gone into making the game better. At least, that's how I see it.

17 years ago

5766

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

Member since 2002 • 5766 Posts

[QUOTE="reilo"]It's not about swapping discs. It's about developers wanting to save money by not having to go the multiple disc rout. Each extra DVD costs money to produce and hence lowers the publishers/developers profit. Do you guys think that BioWare had ME fit on one DVD9 because that's just how it happened? ME if anything is bigger than DVD9, and they had to use money and resources to get it to fit on one DVD9 -- money and resources that could have gone into making the game better. At least, that's how I see it.

Money and resources that could have just been used to put it on multiple disks?

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#73 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

[QUOTE="reilo"]It's not about swapping discs. It's about developers wanting to save money by not having to go the multiple disc rout. Each extra DVD costs money to produce and hence lowers the publishers/developers profit. Do you guys think that BioWare had ME fit on one DVD9 because that's just how it happened? ME if anything is bigger than DVD9, and they had to use money and resources to get it to fit on one DVD9 -- money and resources that could have gone into making the game better. At least, that's how I see it.

No, it IS about swapping discs. Going multiple discs costs only a few extra cents per game copy, and it's a worry for the publisher, not the developer. The developer gets a different budget to work with.

17 years ago

5766

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

Member since 2002 • 5766 Posts

[QUOTE="billing"]

Actually Mass Effect proves that data compression technology is still improving.
purplemidgets

You can only compress data so much. And you can't continue compressing the data to extremes on old dvd drives, because the more you compress the longer the read times are. You need a coupling of compressing and new drives/disc formats.

Uhm, no. More compression means putting more into less space. This means the drive can read it faster since it only needs to read a smaller space for the same amount of data. The system itself (cpu) has to decompress it more if it's highly compressed.

17 years ago

200

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#75 RBlair21088

Member since 2004 • 200 Posts

[QUOTE="TheTrueEdge"][QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. Carmilla31

From what I understood, the game Blue Dragon itself isn't on three DVD's. The game itself was on 1/2 DVD's due to cutscenes and whatnot and the remaining 1/2 DVD's were extra content. Not sure about this though.

But I can't seem to believe DVD9 holds too little capicity for this generation. At least, not for Microsoft in any way. They were suppose to announce their new machine in 2010 or so. I don't think we'll see huge amounts of games on multiple discs by that time. Infact, I think rarely any.

And if we do, really, what's the trouble of changing a disc? I never quite understood that. You are changing discs all the time because you play different games. So what's the trouble in changing a disc after 30 hours into a game? It's a weak arguement to justify Blu Ray games by saying: 'Yeah... well... we don't have to change a disc!' because you are changing discs when you want to play a different game anyway. I don't see the 'ownage' in having to change a disc somewhere in a long single player.

Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds because of its huge amount of cgi which takes up a lot of disc space. Final Fantasy is the king of cgi and would take much more then 3 discs. And sure changing discs isnt a big deal. But having it on one disc is just a little perk that most would rather have.

And I prefer to play my games rather than whatch them. Your only counter argument is nameing two, more cgi than gameplay, JRPGs.

17 years ago

200

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 RBlair21088

Member since 2004 • 200 Posts

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"][QUOTE="amcallister902"][QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. Vampyronight

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

Right- that's why Kojima is saying that the standard Blu Ray disc isn't big enough for his game. He wants a 50gb disc. But I suppose MGS4 is just a mythical titles...you know, vaporware that'll never happen. :roll:

Kojima is also in Sony's pocket. He'll shove all kinds of uncompressed CG, texture, and sound in there just so Sony can say "See you need teh blu-ray see...Kojima said so" when in reality blu-ray is in the PS3 because it's Sony's format and they want to sell blu-ray by using the PS3

17 years ago

10318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 57

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 10318 Posts

Having games on one disc also cuts back on development costs and overall the game will be cheaper, not to mention Blu Ray disc production is cheaper then DVD's believe it or not, I read somewhere that it costs about 25 cents to make a Blu Ray disc where its a bit more for a DVD. It all adds up though in the long run.DSgamer64

I'd LOVE to see your proof of this statement.

I'm waiting....

17 years ago

5232

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 5232 Posts

"OMG I HAVE TO GET UP TO MOVE MY 500LB BODY TO PUT ANOTHER DISK!" c'mon this thread is LAME

17 years ago

8802

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 8802 Posts

Um. Theres nothing huge about Crackdown or Saints Row.

17 years ago

9085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 Paul_TheGreat

Member since 2004 • 9085 Posts

I heard Mass Effect just barely fit on DVD.

17 years ago

5232

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 5232 Posts

[QUOTE="Vampyronight"][QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"][QUOTE="amcallister902"][QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. mjarantilla

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

Right- that's why Kojima is saying that the standard Blu Ray disc isn't big enough for his game. He wants a 50gb disc. But I suppose MGS4 is just a mythical titles...you know, vaporware that'll never happen. :roll:

I said games that TRULY need it. Believe me, if MASS EFFECT could fit on a DVD, then ANY GAME (of this generation) can fit on a DVD. I don't work for Kojima, but I don't see how one game can fit within 8GB while another game, MUCH shorter and MUCH smaller in scope, requires over 30GBs. Kojima's just being (gasp) lazy!

Exactly.

17 years ago

5766

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

Member since 2002 • 5766 Posts

[QUOTE="RBlair21088"] Kojima is also in Sony's pocket. He'll shove all kinds of uncompressed CG, texture, and sound in there just so Sony can say "See you need teh blu-ray see...Kojima said so" when in reality blu-ray is in the PS3 because it's Sony's format and they want to sell blu-ray by using the PS3

All those CGI movies are probably in HD 1080p to (since that is the whole purpose of blu-ray) which means that they are 4x the size of CGI movies that would be on DVD's in Standard Def. CGI movies are a thing of the past, and should have died with the last generation of consoles. In-engine is the way to go.

17 years ago

10318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 57

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 10318 Posts

Do you guys think that BioWare had ME fit on one DVD9 because that's just how it happened? ME if anything is bigger than DVD9, and they had to use money and resources to get it to fit on one DVD9 -- money and resources that could have gone into making the game better. At least, that's how I see it.reilo

Then why was Blue Dragon allowed to be on 3 DVDs?

17 years ago

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#84 purplemidgets

Member since 2002 • 3103 Posts

[QUOTE="Bgrngod"][QUOTE="RBlair21088"] Kojima is also in Sony's pocket. He'll shove all kinds of uncompressed CG, texture, and sound in there just so Sony can say "See you need teh blu-ray see...Kojima said so" when in reality blu-ray is in the PS3 because it's Sony's format and they want to sell blu-ray by using the PS3

All those CGI movies are probably in HD 1080p to (since that is the whole purpose of blu-ray) which means that they are 4x the size of CGI movies that would be on DVD's in Standard Def. CGI movies are a thing of the past, and should have died with the last generation of consoles. In-engine is the way to go.

Metal Gear Solid doesn't use CGI.

17 years ago

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#85 purplemidgets

Member since 2002 • 3103 Posts

Uhm, no. More compression means putting more into less space. This means the drive can read it faster since it only needs to read a smaller space for the same amount of data. The system itself (cpu) has to decompress it more if it's highly compressed.Bgrngod

Yes, I know what compression does. Do you know how we fit so much data on a BD disc? Because the laser is can write information into smaller sectors. If the dvd drive's laser could read ultra small compressed data, there would be no need to upgrade the drive. When you make the information smaller and smaller, the dvd drive will have a harder time reading it.

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#86 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

[QUOTE="Bgrngod"]Uhm, no. More compression means putting more into less space. This means the drive can read it faster since it only needs to read a smaller space for the same amount of data. The system itself (cpu) has to decompress it more if it's highly compressed.purplemidgets

Yes, I know what compression does. Do you know how we fit so much data on a BD disc? Because the laser is can write information into smaller sectors. If the dvd drive's laser could read ultra small compressed data, there would be no need to upgrade the drive. When you make the information smaller and smaller, the dvd drive will have a harder time reading it.

What the bloody hell are you talking about? :| Compression doesn't make the pits and peaks of an optical disc's bits physically smaller or larger. Compression is an algorithm that reduces data into a complex mathematical formula that uses fewer bits than the raw uncompressed data. I have never, NEVER heard a more ignorant explanation of optical disc technology than yours.

17 years ago

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#87 purplemidgets

Member since 2002 • 3103 Posts

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"]What the bloody hell are you talking about? :| Compression doesn't make the pits and peaks of an optical disc's bits physically smaller or larger. Compression is an algorithm that reduces data into a complex mathematical formula that uses fewer bits than the raw uncompressed data. I have never, NEVER heard a more ignorant explanation of optical disc technology than yours.

When I say "smaller" I don't literally mean physically smaller. Like I said, I know what compression does. My original point which I forgot to even mention was that you can only compress the data so much. And that only using that method won't solve your problems.
Maybe I fudged my idea of the dvd drive's laser, but logic still stands. You need a combonation of both compression and new technology, not just one or the other.

17 years ago

2355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 2355 Posts

[QUOTE="Vampyronight"][QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"][QUOTE="amcallister902"][QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. mjarantilla

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

So let's see here...if the Mass Effect were a PS3 game it could be TWICE as long and TWICE as pretty right?

And it would cost devs TWICE as much and thus would never have been made in the first place. NOW do you understand why BluRay is useless? A game that truly DOES need BluRay would be so big that it would be unfeasible for any publisher to finance it.

Right- that's why Kojima is saying that the standard Blu Ray disc isn't big enough for his game. He wants a 50gb disc. But I suppose MGS4 is just a mythical titles...you know, vaporware that'll never happen. :roll:

I said games that TRULY need it. Believe me, if MASS EFFECT could fit on a DVD, then ANY GAME (of this generation) can fit on a DVD. I don't work for Kojima, but I don't see how one game can fit within 8GB while another game, MUCH shorter and MUCH smaller in scope, requires over 30GBs. Kojima's just being (gasp) lazy!

How can the hero of the cows be lazy? OMG!!!

Its funny many of those people who favor Sony. Suddenly all their games size are jumping to like 20gigs. Yet funny enough most of those games are not any bigger than ones out now. Sounds like they just are not compressing it. Funny that PS3 games have been needing to install gigs worth of data on the system just to have reasonable load times.

Oh and 50gigs? LOL. Probably just some stupid BS he decided to say.

17 years ago

10318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 57

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 10318 Posts

[QUOTE="DSgamer64"]
Having games on one disc also cuts back on development costs and overall the game will be cheaper, not to mention Blu Ray disc production is cheaper then DVD's believe it or not, I read somewhere that it costs about 25 cents to make a Blu Ray disc where its a bit more for a DVD. It all adds up though in the long run.LosDaddie

I'd LOVE to see your proof of this statement.

I'm waiting....

Still waiting.....

17 years ago

2001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 2001 Posts

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"][QUOTE="DSgamer64"]
Having games on one disc also cuts back on development costs and overall the game will be cheaper, not to mention Blu Ray disc production is cheaper then DVD's believe it or not, I read somewhere that it costs about 25 cents to make a Blu Ray disc where its a bit more for a DVD. It all adds up though in the long run.LosDaddie

I'd LOVE to see your proof of this statement.

I'm waiting....

Still waiting.....

It's not coming.

17 years ago

7169

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 Adrian_Cloud

Member since 2006 • 7169 Posts

Your not making a real point because there are some games that need blu-ray:

As technology advances so will software formats. DVD will either be followed by Blu-ray or Hd-dvd. Blu-ray is just evolution of software formats. Its always necessary to advance technology. Or else we would still be stuck with 480p and not the gd standard of 1080p. MS left these 2 things as after thoughts, SOny just capatalized on that and so are these games.

17 years ago

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#92 musicalmac Moderator

Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts

Why do those games require Blu-Ray?

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#93 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

Your not making a real point because there are some games that need blu-ray:Adrian_Cloud

NEED BluRay or USE BluRay? Because using =/= needing.

As technology advances so will software formats. DVD will either be followed by Blu-ray or Hd-dvd. Blu-ray is just evolution of software formats. Its always necessary to advance technology. Or else we would still be stuck with 480p and not the gd standard of 1080p. MS left these 2 things as after thoughts, SOny just capatalized on that and so are these games.Adrian_Cloud

Yes, technology advances. But software technology has not advanced enough, IMO, to justify BluRay.

17 years ago

2651

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 2651 Posts

[QUOTE="billing"]
[QUOTE="Carmilla31"]Blue Dragon is on 3 dvds. If Final Fantasy 13 hit the 360 it would probably be on 5-7 dvds. amcallister902

Thats fine.

As long as I dont have to wait 30 mins for each load.

dont be stupid! that is not fine. thats a disgrace. and if mass effect just fits on one disc, then that is the biggest, possibly best game 360 will see. ps3 can handle much larger games as can blu ray.

you people need to stop with having larger games.an average game will not be above 10 hours. even if sony has blu-ray only games that are going to be massive are rpg because one they likely feature truck loads of CGI clips, and 2 the worlds are huge. having more space doesnt scream bigger games to developers. if you want to play a very long game expect it to cost $100. you are already seeing developers charging for extras in game. doesnt that show you that they dont want everything to be in the game for a price tag of 50 bucks. like please stop with the whole bigger games because of more space.

17 years ago

7169

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#95 Adrian_Cloud

Member since 2006 • 7169 Posts

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]Your not making a real point because there are some games that need blu-ray:mjarantilla

NEED BluRay or USE BluRay? Because using =/= needing.

As technology advances so will software formats. DVD will either be followed by Blu-ray or Hd-dvd. Blu-ray is just evolution of software formats. Its always necessary to advance technology. Or else we would still be stuck with 480p and not the gd standard of 1080p. MS left these 2 things as after thoughts, SOny just capatalized on that and so are these games.Adrian_Cloud

Yes, technology advances. But software technology has not advanced enough, IMO, to justify BluRay.

1. Hideo Kojima Stated he needed Blu-ray as well as the Devil May Cry 4 producer. Square-enix also stated that aswell. As far as WarHawk and LAir and WHS, the only reason they need to use it is because they are making a game on a Sony console. I don't ever remember them stating they had to to use it. But its alot better than using DVD-9s in most peoples opinions which the 360 uses.

2. I certainly agree.

17 years ago

danielsmith2020

2244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#96 danielsmith2020

Member since 2003 • 2244 Posts

[QUOTE="purplemidgets"][QUOTE="Bgrngod"][QUOTE="RBlair21088"] Kojima is also in Sony's pocket. He'll shove all kinds of uncompressed CG, texture, and sound in there just so Sony can say "See you need teh blu-ray see...Kojima said so" when in reality blu-ray is in the PS3 because it's Sony's format and they want to sell blu-ray by using the PS3

All those CGI movies are probably in HD 1080p to (since that is the whole purpose of blu-ray) which means that they are 4x the size of CGI movies that would be on DVD's in Standard Def. CGI movies are a thing of the past, and should have died with the last generation of consoles. In-engine is the way to go.

Metal Gear Solid doesn't use CGI.

What kind of retard thinks that MGS uses CGI? MGS has only ever used the ingame engine to render cutscenes there is no exception to this rule as I recall hideo kojima said he needed the space for audio not cut scenes or textures. Makes you think what the hell he's up to.

17 years ago

10318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 57

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 10318 Posts

But its alot better than using DVD-9s in most peoples opinions which the 360 uses.

Adrian_Cloud

And how is better? The PS3's BR drive is slow compared to the x360's DVD drive.

17 years ago

7169

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#98 Adrian_Cloud

Member since 2006 • 7169 Posts

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"] But its alot better than using DVD-9s in most peoples opinions which the 360 uses.

LosDaddie

And how is better? The PS3's BR drive is slow compared to the x360's DVD drive.

1.Physical size -------- Single layer capacity 12 cm, single sided -------- 25 GB (23.3 GiB) 2.Hard Coating 3.Playback 23 hours 4.Supports more Video- codecs 5.Supports more Audio Codecs 6.Higher DataTR 7.Higher MvideoTR

17 years ago

15721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#99 mjarantilla

Member since 2002 • 15721 Posts

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"]
[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"] But its alot better than using DVD-9s in most peoples opinions which the 360 uses.

Adrian_Cloud

And how is better? The PS3's BR drive is slow compared to the x360's DVD drive.

1.Physical size -------- Single layer capacity 12 cm, single sided -------- 25 GB (23.3 GiB) 2.Hard Coating 3.Playback 23 hours 4.Supports more Video- codecs 5.Supports more Audio Codecs 6.Higher DataTR 7.Higher MvideoTR

4 and 5 are totally false when it comes to gaming since the DVDs used are data DVDs, and 6 and 7 are false for the PS3 and 360 because the 360's drive has a faster transfer rate across the board. The hard coating's neat, though. I could tell a BluRay disc from a DVD disc by touch alone since the BD's surface was so smooth. :D

17 years ago

10318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 57

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 10318 Posts

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"]
[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"] But its alot better than using DVD-9s in most peoples opinions which the 360 uses.

Adrian_Cloud

And how is better? The PS3's BR drive is slow compared to the x360's DVD drive.

1.Physical size -------- Single layer capacity 12 cm, single sided -------- 25 GB (23.3 GiB) 2.Hard Coating 3.Playback 23 hours 4.Supports more Video- codecs 5.Supports more Audio Codecs 6.Higher DataTR 7.Higher MvideoTR

Actually the x360's 12x DVD drive has faster data transfer rates.

The rest of the features have nothing to do with games. ;)

17 years ago

150 results
1
2
3
4

Jump to Top

Please Log In to post.

Use your keyboard!

ESC

Log in to comment