The X360 port of Dark Souls is heavily compressed to stay on one disc

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"]

what.

who said less compresions means less quality? all 360 games have to be more compressed than ps3 games, yet the 360 gets the better version of most multiplats; compression and quality aren't necessarily related

The_RedLion

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

I guess so, but like I said to him, it's important not mandatory ..... games like U, GOW, KZ, remastered collections and others make use of that advantage .... so it's important for them.

lol, so remasted last generation games need multiple discs now..... racing games need multiple discs ..... a game like DS2 is on mutiple discs ..... DS2 on the PS3 has an extra game on it and it's still on one bluray ... what a shame.

3-5 games and remakes? lol, it's even less important than I thoughtThe_RedLion

lol, so remasted last generation games need multiple discs now..... racing games need multiple discs ..... a game like DS2 is on mutiple discs ..... DS2 on the PS3 has an extra game on it and it's still on one bluray ... what a shame.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="sethman410"] problem is, this one is heavily compressed and im sure ps3 version are better in some areas.sethman410

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] yes and? compression is vital in game development that doesn't make it last gen or anythingWilliamRLBaker

*laughs hard* do you know that a game truely uncompressed wouldn't fit on even a 10 layer bluray? compression is a natural function of games without it every thing would be drastically large, and not only that wouldn't even play cause the ram would fill up.

P.S: and I just thought of the load times even with a required install the game would take hours to load.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

lol, so remasted last generation games need multiple discs now..... racing games need multiple discs ..... a game like DS2 is on mutiple discs ..... DS2 on the PS3 has an extra game on it and it's still on one bluray ... what a shame.

sethman410

seriously, pressing the pause button would be a bigger shame than that, lol

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

lol, so remasted last generation games need multiple discs now..... racing games need multiple discs ..... a game like DS2 is on mutiple discs ..... DS2 on the PS3 has an extra game on it and it's still on one bluray ... what a shame.

sethman410

Not exactly .... it just doesn't feel right to swap discs in a racing game for example, or in a remake of a 10 year old game .... it's like putting Super Mario Bros. on a DVD .... Super Mario Bros. is decades old but the DVD is as old as it .. it could totally fill it. we are in 2011 .... tech improves ... I have nothing against the X360 but clearly, DVD is a poor choice, even MS knew it and tried to push the HD DVD, but bluray killed it.

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] why would be more than one disc a shame?The_RedLion

seriously, pressing the pause button would be a bigger shame than that, lol

Right now it seems like DVD's are being really dated. With digital distribution becoming so popular with services like Steam, and high capacity media like Blu-Ray it really is disappointing to hear stuff like this.

Honestly, it doesn't mean bad games, it just means a handicap to making those great games. Anyone saying that DVD's are still as good as Blu Rays or downloading services are just ignoring cases like LA Noire and RAGE (Which will also be on 3 discs from what I hear). Don't let fanboyism blind you from the truth. Its like saying the cartridge format was still viable and didn't cripple games when the PSOne was giving us full voice acting, improved voice acting and FMV. I mean, everyone loves the N64, but the cartridge format the was like the DVD format now and just was not the best choice for games.

SPYDER0416

I doubt they would compress the game so much that it would negatively affect audio or visuals to a noticable degree. Not to say that it's out of the question, but it seems highly unlikely to me.

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] why would be more than one disc a shame?omho88

Not exactly .... it just doesn't feel right to swap discs in a racing game for example, or in a remake of a 10 year old game .... it's like putting Super Mario Bros. on a DVD .... Super Mario Bros. is decades old but the DVD is as old as it .. it could totally fill it. we are in 2011 .... tech improves ... I have nothing against the X360 but clearly, DVD is a poor choice, even MS knew it and tried to push the HD DVD, but bluray killed it.

because it breaks the flow if you have to get up and switch discs?sethman410

seriously, pressing the pause button would be a bigger shame than that, lol

what exactly does heavily compressed means? how does it differentiate of other games? how does it affect the game? can you prove anything of what you're saying? what you're sure of means nothing if you can't show proof of itThe_RedLion

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] why would be more than one disc a shame?The_RedLion

seriously, pressing the pause button would be a bigger shame than that, lol

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="sethman410"] you can't prove your points neither? read my edit above too...

sethman410

the quality I'm talking about is what the player gets to feel, see, and play you yourself say most multiplat are identical, meaning what the players see, play and feel is identical, despite one version been way more compressed than the other

that's my point, and your own words agree with it

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"] why would be more than one disc a shame?sethman410

seriously, pressing the pause button would be a bigger shame than that, lol

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] my point (most multiplats be superior on the 360 despite more compression) has been proven many times, you can check digital foundry, lens of truth, the gt and gs comparisons, etc your edit just says the same that i said, if in most cases isn't noticeable, then quality and compression aren't always related, as I saidThe_RedLion

the quality I'm talking about is what the player gets to feel, see, and play you yourself say most multiplat are identical, meaning what the players see, play and feel is identical, despite one version been way more compressed than the other

that's my point, and your own words agree with it

[QUOTE="omho88"]

[QUOTE="sethman410"] because it breaks the flow if you have to get up and switch discs?The_RedLion

Not exactly .... it just doesn't feel right to swap discs in a racing game for example, or in a remake of a 10 year old game .... it's like putting Super Mario Bros. on a DVD .... Super Mario Bros. is decades old but the DVD is as old as it .. it could totally fill it. we are in 2011 .... tech improves ... I have nothing against the X360 but clearly, DVD is a poor choice, even MS knew it and tried to push the HD DVD, but bluray killed it.

If you are really talking gaming here ... then bluray is clearly better ....... less compression, more content, some games used the massive space to eliminate loading ....... all at the expense of 10 min before you start the game, and that only for handful of games.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

lol, so remasted last generation games need multiple discs now..... racing games need multiple discs ..... a game like DS2 is on mutiple discs ..... DS2 on the PS3 has an extra game on it and it's still on one bluray ... what a shame.

sethman410

How do you think all of this is making you sound? I guarantee you that this will turn out to be terrible criticism if you were to actually put it into context and try the 360 version out for yourself.

yet and most multiplats are identical. compression needs to be done heavily to make a noticable difference which in those cases is not. compression and quality are related...sethman410

the quality I'm talking about is what the player gets to feel, see, and play you yourself say most multiplat are identical, meaning what the players see, play and feel is identical, despite one version been way more compressed than the other

that's my point, and your own words agree with it

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

Not exactly .... it just doesn't feel right to swap discs in a racing game for example, or in a remake of a 10 year old game .... it's like putting Super Mario Bros. on a DVD .... Super Mario Bros. is decades old but the DVD is as old as it .. it could totally fill it. we are in 2011 .... tech improves ... I have nothing against the X360 but clearly, DVD is a poor choice, even MS knew it and tried to push the HD DVD, but bluray killed it.

If you are really talking gaming here ... then bluray is clearly better ....... less compression, more content, some games used the massive space to eliminate loading ....... all at the expense of 10 min before you start the game, and that only for handful of games.

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"]

the quality I'm talking about is what the player gets to feel, see, and play you yourself say most multiplat are identical, meaning what the players see, play and feel is identical, despite one version been way more compressed than the other

that's my point, and your own words agree with it

The_RedLion

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot more than usual)

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="sethman410"] ok. but... quality=compression. nuff said.sethman410

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot)

it has already been proven that not necessarily, by both mine arguments and yours ;)The_RedLion

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot)

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"]

[QUOTE="sethman410"] yet and most multiplats are identical. compression needs to be done heavily to make a noticable difference which in those cases is not. compression and quality are related...sethman410

the quality I'm talking about is what the player gets to feel, see, and play you yourself say most multiplat are identical, meaning what the players see, play and feel is identical, despite one version been way more compressed than the other

that's my point, and your own words agree with it

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="sethman410"] ok. but... quality=compression. nuff said.sethman410

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot)

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="sethman410"] not really, because it needs a lot of compression to make a noticable difference. *looks at ff13*

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot)

sethman410

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] it has already been proven that not necessarily, by both mine arguments and yours ;)Karnage108

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot)

Sucks but no doubt this will be a great game for both Xbox and PS3 and I'll still be picking it up on the 360.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="sethman410"] not really, because it needs a lot of compression to make a noticable difference. *looks at ff13*

so, that kinda does prove it doesnt it? yup.

in conclusion, more compression=less quality. (needs to be done a lot)

sethman410

i haven't countered because there's nothing to counter

no one knows the amount of compression each game has to get through, or what EXACTLY does "heavily compressed" means (such a vague term doesn't tell us much)

how do you know rdr or fallout 3, multiplats regarded superior on the 360, weren't "heavily" compressed? hell, what exactly does "heavily" means? and standard compression? what games go through each?

if you can define (and prove those definitions) the difference between standard and heavy compression, then prove what games go through each and more imporantly, how does it affect each game, there would be something to counter

[QUOTE="omho88"]

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"] ms didn't push hd dvd for gaming dvd has worked prefectly this gen, arguably better than blu ray (there are less multiple disc games than games with mandatory installs)The_RedLion

If you are really talking gaming here ... then bluray is clearly better ....... less compression, more content, some games used the massive space to eliminate loading ....... all at the expense of 10 min before you start the game, and that only for handful of games.

This isn't really coz the DVD is superior but rather to the CPU, GPU and the development process ....... you dun even know what you are talking about.

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] why would be more than one disc a shame?omho88

Not exactly .... it just doesn't feel right to swap discs in a racing game for example, or in a remake of a 10 year old game .... it's like putting Super Mario Bros. on a DVD .... Super Mario Bros. is decades old but the DVD is as old as it .. it could totally fill it. we are in 2011 .... tech improves ... I have nothing against the X360 but clearly, DVD is a poor choice, even MS knew it and tried to push the HD DVD, but bluray killed it.

There goes MS and it's outdated storage medium again ... DVD9 lol , my oh my ...rasengan2552

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

If you are really talking gaming here ... then bluray is clearly better ....... less compression, more content, some games used the massive space to eliminate loading ....... all at the expense of 10 min before you start the game, and that only for handful of games.

This isn't really coz the DVD is superior but rather to the CPU, GPU and the development process ....... you dun even know what you are talking about.

Sucks but no doubt this will be a great game for both Xbox and PS3 and I'll still be picking it up on the 360.

Thefatness16

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"] ffxiii's problem was not the quantity of compression, but the fact that it was cgi, and cgi reacts differently to compression than in engine graphics the question is easy: does less compression make a better game? most multiplat says no, and that's all about it ;) The_RedLion

i haven't countered because there's nothing to counter

no one knows the amount of compression each game has to get through, or what EXACTLY does "heavily compressed" means (such a vague term doesn't tell us much)

how do you know rdr or fallout 3, multiplats regarded superior on the 360, weren't "heavily" compressed? hell, what exactly does "heavily" means? and standard compression? what games go through each?

if you can define (and prove those definitions) the difference between standard and heavy compression, then prove what games go through each and more imporantly, how does it affect each game, there would be something to counter

[QUOTE="sethman410"] because it breaks the flow if you have to get up and switch discs?The_RedLion

seriously, pressing the pause button would be a bigger shame than that, lol

Demon's Souls actually didn't have a pause button because it would break the flow of the game, so that is quite possibly the worst reference you could've made :P

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"]

[QUOTE="sethman410"] yet compression isn't done heavily in those multiplats isn't? you haven't counter argue this yet.sethman410

i haven't countered because there's nothing to counter

no one knows the amount of compression each game has to get through, or what EXACTLY does "heavily compressed" means (such a vague term doesn't tell us much)

how do you know rdr or fallout 3, multiplats regarded superior on the 360, weren't "heavily" compressed? hell, what exactly does "heavily" means? and standard compression? what games go through each?

if you can define (and prove those definitions) the difference between standard and heavy compression, then prove what games go through each and more imporantly, how does it affect each game, there would be something to counter

Tell me exactly how that reflects the amount of compression a game went through?

yet compression isn't done heavily in those multiplats isn't? you haven't counter argue this yet.sethman410

i haven't countered because there's nothing to counter

no one knows the amount of compression each game has to get through, or what EXACTLY does "heavily compressed" means (such a vague term doesn't tell us much)

how do you know rdr or fallout 3, multiplats regarded superior on the 360, weren't "heavily" compressed? hell, what exactly does "heavily" means? and standard compression? what games go through each?

if you can define (and prove those definitions) the difference between standard and heavy compression, then prove what games go through each and more imporantly, how does it affect each game, there would be something to counter

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"]

i haven't countered because there's nothing to counter

no one knows the amount of compression each game has to get through, or what EXACTLY does "heavily compressed" means (such a vague term doesn't tell us much)

how do you know rdr or fallout 3, multiplats regarded superior on the 360, weren't "heavily" compressed? hell, what exactly does "heavily" means? and standard compression? what games go through each?

if you can define (and prove those definitions) the difference between standard and heavy compression, then prove what games go through each and more imporantly, how does it affect each game, there would be something to counter

Karnage108

Tell me exactly how that reflects the amount of compression a game went through?

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="omho88"]

This isn't really coz the DVD is superior but rather to the CPU, GPU and the development process ....... you dun even know what you are talking about.

LOOL, Bluray is a storage meduim.... notGOD .... there some big confusion in ur mind here.

regardless, at least 360 gamers still get to play it. I planned on getting it for PS3 regardless.

[QUOTE="Karnage108"]

[QUOTE="sethman410"] lol you're joking right? it's already proven that those games aren't heavily compressed because they both look identical on both systems. I take that you don't know anything about compression.sethman410

Tell me exactly how that reflects the amount of compression a game went through?

if compression is needed as a natural process in gaming development then, it's ok ..... but compressing something big to fit into something smaller .... this isn't good.

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="Karnage108"]

Tell me exactly how that reflects the amount of compression a game went through?

if compression is needed as a natural process in gaming development then, it's ok ..... but compressing something big to fit into something smaller .... this isn't good.

is there any information regarding the audio track of either version? Many ps3 versions comes with a full PCM track whereas x360 are just DD. That is the easiest and clearest example always of the impact compression has on something, like a game here. And don't make the mistake that uncompressed audio is not important to anyone...

Not much at all. Or none at all. Not saying blu ray didn't have compression. Even it did, not much at all.sethman410

if compression is needed as a natural process in gaming development then, it's ok ..... but compressing something big to fit into something smaller .... this isn't good.

is there any information regarding the audio track of either version? Many ps3 versions comes with a full PCM track whereas x360 are just DD. That is the easiest and clearest example always of the impact compression has on something, like a game here. And don't make the mistake that uncompressed audio is not important to anyone...

tamabeast04

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="omho88"] A

if compression is needed as a natural process in gaming development then, it's ok ..... but compressing something big to fit into something smaller .... this isn't good.

The_RedLion

EDIT: oh wait, kz2 does somewhat prove it because it's not on 360. Uncompressed audio designed for 7.1 surround. Any 360 game do that yet?