[QUOTE="Albanian_Killa"][QUOTE="AlphaGamer469"]

[QUOTE="Albanian_Killa"]:lol: Toshiba again? They didn't learn? Seriously, Blu-Ray is the next disc until another one comes next generation. Blu-Ray is standard HD disc now. No company is going to back a new disc when Blu-Ray is so much more popular. DVD 2.0? LOL seriously get a better nametaj7575

Seriously are you guys this insecure?

And the most important. The new format DVD 2.0 will be compatible with conventional DVD drives! That is, we get HD video with slightly inferior quality Blu-ray, but the conventional DVD devices. All that is needed for a new video format - its updated firmware player and the opportunity to display high-resolution signal.

I'm not insecure, I'm just saying why waste money to go back to last-gen technology? What about that 500GB Blu-Ray disc that plays on conventional players? The HD video has to be played on a DVD player with HDMI that goes beyond 480p. My DVD player is 480p max. How will I Get HD video? All I'm saying is that Blu-Ray is taking off, DVD 2.0 is too late.

500 gb bluray disc? HA.

I hope you realize that those 500gb is all the layers on the bluray disc itself.

Right now, the technology can only read 1 layer, which is 25-30 gb, so dont be bragging about storage space that cant be used at the moment.

False.

MGS4 alone was 33gb and guess what? That's 2 layers (upto 50gb).

You guys are hullusinating.

There's absolutely NO cross-console game between 360 and ps3.

However, UBI did want to make their Endwar such one but failed to get Microsoft and Sony's cooperation.

[QUOTE="Adonymous"]DVD will never become standard...VHS FTMFWmstc_Q

Did you ever hear that while the DVD thing was hitting the market though?

And DvDs have clear advantages over VHS.

The bluray doesn't seem to have those kinds of advantages...

You've obviously never experinced 1080p before.

[QUOTE="Jared2720"][QUOTE="horrowhip"][QUOTE="Jared2720"]It's fairly obvious that you didn't read or simply didn't understand my post. That's okay, though.

That being said, you do seem to be an expert. "Technically, every game uses all the power at hand." Could you expound upon this a bit further? I'm not sure I follow. I eagerly await your explanation on how every game maximizes the computing resources of its given platform.

karasill

A lot of that can be wasted though.

Things that never get used on screen.

As someone else said, if they left all that room unused, why not make the game a 60FPS, 1080p game? Why not put extra post processing? Why not clean up the game? Because they can't.

And if they can't, they are using all the power.

OR they are being lazy developers.

As I have said before, Naughty Dog isn't lazy.

They are just getting a paycheck from Sony who likes things like this to be said.

There is no way anyone can actually prove the statement one way or the other, because saying you are using a percentage of a machine's power is completely arbitrary anyway.

I think you're missing a very key point in this discussion. You and another member asked the question, "If they left all that room unused, why not make the game a 60FPS, 1080p game?" You have to stop thinking like a computer programmer and consider the economics of such a scenario. It seems entirely plausible that Naughty Dog/Sony saw little reason to throw more time/money at these features when, for all intents and purposes, they would go unused by many gamers.

How many people are gaming on 1080p televisions? The majority are still playing on SD televisions. In the business world, time is money. Admittedly, I don't know anything about video game development or computer programming, so I can't say for certain how long it would take and how difficult it would be to optimize an engine to run well at the aforementioned specifications, but for the sake of discussion, suppose it would have taken Naughty Dog an extra three months to achieve this. That's just going to cost both companies a great deal more money. And for what? A few more pixels on screen?

That's just not smart business.

What a load of crap.

I'm a Software Engineer student and I can tell first hand why it takes months and sometimes years to develop a game.

There's a difference between making a "pong" game with C and rendering 1080p textures. That's far from being over-night.

This year's really far from being over.

We've still got LBP, Motorstorm2 and Resistance2 coming up.

Regarding Sony's financial situation, they're not exactly going "bankruptcy" so hold on to your horses son.

[QUOTE="Jared2720"]It's fairly obvious that you didn't read or simply didn't understand my post. That's okay, though.

That being said, you do seem to be an expert. "Technically, every game uses all the power at hand." Could you expound upon this a bit further? I'm not sure I follow. I eagerly await your explanation on how every game maximizes the computing resources of its given platform.

horrowhip

every game technically, uses everything that it can. Every clock, every MB, every everything.

A lot of that can be wasted though.

Things that never get used on screen.

As someone else said, if they left all that room unused, why not make the game a 60FPS, 1080p game? Why not put extra post processing? Why not clean up the game? Because they can't.

And if they can't, they are using all the power.

OR they are being lazy developers.

As I have said before, Naughty Dog isn't lazy.

They are just getting a paycheck from Sony who likes things like this to be said.

There is no way anyone can actually prove the statement one way or the other, because saying you are using a percentage of a machine's power is completely arbitrary anyway.

I dont think you're even listening to yourself.

Please explain the fact that games are improving graphically within time. Just for an example: Motorstorm 1 - 30fps, no AA; Motorstorm2 - 60fps fullscreen AA. Sounds weird, no?

Haze was never Hyped.

It looked like crap from point one.

And I'm a cow.

Ummm, this was like what 6 months old?

And its a load of ****

PC360Wii

Look at the date you clown

2008-08-05