liangmic's forum posts
[QUOTE="liangmic"][QUOTE="Danthegamingman"][QUOTE="liangmic"]Cows blow this disc format way out of control. Physical media is not the future, digital distribution is, so I could care less about blu-ray or dvd discs. I care more about hdd space and hdd speed. Alot of kids on here pretend to know what they are talking about by saying blu-ray makes bigger games.......Wrong........blu-ray is a format Sony is trying to make standard for them to make money. It has nothing to do with gaming. First the Blu-ray drive in PS3 is to slow to stream and Secondly neither the X360 or PS3 have the RAM required for these huge worlds. Lastly even if they did, how long is a team going to work on a game to fill up blu-ray? These games cost millions and years as it is, yet Cows seem compelled to justify a trojan horse format by saying we need the space. Right now the space is not needed and even if it was utilized the RAM in these machines prohibit whatever expansive benefits you think could occur.Don't get me wrong. I think blue-ray is a great thing. More storage is always better. A lot of people think that because the 360 is only limited to reading DVDs, games like GTA and ME can't be as big as they could have been. And I agree to that. If the 360 reads blue-ray, Liberty city could be much much bigger. There would be a lot more "populated" planets in ME.
However, doesn't all that require more development time? In my opinion, developers/publishers want to have a reasonable development time and yet get the chance to sell the game. I think everybody agree that games these days are much shorter than past gen games but it takes same if not more time to develop than past gen. With better graphic, better AI, better physics all that only adds to more develop time/money. So let's say if games get larger and larger =more time/resource to develop. If a good development team can push out 2 to 3 games in a console's life span, with bigger games, they only have the time/resource to get one out. Then they make less money and I'm sure that's not what they want.
sSubZerOo
i agree, but my argument isn't just if BR is needed. I'm more concern about if develpers would want to design bigger games and lose money. i agree bigger and faster harddrive would be better.
Yes but we have been seeing lately that games are not getting longer they are getting shorter..
exactly! that's why i doubt games will get much bigger in the future. at least in this gen. because the time and money to develop the game just isn't worth it for the developers. games stay smaller =BR may not be needed ...but is that what we as gamers want?
[QUOTE="liangmic"]Cows blow this disc format way out of control. Physical media is not the future, digital distribution is, so I could care less about blu-ray or dvd discs. I care more about hdd space and hdd speed. Alot of kids on here pretend to know what they are talking about by saying blu-ray makes bigger games.......Wrong........blu-ray is a format Sony is trying to make standard for them to make money. It has nothing to do with gaming. First the Blu-ray drive in PS3 is to slow to stream and Secondly neither the X360 or PS3 have the RAM required for these huge worlds. Lastly even if they did, how long is a team going to work on a game to fill up blu-ray? These games cost millions and years as it is, yet Cows seem compelled to justify a trojan horse format by saying we need the space. Right now the space is not needed and even if it was utilized the RAM in these machines prohibit whatever expansive benefits you think could occur.Don't get me wrong. I think blue-ray is a great thing. More storage is always better. A lot of people think that because the 360 is only limited to reading DVDs, games like GTA and ME can't be as big as they could have been. And I agree to that. If the 360 reads blue-ray, Liberty city could be much much bigger. There would be a lot more "populated" planets in ME.
However, doesn't all that require more development time? In my opinion, developers/publishers want to have a reasonable development time and yet get the chance to sell the game. I think everybody agree that games these days are much shorter than past gen games but it takes same if not more time to develop than past gen. With better graphic, better AI, better physics all that only adds to more develop time/money. So let's say if games get larger and larger =more time/resource to develop. If a good development team can push out 2 to 3 games in a console's life span, with bigger games, they only have the time/resource to get one out. Then they make less money and I'm sure that's not what they want.
Danthegamingman
i agree, but my argument isn't just if BR is needed. I'm more concern about if develpers would want to design bigger games and lose money. i agree bigger and faster harddrive would be better.
[QUOTE="liangmic"]Ok, I agree 20-30 hour is long enough. However when we first heard about ME bioware gave us the impression that we can explore all the planets we want. All the planets are going to be unique and stand on its own. However in the real game most of the planets are just plain boring. Wastelands..LosDaddie
understood.
I just don't think this "problem" is a DVD9 issue, but a Bioware issue. The game could've been on 2 DVD9s if they wanted.
[QUOTE="liangmic"]Ok, I agree 20-30 hour is long enough. However when we first heard about ME bioware gave us the impression that we can explore all the planets we want. All the planets are going to be unique and stand on its own. However in the real game most of the planets are just plain boring. Wastelands..LosDaddie
understood.
I just don't think this "problem" is a DVD9 issue, but a Bioware issue. The game could've been on 2 DVD9s if they wanted.
but then it's going to take longer to develop ... -> make less money
[QUOTE="liangmic"][QUOTE="kentaro22"][QUOTE="liangmic"]Development tools get better everytime and so development get faster and better as time passes. When costs of developing things to run on a system get low enough, then, will devs start getting more content into the games.Don't get me wrong. I think blue-ray is a great thing. More storage is always better. A lot of people think that because the 360 is only limited to reading DVDs, games like GTA and ME can't be as big as they could have been. And I agree to that. If the 360 reads blue-ray, Liberty city could be much much bigger. There would be a lot more "populated" planets in ME.
However, doesn't all that require more development time? In my opinion, developers/publishers want to have a reasonable development time and yet get the chance to sell the game. I think everybody agree that games these days are much shorter than past gen games but it takes same if not more time to develop than past gen. With better graphic, better AI, better physics all that only adds to more develop time/money. So let's say if games get larger and larger =more time/resource to develop. If a good development team can push out 2 to 3 games in a console's life span, with bigger games, they only have the time/resource to get one out. Then they make less money and I'm sure that's not what they want.
kentaro22
360 launched two years ago. developers must have gotten develpment tools way earlier than that. AC took what 3 years to develop. What about Mass effect also 3 years. And a lot of people still consider these games as shallow. (i own both btw) i just don't think developers will put in any more money and time to develop a game and only sell one game instead of 3 short games.
Mass effect may have taken 10 years, it doesn't matter. How many games have the developer done for that console? Is Mass Effect it's first game in the console. There are you're answers. Take my word for it, the next game from Bioware for the 360 will be many times technically better, especially if they are hard working devs (aka no EA).No doubt next bioware game is going to be even better. But how long are they going to take to develop that game? if ME took 3 years..and it's only meh~ good but could be better....in with better development tools in order to make the next ME better and bigger they still need to put more money and more time than what they have accomplished in 3 years, no?
[QUOTE="liangmic"][QUOTE="LosDaddie"][QUOTE="liangmic"][QUOTE="LosDaddie"]The problem with the blu-ray vs DVD9 argument is tha the PS3's 2x blu-ray drive is not outright superior to the x360's 12x DVD drive. The BR drive's read speed is slower and game devs want the fastest access possible to their game code. That's why PC games are installed onto the PC's HDD.
In order to achieve all this "extra" stuff on the game the PS3's 2x blu-ray drive is capable of, the loading times would be atrocious. And let's not forget the extra development time for all this extra content.
LosDaddie
Well, DVD players started out with 2x speed too. Blu-ray players will get faster.
What does that have to do with my post? :|
The PS3's BR drive won't get any faster.
i know PS3's blu-ray drive won't get any faster. I'm talking about whether future games should get bigger to satisfy us players (in that case BR will be needed) and let us wait 4-5 years for one game. OR games will be like ME or GTA...just not big and long enough...but we get to play more of them.
#1 GTA is not out yet.
#2 Depends on your definition of "long enough". Most of my XBL friends said ME took them 20-30hrs (and they were going to play it again). That's "long enough" for me.
Ok, I agree 20-30 hour is long enough. However when we first heard about ME bioware gave us the impression that we can explore all the planets we want. All the planets are going to be unique and stand on its own. However in the real game most of the planets are just plain boring. Wastelands..
And i know GTA is not out yet. Sorry for bringing it up.
Log in to comment