By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - L.A. Noire was once a six-disc game on Xbox 360

Mr Puggsly on 20 May 2011
LivingMetal said:

 

But any gamer would tell you that if you're going to buy an Xbox 360, you might as well go "big" and buy a 250GB version due to encroaching limitation with the 4GB version such as:

http://hubpages.com/hub/Problems-with-Xbox-360-Slim-4GB-console

As a gamer, don't half-ass it, right?

And, yes you do have the option of buying an Xbox 360 PROPRIETARY USB such as the Xbox 360 - 16GB 2.0 Flash Drive by Sandisk for only $30 via Amazon.  But you get this NON-PROPRIETARY Western Digital 500GB 2.5 SATA for $55 also from Amazon during the time of this writing.  Much better value here with hard drive prices constantly dropping.  So my successful counter argument and point that "Owning a console which allows the user to purchase and self-install a non-proprietary relatively inexpensive 2.5 SATA hard drive is NOT extreme.  It's smart shopping" still holds true and still stands.

 

I would definitely tell people to, "half ass it." They can save $100 and the only big sacrifice is no online co-op campaign in Halo: Reach? Big deal. I wouldn't tell people to buy the hard drive unless I really think they're gonna utilize it. Most people don't.

Its more important that the PS3 use non-propritary hard drives because a hard drive is mandatory to use a PS3. You also need a lot of storage because of mandatory installs and big updates.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
LivingMetal on 20 May 2011
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:


And any PS3 user can sell back the older smaller storage capacity hard drive while buying a non-proprietary hard drive is still a better value than any proprietary Xbox 360  storage media.  No one can argue that.  Besides, you can buy an incasement of your choice for that older non-proprietary hard drive so it can be used for your PC and/or PS3 when formatted correctly.  Another value there.  I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper.  But when you are referring to the monetary value of hard drive space and the flexibility (or lack of) its usage, my argument still stands.

Xbox 360 is easier. Therefore Microsoft gets to charge for the 'better solution'. Why should anyone but geeks care about such things and most real geeks have left the PS3 behind years ago for being obsolete.

 


Very nice "selective justification" there.  But as I also said earlier, "I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper."  At least I'm graceful and respectful enough to keep and opened mind here.  



Squilliam on 20 May 2011
LivingMetal said:
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:


And any PS3 user can sell back the older smaller storage capacity hard drive while buying a non-proprietary hard drive is still a better value than any proprietary Xbox 360  storage media.  No one can argue that.  Besides, you can buy an incasement of your choice for that older non-proprietary hard drive so it can be used for your PC and/or PS3 when formatted correctly.  Another value there.  I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper.  But when you are referring to the monetary value of hard drive space and the flexibility (or lack of) its usage, my argument still stands.

Xbox 360 is easier. Therefore Microsoft gets to charge for the 'better solution'. Why should anyone but geeks care about such things and most real geeks have left the PS3 behind years ago for being obsolete.

 


Very nice "selective justification" there.  But as I also said earlier, "I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper."  At least I'm graceful and respectful enough to keep and opened mind here.  

Hardly selective. Most people wouldn't be able to swap over the HDD of their consoles or if they did they wouldn't have the inclination to put in the effort. It's the natural way things are, the same way that store bought PCs outnumber home built ones even though theoretically almost anyone could build one. Your example is probably a user which is 2-3 standard deviations away from the median.



Tease.

LivingMetal on 20 May 2011
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:

 

But any gamer would tell you that if you're going to buy an Xbox 360, you might as well go "big" and buy a 250GB version due to encroaching limitation with the 4GB version such as:

http://hubpages.com/hub/Problems-with-Xbox-360-Slim-4GB-console

As a gamer, don't half-ass it, right?

And, yes you do have the option of buying an Xbox 360 PROPRIETARY USB such as the Xbox 360 - 16GB 2.0 Flash Drive by Sandisk for only $30 via Amazon.  But you get this NON-PROPRIETARY Western Digital 500GB 2.5 SATA for $55 also from Amazon during the time of this writing.  Much better value here with hard drive prices constantly dropping.  So my successful counter argument and point that "Owning a console which allows the user to purchase and self-install a non-proprietary relatively inexpensive 2.5 SATA hard drive is NOT extreme.  It's smart shopping" still holds true and still stands.

 

I would definitely tell people to, "half ass it." They can save $100 and the only big sacrifice is no online co-op campaign in Halo: Reach? Big deal. I wouldn't tell people to buy the hard drive unless I really think they're gonna utilize it. Most people don't.

Its more important that the PS3 use non-propritary hard drives because a hard drive is mandatory to use a PS3. You also need a lot of storage because of mandatory installs and big updates.


Okay, so I could make the claim that most 160GB PS3 users are only using it for gaming so they have little to no use for upgrading the hard drive.  So therefore, it would make Pearljam's claim of:

"The other forces you to clutter up your HDD and waste several minutes, JUST to try the game. What if you want to go back to a game a few weeks later, but you already deleted the install data? What if the game sucks? You wasted time installing it for nothing, and now have to waste more time deleting it."

...invalid.  So you buy you a 160GB PS3, and you're all set.  So we're in agreeance.  Good stuff, huh?



LivingMetal on 20 May 2011
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:


And any PS3 user can sell back the older smaller storage capacity hard drive while buying a non-proprietary hard drive is still a better value than any proprietary Xbox 360  storage media.  No one can argue that.  Besides, you can buy an incasement of your choice for that older non-proprietary hard drive so it can be used for your PC and/or PS3 when formatted correctly.  Another value there.  I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper.  But when you are referring to the monetary value of hard drive space and the flexibility (or lack of) its usage, my argument still stands.

Xbox 360 is easier. Therefore Microsoft gets to charge for the 'better solution'. Why should anyone but geeks care about such things and most real geeks have left the PS3 behind years ago for being obsolete.

 


Very nice "selective justification" there.  But as I also said earlier, "I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper."  At least I'm graceful and respectful enough to keep and opened mind here.  

Hardly selective. Most people wouldn't be able to swap over the HDD of their consoles or if they did they wouldn't have the inclination to put in the effort. It's the natural way things are, the same way that store bought PCs outnumber home built ones even though theoretically almost anyone could build one. Your example is probably a user which is 2-3 standard deviations away from the median.

 

...

Do you have a link for that?



Around the Network
Squilliam on 20 May 2011
LivingMetal said:
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:


And any PS3 user can sell back the older smaller storage capacity hard drive while buying a non-proprietary hard drive is still a better value than any proprietary Xbox 360  storage media.  No one can argue that.  Besides, you can buy an incasement of your choice for that older non-proprietary hard drive so it can be used for your PC and/or PS3 when formatted correctly.  Another value there.  I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper.  But when you are referring to the monetary value of hard drive space and the flexibility (or lack of) its usage, my argument still stands.

Xbox 360 is easier. Therefore Microsoft gets to charge for the 'better solution'. Why should anyone but geeks care about such things and most real geeks have left the PS3 behind years ago for being obsolete.

 


Very nice "selective justification" there.  But as I also said earlier, "I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper."  At least I'm graceful and respectful enough to keep and opened mind here.  

Hardly selective. Most people wouldn't be able to swap over the HDD of their consoles or if they did they wouldn't have the inclination to put in the effort. It's the natural way things are, the same way that store bought PCs outnumber home built ones even though theoretically almost anyone could build one. Your example is probably a user which is 2-3 standard deviations away from the median.

 

...

Do you have a link for that?


http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SNE



Tease.

Mr Puggsly on 20 May 2011
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I would definitely tell people to, "half ass it." They can save $100 and the only big sacrifice is no online co-op campaign in Halo: Reach? Big deal. I wouldn't tell people to buy the hard drive unless I really think they're gonna utilize it. Most people don't.

Its more important that the PS3 use non-propritary hard drives because a hard drive is mandatory to use a PS3. You also need a lot of storage because of mandatory installs and big updates.


Okay, so I could made the claim that most 160GB PS3 users are only using it for gaming so they have little to no use for upgrading the hard drive.  So therefore, it would make Pearljam's claim of:

"The other forces you to clutter up your HDD and waste several minutes, JUST to try the game. What if you want to go back to a game a few weeks later, but you already deleted the install data? What if the game sucks? You wasted time installing it for nothing, and now have to waste more time deleting it."

...invalid.  So you buy you a 160GB PS3, and you're all set.  So we're in agreeance.  Good stuff, huh?

I'm sorry, I really have no idea what you're babbling about.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

LivingMetal on 20 May 2011
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I would definitely tell people to, "half ass it." They can save $100 and the only big sacrifice is no online co-op campaign in Halo: Reach? Big deal. I wouldn't tell people to buy the hard drive unless I really think they're gonna utilize it. Most people don't.

Its more important that the PS3 use non-propritary hard drives because a hard drive is mandatory to use a PS3. You also need a lot of storage because of mandatory installs and big updates.


Okay, so I could made the claim that most 160GB PS3 users are only using it for gaming so they have little to no use for upgrading the hard drive.  So therefore, it would make Pearljam's claim of:

"The other forces you to clutter up your HDD and waste several minutes, JUST to try the game. What if you want to go back to a game a few weeks later, but you already deleted the install data? What if the game sucks? You wasted time installing it for nothing, and now have to waste more time deleting it."

...invalid.  So you buy you a 160GB PS3, and you're all set.  So we're in agreeance.  Good stuff, huh?

I'm sorry, I really have no idea what you're babbling about.


Well, I was hoping you would, but sometime turning a blind eye to double standards causes lack of understanding.  But that's cool.  You're not the only one reading these forums.



LivingMetal on 20 May 2011
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:
Squilliam said:
LivingMetal said:


And any PS3 user can sell back the older smaller storage capacity hard drive while buying a non-proprietary hard drive is still a better value than any proprietary Xbox 360  storage media.  No one can argue that.  Besides, you can buy an incasement of your choice for that older non-proprietary hard drive so it can be used for your PC and/or PS3 when formatted correctly.  Another value there.  I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper.  But when you are referring to the monetary value of hard drive space and the flexibility (or lack of) its usage, my argument still stands.

Xbox 360 is easier. Therefore Microsoft gets to charge for the 'better solution'. Why should anyone but geeks care about such things and most real geeks have left the PS3 behind years ago for being obsolete.

 


Very nice "selective justification" there.  But as I also said earlier, "I understand that not all shopping scenarios will fit every shopper."  At least I'm graceful and respectful enough to keep and opened mind here.  

Hardly selective. Most people wouldn't be able to swap over the HDD of their consoles or if they did they wouldn't have the inclination to put in the effort. It's the natural way things are, the same way that store bought PCs outnumber home built ones even though theoretically almost anyone could build one. Your example is probably a user which is 2-3 standard deviations away from the median.

 

...

Do you have a link for that?


http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SNE


Nice.  But I really don't see the relevance to this thread and myself as well since I do have shares of Microsoft stock as part of my long term retirement mutual funds.  Your intent: Spitefulness maybe..?



bunyan on 20 May 2011

Im sure more and more games will be getting larger as there becomes more content put into each game. People nowadays are not going to pay $60 for a game that you beat in 6 hours or less with no extra content. Games are getting much bigger as time goes on. This problem will continue to occur. I see three solutions that Microsoft can consider.

1. Bite the bullet and impliment Sony's Bluray capability into the next Xbox console within the next couple of years.

2. Start figuring out a way to just sell the larger games as DLC codes you buy from the store and then download the game from their servers over Live. (this however presents a huge problem as it leaves out those that don't connect their x360 to the internet. There is no doubt at least a small percentage of people that still don't connect to Live at all.)

3. Create their own type of disc format/data storage device that is not bluray, but has similar capacity of bluray. This, however may not even be feasable unless a new technology is unraveled that has not been yet. This also would more than likely require hardware changes, which in turn would just force the next xbox console.

Im sure Microsoft has realized this problem is only going to get worse. Unless every home in the world somehow is mandatory to have internet capabilities to allow for Downloadable Game code sales, Microsoft will have to come up with a physical way to increase game storage capacity. The only physical option I see thats pheasable is bluray discs, which forces the next xbox console.