They are NOT using "uncompressed" textures.
That is technically impossible, do you know how much video memory that would require?
If they *could* use uncompressed textures it would result in a far blurrier image, because the resolution of the textures would have to be incredibly low.
I think what you mean is "less compression".
Compression isn't always a negative, it only becomes a negative when something is compressed beyond a certain level and it becomes noticeable to the human ear\eye etc, in its particular use.
I n response to this ^
"On the topic, and at the guy that asked why they would do this, they didnt have to do anything besides use non-compressed textures. They already had them from the 360 version, but I would assume they had to be compressed for the DVD9"
^ Total and utter bullshit.
There is plenty of room to spare on the Xbox 360 Bioshock DVD9. People talk so much shit...Its the same with MGS4 and the "uncompressed audio"....
There was NO uncompressed audio as in assets (your amp might show a PCM uncompressed signal but this is because the PS3 has decoded the compressed audio).
People don't use "uncompressed....anything" These days, apart from...
Blu-ray movies.
The reason being is that to store stuff uncompressed takes...
1. A lot of space (we'll forget this due to teh pawR of BR!!!!)
2. MASSIVE TRANSFER!!!!
This IS a problem! The BR drive in the PS3 is incredibly slow, to stream textures\audio uncompressed simply would not be possible in a game, without requiring a massive install, and you'd still have the problem that the RSX would not be able to handle the massive size of the textures.
Compressing textures is an industrial standard these days, much like on Digital Cameras...They all use JPEG to compress your pictures...
Do you know how many MB a "10 mega pixel" image would take stored in a standard bitmap format?
Do you know how much space if would take using minimal JPEG compression?
....This thread is silly.







