By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
WilliamWatts on 19 February 2010
Edit Thread
joeorc said:
WilliamWatts said:
joeorc said:

it's not so much as a problem it's more of a logistic's thing, one only has to look at statement's from Carmack and other's like Rockstar game's

Example:

"The PC is limitless in the amount of data you can put on it," said Willits. "The PS3 has about 25GB. But the Xbox 360 roughly has 6 to 8 GB of data. We're hoping we can squeeze the game down to two discs for the 360 version."

According to Willits, the game was supposed to feature several wastelands for the player to explore. Because of the limitations of the Xbox 360's media, they had to cut down the wastelands to only two, which are themselves split into multiple instances. These changes have been made across all versions of Rage, not just the 360 port.

"I wouldn't say the overall story was changed in any way in order to fit on the Xbox 360 version," Willits said, "but how the player experiences Rage's story has been altered." Unfortunately, that means the experience has been altered across all platforms. This is one of the first signs we've received of the 360's older DVD media showing its age, but we expect some fans won't be terribly pleased that it's affecting other versions of the game as well.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169963

think about this they did not even talk about the BD-50 they talked about both the xbox360's and the PS3's base storage for their optical disc's storage capacity

notice what i pointed out before its cheaper for a single layer BD-25 for developer's than it is for ( 2 ) DL-DVD 9's

not only is that single layer  HD DVD would have been cheaper to produce an distribute this game on they would not have to worry about the space issue v's cost's to distribute the multi-production on multiple disc's. it's just one more thing that add's to the cost than the limitation that game's most of the time are locked in at $60.00 for a new release, multiple disc's eat into those cost's moreso than a single layer HD DVD 15  or Single layer BD 25

 

Hypothetical improvement list:

  1. Reliable
  2. More ED-Ram
  3. More CPU cores
  4. More RAM
  5. More memory bandwidth
  6. Larger disc

So really even if we strike off initial reliability (PS3 sucks too) we've probably got about 4 objects higher on the list of things to improve before they get around to something which maybe helps 10% of games 4 years after release. The cost/benefit isn't there.

 

but on the very same token say in 4 year's how would not having a HD DVD 15 disc not help the current XBOX360 for game's?

it only helps keep the xbox360 more of a viable choice instead of the upgrade. that i think is the bottom line of cost/not needed benefit of right now than later, yes it's not great upfront but later the format becomes cheaper and only become's more of a Asset than a hinderance. just look at how many system's the xbox360 sell per year

think 10 muillion system sold per year is not worth the production for Toshiba to not produce the optical drive for Microsoft even when as time goes by it would be much cheaper to do so for Toshib and Microsoft both.

the only thing that hurt's the life of the xbox360 is if the next system come's out and the xbox360 fan base decide to forego supporting the xbox360 which do you think that would happen?

I do not but on the same token what kind of optical drive will the next xbox have? or will it even have an optical drive at all?

do you think Microsoft's next system will still be using DVD?

that's a big ? what if indeed Microsoft dis put HD DVD inside the new xbox would that gather more of a drive for xbox360 gamer's to move onto the new xbox over keeping their xbox360 esp. if the new XBOX can play xbox360 game's?

 

Its simply not worth it. $1B worth of HDDVD equipment doesn't really offset a marginal cost paid by publishers a couple of years down the track and certainly not for a marginal number of games which would stand to really benefit. However paying more money for say a better memory architecture, more ED-Ram etc would pay off from launch vs the PS3 and relative to itself on its own in a much better fashion. If more ED-Ram didn't meet their cost/benefit criteria then I doubt that an HD-DVD drive would and continue paying off better than HD-DVD or Blu Ray because every single game has a graphical interface but not every game requires more than 7GB of space.