| Demonslayersoultaker said:
Nope but blu ray is better for both
A DD beats that.
You can fit a whole blu-ray movie onto a dvd At lower quality,not at the same quality so no thats not the case, hd movies can be only 2gb 4gb>2gb
That's a bad port, ps3 exclusives look better then 360 ones, whats your explination for that? And again without arcade they would have an install on 360
my EXPLANATION for that is good on them, the processor on the PS3 is better thus making games look better. WOW what a revelation, nothing to do with disc space. That is a bad port you said.. there are plenty out there.
Either way it's insignificant and why don't you linke me, you always ask me for proof you haven't done any research
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-1 <- VC-1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-2 <- Mpeg-2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4 <- MPEG-4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc <- look at encoding
Square actually never made that excuse they kept claiming they were equal, and then there was the devs saying they cut like 8 gigs for the 360 version (both got cut because of it) so yeah, blu ray > dvd
No, square also never said the space was the reason it was cut, they said they cut the movie quality and only the movie quality because of the space. They stated that the reason the other parts were cut because they were unneeded and appearance of XIII-2 would explain why
No they don't 360 games have just as much compression as pc games, moreso then some since MS holds patents, the arcade model is the only reason 360 doesn't have games with mandatory installs
You cant play PC games directly off the disc, you have to install them first which then becomes bigger than a dvd. Find me a link that states the arcade is the reason there are no mandatory installs for the 360.
|
