starcraft said:
LongLiveTheBeatles said:
Does this quote suffice?: "Kojima complained that a few features had to be cut from the game so it would fit on a duel layer Blu-ray disc. As format fanatics already know, that means the game takes up nearly 50 gigabytes of space." I'm done talking about space because I could easily pull up a thousand other articles just like that one and I don't think every site saying the same thing has the same agenda. Accept it. You are going by your word, while every source in the media disagrees with your thesis. If parts of the game had to be cut then there obviously is no duplicated data and I have already proven that multiple languages will not be shipped on the same disc. This means that the game undeniably is only possible on the PS3 because of blu-ray; contradicting your preconceived notions. If you would like MGS4 on nine discs then you can have fun because unlike you, I have both systems therefore I can pick and choose which version I want. The PS3 port would have been better any way you look at it and profit would have quickly diminished upon the publics discovery that MGS4 for the 360 came on 9 discs. How many gamers looking at that package would find it appealing? Not only that but you also have to factor in manufacturing costs for extra discs scratching off even more profit. Konami at that point wouldn't port the game to the 360 because it would simply be bad business, which would remove the need for Sony to do any money hatting in the first place. I'm wrong on things all of the time and it's OK to be wrong every now and then. But you stated in your first post that you were completly speculating. If you really want the game that bad then just get a PS3, otherwise it shouldn't concern you at all and no thread should have been made in the first place. |
Care to provide a link to that quote? And afterwards, care to provide an explanation of how just six months from launch the game was just "pushing the 25GB mark?" You clearly didn't read what I wrote above. All major PS3 games have duplicated data where their 360 counterparts do not, in order to reduce seek times. By definition, a game on a Blu-Ray disk will inevitable take up more space than an equivelantly performing game on a DVD9 disk. As for your nine disk crap? You realize by the time the 30GB PS3 version is cut down due to no duplicated data and compressed audio it would EASILY be under 27GB (meaning three DVD's) but PROBABLY be under 18GB meaning two DVD's? You realize that if the game took 9 360 disks it would be 81GB meaning it would take three Blu-Ray disks (Accounting for the need to duplicate data for equivelant performance)? |
You know what? I'm banging my head against a wall throwing source after source out in front of you while you continue to speculate. This is a battle between fact and opinion, and your alliance with Microsoft is more powerful than your ability to be rational. I want you to objectively look at this thread and then come to your own honest conclusion because there is no use in arguing with someone who is being completely delusional. What I like doing is thinking of ways to counter my own arguments. Do the same thing yourself and you find it is very flawed and is based heavily on guesses, estimations, and things you must assume. A great example is your magic number of 30GB's.
I'm done here
Peace out
