The disk swapping isn't that annoying its years later when you lose one disk, but have the rest. I lost disk three for final fantasy 7 after letting my brother borrow it. Now every time I think of downloading it on psn I think well I have the first 2/3 of the game here, but now I can't finish it unless I pay again. That is what can be really annoying with multiple disks.

You're right that it's a inconvenience but it's such a minor one that it doesn't even matter.

Take Mass Effect 2 for example, I had to change discs twice in a little over 30 hours of play.  When the little screen came up prompting me to change discs, my game wasn't ruined, I walked up, inserted the new disc, and went on.  It didn't break any kind of immersion, it just meant I had to get up off the couch lets say every 10-ish hours of gameplay.  Considering most games last 8-12 hours, that's fine with me.

Now if I had to change discs every 4 or so hours, that would bother me, but every 10+ hours, I really don't care.  It's just completely insignificant.

I was actually more annoyed because someone told me if you installed both discs you didn't have to change discs at all.  I wasn't annoyed that I swapped discs, I was mainly annoyed that I waited to play the game until I installed both discs.  If I had known I was going to have to change anyways, I would have just installed the 2nd disc later.

Oh god another internet grammar nazi.
I'll say what I always say to you  Cambridge taught Oxford English professors. This is the internet not the foreword to the complete works of Shakespear. People post in a rush, in a seconds language or just enough for people to get the message but as you lack the ability to understand that I'll try to spell it out to you. in crayons if i can find some.

I'm talking in general not absolutes like most people in the world. Are you telling me that it isn't usually cheaper to mass produce something?
To the bolded. I was talking to someone else who was saying it was always cheaper to make BD's than DVDs. Did you read all that before you interjected yourself into this? I was saying that if a game isn't going to sell that many on BD then the cost would be even higher. Higher than it would be if the same amout was made for DVD9 due to the whole, the more you order the cheaper it becomes and how long DVD has been out. I was saying that DVD's are cheaper to make than BD's in similar quantities. I have said that many times.

You have an obsession with setting up production lines. Ignore that. In fact don't. Are you telling me that if you have to factor in the cost of setting up a DVD line against setting up a BD line the DVD line wouldn't be cheaper given how long DVDs have been on the market and the market share it has, how much it has sold and how long they have had to refine the tech to drive cost down? Sure it might not be an absolute but in general.
COMPARED TO EACH OTHER. Why is it so difficult for you to comprehend that. I'm not talking about if they are cheap to make but compared to each other which would be cheapest and all the evidence people have produced on here backs me up.

Do you think I'm saying it it's expensive to make BD's? I'm not I'm saying it's cheaper to make DVDs than it is to make BDs. I might have said that somewhere in this thread I'll see if I can dig up a quote somewhere.

Please tell me where I insinuated that every new game made they had to factor in the initial cost of setting up a production line?
You are seeing a lot of things in what I'm saying that aren't there.

PS your grammar is perfect

I tried looking for a quote where I had said that it's cheaper to make DVDs than it is to make BDs in this thread but I couldn't find any.

Well, the guy was posting to provoke a response, he even said it himself. With 8 post and posting to provoke, well im not gonna explain further. Find it strange that you defend him instead of me, thx a lot!

Actually ill afford the 15 minutes to explain, as I would have did with a regular poster.

1. Sure they will all be lazy, we know that developers never care about the final product, and that they will only use more space because they are too lazy too optimize, thats common sense right?

2. Duplicate data? for what we knows its only bethesda with oblivion in the early days of PS3 that stated having to use duplicate data to work around the slower load speed of their PS3 version. Uncompressed audio is only to feel a disc space? I thought it was a nice features when you have a 7.1 surround sound. Adding side quest in a jRPG or adding a making of film in a game like uncharted 2 is not necassry or required, your right on that. But its nice no?

3. You know what, america and english language is the center of the world, the sun revolute around it, extra language has little to no value right?

4. Theres developer that makes tons of cash and easily can afford a longer developement cycle and bigger asset. But they need to release their game on DVD, so how do you know they wouldnt have done more.

5. Your contradicting yourself you know. Its obvious why its only 1st party titles that use more spaces.

6. Finally something that makes sense, preferring a console, interface, controller is very legetimate. And yes it can easily surpass the type of disc it uses.

7. The fact that you dont use the advantages of blu-ray doesnt cancel the advantages. What about I tell you im not connected to Xbox live hence Xbox live makes no difference. Im not fanboy enough to claim anything like that tho.

8. Very very good point in favor of multi-disc.

9. Well other than thinking your here only to provoke others, theres little to think.

CASSÉ

This is really a pointless thread. Of course one disk is 'more convenient'. However, XBOX360 doesn't use blu ray, so unless you want every game to be dumbed down to 1 disk, then stop arguing over disk swapping. All you're really arguing over is 'XBOX360 vs PS3'.

yes, do yourself a favor and follow your advise, think first man before posting such rubish