By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Lost Odyssey to be featured on 4 DVDs!

ookaze on 21 September 2007

All of this because people can't admit that 1 disc is better than several.
Swapping was always a problem, but people could stand it because there was no better solution.

It's amazing that people want to eat crow in place of the company officials that said the nonsense.
If your company officials made stupid comments like BluRay space was useless, and then games for his console starts needing 4 discs, well, that's their crow to eat, not yours.
But no, the fanboys will go as far as saying they were right against all logic and against the facts.

Sad...



http://www.backloggery.com/main.php?user=ookaze

Around the Network
souixan on 21 September 2007

 

ookaze said:
All of this because people can't admit that 1 disc is better than several.
Swapping was always a problem, but people could stand it because there was no better solution.

It's amazing that people want to eat crow in place of the company officials that said the nonsense.
If your company officials made stupid comments like BluRay space was useless, and then games for his console starts needing 4 discs, well, that's their crow to eat, not yours.
But no, the fanboys will go as far as saying they were right against all logic and against the facts.

Sad...


the problem with your logic is in the fact that I have no problem swapping none at all..

 

I won't say that one disc isn't more convient, but I swap that in and out all the time anyway. I NEVER leave the games in the console so I'm technically doing the same thing when swapping discs as I'm doing when turning the system on..



Legend11 on 21 September 2007
ookaze said:
All of this because people can't admit that 1 disc is better than several.
Swapping was always a problem, but people could stand it because there was no better solution.

It's amazing that people want to eat crow in place of the company officials that said the nonsense.
If your company officials made stupid comments like BluRay space was useless, and then games for his console starts needing 4 discs, well, that's their crow to eat, not yours.
But no, the fanboys will go as far as saying they were right against all logic and against the facts.

Sad...

So is not having to swap discs for 2 games out of 200+, something that likely takes most people less than a minute and a half (30seconds to swap dvds x 3 dvds), really worth $160 (the likely additional cost the 360 would have been if it had came with a HD-DVD drive)?



mysticD on 21 September 2007

I will take 4-DVDs game, heck even 8 DVDs game over NO game on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. 

What good is technology if you don't have good software to run on it?  All I ever read and hear from Sony Fanboy even before I decided to buy 360 was good game will comes and it has yet to come.  I was told by several people who try to convince me that Sony (Cell & Blu-Ray) is the way to go because game like Lair, Heavenly Sword etc will blow away anything Xbox has to offer.

Heavenly Sword is running on Sony platform with not only Blu-Ray but also built in HD drive and yet the game is only 6-7 hours long.  So in the end what good is Blu-Ray if developer don't take advantage of it?  I am rather glad that Mistwalker is willing to put 4 discs game out rather than try to stick to one disc and compromise their design.

Also I just don't understand if you like games why should the number of discs matter?  I remember people used to get excited about multi-discs game like FF series.  Did having 4 disc for the old FF series make the game horrible and unenjoyable?  Should Square Enix not release the game and wait until new technology came along?   (Heck, I remember 10 floppy disks , yes those big, black sleeve thing that were required to install Ultima VI).

I played Forza2, Bio-shock, PGR3, Deadrising, Gears, Project Sylpheed and currently playing Blue Dragon, MotoGP.  There are more games I would love to play but I just don't have time for it.  I can't even think of all the games I would have miss out if I got the PS3.  I would be singing the same tune most PS3 owners are ... "wait, games are coming soonish....like 2008".

 



libellule on 21 September 2007

I dont understand some of you.

1 BR > 4 DVD
as
1DVD > 4 CD

that is all,
it is not even about Xbox360 (DVD+games) or PS3 (BR+no games)
it is about "logic"
if you don't understand this, then YOU are a Xbox360 fanboy

"""I will take 4-DVDs game, heck even 8 DVDs game over NO game on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.
What good is technology if you don't have good software to run on it?"""

lol

But, I agree, this is NOT a big problem to play on 4 DVD ...
(what is the interest of this thread except starting a flamewar ?)



Time to Work !

Around the Network
vizunary on 21 September 2007
LordTheNightKnight said:
makingmusic476 said:
sharky said:
makingmusic476 said:
To quote the article:

"The game uses a mixture of CG and real-time cut scenes to illustrate the storyline."

So it's 4 DVDs and not even all the cutscenes are CGI. How many discs will 360 games require in another 2 years?

Well, 4 DVD's is approaching 40 GB's..and considering I dont think a Blu ray game has yet to be even released on more than a single layer disc...meaning



your mother on 21 September 2007

8-Track FTW!!!



LordTheNightKnight on 21 September 2007
vizunary said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
makingmusic476 said:
sharky said:
makingmusic476 said:
To quote the article:

"The game uses a mixture of CG and real-time cut scenes to illustrate the storyline."

So it's 4 DVDs and not even all the cutscenes are CGI. How many discs will 360 games require in another 2 years?

Well, 4 DVD's is approaching 40 GB's..and considering I dont think a Blu ray game has yet to be even released on more than a single layer disc...meaning <23GB of data...

 

Blu ray is more expensive for a dual layer. I think Heavenly Sword said they almost used dual layer but didn't. All things equal PS3 publishers will try to avoid it because of extra cost right now.

 

In other words, 4 DVD's is approaching so big it would take two Blu ray's..look at it that way. Or in other words, it's more data than any PS3 game yet as well.

 

Anyways, I dont see top of the line PC games using that much. Look at World in Conflict, the just released PC RTS game that has superb graphics. I randomly noticed it installs to 9GB. However it is meant for a PC with 2-4GB of RAM, and more raw power than PS3/360 have.

 

So basically I dont think DVD is a realistic limitation. I will be interested also in what size is the Crysis install, since it has better graphics than any console game anyway.

 

Also Heavenly Sword is a good example. A 23 GB game that was only 6 hours. More storage doesn't mean much.

The real console limitation is 512 MB RAM. That and the fact all the data has to stream from a tiny pipe the optical drives. Because of this, the data has to be heavily compressed anyway, no matter how big of a reservoir it has. It still has to go through that tiny bottleneck from disc to 512MB RAM.


First off, single-layered BD-Roms hold 25GB of data, not 23. Also, only ~7GB of space is available to 360 developers on a DVD9 due to restrictions from MS (i'm not sure what they are). They do not have access to the full 8.5GB. Assuming that the 4th disc is roughly half full, you'd have 3.5 x 7GB = 24.5GB. 24.5GB is less than 25GB. Even if the total data did surpass the 25GB mark, they could just go dual-layer like you said. Kojima already plans to do this with MGS4.

As far as the expense of Blu-Ray discs, large runs of single-layered BD-Roms came to about 37 cents per disc, compared to ~10 cents per DVD, so a 4 disc DVD game would actually cost publishers more than a Blu-Ray disc game. I'm sure a dual-layered BD-rom wouldn't cost much more than a single layer, as they are already being mass produced for movies like Pirates of the Caribbean, so the cost difference is negligible.

About high end pc games, on the EA store it was recently listed that Crysis would need 16GB of HDD space. However, these specs were quickly taken down and Crytek scame out saying that the specs are not final yet. It could end up being a little bit more or a little bit less, but it's a safe bet that the final number will be roughly 16GB.

Also, Medieval II: Total War shipped on two DVD9s way back in Nov. '06.

To repeat my initial statement, how many discs will 360 games require in another 2 years?


Likely one to two discs, with 2 or more reserved for large and/or AAA titles. The fallacy of your examples is you are assuming games like Crysis and Medieval II are typical titles, instead of major titles, where a lot of content is called for due to their scale and ambitions. So most 360 games will be one disc, with the major titles meriting the content needing more than one disc.

Yet if the majority of major titles are more than one disc, so what? Can you prove that's a bad thing? Something like sales showing games selling worse than average due to more than one disc?


 

i don't see where he ever referred to the quality of the game or the sellability(neither were ever brought into question) this entire thread was about the technology used to present the game, that's all... by your path of logic maybe we should all still be using CDs?... or maybe just stopped with magnetic tape?

 Maybe he didn't imply it would be a bad thing, but it was hard to tell.

 Plus my comment did not imply we shouldn't advance. HD does make anything smaller than DVD9 impractical for this gen. My comments were that average and minor titles are unlikely to use up more than 7GB, as all that content would not be worth the time and money for such titles.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

mysticD on 21 September 2007
libellule said:
I dont understand some of you.

1 BR > 4 DVD
as
1DVD > 4 CD

that is all,
it is not even about Xbox360 (DVD+games) or PS3 (BR+no games)
it is about "logic"
if you don't understand this, then YOU are a Xbox360 fanboy

"""I will take 4-DVDs game, heck even 8 DVDs game over NO game on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.
What good is technology if you don't have good software to run on it?"""

lol

But, I agree, this is NOT a big problem to play on 4 DVD ...
(what is the interest of this thread except starting a flamewar ?)

I don't disagree with you that Blu-Ray or HD-DVD is better than DVD (when it come to space).   Heck, I won't even disagree with you that technically PS3 is in many ways is more advance than the Xbox 360.  Actually I was so close in getting PS3 as it is actually a "better" deal for what you pay for - Blu-Ray drive, built in wi-fi , (not to mention a much better built hardware than the junk MS put out) however in the end the reason I went to shop for the new console is to play game and frankly for that the 360 is by far the best platform. 

Which lead me to my point that you seems to miss, is the fact that Blu-Ray and Cell were always bring up as what make PS3 a better gaming system than the 360.  But this is obviously not the case at least not at the moment, and this is not because Blu-Ray or Cell suck, but because frankly there are seriouly lack of quality software on PS3.  So in the end DVD-9 or Blu-Ray doesn't mean crap if you don't have games to play on it.   

You can call me whatever you want fanboy, xbot, Sony-haters but seriously, as a gamers why would it matter if the game is on 4-DVDs or 1-Blu-Ray.  Blu-Ray does not make bad game good or DVDs make great game bad.  If PS3 have more quality games I would have bought it regardless if it has Blu-ray or DVD. 

 



friedtofu on 21 September 2007
ookaze said:
All of this because people can't admit that 1 disc is better than several.
Swapping was always a problem, but people could stand it because there was no better solution.

It's amazing that people want to eat crow in place of the company officials that said the nonsense.
If your company officials made stupid comments like BluRay space was useless, and then games for his console starts needing 4 discs, well, that's their crow to eat, not yours.
But no, the fanboys will go as far as saying they were right against all logic and against the facts.

Sad...

Well, having a game on 1 disc IS better than needing several. Multiple discs isnt as much a dealbreaker as some people make it out to be though.

Yah, if your a Wii60 fanboy you might try and find reasons why BD is not needed or even inferior, but thats just silly. This is just envy of a technology you dont have in your console. 

If your a Sony fanboy you will try and dig up every reason why a multidisc release is a bad thing. (You might scratch your disc more, give me a f*cking break) This is just envy of a game you wont be able to play or maybe youre sore about your console with hardly any games and need to vent. Who knows.

Fanboyism leads to stupid arguments like this. But hey this is what makes forums fun no? 

Even Kojima said he could have used more space than the current standard BD so if MGS4 released on 3 BD's would Sony fans be like "omg we have to swap discs ...boo! He should have used a next gen 200gb BD!!! boo!" or would they be elated about how much content they are getting? I KNOW it would be the latter and all of a sudden this "swapping is bad" sh*t would get swept under a carpet and then the focus would be "OMG the 360 would need 15 dvd9s to hold this game"! Now that would be a topic full of flames

BD is superior. It holds more space. Yay. If it makes people feel better to have one in their console then go ahead and pat yourself on the back and give your PS3 a hug.  If you keep telling yourself its not needed well, maybe it isnt right now but it would be nice to have now wouldnt? 



PS360 ftw!

Currently playing..........

Gears of War 2, GTA IV Lost and Damned, Little Big Planet (Yes I said I had no interest but my girl wanted to try it and we did and now Im hooked )