ChronotriggerJM said: I believe it matters greatly. Its kind of like when FF7 came out, they could have picked nintendo's cartridges as the medium, but they found the disk to have more room, so they tossed in a bunch of Cutscenes and extra's etc etc. It was the vision Square wanted for the game and the disk's let them have the freedom to do so. I've heard people give excuses for disk space like "Well just cut out some of the CGI" or "Who needs 5.1 or 7.1" I mean alot of people can agree with it, but honestly why should you have to "cut" anything? In fact if I could pick up the same game on the 360 or PS3 the only diff. being 7.1 audio? Believe me I'm picking the later. If the creaters can put everything they want on the disk with no "Sacrifices" by all means I'm down for that. |
Capacity was not the problem with the carts. The game could have fit on two or three N64 carts, if they were willing to compress the hell out of the data, as was done with the N64 version of RE2, and all the voicework with Conker. The problem was cost. All that compression required a lot of enhancement chips, and that would have made the game prohbitively expensive (RE2 and Conker came a few years later, when costs were greately reduced). There would be no way Square could sell the game at $60. It would be sold at a loss, which is unthinkable for software. They would have to sell the game at a higher price, and cut into sales (the high cost of Chrono Trigger presaged this).
CDs, on the other hand, cost pennies. So Square could put the game on a dozen discs, and still have a much better profit margin.
With the 360, the lower capacity is negated by the large profit margin of the discs. Even if they have to leave out content, not making content costs nothing, so there is still the profit margin.