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

Forums - Microsoft - Final Fantasy XIII 360 Losing 15GB

twesterm on 22 December 2009
Raistline said:
twesterm said:
pokeclaudel said:
I don't understand why this is even an issue. The gameplay is most important. Look at FF7. It had 3 discs but the last disc barley took up half of the cd space yet it still had all the areas from the other two discs. Doesn't this mean that only the FMVs took up the other half of the cds on the other discs. Only things changing for FF13 are going to be compressed cgi and some music maybe.

If you have both a 360 and PS3 you would obviously get the PS3 version. But if you don't have a PS3 and don't feel like spending 400 to play a game then just get the 360 version. I will get the 360 version as I have no PS3. I doubt the story will make any more sense with uncompressed FMVs

Why?

As far as we know it's not like Bayonetta where there's an obvious advantage, it's two extra discs and 7.1 audio.  Not a lot of people have 7.1 audio and disc number isn't that big of a deal.

I guess if you do have a 7.1 setup it might be obvious, but for everyone else, so far, it just comes down to preference.

At the moment I'm leaning towards 360 for my own reasons, but I'll wait for the reviews to start pouring to finalize what system and to decide if I'm even getting the game.

There is more of a difference in audio than just 5.1 vs. 7.1 and simple uncompressed vs. compressed audio.

The Xbox 360 is not capable of any kind of HD Audio, it is capable of Dolby and DTS 5.1 only. So the version of audio you will be getting on the Xbox360 is going to be Dolby. The PS3 verison has have Linear PCM 5.1, DTS 5.1 and Dolby 5.1 for audio choices. Neither have 7.1, unless they change that for the US Release. (source: http://scrawlfx.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Final-Fantasy-XIII-Box-Art-Scan_01.jpg).

The LCPM audio is supposedly 1.5mps which is in line with HD audio formats. I cannot find anywhere that confirms the actual bit-rate of the audio.

The difference in audio will about equal to DVD vs Blu-Ray if this information is correct.

How many people can hear that difference though?  I know I don't notice it and I have to wonder how many other people don't notice it either.

I'm sure audiophiles will love it but even when watching a Blue Ray vs. DVD I don't hear enough of a difference to care and I even have a pretty good audio setup (or so the friend that convinced me to buy the system tells me who is a big audio person).

Again, I'm pretty sure audio is going to be pretty much a non-issue for most people. 

Now if one had more content, one had significant performance issues, or one actually looked better then those would be actual issues.  We're visual people, that's what we care about.



 

Around the Network
Lolcislaw on 22 December 2009

Ill be getting this game for the 360 since i dont own a PS3.

But i dont really believe that there a definative version of this game , disc swopping is not an issue ( and i dont really see how its that a problem for everyone) Plus i know i will be playing this game on a 8 years old 32' SD TV (without any speakers or anything) so the 7.1 sound wont really matter (for majority of people)

It comes to personal preference, not PS3 version being better. If i had both consoles i would probably get a version which i can find chepaer :P



Badassbab on 22 December 2009
Xoj said:
Burning Typhoon said:
NKAJ said:
why would they dileberatly make the graphics worse on ps3 just so it could be equal to xbox360? graphics are ment to get better not worse

They did the same thing with Tekken 6...  So, of course, the arcade makes both versions look like crap, and the arcade version is based on PS3 hardware.

Anyway, I wish they'd stop gimping PS3 ports... they've got no problem leaving the graphics as-is when it's the 360 with the better looking version.  Oh well, I guess I could just stop buying even-numbered Tekken games..  But, as for this game, I'll need to wait and see what other people think before getting it.

i can confirm this :/.

The arcade version is based on PS3 hardware with more memory so they could improve the texture detail etc. In fact the 360 version runs at a higher resolution than the PS3 version with the motion blur switched off. Also VF5, SC4 and SF4 all look better than T6 Arcade and all three of those games are technically superior on the 360 (T6 is a two year old arcade game). To say they wanted to keep both versions equal and so watered down the PS3 version (which takes advantage of it's Blu Ray capability) is pure make believe.

Tekken 6 Arcade version = 1280x720
Tekken 6 BR Arcade (Blur Effects cannot be disabled) = 1024x576
Tekken 6 PS3 = 1024x576 No AA (Blur Effects On) , 1024x576 2XAA (Blur Effects Off)
Tekken 6 Xbox 360 = 1024x576 No AA (Blur Effects On), 1365x768 No AA (Blur Effects Off)






twesterm on 22 December 2009
Badassbab said:
Xoj said:
Burning Typhoon said:
NKAJ said:
why would they dileberatly make the graphics worse on ps3 just so it could be equal to xbox360? graphics are ment to get better not worse

They did the same thing with Tekken 6...  So, of course, the arcade makes both versions look like crap, and the arcade version is based on PS3 hardware.

Anyway, I wish they'd stop gimping PS3 ports... they've got no problem leaving the graphics as-is when it's the 360 with the better looking version.  Oh well, I guess I could just stop buying even-numbered Tekken games..  But, as for this game, I'll need to wait and see what other people think before getting it.

i can confirm this :/.

The arcade version is based on PS3 hardware with more memory so they could improve the texture detail etc. In fact the 360 version runs at a higher resolution than the PS3 version with the motion blur switched off. Also VF5, SC4 and SF4 all look better than T6 Arcade and all three of those games are technically superior on the 360 (T6 is a two year old arcade game). To say they wanted to keep both versions equal and so watered down the PS3 version (which takes advantage of it's Blu Ray capability) is pure make believe.

Actually, the 360 has more texture memory than the PS3.



 

cloofoofoo on 22 December 2009
twesterm said:
Badassbab said:
Xoj said:
Burning Typhoon said:
NKAJ said:
why would they dileberatly make the graphics worse on ps3 just so it could be equal to xbox360? graphics are ment to get better not worse

They did the same thing with Tekken 6...  So, of course, the arcade makes both versions look like crap, and the arcade version is based on PS3 hardware.

Anyway, I wish they'd stop gimping PS3 ports... they've got no problem leaving the graphics as-is when it's the 360 with the better looking version.  Oh well, I guess I could just stop buying even-numbered Tekken games..  But, as for this game, I'll need to wait and see what other people think before getting it.

i can confirm this :/.

The arcade version is based on PS3 hardware with more memory so they could improve the texture detail etc. In fact the 360 version runs at a higher resolution than the PS3 version with the motion blur switched off. Also VF5, SC4 and SF4 all look better than T6 Arcade and all three of those games are technically superior on the 360 (T6 is a two year old arcade game). To say they wanted to keep both versions equal and so watered down the PS3 version (which takes advantage of it's Blu Ray capability) is pure make believe.

Actually, the 360 has more texture memory than the PS3.

I thought he meant the arcade board thats based off the ps3 has more texture memory than ps3 or 360 and thats y the hompe port looks like it looks.Kinda like how naomi has double the main and vram compared to the dreamcast sort of situation.

 

On topic bout final fantasy,I recently purchased a slim bundle(3 games) But I told my wife the ps3 will be solely for exclusives and ALL multiplatform Ill get for the xbox.Any according to that article on the website the actually game content is around 8gb big,that shouldnt be too hard to spread on 3 discs.The only thing probably taking a hit on the x360 is audio and the pre-recorded cutscenes.



Natal and Sony's flashing Ice cream cone

Around the Network
Pristine20 on 22 December 2009
o187em said:
whats with all these in game cinemas? im getting sick and tired of watching 4-6 hours of in game cinemas and only getting 3-5 hours of in-game play. I know the story is an important part of the experience but come on i want to play my games not watch them.

thats the ff we know and love. the series is not for you. as for me, i say bring on the cgi



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

Badassbab on 22 December 2009
twesterm said:
Badassbab said:
Xoj said:
Burning Typhoon said:
NKAJ said:
why would they dileberatly make the graphics worse on ps3 just so it could be equal to xbox360? graphics are ment to get better not worse

They did the same thing with Tekken 6...  So, of course, the arcade makes both versions look like crap, and the arcade version is based on PS3 hardware.

Anyway, I wish they'd stop gimping PS3 ports... they've got no problem leaving the graphics as-is when it's the 360 with the better looking version.  Oh well, I guess I could just stop buying even-numbered Tekken games..  But, as for this game, I'll need to wait and see what other people think before getting it.

i can confirm this :/.

The arcade version is based on PS3 hardware with more memory so they could improve the texture detail etc. In fact the 360 version runs at a higher resolution than the PS3 version with the motion blur switched off. Also VF5, SC4 and SF4 all look better than T6 Arcade and all three of those games are technically superior on the 360 (T6 is a two year old arcade game). To say they wanted to keep both versions equal and so watered down the PS3 version (which takes advantage of it's Blu Ray capability) is pure make believe.

Actually, the 360 has more texture memory than the PS3.

I was talking about System 357 (PS3 based Namco arcade hardware) having more memory than the console PS3. (736MB vs 512MB)

I think both the 360 and PS3 have 512MB memory but on 360 it's unified (developer decides) while PS3 it's evenly split between the GPU and CPU.






twesterm on 22 December 2009
cloofoofoo said:
twesterm said:
Badassbab said:
Xoj said:
Burning Typhoon said:
NKAJ said:
why would they dileberatly make the graphics worse on ps3 just so it could be equal to xbox360? graphics are ment to get better not worse

They did the same thing with Tekken 6...  So, of course, the arcade makes both versions look like crap, and the arcade version is based on PS3 hardware.

Anyway, I wish they'd stop gimping PS3 ports... they've got no problem leaving the graphics as-is when it's the 360 with the better looking version.  Oh well, I guess I could just stop buying even-numbered Tekken games..  But, as for this game, I'll need to wait and see what other people think before getting it.

i can confirm this :/.

The arcade version is based on PS3 hardware with more memory so they could improve the texture detail etc. In fact the 360 version runs at a higher resolution than the PS3 version with the motion blur switched off. Also VF5, SC4 and SF4 all look better than T6 Arcade and all three of those games are technically superior on the 360 (T6 is a two year old arcade game). To say they wanted to keep both versions equal and so watered down the PS3 version (which takes advantage of it's Blu Ray capability) is pure make believe.

Actually, the 360 has more texture memory than the PS3.

I thought he meant the arcade board thats based off the ps3 has more texture memory than ps3 or 360 and thats y the hompe port looks like it looks.Kinda like how naomi has double the main and vram compared to the dreamcast sort of situation.

 

On topic bout final fantasy,I recently purchased a slim bundle(3 games) But I told my wife the ps3 will be solely for exclusives and ALL multiplatform Ill get for the xbox.Any according to that article on the website the actually game content is around 8gb big,that shouldnt be too hard to spread on 3 discs.The only thing probably taking a hit on the x360 is audio and the pre-recorded cutscenes.

Whoops, he was, I fail at reading today.  -_-



 

Feylic on 22 December 2009
slowmo said:
Feylic said:
slowmo said:
Feylic said:
NightAntilli said:
@Feylic: That's why developers put the largest files on the outside edge of the disk.. And that's also why 99% of the multiplats have faster loading on the X360. And also, if you wanna argue like that, here:

http://img418.imageshack.us/img418/5399/12xdvdvsbdrs0cg.png

That graph shows that the minimum read speed is basically just a tad lower, and the maximum is way above it.. Yes, this is for 12x, since the X360 is capable of that. That does not mean all games use it, but if it's needed, they probably will. And again, even if they use 8x, the largest files are put on the outside part of the disk, and the menu files and stuff that doesn't need high read speeds are put on the inner edge. Because of this, 8x will have the advantage over 2x Blu-Ray in games.. Period.

Yea, no kidding, thats called mastering, but the fact remains that not ALL of the information can be stored at the edge of the disc, and hence, it will not always be read faster.

As for the graph, like you said it's 12X so it's pretty much useless and but the part I bolded does not work. If the game is big enough, they will use a dual layer DVD and it will be 8X, they can't just decide it will run faster at this point, it's 8, the 12 no longer matters. Because of this, over the entire size of the disc, the read speeds are quite comparable between the PS3 and 360's respective drives. PERIOD.


No, the 360 can read Dual layer DVD's at 12x, please stop spreading MikeB's fud, this has been proven wrong several times yet still people insist on spreading misinformation.  Not only that but newer drives are capable of reading single layer disks at 16x.

I have never seen anyone prove this wrong, and have read and participated in tons of threads about the subject here. If you can show me where this proof is I would like to read it.


It is quite clearly shown in the firmware that it reads dual layer at 12x, if you want to continue in ignorance thats your problem.  The burden of proof is upon you to prove your claim that the drive can only read Dual Layer at 8x which I know you cannot do.

Show me where? All the hardware specs say 12X, they say nothing about dual layer. How am I being ignorant? I asked you to show me where, I would like to learn if I am wrong, but you refuse to show me. Anyways, some quick searching found me this, though I doubt you will look at it,

http://www.samsung.com/ca/consumer/office/optical-disk-drives/optical-disk-drives/SH-S223Q/BEBD/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail&tab=spec&fullspec=F

http://www.lge.com/ca_en/computer-products/optical-storage/LG-external-dvd-burner-GP08LU10.jsp

Those are two dvd drives that show the dual layer read speed is LESS than the specified read speed of the drive. Yes, it is not a 12X drive, but it gives an idea of how they work and this is much more credible than your bs.



slowmo on 22 December 2009
Feylic said:
slowmo said:
Feylic said:
slowmo said:
Feylic said:
NightAntilli said:
@Feylic: That's why developers put the largest files on the outside edge of the disk.. And that's also why 99% of the multiplats have faster loading on the X360. And also, if you wanna argue like that, here:

http://img418.imageshack.us/img418/5399/12xdvdvsbdrs0cg.png

That graph shows that the minimum read speed is basically just a tad lower, and the maximum is way above it.. Yes, this is for 12x, since the X360 is capable of that. That does not mean all games use it, but if it's needed, they probably will. And again, even if they use 8x, the largest files are put on the outside part of the disk, and the menu files and stuff that doesn't need high read speeds are put on the inner edge. Because of this, 8x will have the advantage over 2x Blu-Ray in games.. Period.

Yea, no kidding, thats called mastering, but the fact remains that not ALL of the information can be stored at the edge of the disc, and hence, it will not always be read faster.

As for the graph, like you said it's 12X so it's pretty much useless and but the part I bolded does not work. If the game is big enough, they will use a dual layer DVD and it will be 8X, they can't just decide it will run faster at this point, it's 8, the 12 no longer matters. Because of this, over the entire size of the disc, the read speeds are quite comparable between the PS3 and 360's respective drives. PERIOD.


No, the 360 can read Dual layer DVD's at 12x, please stop spreading MikeB's fud, this has been proven wrong several times yet still people insist on spreading misinformation.  Not only that but newer drives are capable of reading single layer disks at 16x.

I have never seen anyone prove this wrong, and have read and participated in tons of threads about the subject here. If you can show me where this proof is I would like to read it.


It is quite clearly shown in the firmware that it reads dual layer at 12x, if you want to continue in ignorance thats your problem.  The burden of proof is upon you to prove your claim that the drive can only read Dual Layer at 8x which I know you cannot do.

Show me where? All the hardware specs say 12X, they say nothing about dual layer. How am I being ignorant? I asked you to show me where, I would like to learn if I am wrong, but you refuse to show me. Anyways, some quick searching found me this, though I doubt you will look at it,

http://www.samsung.com/ca/consumer/office/optical-disk-drives/optical-disk-drives/SH-S223Q/BEBD/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail&tab=spec&fullspec=F

http://www.lge.com/ca_en/computer-products/optical-storage/LG-external-dvd-burner-GP08LU10.jsp

Those are two dvd drives that show the dual layer read speed is LESS than the specified read speed of the drive. Yes, it is not a 12X drive, but it gives an idea of how they work and this is much more credible than your bs.

Neither of those is the drives in the 360 and neither run custom firmaware designed for a console.  Come on where is your proof, all I say is supposition in those links with no basis of fact to prove your theory.  Like I said previously YOU made the claim of 8x read speed on DL, it's for you to prove not me.  Your "proof" isn't credible in the slightest and you're still talking bs yourself.