werppa Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Microsoft's mistake was to make Xbox360 without HDD. If every xbox had a HDD, you could have like 2-3 dvd's and install files to HDD and use one disc to play the game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5HT2a Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 On that quote by Houser: Yes, DVD has limitations, but nowhere did he say or even imply that it limited GTA IV. I still stand by my opinion that games do need larger discs to store data on, but we are still years away from it meaning anything. And that whole Metal Gear Solid taking up 50GB is a total scam. There are two things they could have done: 1) Not compressed any data, added prerendered movement after prerendered movement, and many super long higher resolution cut scenes. Remember it only took video game testers three days to beat (same thing with GTA IV) so it's not like it's an extremely long game. Or 2) They are lying in order to hype their game. I'm sorry if I sound like a fanboy (I own a 360 and not a PS3, although I definitely plan on buying one if it builds its exclusive game library up. I'm not loyal to either greedy ass Microsoft or greedy ass Sony, they could both go f*ck themselves for all I care) but I just find it hard to imagine seeing as how no game before it has used 15GB of data, much less 50. You should all be skeptical of this in till we have some solid proof that they filled this disc in a legit way, or at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Couldn't find the disc I was talking about earlier, but there are others out there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Card Not as large as a Blu-Ray disc, but they say it can be 3X faster than Blu-Ray. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stacked_Volumetric_Optical_Disk Doesn't say how fast those are, but there are a lot of things in the works, and I wouldn't be surprised if one of them actually hits the consumer market in about a year. Here's the disc you were talking about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein-coated_disc Thats amazing, never even knew these things existed, imagine the implications for future games.... A number of years ago, optical disc pioneer, and some might say, inventor David Paul Gregg mentioned that after bringing LaserVision video disks to the public (LaserDisc under Pioneer ownership), he moved on to holographic tape as a future format, that was before we had an HD DVD or Blue Laser system, so you see some of where that springs from. Laser Magic 1998 details the whole story and it's quite a read, Google Widescreen Review/ Laser Magic 98 for their special edition they put together over about 2 years, at the time, chock full of information!! Worth hunting down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Microsoft's mistake was to make Xbox360 without HDD. If every xbox had a HDD, you could have like 2-3 dvd's and install files to HDD and use one disc to play the game... I agree, and disagree. You can get the Xbox with the HDD, but the damn HDD is so small it amounts for almost nothing. The HDD they have in it is worth probably $5. The amount of versions available however, that is absurd...No one needs 7 million different types of Xbox's, as then you make your customer base upset, because they feel they have an outdated box thats worth less than half what they paid for it. Microsoft also made a big mistake with their RROD issue, instead of making a good console, they went the cheap route, and rushed it. They had time, they just didn't want to spend the money, but now they have to spend way more than they would have had to of spent to begin with... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIND BULL3TS Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Are you saying dvds have a higher read rate than blu-ray?You have any idea what blu-ray was invented to do? http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_vs_dvd_comparison Hmmmm... A Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD comparison written up on Blu-ray.com... Biased Much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Are you saying dvds have a higher read rate than blu-ray?You have any idea what blu-ray was invented to do? http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_vs_dvd_comparison Hmmmm... A Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD comparison written up on Blu-ray.com... Biased Much? Hehe, someone give this man a cookie. Here ya go, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTE777 Posted April 23, 2008 Author Share Posted April 23, 2008 Might as well have another game in the time that they have from now till whenever. What exactly do you mean though. PS3 exclusive or MS with BluRay? I mean, M$ with blu-ray! Or at least relase a beefed up game on multiple DVD 9 Discs. Im not saying PS3 is better or 360 is better, but the fact is that you can fit a lot more in with far more storage space, and im talking a lot more!! All im "suggesting" is that although harder to develop for ps3 and blu-ray, they might have been limited by DVD 9 Space. In the mean time they could have release GTA:IV Online, with arena's and gangs etc., that would have tied us over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Illicious Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Blu-ray 2x: 72Mbp / 8MBps12x DVD: 66 - 132Mbps / 8.2 - 16.5MBps (The dvd's speed is minimum through maximum) Exactly how does Blu-Ray win the cookiez? eh? Well that would be the reader's rate speed not the disk. Thats why early 2x players use a HDD. No that is the disc speed. Directly from the Blu-Ray website: According to the Blu-ray Disc specification, 1x speed is defined as 36Mbps. However, as BD-ROM movies will require a 54Mbps data transfer rate the minimum speed we're expecting to see is 2x (72Mbps). I am not calling the PS3 a piece of a garbage, or anything near that. I am just debating that Blu-Ray is going to be replaced, very soon, with a way better disc. The same thing happened with the BetaMax and VHS format war, be it both were going at the same time (I think). I'm not even saying the 360 is better than the PS3, I am talking disc format, and solely disc format. As for me suggesting GTA IV be delayed another year to fit it on a possibly better disc than Blu-Ray, I would never want such a thing. If they got GTA IV on a DVD 9, then so be it. However, for GTA V, they will possibly be placing it on a much bigger disc. Huh? Dude. You now talking about the standard of a 1x blu ray disk speed being crappy when you just compared it to a 12x dvd disk speed. Well if there is another format that would have a standard of 1x equal or higher to that of a 12x dvd speed then im all for it but to have more than 25gb on one layer at a higher output rate at an affordable price will shock the hell out of me. What your talking about sounds many years away regardless if its technology has been around for years. That will be one hell of a flat disk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Might as well have another game in the time that they have from now till whenever. What exactly do you mean though. PS3 exclusive or MS with BluRay? I mean, M$ with blu-ray! Or at least relase a beefed up game on multiple DVD 9 Discs. Im not saying PS3 is better or 360 is better, but the fact is that you can fit a lot more in with far more storage space, and im talking a lot more!! All im "suggesting" is that although harder to develop for ps3 and blu-ray, they might have been limited by DVD 9 Space. In the mean time they could have release GTA:IV Online, with arena's and gangs etc., that would have tied us over. I am VERY pleased with GTA IV, and did not expect as much as they have put into this game. I think this game is a prime example that Blu-Ray may be big, bulky, and 'OK' (Ok, loosely used here), but is still not better than DVD 9, no matter how much there is in size difference. When it comes to games that is, movies is another thing altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaJones Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 We all knwo M$ is in negotiations to adopt Blu Ray technology Link? Last I heard that was just a false rumour... http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9893090-7.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Are you saying dvds have a higher read rate than blu-ray?You have any idea what blu-ray was invented to do? http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_vs_dvd_comparison Hmmmm... A Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD comparison written up on Blu-ray.com... Biased Much? Only if you're the same kind of person who thinks standard (SD) TV is the same as HDTV and a CD is the same as a BluRay, because, hey, only the color of the Laser is different. Can't mean more then that when there's slower physical or reading by the optical pickup. Stop and think AGAIN, does that mean the content is the same and one takes longer to read the same imprinted digital information??? I'd like to see that proved, once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Blu-ray 2x: 72Mbp / 8MBps12x DVD: 66 - 132Mbps / 8.2 - 16.5MBps (The dvd's speed is minimum through maximum) Exactly how does Blu-Ray win the cookiez? eh? Well that would be the reader's rate speed not the disk. Thats why early 2x players use a HDD. No that is the disc speed. Directly from the Blu-Ray website: According to the Blu-ray Disc specification, 1x speed is defined as 36Mbps. However, as BD-ROM movies will require a 54Mbps data transfer rate the minimum speed we're expecting to see is 2x (72Mbps). I am not calling the PS3 a piece of a garbage, or anything near that. I am just debating that Blu-Ray is going to be replaced, very soon, with a way better disc. The same thing happened with the BetaMax and VHS format war, be it both were going at the same time (I think). I'm not even saying the 360 is better than the PS3, I am talking disc format, and solely disc format. As for me suggesting GTA IV be delayed another year to fit it on a possibly better disc than Blu-Ray, I would never want such a thing. If they got GTA IV on a DVD 9, then so be it. However, for GTA V, they will possibly be placing it on a much bigger disc. Huh? Dude. You now talking about the standard of a 1x blu ray disk speed being crappy when you just compared it to a 12x dvd disk speed. Well if there is another format that would have a standard of 1x equal or higher to that of a 12x dvd speed then im all for it but to have more than 25gb on one layer at a higher output rate at an affordable price will shock the hell out of me. What your talking about sounds many years away regardless if its technology has been around for years. That will be one hell of a flat disk. I didn't say that, it was on the Blu-Ray website. The PS3 only gets a 2X read speed off of the Blu-Ray disc, yes 3X would be faster than 2X, and yes 2X on Blu-Ray is almost as fast as 12X for DVD 9, but you're missing the point. PS3 doesn't read Blu-Ray at 3X, and the only thing that does (that I know of) is a Blu-Ray burner LG made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raynos Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 geeze look, if dvd was so much better than blu-ray then gta4 would also come on a dvd for the ps3. Try to remember the the ps3 is not BLU-RAY ONLY. It'll play all optical formats expect for HD-DVD and UMD(for obvious reasons) If it up to a game developer they'd rather read their data without having to decompress it. Thats why its better to have larger amounts of space. Thats why having all your consoles with a HDD is a better idea. Im not trying to be a fanboy, im just staying the facts, most of you xbox lovers are too ignorant to wake up and lick the pie. Would be good if microsh*t didnt introduce consoles like the xbox arcade. If every xbox had a HD you'd probably be getting a gta with alot more content and probably 2 dvd dics, 1 to install and 1 to keep in the drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 geeze look, if dvd was so much better than blu-ray then gta4 would also come on a dvd for the ps3. Try to remember the the ps3 is not BLU-RAY ONLY. It'll play all optical formats expect for HD-DVD and UMD(for obvious reasons) If it up to a game developer they'd rather read their data without having to decompress it. Thats why its better to have larger amounts of space. Thats why having all your consoles with a HDD is a better idea. Im not trying to be a fanboy, im just staying the facts, most of you xbox lovers are too ignorant to wake up and lick the pie. Would be good if microsh*t didnt introduce consoles like the xbox arcade. If every xbox had a HD you'd probably be getting a gta with alot more content and probably 2 dvd dics, 1 to install and 1 to keep in the drive. All that space going to waste, it's a waste of money. Not only that, but the reason why they won't use a DVD 9 disc for a game on the PS3 is because its ASSOCIATED WITH Xbox 360! Yes, that's right. The only reason they added support for DVD 9 was for MOVIES, and PS2 games (that is, if they even use DVD 9), not PS3 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJBremner Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Yes, I agree whole heartedly, GTAIV should have been delayed until next year minimun so Microsoft can release a new brand of 360's with Blu-Ray and then release GTAIV in Blu-Ray only. I don't see any down side to that strategy. dont you just love sarcasm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTE777 Posted April 23, 2008 Author Share Posted April 23, 2008 We all knwo M$ is in negotiations to adopt Blu Ray technology Link? Last I heard that was just a false rumour... http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9893090-7.html http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/03....blu.ray.talks/ I have no doubt that they are in talks, but it doesnt mean they will adopt it...I reckon they might get an add-on player built tho! Last i read tho they were adpoting an add-on, time will tell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceedot Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Are you saying dvds have a higher read rate than blu-ray?You have any idea what blu-ray was invented to do? http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_vs_dvd_comparison Hmmmm... A Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD comparison written up on Blu-ray.com... Biased Much? Hehe, someone give this man a cookie. Here ya go, . Except it's based on fact. . There is no doubt that BluRay is better than DVD. I mean, come on. Look at the video quality, size and technology. The BluRay even has a hard coating so it's harder to scratch. It's not as if the PS2 didn't use a DVD. On another note, if Microsoft adapts a BluRay add on, it will not support games. They will have to release a whole new console for BluRay support on games. I don't think GTA IV was held back, but I see other PS3 exclusives that benifit from not having a DVD console as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Are you saying dvds have a higher read rate than blu-ray?You have any idea what blu-ray was invented to do? http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_vs_dvd_comparison Hmmmm... A Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD comparison written up on Blu-ray.com... Biased Much? Hehe, someone give this man a cookie. Here ya go, . Except it's based on fact. . There is no doubt that BluRay is better than DVD. I mean, come on. Look at the video quality, size and technology. The BluRay even has a hard coating so it's harder to scratch. It's not as if the PS2 didn't use a DVD. On another note, if Microsoft adapts a BluRay add on, it will not support games. They will have to release a whole new console for BluRay support on games. I don't think GTA IV was held back, but I see other PS3 exclusives that benifit from not having a DVD console as well. Really, HD-DVD and Blu-Ray weren't all that different. Of course Blu-Ray displays a pretty picture and all, but it is still slow, and if anyone should consider it Next Generation, it should be better in all categories compared to the format it's replacing, and it just isn't better in the speed category. Also, I believe MS already came out and said they were not going to add Blu-Ray support to the 360, or release a Blu-Ray drive for it either. So, I don't think we will see anything until the next batch of consoles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 (edited) Blu-ray 2x: 72Mbp / 8MBps12x DVD: 66 - 132Mbps / 8.2 - 16.5MBps (The dvd's speed is minimum through maximum) Exactly how does Blu-Ray win the cookiez? eh? Well that would be the reader's rate speed not the disk. Thats why early 2x players use a HDD. No that is the disc speed. Directly from the Blu-Ray website: According to the Blu-ray Disc specification, 1x speed is defined as 36Mbps. However, as BD-ROM movies will require a 54Mbps data transfer rate the minimum speed we're expecting to see is 2x (72Mbps). I am not calling the PS3 a piece of a garbage, or anything near that. I am just debating that Blu-Ray is going to be replaced, very soon, with a way better disc. The same thing happened with the BetaMax and VHS format war, be it both were going at the same time (I think). I'm not even saying the 360 is better than the PS3, I am talking disc format, and solely disc format. As for me suggesting GTA IV be delayed another year to fit it on a possibly better disc than Blu-Ray, I would never want such a thing. If they got GTA IV on a DVD 9, then so be it. However, for GTA V, they will possibly be placing it on a much bigger disc. Huh? Dude. You now talking about the standard of a 1x blu ray disk speed being crappy when you just compared it to a 12x dvd disk speed. Well if there is another format that would have a standard of 1x equal or higher to that of a 12x dvd speed then im all for it but to have more than 25gb on one layer at a higher output rate at an affordable price will shock the hell out of me. What your talking about sounds many years away regardless if its technology has been around for years. That will be one hell of a flat disk. Do some homework on the Betamax vs VHS formats, you already expressed you were unaware of that timeline. It's easy to research now, back in the day I subscribed to Home Theater magazines and visits to the library to read up on tech. Sony was in effect, in a war with both MCA/Universal in the mid 70s, and the latter half, with JVC. It was an amazing journey to survive both battles but they proved with Beta everything VHS and JVC were able to duplicate, but it took them 1 year, or 6 months at least to catch up to EVERY Beta innovation except in 1987 with the introduction of SuperVHS, where as Sony had 8mm reinvented for camcorders along with Hi8. Both looking as good as SVHS. S-video cable was born out of Hi-Band video. Now Sony is in effect 1 year behind the next gen Game systems race, but they kept to the best suited hardware design, though debate will rage over RSX and Cell as game worthy, we will see some proof as time goes by how well they handle the challenges! Edited April 23, 2008 by Slamman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Do some homework on the Betamax vs VHS formats, you already expressed you were unaware of that timeline. It's easy to research now, back in the day I subscribed to Home Theater magazines and visits to the library to read up on tech. Sony was in effect, in a war with both MCA/Universal in the mid 70s, and the latter half, with JVC. It was an amazing journey to survive both battles but they proved with Beta everything VHS and JVC were able to duplicate, but it took them 1 year, or 6 months at least to catch up to EVERY Beta innovation except in 1987 with the introduction of SuperVHS, where as Sony had 8mm reinvented for camcorders along with Hi8. Both looking as good as SVHS. S-video cable was born out of Hi-Band video. Now Sony is in effect 1 year behind the next gen Game systems race, but they kept to the best suited hardware design, though debate will rage over RSX and Cell as game worthy, we will see some proof as time goes by how well they handle the challenges! With the new atom sized transistors being developed on Graphite, I think we will start to hear of some pretty powerful CPUs being drawn up, that will run cooler, and faster than the ones we have today, along with being a lot smaller. I think their invention may just put cell technology out, if they can keep up with it (which they most likely will ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
werppa Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Microsoft's mistake was to make Xbox360 without HDD. If every xbox had a HDD, you could have like 2-3 dvd's and install files to HDD and use one disc to play the game... I agree, and disagree. You can get the Xbox with the HDD, but the damn HDD is so small it amounts for almost nothing. The HDD they have in it is worth probably $5. The amount of versions available however, that is absurd...No one needs 7 million different types of Xbox's, as then you make your customer base upset, because they feel they have an outdated box thats worth less than half what they paid for it. I agree, you can't fit too many games to the standard premium HDD. I guess you can always delete them and reinstall when you want to play them again, it's annoying though. MS went little bit too trigger happy with the different versions of 360's, premium and Elite would've been enough. No offense to anyone, but if you can save for Arcade version, you can save for Premium or whatever it is called now too, it's not so much more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 (edited) I read IBM's developed Cell dates to the later half of 2001, to put that in perspective (9/11, We Shall Never Forget) RIP. Anyway, that same tech report mentioned IBM helping develop the CPU for Xb360 as well, so there ya go! Some argument when you think about it! Now, the question of memory in terms of efficiency and the GPUs come into play. It will be interesting to see who develops the next CPU/GPUs and how the memory is allocated. Much like a PC, the guts of the hardware won't be dependent on a dedicated HDD and perhaps an upgrade optical read path, like PCs, but then again, highly unlikely. (By the dependency issue, I mean in terms of the biggest part of the equation won't matter as much about the HDD, that issue is likely to take a back seat to the newer evolution in the GPU/CPU combo. To me those two key components should be what makes everything tick. Still bottlenecks occur in data transfer, even in very fast things like the one bank of 256MB Ram in PS3) Oh, and Disc Speeds in technical terms are expressed in RPM, so the above comment I quoted was right, the data read speed and physical speeds are expressed differently and not related as much as some argue Edited April 23, 2008 by Slamman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I read IBM's developed Cell dates to the later half of 2001, to put that in perspective (9/11, We Shall Never Forget) RIP. Anyway, that same tech report mentioned IBM helping develop the CPU for Xb360 as well, so there ya go! Some argument when you think about it! Now, the question of memory in terms of efficiency and the GPUs come into play. It will be interesting to see who develops the next CPU/GPUs and how the memory is allocated. Much like a PC, the guts of the hardware won't be dependent on a dedicated HDD and perhaps an upgrade optical read path, like PCs, but then again, highly unlikely. Oh, and Disc Speeds in technical terms are expressed in RPM, so the above comment I quoted was right, the data read speed and physical speeds are expressed differently and not related as much as some argue Have you ever used/heard/used the RAM back when computers were really taking off? I believe it was magnetic or something, you could turn your computer off and it would supposedly save all your open programs, etc. I haven't seen/used it, but I have heard of it. I think we should go back to something like that, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I just hibernate Windows, does the same thing! hahaha Actually, I date back to the Cider, the early HDD for the Apple ][ and // series computers...8 bits of tech glory, before the MacIntosh!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTE777 Posted April 23, 2008 Author Share Posted April 23, 2008 Might as well have another game in the time that they have from now till whenever. What exactly do you mean though. PS3 exclusive or MS with BluRay? I mean, M$ with blu-ray! Or at least relase a beefed up game on multiple DVD 9 Discs. Im not saying PS3 is better or 360 is better, but the fact is that you can fit a lot more in with far more storage space, and im talking a lot more!! All im "suggesting" is that although harder to develop for ps3 and blu-ray, they might have been limited by DVD 9 Space. In the mean time they could have release GTA:IV Online, with arena's and gangs etc., that would have tied us over. I am VERY pleased with GTA IV, and did not expect as much as they have put into this game. I think this game is a prime example that Blu-Ray may be big, bulky, and 'OK' (Ok, loosely used here), but is still not better than DVD 9, no matter how much there is in size difference. When it comes to games that is, movies is another thing altogether. With all thats been argued, how can you say its not better than DVD9 in terms of size, obviously a lot more can be put into a game with a bigger hard disk space, for example, final fantasy 8 was 4 disks long, imagine if they had to fit that same game (with graphics on par with N64 graphics) on a cartridge? What i am saying is, regarless of the disk used, do you think the game has been held back by not full utilising all the space in the blu ray disk? Sure most games dont fill it but this is one of the "big" games! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthethug Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Might as well have another game in the time that they have from now till whenever. What exactly do you mean though. PS3 exclusive or MS with BluRay? I mean, M$ with blu-ray! Or at least relase a beefed up game on multiple DVD 9 Discs. Im not saying PS3 is better or 360 is better, but the fact is that you can fit a lot more in with far more storage space, and im talking a lot more!! All im "suggesting" is that although harder to develop for ps3 and blu-ray, they might have been limited by DVD 9 Space. In the mean time they could have release GTA:IV Online, with arena's and gangs etc., that would have tied us over. I am VERY pleased with GTA IV, and did not expect as much as they have put into this game. I think this game is a prime example that Blu-Ray may be big, bulky, and 'OK' (Ok, loosely used here), but is still not better than DVD 9, no matter how much there is in size difference. When it comes to games that is, movies is another thing altogether. With all thats been argued, how can you say its not better than DVD9 in terms of size, obviously a lot more can be put into a game with a bigger hard disk space, for example, final fantasy 8 was 4 disks long, imagine if they had to fit that same game (with graphics on par with N64 graphics) on a cartridge? What i am saying is, regarless of the disk used, do you think the game has been held back by not full utilising all the space in the blu ray disk? Sure most games dont fill it but this is one of the "big" games! No, I do not think the game has been held back at all by the size of DVD 9. I think the limitations are on the systems themselves, and Rockstars budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterYoca13 Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 save it for later episodes. like gta3 is to san andreas as gta4 is to future episode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 That argument is not very good, but the main point he is trying to express is the BluRay storage is mostly thought out in terms of HiDef movie storage, as a data and game resource (for developers/coders), it has a bigger evolutionary road. In terms of movies, BluRay Live or BD Live is the big thing, but it equates to DVD ROM online features to me and again, not all that exciting, yet. Never count these capabilities out, they haven't been exploited. One can argue that may never be fully realized, but sadly, that's only known in hind-sight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxPowers87 Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 If and when Microsoft introduces a blu-ray drive.. It will NOT be used for games. The read speeds are far too slow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e2thejdot Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I think this game needs to come out now. Why wait a year to put it out when you can be working on another sequel in a year? If everyone used that train of thought nothing would ever get done. Honestly, I think if they went from filling a 9 gig DVD disc in 3 years.. do you really think they could have filled the remaining 16 gigs for a Blu-Ray disc in one year? Try 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now