|
| quote: | Originally posted by TheDemon
This is going to be very interesting. Mgs4 took up all 50 gigs of the blu ray disc. How many discs is this gonna be on the 360? |
Well, there's more reasoning behind that than just the mere "the game was big".
First off, the PS3's Blu-ray drive is ridiculously slow. A big reason why PS3 games either have shitty load times (a bigger problem around when the system first launched) or have to be installed (a total nuisance considering some people only have 20GB PS3's, so installing 1 or 2 games takes away a chunk of the space available, ultimately contradicting the whole digital market idea that Sony is pioneering with the PSN and Home) is because the drive takes a helluva long time to read data, so companies have to take additional steps to make the game playable without making the gamer wait 2 or 3 minutes for data to load.
One trick is by leaving all audio uncompressed. MGS4 has a bitchload of audio (seeing as how people bitch about the number of cut-scenes, imagine the amount of data regarding just the sound alone), so in order to make the game playable without millions of load times, Kojima and the gang left the audio uncompressed. To compensate for the PS3's Blu-ray disc reader lack of speed, they spread the data out throughout the disc so as to speed up the loading process. The original Resistance, one of the smaller games on the PS3, took up something like 30GB of the Blu-ray disc, and it was for similar reasoning. Spreading files.
I'm not saying that compression would lead to a single DVD of MGS4, but I will tell you that people oversell the Blu-ray discs capacity in relation to the PS3, and how it's the end-all, be-all of gaming mediums. Really, that space (for gaming at least) is being used to make up for the lack of speed the Blu-ray laser possesses. Obviously, if the speed was faster, this wouldn't be an issue. But it is: if you ask me, Sony attempted to pioneer a technology a little too early into the ballgame. Whereas DVD's were available on the market a full 4 years before the first console made use of the format (first DVD player in 1996, the PS2 in 2000) giving companies including Sony plenty of time to amp up quality disc readers, the PS3 launched a mere 6 months after the first Blu-ray player. The PS3 was built with rudimentary Blu-ray technology. Now, Blu-ray players are constantly improving, whereas the PS3, a technology that must remain universal so as to maintain an equilibrium in console quality (selling a "better" PS3 later on down the road alienates the first-time adopters, and fucks up the development process of later games) must stick with an ancient disc reader that continues to suck ass, forcing companies to work around it.
Even with all of this being said, I still don't think we'll see MGS4 on the 360. It's too late into the ballgame; those who wanted MGS4 probably bought PS3's, knowing full well that it was a Sony flagship franchise. Kinda like how porting Halo 3 to the PS3 would be rather pointless too. It'd sell a little bit at the beginning, but overall, the development costs of the port process would not be made back, because people wouldn't care and they would probably already own it on their 360 anyway.
___________________
 
|
