silhouette
Regular
I saw two games on Xbox site that says hard-drive required. It seems MS relaxed the requirement even for non-MMO games. Oddly, the HD requried games are Soulcalibur 4 and Left for Dead.
360 HDD required games
- Thread starter silhouette
- Start date
Why the HDD is required for those games is beyond me. I don't think there's anything about those games that can't be done without an HDD, only with (probably not much) longer loading times. I'm all for using the hard disk for caching critical files to cut on loading, but I just don't see the point in mandatory installations unless it's strictly necessary.
interesting that they say you need a hard drive and a storage device.
It could be required for certain features.
It might have something to do with customizable characters. It's similar reasoning for Burnout IIRC.
Football Manager requires installs aswell. But that game is basically an excel spreadsheet with a huge database so its understandable to use a HDD install, as reading from DVD would kill that game.
The PS3 version of Soul Calibur IV is rumored (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=323074) to require ridiculous amounts of HDD space - so ridiculous probably one or two of the numbers quoted (install space and savegame size) is a mistake. But if it's not, it might corroborate the otherwise strange news that the 360 version requires a HDD.
I'm usually very annoyed at the popular meme of "lazy developers" but this time I'm tempted...
They are not lazy or incompetent, they have the wrong priorities set before them, and "make a console game" was at the end of the list. And the priorities were wrong because management knows they will get away with it, the console vendors will let them - Sony seems to be completely oblivious to the idiocy of mandatory installs, while Microsoft is supposed to be so happy to get Soul Calibur IV day-and-date that they wouldn't dare object.
I'm usually very annoyed at the popular meme of "lazy developers" but this time I'm tempted...
They are not lazy or incompetent, they have the wrong priorities set before them, and "make a console game" was at the end of the list. And the priorities were wrong because management knows they will get away with it, the console vendors will let them - Sony seems to be completely oblivious to the idiocy of mandatory installs, while Microsoft is supposed to be so happy to get Soul Calibur IV day-and-date that they wouldn't dare object.
I don't really see how Sony is in a position to object either...do they really need more bad press for making lives even harder for third-party developers?
All TCR enforcing is making lives of third- (and first-, supposedly)-party developers hard - in the best interest of the long-term quality of experience on the platform.
Or maybe what I called earlier "obliviousness to the idiocy of mandatory installs" is actually a sinister plan to nudge developers in the direction of HDD reliance, make more 360 games require the HDD and thus make the inevitable first-to-$199 milestone for Microsoft a hollow victory?
I thought the HDD-less 360 was more of a symbolic thing rather than a console MS really wants you to buy.
Alone in the Dark is listed as HDD required too, and that's not true
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/a/aloneinthedark/
Blade47167
Newcomer
Its most likely a 2.4GB install with a 6MB game save. There is ~5GB file limitation is there not?
Also considering the fact that Ridge Racer HD install was optional it was was under 5GB I just don't see why something like Soul Caliber would require so much.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/s/soulcalibur4/
HDD required no longer.
and about the ps3 version:
http://kotaku.com/5021311/namco-bandai-says-soulcalibur-iv-install-size-significantly-overblown
HDD required no longer.
and about the ps3 version:
http://kotaku.com/5021311/namco-bandai-says-soulcalibur-iv-install-size-significantly-overblown
Similar threads
