Claimed: Oblivion coming to PS3, Nov 6 (launch?)

Titanio said:
Yeah, I should say version, not 'port', my bad. It'd have to be from the ground-up.
Click to expand...

Yes but it does not change the "fact" that an Oblivion conversion might be on the run, in one or another way, which also would confirmate the rumors about various listings of t he games in shops etc.
 
deathkiller said:
Silent Hill for PSP is not a port and, if that theory is true, Oblivion PSP would be an action spin-off no a port.
Click to expand...
Most likely given the wording. Think Oblivion universe and story with a more Untold Legends type combat perhaps.
 
Jesus2006 said:
Yes but it does not change the "fact" that an Oblivion conversion might be on the run, in one or another way, which also would confirmate the rumors about various listings of t he games in shops etc.
Click to expand...

You have a very strange definition of the word 'fact'
 
As a quick side note, Bethesda is working on a special edition of Oblivion just for PS3. We were shown some screenshots (sadly, not the actual game) and it looks like an entirely different game. Every texture is being replaced with new extremely-high resolution ones. It’s basically what Bethesda wanted to do the first time until they ran into the DVDs capacity limit. BluRay fixes that little bottleneck.
Click to expand...
- http://forums.modojo.com/showthread.php?t=142564

Any comments on this?
 
yeah that forum post sounds like fud if you ask me. sneaks some BS into a list of stuff we already know to make it more realistic, but thats just what it comes off to me as.
 
london-boy said:
Sounds like PR to me.. Plus, what does this mean:

We were shown some screenshots (sadly, not the actual game) and it looks like an entirely different game
Click to expand...

If they were shown something that is not the actual game, then of course it will look different...
Click to expand...


I think he meant they were shown screenshots from the game instead of seeing the actual game in motion. That's what i took from it anyway :)
 
It does indeed sound like complete Bull.

On a slightly off-topic note, though, regarding Oblivion's size - does it not strike anyone else as slightly coincidental that it uses slightly less space than is on a single layer DVD? How is capacity on the 360 discs split between the layers - is it 3.5GB on each side, or 4.7GB on one layer (as normal), 2.3GB on the other layer (with the rest being the security?)? I ask this because it seems plausible Bethesda had to limit themselves to the capacity of a single layer given the latency associated with layer switches. For a game like Oblivion - large streaming world - it could perhaps be a no-go to read data from both layers alternately given the switching latency.
 
Plus for the PC they can install mega-gigabytes onto the HDD, although I suppose they may have wanted a cap based on not wanting to consume too much HDD space :???: Texture wise I didn't think Oblivion was doing a great deal and can see higher-res textures being an option, but I don't know why DVD would be the limiting factor if this is so.

From what I saw of the game it'd benefit from a stable 30 FPS more than anything. And an improved lighting engine. I think they'd need to do some upgrades if they want to rerelease onto a new platform a year after launch.
 
Titanio said:
it could perhaps be a no-go to read data from both layers alternately given the switching latency.
Click to expand...
You might well have a point there, though wouldn't it make sense for devs to put say, indoors textures on one layer, outdoors on the other for example (and maybe duplicating stuff that needs to be duplicated), or using some other kind of scheme for separating textures so that multiple switches would not be needed while loading. Besides, a layer switch can't be all that much slower than a seek anyway - optical drives are so terribly slow almost from every respect as it is...
 
Titanio said:
It does indeed sound like complete Bull.

On a slightly off-topic note, though, regarding Oblivion's size - does it not strike anyone else as slightly coincidental that it uses slightly less space than is on a single layer DVD? How is capacity on the 360 discs split between the layers - is it 3.5GB on each side, or 4.7GB on one layer (as normal), 2.3GB on the other layer (with the rest being the security?)? I ask this because it seems plausible Bethesda had to limit themselves to the capacity of a single layer given the latency associated with layer switches. For a game like Oblivion - large streaming world - it could perhaps be a no-go to read data from both layers alternately given the switching latency.
Click to expand...

3.5GB per layer apparently for 360 discs. Also, that 4.5GB was the PC install size, with assets in compressed archives. The 360 version apparently fills ~6GB or something. If nothing were to change at all, Blu-ray should at least be able to provide redundancy for data streaming to help cut down on stutters.
 
Guden Oden said:
You might well have a point there, though wouldn't it make sense for devs to put say, indoors textures on one layer, outdoors on the other for example (and maybe duplicating stuff that needs to be duplicated), or using some other kind of scheme for separating textures so that multiple switches would not be needed while loading.
Click to expand...

True, though it is possibly another complication when laying out your data and figuring out where to put things.

And layer switching is an additional penalty on the seek time..sure, seeks aren't great to start with, but it does make it that bit worse. I don't know how much time a switch costs, though..switch times on a regular player are one thing, but 360's behaviour may always differ anyway.

Mmmkay has answered my question though - cheers Mmmkay.
 
Titanio said:
It does indeed sound like complete Bull.

On a slightly off-topic note, though, regarding Oblivion's size - does it not strike anyone else as slightly coincidental that it uses slightly less space than is on a single layer DVD? How is capacity on the 360 discs split between the layers - is it 3.5GB on each side, or 4.7GB on one layer (as normal), 2.3GB on the other layer (with the rest being the security?)? I ask this because it seems plausible Bethesda had to limit themselves to the capacity of a single layer given the latency associated with layer switches. For a game like Oblivion - large streaming world - it could perhaps be a no-go to read data from both layers alternately given the switching latency.
Click to expand...

The load times in Oblivion are pretty brutal anyways, so I don't know why that would be a big issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
NPD May 2005
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
12K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Q
NPD January 2003 Top 100
2
Replies
25
Views
5K
Sonic
S
Back
Top