Blue Dragon will ship on 3 DVDs.

[pakotlar]

Is DVD not providing the storage for Blue Dragon?

Moreover why the focus on providing a seamless experience? What are you going to play through the game without pause? So if this game was on PS3 you'd go through 40 hours of play time without interruption? Thank god for BluRay then (and nuts to your bladder)

P.S: I mean, I agree its "nicer" to have the game on a single disc, but its such a small issue to get your lazy ass off the couch and swap discs that I don't see it as an issue even worth bringing up as far as it relates to the consumer. For the developer it poses more of an issue, because you have to intelligently split up/duplicate assets so that you will only realistically have to swap discs a maximum of 3x (2 + disc1). They should be able to pull it off with 2 swaps.

BTW, I didn't see anyone complaining that RE4 came on 2 discs. In fact, I saw a whole lot of praise about what an amazing game that was. I mean sure, it bothered the hell out of me that 15 hours into the game I had to change the disc, but it seemed to be alright otherwise

 

[NERO]

Its no surprise if that was not your first time playing, you have to also keep in mind that when I first played FF7 I was in the 3rd grade with very limited english vocabulary. Can't even imagine now how I managed to finish it in the end without understanding pretty much nothing. I guess patience pays in the end.

I have never really had the patience to master knights of the round tho. I don't know if you have seen that one dude finish off emerald weapon with lvl 7 tifa.

Your were in the 3rd grade? Well I was in the 1st grade, could not speak or understand any language and had bandages on my hands. Take that! <just kidding > Mastering the super summons in FF7 was extremely tedious and robotic. I fooled my sister and little cousins into thinking that it was cool to keep fighting the same enemies using all-slash, LOL.

Back to the topic:
Swapping disks is not that big of a deal and the swapping normally takes place after a climax. In the end I still would like the option to rip to the hd and I am definitely willing to pay the premium on a large enough hd just for this purpose.

 

[scooby_dooby]

If you consider having to use 3 DVD's, "providing storage" fine by me.

Using 3 dvd's is providing storage, there's no 2 ways about it. Having multiple discs is a extremely minor annoyance at worst.

30-50 hour game, so at worst you have to switch a disc every 10 hours. How can anyone pretend that's a big deal and actually keep a straght face?

 

[Mordecaii]

Using 3 dvd's is providing storage, there's no 2 ways about it. Having multiple discs is a extremely minor annoyance at worst.

30-50 hour game, so at worst you have to switch a disc every 10 hours. How can anyone pretend that's a big deal and actually keep a straght face?

I absolutely agree it's not a big deal for this game. Will it be a big deal for non-linear games however? Possibly, but then again it's entirely possible that no non-linear RPG's will need more than one DVD.

I will say, however, that if a game like that comes out on both systems and sacrifices have to be made due to limited storage, you know which version I'll end up getting. I love having multiple systems. (And no I don't have PS3 yet, but will just as soon as I can walk into a store and buy one.)

 

[groper]

Except it's going to require you to change discs. If it is going to be a seamless world, it will detract from the experience. Even if it is going to be a linear/episodic game, then it is still a disc swapping experience that didn't have to be there, however minor a point it is for some.

I cant see how a game could be in 3 dvds and provide a seemless world at the same time. If i have to find a negative point in this game it could be that the absence of a next-gen storage forced the developers to create a linear world. *run for cover*

 

[Shark Sandwich]

Well, I'm not Inane but I can list a couple PS2 games that had multiple discs. Xenosaga 2 and 3 had multiple discs. To be honest, those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head, but I'm sure I remember hearing of a couple others.

Star Ocean 3 did as well, IIRC. I could've sworn, though, that I heard these games were on single-layer DVDs. They used 2 single-layer ones because the dual-layer one increased load times.

 

[Mordecaii]

It's possible that they all used single layer DVD's, however I was thinking for some reason that one of the Xenosaga games used 2 dual layer DVD's... but I'm most likely wrong.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Well, I'm not Inane but I can list a couple PS2 games that had multiple discs. Xenosaga 2 and 3 had multiple discs. To be honest, those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head, but I'm sure I remember hearing of a couple others.

Xenosaga 2 and 3 both would have fit in a single Dual-layered DVD. Check the files on bittorent yourself.
No game actually used up more than a DVD9 on the PS2. Atleast no game to my knowledge, but some games were on 2 single layered discs instead of one dual layered, because the first gen PS2 consoles cant really read dual layered DVDs.

 

[onanie]

Is DVD not providing the storage for Blue Dragon?

Nobody every said there would be zero games, just that it will be few and far between, and for most genres there are workarounds, so that in the end it shouldn't really be a big issue.

So can CDs, yes?

There are now two examples of games that won't fit on a DVD9 (like there were games that won't fit on single-layered DVDs). Arguably, games like GeOW could be longer, and games like Oblivion could have better looking textures. The argument isn't just limited to the linear RPG genre. Doesn't this suggest the natural progression of games to come (if it weren't obvious to you before)?

I might add that the playstation brand is familiar to JPRPGs - all the more reason to have the capacity for such games, right?

Speaking of "workarounds" for games that can't fit on one disc (despite best efforts), the only one that works is disc swapping.

 

[TrungGap]

If you consider having to use 3 DVD's, "providing storage" fine by me. I disagree however, not to say blu-ray or HD-DVD would be any better but you get my point. Wouldn't hurt for the game to be on one disc, no?

If 75% of the games fits on a single dual-layer DVD, then for the greater good of the console it's better to ship with DVD than Bluray or HD-DVD and having slipped a year and still having production issue with blue diodes. Granted, I'll have to switch disc once in a while playing these games, but having to wait and missed out on 75% of the other games isn't acceptable.

When/if we comes to the point that the majority of the games require more than one DVD, then I'm sure we can use a dual disc system...the game will be on the DVD and the content will be on an external drive like HD-DVD. This allows the streaming of video/music to the screen while the dvd could stream level, texture and etc. However, I doubt devs will do this...and instead have everything on one HD-DVD disc.

Edit: One could always argue that even current HD-DVD and Bluray isn't large enough. We should wait til HVD. How long should we wait? There are still thousand of people that are still waiting for a PS3. Why not enjoy life now instead of waiting? Technology will advance, technology will get cheaper...you should not buy technology and hope it will last you 5-10 years down the line. Look at all those people who brought into HD TV a couple of years ago. They're shit out of luck (and money).

 

[Cheezdoodles]

So can CDs, yes?

There are now two examples of games that won't fit on a DVD9 (like there were games that won't fit on single-layered DVDs). Arguably, games like GeOW could be longer, and games like Oblivion could have better looking textures. .

Games are limited by budgets not by disc size for the most part. Oblivion is 4.5gb big, and 2 gb of that is audio, they could easly doubled the texture resolutions (but also count in the performance factor)

 

[RobertR1]

The HD DVD specs were not even finalized by the time the 360 was in developer hands. It was never in the plans. Oh and back at this stage, had the Blu Ray camp picked HDi over Java for their interactivity layer, MS would be fully neutral. So really, for the 360, DVD was THE option.

 

[onanie]

If 75% of the games fits on a single dual-layer DVD, then for the greater good of the console it's better to ship with DVD than Bluray or HD-DVD and having slipped a year and still having production issue with blue diodes. Granted, I'll have to switch disc once in a while playing these games, but having to wait and missed out on 75% of the other games isn't acceptable.

When/if we comes to the point that the majority of the games require more than one DVD, then I'm sure we can use a dual disc system...the game will be on the DVD and the content will be on an external drive like HD-DVD. This allows the streaming of video/music to the screen while the dvd could stream level, texture and etc. However, I doubt devs will do this...and instead have everything on one HD-DVD disc.

Edit: One could always argue that even current HD-DVD and Bluray isn't large enough. We should wait til HVD. How long should we wait? There are still thousand of people that are still waiting for a PS3. Why not enjoy life now instead of waiting? Technology will advance, technology will get cheaper...you should not buy technology and hope it will last you 5-10 years down the line. Look at all those people who brought into HD TV a couple of years ago. They're shit out of luck (and money).

There is a distinct possibility that an increasing number of games will require more than one DVD, and with it, the possibility of swapping not just once in a while. While it may be difficult for some to envision that games will eventually take up all of 50GB, it is not so hard to imagine a game taking up say 10GB now is it?

The difference between waiting for HVD and waiting for Blu-ray is that Blu-ray is already here. To those who just got their PS3 - it wasn't so painful, was it? Also, If you already have a 360, why not get the PS3 also, if one concedes that technology is still advancing regardless of when you buy. You're not about to leave this world in the next few weeks, are you?

 

[onanie]

Games are limited by budgets not by disc size for the most part. Oblivion is 4.5gb big, and 2 gb of that is audio, they could easly doubled the texture resolutions (but also count in the performance factor)

Budget certainly didn't limit the progression from CD to DVD, nor the subsequent progression to DVD9. The technology for content creation and asset management isn't stillborn.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Budget certainly didn't limit the progression from CD to DVD, nor the subsequent progression to DVD9. The technology for content creation and asset management isn't stillborn.

Well.... If your going to take a historical perspective on things, ofcourse. I was saying that right now, most games are limited by budgets not by disc size. AND that your oblivion example was a very bad one, since we obviously could have fit much much higher texture resolutions in the game if we wanted.

 

[Tap In]

There is a distinct possibility that an increasing number of games will require more than one DVD

so?

nobody ever said they wouldn't and only people that do not care to understand the reason why DVD was used in 360 and only those who intend on making Blu Ray appear to be a big advantage for PS3 care about this or are surprised.

Those of us who would just like to play this (and others like it) won't care. Would I prefer a bigger disc size? sure but I also am one of those that does understand why DVD was used in 360 and therefore when all things are considered, I don't mind.

 

[onanie]

Well.... If your going to take a historical perspective on things, ofcourse. I was saying that right now, most games are limited by budgets not by disc size. AND that your oblivion example was a very bad one, since we obviously could have fit much much higher texture resolutions in the game if we wanted.

Any game is limited by budget (doesn't have to be right now). Budgets may well increase, though the technology for content creation will certainly be improving. My comment is not just historically based, but about the natural progression of tools. Breaking down the arbitrary DVD9 barrier isn't inconceivable.

 

[aaaaa00]

Neither Blu Ray nor HD DVD were "here" when the 360 was finalized. There was way too much left unfinished for 360 to ship with either standard. Furthermore, blue laser diode production would have screwed both consoles, and anyone who thinks MS should have launched along-side Sony is obviously rooting for MS to fail.

Nope, the DVD strategy was the right call for MS, and a one year head start was the best possible choice for them.

In fact it's arguable whether Blu Ray is going to be the thing that sinks PS3 this generation, giving MS two virtually uncontested Christmas seasons in North America and Europe -- we'll see the sales figures in January, and I'm guessing it won't be too pretty for Sony.

 

[onanie]

so?

nobody ever said they wouldn't and only people that do not care to understand the reason why DVD was used in 360 and only those who intend on making Blu Ray appear to be a big advantage for PS3 care about this or are surprised.

Those of us who would just like to play this (and others like it) won't care. Would I prefer a bigger disc size? sure but I also am one of those that does understand why DVD was used in 360 and therefore when all things are considered, I don't mind.

The reason is completely understood. My comments are, however, in response to past criticisms about "unnecessarily" increasing the cost of owning the console by including a next generation movie player that people don't necessarily need. The "misunderstanding" is that the drive is only to drive Sony's financial interest in the Blu-ray format. It should be understood now that the increased capacity has always been for the games primarily (it is a gaming console afterall), and that there is a very real possibility that games will take advantage of the capacity.

 

[scooby_dooby]

So can CDs, yes?

Not feasibly. What a ridiculous argument. 3 DVD's is sure comparable to 30 CD's....riiiiight