Xbox360 owners: How would multi DVD games affect you?

[scooby_dooby]

Non-linear RPGs exclusive to PS3 confirmed.

Oblivion, Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon are what exactly? Both BD and LO have airships which allow free traversal of the gameworld. Oblivion and Mass Effect are extremely non-linear, especially ME where it extends to the main narrative as well.

Obviously, there may have to be some tradeoffs, or reduced content, but non-linear RPG's are possible. In fact, 360 is superior in both JRPG and WRPG's right now.

On the disc switching issues, Alstrong pretty much covered all the points.

The only real downside to DVD for 360 owners, is that they may miss out on a handful of games which decide that DVD is too limiting for their concept.

I'm sure they're either more than happy with having their games be DVD limited, forced into linearity, shorter than they could have been, having worse textures than they could have had, sometimes having very limited multi-language options (if any), and so on.

Im just happy to have games.

Seriously though, there is asbolutely no shortage on 360 of non-linear, 30+ hour RPG's with excellent textures. You're just conjuring up some situation that doesn't actually exist. As an RPG owner, I've been beyond satisfied with the RPG offering over the initial 24 months. Probably the best console ever in that regard.

I still haven't gotten around to renting Trusty Bell, have a whole wack of end-game missions in Blue Dragon to complete before fighting the final boss, am only about halfway through my 2nd play of Mass Effect....and Lost Odyssey comes out next month! Why would anyone complain?

 

[Mboojigga]

Xbox360 owners: How would multi DVD games affect you?

No different then how it affects me when switching from the long list of games I own.

 

[habbe]

If disc swapping will make more room for redundant data and/or eliminates loading screens, i'm all for it.

 

[Arwin]

Seriously, pay attention to words like 'Seriously'. They affect what comes before them. Anyway, sorry, I just couldn't take this thread seriously. I am serious when I say that I don't think 360 owners are going to know in the short term what the effects of DVD limitations really are, and definitely not in the US. And call me jaded, but I don't expect many replies here that are going to change the discussions on the subject we've had previously. A game like Uncharted won't convince DVD believers, because they have found plenty of mental pathways to avoid dealing with the subject. It's out there though, and if people were interested in a real discussion, it would be possible to have one. But I seriously doubt anyone but multi-platform owners are interested in holding a proper discussion. And I am also serious when I say 'and why not?'. If a 360 owner is happy with his machine, why should he worry about the limits of the DVD? All systems have limits. It's up to Sony to prove it was worth it, but ...

 

[Arwin]

... I do wonder if anyone else wonders if current multi-platform games would have been different if both the 360 and the PS3 had hi-capacity disc formats. And I am convinced that a game like Uncharted shows the potential differences in experience, even in a linear game. We're still early in the generation. As a multi-platform owner, I do think that in terms of multi-platform gaming, Microsoft's choice for DVD is holding us back this generation. However, they make up for it more than enough by forcing Sony to be aggressive in their online support. I was just thinking today before I even came to the forums here how great all three consoles are this generation, and that I think if none of the three let us down in a big way, then this is going to be one of the very best generations ever.

 

[ninzel]

I would prefer not to have to change disks just like I would prefer not to have to get up and change channels.I think it would get annoying. But if the game is worth I would of course do it. It wouldn't make me not buy an otherwise great game.

 

[warb]

Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey are 3-disc games because they contain hours of HD video cut-scenes.

 

[joker454]

And I am convinced that a game like Uncharted shows the potential differences in experience, even in a linear game.

I've finished Uncharted (ps3). I also finished Tomb Raider Legend (360). Uncharted did not, to me, provide any more 'game' than Tomb Raider Legend did. In fact it provided less (I preferred Legend). This is no knock on Uncharted because I liked that game as well. But after finishing both titles I did not in any way feel that somehow Uncharted had 3.5x more stuff.

I also finished Mass Effect. Now that game, to me, appeared to provide far more 'game' than Uncharted. More locales, more audio conversation, more hours of gameplay, greater replayability, etc. And Mass Effect is just one example, there are others.

This is partly why it sounds silly to 360 owners when people claim Uncharted means dvd is dead for gaming. I can only guess that these same people don't have 360's, so they don't realize how many great games with greater scope than Uncharted they've totally missed out on.

 

[V3]

I am fine with multi DVDs as long as I don't have to keep changing disc back and forth.

I generally tend to go through multiple games in one sitting, so having to switch games that don't require me ejecting and swapping the disc is nicer.

When PS3 has greater libraries, I want to see publishers package their older games together on that big 50 GB BR discs. Multi platinum on a single disc is what I prefered at this point.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Seriously, pay attention to words like 'Seriously'. They affect what comes before them. Anyway, sorry, I just couldn't take this thread seriously. I am serious when I say that I don't think 360 owners are going to know in the short term what the effects of DVD limitations really are, and definitely not in the US. And call me jaded, but I don't expect many replies here that are going to change the discussions on the subject we've had previously. A game like Uncharted won't convince DVD believers, because they have found plenty of mental pathways to avoid dealing with the subject. It's out there though, and if people were interested in a real discussion, it would be possible to have one. But I seriously doubt anyone but multi-platform owners are interested in holding a proper discussion. And I am also serious when I say 'and why not?'. If a 360 owner is happy with his machine, why should he worry about the limits of the DVD? All systems have limits. It's up to Sony to prove it was worth it, but ...

Lol. Great way to dodge essentially every single point I made.

If you want to have a serious conversation, first admit how wrong your entire OP was. Then we can move on to what exactly you think Uncharted is supposed to 'convince' people of.

The only reason I replied to your blatant troll is because I thought you would at least attempt to defend it. Which would be pretty amusing. But apparently not...

 

[woundingchaney]

Seriously, pay attention to words like 'Seriously'. They affect what comes before them. Anyway, sorry, I just couldn't take this thread seriously. I am serious when I say that I don't think 360 owners are going to know in the short term what the effects of DVD limitations really are, and definitely not in the US. And call me jaded, but I don't expect many replies here that are going to change the discussions on the subject we've had previously. A game like Uncharted won't convince DVD believers, because they have found plenty of mental pathways to avoid dealing with the subject. It's out there though, and if people were interested in a real discussion, it would be possible to have one. But I seriously doubt anyone but multi-platform owners are interested in holding a proper discussion. And I am also serious when I say 'and why not?'. If a 360 owner is happy with his machine, why should he worry about the limits of the DVD? All systems have limits. It's up to Sony to prove it was worth it, but ...

You know if you would bring up something to suggest the doom of dvd outside of Uncharted perhaps you would have a viable statement. Outside of the lack of loading times I dont feel as if Uncharted brought anything to the table that we havent seen numerous times. There is no adequate reasoning as to why Uncharted couldnt have been reproduced on multiple dvds. If anything you seem to be lost in your own mental labyrinth to suggest that 360 isnt goint to see quality titles throughout the extent of the generation regardless of dvd or anything of the like. I find it ridiculous that Uncharted would be the epitome of gaming you are putting on a pedestal.

The concept of dvd limiting games really isnt new as it was uttered repeatedly well before the launch of the 360. Given the forum population Im sure most went into the scenario with a rather educated purchase decision. I really dont see any realistic evidence to suggest that "dvd" is going to irreversibly hamper the quality of games on the console at this point. I do not find it difficult to believe swapping disks is a concern for many 360 owners or potential owners, just as I dont believe that PS3 owners have a problem with lengthy install times. As hard as it may be for you or others to believe there are many out there that buy consoles to play games rather than wave the flag of righteousness for BD, Cell, Xenos, Live, or any corporation (not that we arent interested in the tech itself).

Im sorry but echoing your multi-platform ownership is not going to mask the general nonsense of your statements, banner waving has become your calling card. I can only imagine just what you would consider a "proper" conversation.

 

[AzBat]

I'm just a Xbox 360 gamer, but I was once a PC gamer and the idea of swapping disks isn't new to me. However, I could understand how a lot of young folk wouldn't have experienced much, if any of it since the PS/2. I could see them having a problem with swapping disks. Myself, I'm little in between. Live Arcade has somewhat spoiled me since I don't have to load a disc at all. So, I wouldn't want every game I buy to be on multiple disks, but then again I remember playing Wing Commander III on the PC they day it came out and I had no problem whatsoever with it being on 4 CDs. Give me a jewel of a game like that one, and if it's on more than 1 disc, then I wouldn't care. Am I worried that the PS3 and their Bluray games will mean that more games will be multi-disc? Nahhh, not really. I'm sure that we'll still get high quality games that will fit on 1 disc. I'm sure there will be a few that will span more than 1 disc, but if current games are any indication it will only be RPGs, of which I have no intention of ever playing.

Tommy McClain

 

[Arwin]

Ok, maybe some of you weren't there, and maybe some of you forgot, but let me remind everyone here by stating where I've come from. To start with, the latest and biggest thread that we've been having this discussion in is here:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=44916&highlight=bluray+gaming+arwin&page=25

Now the reason Uncharted is meaningful to me, is that for me it is a game that beyond a doubt uses the BluRay to create a bigger experience. This is because in that thread, there was a discussion that there aren't any games right now that have assets that don't fit on a single DVD, making the whole multi-DVD issue moot. This was an important aspect of the discussion about whether or not BluRay was needed for next-gen gaming at all.

Now, true enough, Uncharted is a limited and liniar experience, though like many games, you can replay any level at any time to hunt for missing treasure. But the whole package, graphical detail, quality of sound and language options, quality of the presentation (both streaming and in-engine movies), the minimised load-times, and so on, in my view, demonstrates at least some of the potential of the BluRay and the HDD standard combined, and the best example of a game that withstands arguments (that have been attempted, mind you!) suggesting that it would fit on a single DVD (which means 6.8MiB on 360).

Anyway, you (now) know where I'm coming from, as I posted the link to the thread above. Which reminds me that we still need an overview. Maybe I'll get to that someday. Hopefully soon! It's needed.

 

[PsychoZA]

They way I see it, the PS3 has a limited amount of RAM, which is even more hindered by its separation between CPU and GPU memory and the size of the OS reservation. Now, the bigger a game (in term of assets), the more loading zones you're going to have. So, you have to decide, do you like your 50GB Blu-Ray disc to be full of content that has to be loaded every 10 mins, or do you want a game that makes optimal use of assets, that fits on a single DVD and doesn't require as many loading zones? The disc could also be full of HD video rather than using in game cutscenes, but I thought we were moving away from that on purpose.

Swapping discs means nothing to me as I game with my 360 on my desk (VGA output), so I don't have to get up from the couch and walk to the TV...

Also, what ever happened to procedurally generated textures? There's two demos that are tiny from .theprodukkt that use procedurally generated textures. They're quite impressive.

http://www.theprodukkt.com/home

 

[Nesh]

Well I ll get a 360 once I finish my masters degree and have more time for gaming. I wont mind if one or two games come on 2 or 3 disks. But I ll be annoyed if multiple disk games appear in swarms and are usually 3 or above.

I take care a lot of my games and there is always a danger of losing or scratching one. I also cant stand changing often disks and in any game.

 

[function]

Thread title: Xbox360 owners: How would multi DVD games affect you?

Thread contents: Arwin thinks BluRay means PS3 games are bigger experiences, and expresses views on the 360 and 360 owners. 360 owners respond.

We can all go OT (I'm certainly no exception) but there's a depressing trend emerging where all threads that go near the topic of storage space or disk format degenerate in a certain way. Is there any way we can avoid this, please?

 

[assen]

But I ll be annoyed if multiple disk games appear in swarms and are usually 3 or above.

Not gonna happen. It costs a lot of money to produce the content filling these discs.

 

[Arwin]

I think the point I'm trying to make is that you for a large part won't see how DVD will affect you, much less multi DVD games. And again, that most won't care, because they won't know any better. Developers will avoid making multi-DVD games as much as possible. The sacrifices that will be made won't be visible on the 360, and you will only be able to see them if you are willing to look at other platforms.

If you stay within the context of the 360 alone, then I simply don't think multi-DVD games will affect 360 owners a whole lot, simply because they won't be there all that much, JRPGs excepted, apparently. There might be more content that is downloadable only, and you might need your HDD a little bit more, so it could affect 20GB owners at some point. Ditto for owners of Arcade and other non-HDD SKUs - they may need a HDD a little bit sooner.

Worst case scenario, the PS3 will come back and become bigger than 360, and/or the PC platform develops into something that needs more data than currently. Multi-platform developers will then be stimulated to compete more with PS3 only developers, and may be tempted to use more of the BluRay/HDD. The biggest (saleswise) of those could end up being ported to 360, with compromises, or they could be released later, and/or lead to more multi-DVD releases. Other games simply won't be ported over. But that is, again, only if PC/PS3 somehow regains the lead.

Function, I understand your objection, but really. My posts aren't THAT dominating, are they?

Anyway, let me stress my point, which is that most of the effects of multi-DVD games simply won't be felt by 360 owners, because they won't be there outside the context of the 360. The 360 will get great games that will make do with the DVD drive. And 360 owners will make do with what they've got. It's a bit like the GameCube still getting it's fair share of multi-platform games, even though it didn't have a DVD drive, and the 360 is likely to have a far more prominent position in the games market than the GameCube ever did.

 

[PsychoZA]

Anyway, let me stress my point, which is that most of the effects of multi-DVD games simply won't be felt by 360 owners, because they won't be there outside the context of the 360. The 360 will get great games that will make do with the DVD drive. And 360 owners will make do with what they've got. It's a bit like the GameCube still getting it's fair share of multi-platform games, even though it didn't have a DVD drive, and the 360 is likely to have a far more prominent position in the games market than the GameCube ever did.

Did you really just compare the 360 to the GameCube??

 

[NavNucST3]

I think the point I'm trying to make is that you for a large part won't see how DVD will affect you, much less multi DVD games. And again, that most won't care, because they won't know any better. Developers will avoid making multi-DVD games as much as possible. The sacrifices that will be made won't be visible on the 360, and you will only be able to see them if you are willing to look at other platforms.

If you stay within the context of the 360 alone, then I simply don't think multi-DVD games will affect 360 owners a whole lot, simply because they won't be there all that much, JRPGs excepted, apparently. There might be more content that is downloadable only, and you might need your HDD a little bit more, so it could affect 20GB owners at some point. Ditto for owners of Arcade and other non-HDD SKUs - they may need a HDD a little bit sooner.

Worst case scenario, the PS3 will come back and become bigger than 360, and/or the PC platform develops into something that needs more data than currently. Multi-platform developers will then be stimulated to compete more with PS3 only developers, and may be tempted to use more of the BluRay/HDD. The biggest (saleswise) of those could end up being ported to 360, with compromises, or they could be released later, and/or lead to more multi-DVD releases. Other games simply won't be ported over. But that is, again, only if PC/PS3 somehow regains the lead.

Function, I understand your objection, but really. My posts aren't THAT dominating, are they?

Anyway, let me stress my point, which is that most of the effects of multi-DVD games simply won't be felt by 360 owners, because they won't be there outside the context of the 360. The 360 will get great games that will make do with the DVD drive. And 360 owners will make do with what they've got. It's a bit like the GameCube still getting it's fair share of multi-platform games, even though it didn't have a DVD drive, and the 360 is likely to have a far more prominent position in the games market than the GameCube ever did.

I am not sure I understand your follow-up posts if in your original post you stipulate, "Because really, multi-platform games are still mostly better on the 360, and that's all that matters, after all."

EDIT: Why should the end-user care about what sacrifices I had to make for DVD if they enjoy their experience?