|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
oneEIGHTkevin
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: Portland
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:58 pm |
  |
|
I think the Blu-Ray drive speed thing is blown out of proportion. The fact that loading times haven't been bad at all on any games so far: RR7 and RR6 have no discernible difference in loading times and Resistance is supposed to stream loading similar to Gears of War but I haven't played it.
Coupled with the fact that every PS3 is equipped with a HDD so caching is more readily available unlike the Xbox 360 which is crippled in that sense even compared to the original Xbox. Stupid core pack.
I would fucking love it if MGS4 came to the 360 though as I'll probably have to buy a PS3 to fuckin play it when it comes out.
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/01/22/tretton-ps3-will-be-difficult-to-cost-reduce/
Seeing shit like this pisses me off though. I really wish Sony would pull their head out of their ass. Look at the PSP and how that pricing strategy has worked! You fuckers!
FUCK SONY GODDAMNIT! FREE MGS4!!!!!!!
_________________
 |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
 |
oneEIGHTkevin
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: Portland
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:50 pm |
|
|
| Shapermc wrote: |
| oneEIGHTkevin wrote: |
| I think the Blu-Ray drive speed thing is blown out of proportion. The fact that loading times haven't been bad at all on any games so far: RR7 and RR6 have no discernible difference in loading times and Resistance is supposed to stream loading similar to Gears of War but I haven't played it. |
Dude, like I said, in order to reduce load times due to a slow drive speed for larger games (like, I doubt RR7 is a larger game) they duplicate data all over the place so that the drive doesn't have to go as far. It's a work around and I never said that there is huge load times. If MGS4 is a huge game that does involve a lot of data duplication to save on load times then a 360 port with faster drive speeds would reduce data size. I mean, it makes sense, but I have no idea if this is the case or even possible. |
Okay yeah I see what your saying. I was just thinking that devs would sooner cache that redundant data to the HDD rather than putting it on multiple parts of the disc to reduce loading.
I guess I wans't really arguing with you directly but with a strawman that I built.
_________________
|
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
oneEIGHTkevin
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: Portland
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:43 pm |
|
|
| Rud13 wrote: |
| GcDiaz wrote: |
| or that the discs don't naturally spin faster than standard discs? |
I'm not sure. I thought it mean something like 1000 times a minute or some such. The problem is CDs got to a point where if they spun any faster they would literally shatter from pure force. So I'm not sure if Blue-Ray is made up of better materials. In all likelyhood it's made up of worse. |
No joke my 52x cd/r shattered a cheap blank cd I bought from Fry's. I think it was just a really bad cd to begin with because none of them ever shattered again but still.
_________________
|
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
