This is still very much a "hardware issue".

if you want to pick it apart.



but it's really more a storage issue.

"He clarified that this has nothing to do with the Xbox 360 hardware."



Okay.



"He says the issue stems from compressing the data so much to the point that quality is compromised."



Wait. So it is a hardware issue! The problem lies in the DVD format, which is, in fact, part of the 360's hardware.

you just said the same thing Seoulfood said, but you wasted a lot more space doing so!



again, pick apart the words instead of addressing the idea...

How old are you? 12?



Back on topic, there was always bound to be a few circumstances where DVD would cause problems on the 360.



Whilst faster it's much faster than the PS3's Blu-ray drive, it's lower capacity means either more discs or more compression (or both). Hence John says it's about production cost rather than hardware (although yes, it's the hardware which caused this issue, so it is related).



I suppose the main issue here is how much worse the textures will look on the 360 version, and for that we'll just have to wait and see.

The word "worse" doesn't say how much. Running 100m with a time of 9.76 seconds is *worse* than the world record of 9.72 sec, and a time of 14 seconds is also worse.



Anyway I've got to go to work now, however I would like to read John Carmacks ACTUAL words from the keynote speech before assuming what it meant by 'worse'.

i was about to say that.

the "hardware" can only handle dvds so it is the hardware that's lacking.



in short the xbox 360 is insufficient.

to all you people who say 'what about double-layered dvds and dvd-9, the 360 is already using that for a load of games. what you guys don'e get is that blu-ray is designed for uncompressed data, and so it can handle full-size textures, dvd-9 is designed for compressed data, which reduces quality. sony knew this would happen, in one of their press events they said something like the perfect ratio of storage data to on-board memory has been made possible due to blu-ray, they did it with ps2 and psx, and each generation will have a higher- capacity storage medium. It makes sense, because what use is having loads of on-board memory if theres not enough data on the disk to feed it? e.g. loads of texture memory not enough textures or poor texture quality, thats whats going to happen to 360 as games get more data.

Holy *****... worse than the mac?

Now who was that guy again who said:

"Did Blu-Ray make the games any better ?"



I guess it just, kindof, did

With John, if he says it, you know it's true.

Maybe kimdrummel thought this comment was on topic.



The problem is the 360 does not have HD-DVD built in. The HD-DVD unit was an add-on for movie playback only and does not support games.



The Xbox 360 main console only has a standard DVD drive, not an HD-DVD drive.

Honestly, who here actully gives a **** about this so-called game?



All we've seen are the same screens over and over again of some Mk Raiden-looking old man.



Production costs, huh?



so basically id is too cheap to produce a multi-disc release in the same way that devs are "lazy" and can't program for PS3 properly.



How about a next gen remake of Dai Katana, cos everyone knew how sweet that blockbuster of a game was...

...to relate it to the topic, instead of making it an HD-DVD vs Blu-ray issue.

Sony had the advantage of developing the technology (Blu-ray), MS had to wait and see. Therefore DVD made perfect sense for the 360 (which has been out for 2 years and 9 months now).



As for games like FFXIII, well I don't see a problem with multiple discs, but hey, I guess if you're a fat lazy couch potato who shudders at the mention of the word 'exercise', then getting up to change discs would be a problem for you ;-), even though it wasn't a problem for gamers last gen, or the gen before.

If your machine can't do it and another machine can...then it's your machine's fault, and the company's fault who made the machine.............Apparently they didn't think you were important enough to invest a little money to make you better off..........accept the facts that it's a hardware problem and stop making excuses you're only lying to yourself..............If it had the right next gen hardware it would have no problem

Who even cares about this game anyways? I've never heard of it.

I don't have proof of my complaint readily available at the moment, but I do remember an article or two where he stated id would not release a games for a particular console system siting technical limitations of that system being far inferior to PCs, despite other companies having no problems with the console.



I'll have to do some digging to find the evidence. I'll post it her if or when I can.



Until then my statement above is simply my opinion.

You might take into consideration that the fact that a dual layer dvd drive is part of the hardware..... but most idiots would just probably think its the motherboard with the gpu and cpu..... first of all, yes 360 did a stupid thing to put a dual layer drive in the console in the first place, but look at it this way, WHEN WILL YOU EVER FIND GAMES LIKE THIS THAT NEED SPACE LIKE THIS!!?? some of the best looking games fit on a dual layer disc and people had no problem with this..... really people need to chill out about this, its one game!!! there are still lots of games that look better on the 360 but no one made a fkn big deal about it!!! ok this game will look better on ps3, and to find out the difference no can because he just said worse, so maybe itll be bad or maybe not.... well just have to wait and see.

and for people saying the wii is a fad, ITS NOT.

and for the people saying 360 is dead, ITS NOT.

and for the people who say the ps3 is just a bluray player, ITS NOT.......

so cmon flame me, and rate this comment one star, but there will be some sense in some people who will not be so IGNORANT

That sounds more like Valve's Gabe Newell, who has attacked the consoles multiple times already, especially the PS3, where he even suggested Sony should scrap it and start again.



http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2007/1/16/6649



JC has done nothing like this, but instead has shown support for both consoles, stating their strengths and weaknesses.



Regarding not releasing a game on a certain console for the reasons you've given, again I just haven't seen this from iD. At most, last gen, we saw Doom 3 ported to the XBox and not the PS2 for the same reasons Half-life 2 was ported to the XBox and not the PS2. It wasn't about the PS2 being inferior to PCs, since the XBox was too, it was about it not being able to do the game justice.



Therefore I don't believe you're going to find any evidence online which supports your argument that JC is a PC elitist who considers consoles to be crap.



Seriously, I think you've got him mixed up with someone else.

before anyone gets their panties in a bunch...



double sided + double layered + 18 GB (or about)... for DVDs.

almost no one here is really commenting on the game... i don't even know what game the article is about lol, compression all that matters

SHOW ME YOUR RAGE!

Hmm, The way how I see it:

Up to now storage wasn't really a big problem so MS didn't really made a BIG mistake here, however I see that it now becomes a problem.

Of course Sony chose the better format, but the Blu-Ray has also two problems: First, The price.

I heard somewhere that producing a BD costs as much as 5 DVDs. The second issue are the slow reading speeds resulting in longer loading times. This is not really a problem of the format itself but rather of the drives. The PS3 reads BDs at 2X, if could increase the drive speeds to approx. 8X or more, you would have such short loading times you wouldn't barely notice them.



Anyway, this is a really bad sign. If you consider that FFXIII is also coming to X360 now, I fear that Squeenix is also decreasing the quality of the game so it fits on a few disks. i think this the reason, why all PS3 fans complained about the whole "FFXIII coming to X360" drama. They simply saw something like that coming. I have to admit that I'm also afraid of that...

Let's say MS did include HD-DVD. Well for a start, the 360 could not launch in November 2005, since HD-DVD was not ready then, not forgetting the AACS anti-copy standard which delayed both HD-DVD and Blu-ray early in 2006.



Therefore with HD-DVD, the 360 would have had to wait until it was ready before MS could launch, meaning mid-2006 at the earliest.



Yes, the extra time would have meant more testing and therefore potentially avoiding the RROD issue, but on the otherhand, like Blu-ray, HD-DVD is slower than the DVD drive in the 360, therefore a HDD in every 360 would have probably been required to offer the possibility of HDD installs to make up for the slower drive.



So now you lose cheapest SKU of 360 (i.e. the core unit), you increase the price of the console by using HD-DVD instead of DVD by at least $100 and you launch around the same time as the PS3 (which was scheduled for spring 2006).



IMO, MS made the best choice they could, and in many ways, I think it was the right choice under the circumstances.



Buy then, what do I know about such issues.

I see your point, and I agree that not including HD-DVD off the bat was the best thing for the 360. However, they would still be selling 360's regardless of when they were released, and thus, they would be shifting HD-DVD units as well.

In my humble opinion, sacrificing the early launch and cheaper price of their console, would mean that their optical format of choice, would have at least had a fighting chance of coming out on top.

But then again, I can hardly say I know better than a multi-billion dollar corporation.

i bought a 360 for the games i like and want to play. i couldnt give a sh#t about who has a slightly better frame rate or graphics or any of the other crap that is consistantly dribbled.if u like it thats all that matters.jeeezzzzzzzzzz............

Funny, although I doubt they'll get that one.. :/



A shame really