Final Fantasy

[Who Really Cares?]

From what ive read no work will start on the 360 version until after the Japanese version is finished for the PS3. It will then come out on xbox360 and PS3 on the same day in the US and Europe. No word on the 360 version being released in Japan but i suppose if the half mill owners over there ask for it enough it might happen?

[Ro Shen]

At least PS3 still has Versus, which aint all that bad, might even be better then 13.

[Clint]

I'm not really bothered, 360 is a good console and the best games should go to both systems.

I am just disappointed in the complete lack of RPG's for the PS3. This is a Japanese console, why is 360 getting the greater deal?

[Henry Spencer]

Probably because Microsoft are good at negotiations? Sony don't pay for exclusives, they just assume they will be~lack of communication = badness for Sony.

Sony need to step up their game, I saw their conference and it wa sokay at best, Microsoft were the clear winners with this steal. I'll be getting the PS3 version of FFXIII anyhow.

[Who Really Cares?]

What would people rather have? FFXIII on the PS3 which will most likely have a forced install at the start and maybe MGS4 style 3 minute installs or the 360 version which will most likely come on more than one disk?

I mean lets say MGS4 did come to the 360 on 4 disks. It would take about 30 senconds to swap the disk and start playing again compared to the 3 minute wait, i know 3 minutes is not long but if i had the choice i think i would take the disk swap.

Of course the possible mini installs all depend on how big the game is so it could end up with just one install at the start but theres a 99% chance it being on more than 1 disk for the 360 version.

[Fist of Legend]

What would people rather have? FFXIII on the PS3 which will most likely have a forced install at the start and maybe MGS4 style 3 minute installs or the 360 version which will most likely come on more than one disk?

I mean lets say MGS4 did come to the 360 on 4 disks. It would take about 30 senconds to swap the disk and start playing again compared to the 3 minute wait, i know 3 minutes is not long but if i had the choice i think i would take the disk swap.

Of course the possible mini installs all depend on how big the game is so it could end up with just one install at the start but theres a 99% chance it being on more than 1 disk for the 360 version.

disc swapping has never bothered me, especially as all the FF titles on the playstation involved disc swapping anyway.

[Clint]

What would people rather have? FFXIII on the PS3 which will most likely have a forced install at the start and maybe MGS4 style 3 minute installs or the 360 version which will most likely come on more than one disk?

I mean lets say MGS4 did come to the 360 on 4 disks. It would take about 30 senconds to swap the disk and start playing again compared to the 3 minute wait, i know 3 minutes is not long but if i had the choice i think i would take the disk swap.

Of course the possible mini installs all depend on how big the game is so it could end up with just one install at the start but theres a 99% chance it being on more than 1 disk for the 360 version.

I'd rather have it on PS3, as it's being created for the PS3. You should expect some data compression for the 360's version and it could go onto atleast 3 discs.

I know you love your 360, but it's a no-contest. Blu-ray everytime.

[MadeManG74]

What would people rather have? FFXIII on the PS3 which will most likely have a forced install at the start and maybe MGS4 style 3 minute installs or the 360 version which will most likely come on more than one disk?

I mean lets say MGS4 did come to the 360 on 4 disks. It would take about 30 senconds to swap the disk and start playing again compared to the 3 minute wait, i know 3 minutes is not long but if i had the choice i think i would take the disk swap.

Of course the possible mini installs all depend on how big the game is so it could end up with just one install at the start but theres a 99% chance it being on more than 1 disk for the 360 version.

More importantly the 360 version won't eat up your HDD space. Granted the PS3 has a larger HDD than 360, but still.

[Fist of Legend]

Another reason I actually like the FF games on more than one disc, is because they seemed to use the disc swaps as part of the pacing of the game. 7 (and 8 in particular) really knew how to ramp up the storyline in some way, shape or fashion then give a sense of closure to that particular chapter as the disc swap kicked in, usually setting it up with a few WTF-style cliffhangers that you knew would then play out on the next disc. Seemed like a good way to break up a huge, sprawling story into more manageable chunks, too. You also had that sense of imminent "aw, crap" when you put the final disc in because you knew it was all going to kick off from that point onwards in no uncertain terms - made it all pretty dramatic.

I kinda missed that with ten.

I do worry that as the xbox version is likely going to be a port of the PS3 version (designed for one disc only, most likely) that any disc swaps will feel a hell of a lot more random and arbitrary. probably won't make any difference, but there's nothing worse than a badly placed "change disc....now!" message flashing up, can completely ruin the atmosphere.

[Who Really Cares?]

The thing is 360 owners might not have to swap disks. It all depends on the new hard drive feature as we may simply have to install all the disks then simply keep disk 1 in the hard drive when playing.

Need more details from MS on the feature really, all they have said is it will take 10 minutes for every game. Not even sure ill get this as im not a massive FF fan but then im not a massive MGS fan and i still bought the 4th.

But i do have Blue Dragon[3 disks] and Lost Odyseey[4] so it will be intreasting to see if you can install the game and only need disk 1.

Aslong as 360 games dont start having forced installs? everything is ok in my book.

[Clint]

^There is nothing wrong with installing games.

You cannot take away anything from MGS4 because of it's installs. There are practically no loading times, so it works out better for everyone.

Again, Blu-ray > HDDVD. Atleast agree on that.

[Who Really Cares?]

Why because 1 formats dead? As movies go they were on par with each other. And BD only won because it was slapped into the PS3, standard HDDVD players vs standard Blu Ray players showed HD DVD in the lead.[Just]

As for no loading times, When you look at it the 3 odd minute installs every chapter are more or less loading screens. Fine the loading during the chapters were short but the areas were never massive so thats expected. The BD drive in the PS3 is just not fast enough which is one of the reasons so many games now have forced installs and when you look at the ones that are also on the 360 it shows no improvement what so ever.

[Clint]

Why because 1 formats dead? As movies go they were on par with each other. And BD only won because it was slapped into the PS3, standard HDDVD players vs standard Blu Ray players showed HD DVD in the lead.[Just]

No because ONE format can hold up to 50gb of data, unlike a shitty 360 disc. This is just absurd.

Look, MGS4 is the most powerful console game ever created. A few installation (or loading) screens take away absolutely NOTHING from the game.

Maybe when the 360 gets a game even half the sheer size of MGS4, we can talk about discs.

I like 360, and I am tempted to buy one later this year, but comparing the discs is just insanity. Installations are now a part of next-gen gaming, you will probably experience this when the Xbox 3 comes out.

Blu-ray is one of, if not the best feature on the PS3. And while you may be getting the greater deal of games at the moment, we atleast have a machine that carries this function, at a reasonable price.

I know you like your 360, but if you want to compare the consoles or comment on Sony's 'fuck-ups' over the last year, fine. But best leave BD out of the equation.

[Bluecast]

HD DVD was easier to transfer films to but blu ray does have a native higher storage capacity and that was the bigger selling point.

Much like beta vs VHS back in the day Beta had better quality but VHS could store more,same with HD DVD vs Blu Ray,HD DVD was able to do better video quality but had a lower native storage capacity also Blu Ray had much more marketing muscle.

People see 50GB vs 25GB and flip and go "omg 50GB" bam that is a sale.
Sony is known to be aggressive in marketing and Toshiba and partners had no muscle like Sony and co did esp with a brand like Playstation.
Like comparing the brand iPod to Creative brand..Creative makes the better MP3 player but ipod has the marketing and the brand. so in the end you got this.



As for 360 DVD9,just to let you know Wii discs have the same storage capacity as 360 DVD9 with 8.5 GB except to prevent piracy they use the same type of discs used for gamecube with Wii optical discs(just cubes only held 1.5gb of data due to physical size) developed by Pannasonic.
Sony took a big risk putting blu ray in PS3 and it paid off.

If MS built HD DVD in,the format might have lasted longer but they felt the risk was too high and they were never fully behind HD DVD,they just wanted to spite Sony.

[ys]

Maybe when the 360 gets a game even half the sheer size of MGS4, we can talk about discs.

Though to be honest. When it comes to the size of the data, the biggest reason why it's so big is because they didn't bother to compress the audio. Even losless compression could've made it three to four times less in size.

I'm disappointed by the lack of Alan Wake. It was practically the only game I was looking forward to actually hearing something about. Oh well.

Same here.