PDA

View Full Version : Xbox 360 is limiting GTA IV, says Rockstar


Pages : [1] 2

AthlonXP1800
05-02-07, 05:58 PM
GTA IV need more storage, PS3 has plenty of storage on Blu-ray and hard drive in every PS3 consoles but GTA IV on Xbox 360 do not have enough storage on DVD.

Xbox 360 should had Blu-ray and hard drives in every console.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=163233

Look like GTA IV will use 50GB Blu-ray disc, same thing with Getaway which need more storage for very high resolution textures.

Acid Rain
05-02-07, 06:14 PM
He also stated that both consoles have their pleasures and pains.

With the 360 it's storage, with the PS3 it's a pain in the ass to code for and it lacks video memory and edram.

Moo
05-02-07, 06:27 PM
Easier to add discs than RAM.

BioHazZarD
05-02-07, 06:34 PM
If this is a sign on future development of such games to the 360 then microsoft will regret it for sure when ps3 can hold 50 gigs of data and already a big upcoming game its no suprise really dvd is old and they should really have added an hd-dvd drive as the 360 shall be in the gaming many more years.

superklye
05-02-07, 06:38 PM
:rolleyes2

We've had multidisc games for years. Why should now be any different and why is now going to make any bigger deal than it has(n't) in the past?

Tr1cK
05-02-07, 06:39 PM
I just have a hard time believe GTA, of ALL games, demands that much space. It must be from the crappy design. Look at how generic they have made everything look since they came out with GTA3. Hell the ports have even been terrible, San Andreas (I so regret that waste of money) anyone? If a standard DVD can't hold that craptacular game, then they need to junk the series.

agentkay
05-02-07, 06:46 PM
What are you talking about? San Andreas (on PC) looked nice for its time and had good gameplay. Sure the theme might not have been something for everyone but for me it was a solid 8.4 title.

|MaguS|
05-02-07, 06:50 PM
He also stated that both consoles have their pleasures and pains.

With the 360 it's storage, with the PS3 it's a pain in the ass to code for and it lacks video memory and edram.
I agree with the possibility that the limiting factor of the PS3 is the difficulty in programming but lack of ram is no arguement since well the PS2 had only 4MB of texture memory and plenty of games released that would rival an Xbox title. Its not the amount the counts but how you use it.

As for lack of edram, edram is overrated especially with this retarded mentality that Xbots have that the X360 automatically gets AA due to it. Plenty of released games says the opposite. BTW PS2 had edram aswell... yet how many titles had good or any AA? :rolleyes:

Both systes have their weakness, the lack of storage in an HD enviroment is a real one... because GTA3 had repetative enviroments doesn't mean GTA4 will, GTA:SA sure didn't and that alone almost filled a DVD9, now imagine a larger game with better graphics.

Tr1cK
05-02-07, 06:53 PM
What are you talking about? San Andreas (on PC) looked nice for its time and had good gameplay. Sure the theme might not have been something for everyone but for me it was a solid 8.4 title.

I have it on the PC. It had TONS (http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=197543) of bugs. I remember the 18 wheelers didnt have but single (instead of dual) wheels on the back of the tractors. Swimming controls were all jacked up. The graphics were pathetic for it to run as slow as it did.

|MaguS|
05-02-07, 06:57 PM
Looked and ran great on the PS2 and Xbox. :p

I should add my reply to those that just say to go multiple discs... that doesn't really work in a free roam enviroment... it would be annoying to cross a street just to have the game pause and tell you to insert disc 2.

Could you imagine playing Oblivion and it was multiple discs? Your fighting some mobs in the forest and running around, suddenly the game pauses while your fighting and tells you to insert disc 2... yeah thats an immersion killer alright...

Tr1cK
05-02-07, 06:58 PM
Looked and ran great on the PS2 and Xbox. :p

Well it ran decent for me. It just could have been a LOT more polished than it was. Especially since Rockstar new they were going to bring in a ton of money on it.

S.I.N
05-02-07, 06:59 PM
I have it on the PC. It had TONS (http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=197543) of bugs. I remember the 18 wheelers didnt have but single (instead of dual) wheels on the back of the tractors. Swimming controls were all jacked up. The graphics were pathetic for it to run as slow as it did.

Maybe you just had a ****ty system. Game ran maxed out and looked great considering the scope. It had more substance than many games combined that were released that year.

agentkay
05-02-07, 07:01 PM
I have it on the PC. It had TONS (http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=197543) of bugs. I remember the 18 wheelers didnt have but single (instead of dual) wheels on the back of the tractors. Swimming controls were all jacked up. The graphics were pathetic for it to run as slow as it did.

I guess I was lucky when I played it because my 6800nu ran it quite well and I didnīt notice any major bugs that had a negative impact on the gameplay. However I can understand the frustation when games show their full range of bugs or performance issues on certain system configurations. This frustation can of course kill the joy and I guess that was your problem. Sorry to hear man, and good luck next time! :)

Tr1cK
05-02-07, 07:02 PM
Maybe you just had a ****ty system. Game ran maxed out and looked great considering the scope. It had more substance than many games combined that were released that year.

Where did that come from? For the record I've never had a "****ty" system. It ran at a good framerate for me, just not as good as it should have been considering what it looked like.

I point out a bunch of bugs, I didn't name but a few, the other forum listed a ton more. It's not like it was revolutionary or anything. They just added more crap on top of the then 4 year old GTA3 engine and let it all slide.

agentkay
05-02-07, 07:13 PM
I should add my reply to those that just say to go multiple discs... that doesn't really work in a free roam enviroment... it would be annoying to cross a street just to have the game pause and tell you to insert disc 2.

Could you imagine playing Oblivion and it was multiple discs? Your fighting some mobs in the forest and running around, suddenly the game pauses while your fighting and tells you to insert disc 2... yeah thats an immersion killer alright...

Could still work if you divide the freeroam area in two (big) zones and create the missions in a way that you wouldnīt go often back and forth between them. They could also make the disc-change-feature only a non-HDD system feature (360 core), and copy the 2nd disc on the HDD if available. This way MS could be happy because they could sell more of their fancy, affordable and never overpriced HDDs. ;)

kevJ420
05-02-07, 07:43 PM
Could still work if you divide the freeroam area in two (big) zones and create the missions in a way that you wouldnīt go often back and forth between them. They could also make the disc-change-feature only a non-HDD system feature (360 core), and copy the 2nd disc on the HDD if available. This way MS could be happy because they could sell more of their fancy, affordable and never overpriced HDDs. ;)

that's kind of limiting, but it might not be.

KasuCode
05-02-07, 08:56 PM
I always looked at the core system as a way for people to get the system and buy the drive when they can afford it. As in I expected people to buy the harddrive. If people will buy a 50$ guitar I dont see why they cant spend a little more on a harddrive to play other games. Then just make some games like GTA4 have an install disk and a play disk or whatever. If I could I would load any game I played at the time on my harddrive first just for faster loading.

ENU291
05-02-07, 08:58 PM
All Rockstar has to do is make it mandatory to have an HD when playing GTA4. And all Microsoft has to do is make that damn 20GB hard drive add-on more affordable. $100 for a 20GB drive boarders on criminal! Shame on you MS!!! :nono:

|MaguS|
05-02-07, 09:30 PM
All Rockstar has to do is make it mandatory to have an HD when playing GTA4. And all Microsoft has to do is make that damn 20GB hard drive add-on more affordable. $100 for a 20GB drive boarders on criminal! Shame on you MS!!! :nono:
By MS standards no game must require the HD to be playable, it has to always be optional (except in europe where this rule has already been broken).

BTW the Install Disc idea isn't bad but it would take alot of time to install 4.5GB onto the HD and well thats just a waste of space aswell.

LiquidX
05-02-07, 10:15 PM
So far not being able to develop with the hard drive in mind I don't think has impacted that many games if any so I don't think we have to worry about GTA:IV. And reading their interview in the last Game Informer they really dint have much of a concern and even said there will be nearly no load times. Also GTA: IV can take advantage of the hard drive if they want but the game must work without it like Oblivion.

toxikneedle
05-02-07, 10:15 PM
Wow thanks for completely taking the article out of context.

kevJ420
05-02-07, 10:44 PM
I agree with the possibility that the limiting factor of the PS3 is the difficulty in programming but lack of ram is no arguement since well the PS2 had only 4MB of texture memory and plenty of games released that would rival an Xbox title. Its not the amount the counts but how you use it.

As for lack of edram, edram is overrated especially with this retarded mentality that Xbots have that the X360 automatically gets AA due to it. Plenty of released games says the opposite. BTW PS2 had edram aswell... yet how many titles had good or any AA? :rolleyes:

Both systes have their weakness, the lack of storage in an HD enviroment is a real one... because GTA3 had repetative enviroments doesn't mean GTA4 will, GTA:SA sure didn't and that alone almost filled a DVD9, now imagine a larger game with better graphics.

I thought that was the total vram, so that would mean it had to use some of that for frame buffer, or i could be completely wrong.

You know more than I do.

Bman212121
05-03-07, 12:50 AM
Wow thanks for completely taking the article out of context.

PS3 you've got a guarantee that every machine is going to have a hard-drive and, with Blu-ray, you've got plenty of storage, whereas on Xbox 360 there's no guarantee of a hard-drive and you're working with the DVD format. Does that create limitations?" To which he replied, "Yep."

Hmm, doesn't sound too far from what I just read. SA from the PS2 is still on a single layer DVD and was 4GB and some change. (Yes, I can confirm that cause I have put my PS2 disc into my pc) So I don't see them having too hard of a time getting it onto a dual layer DVD for this round, unless the massive size and high res textures eat up more than double of what it was. They might have to do a little compression, but it should be manageable.

My guess is that GTA 5 which is probably going to be on this round of consoles might be limited by a dual layer disc on the 360.

Just to clear up the FUD about the size of disc usage:

GTA: SA : 229 files, 28 folders, and 4.18GB Audio folder: 2.8GB Models: 1.06GB Anim: 258MB
GTA: VC : 402 files, 78 folders, and 4.34GB Audio folder: 2.33GB Models: 1.83GB Anim: 113MB
GTA: 3 : 366 files, 33 folders, and 2.39GB Audio folder: 888MB Models: 1.36GB Anim: 42.6MB *Note, when you right click on the drive, it says total size of 4.32GB, but when you select the files, it is 2.39GB

toxikneedle
05-03-07, 01:19 AM
I'm not even arguing with the whole how much space do games take up thing. At the end of the day, BDs are bigger than DVD9s..... What I was saying was that the thread makes it look like the Xbox 360 is gonna make GTA IV crappy.... even if it is "limiting" the game, the interview is from a Playstation magazine and the Rockstar guy went on to talk about that the PS3 isn't perfect either.

Eh... whatever, I love the 360... so I get all defensive I guess. I doubt I'm even gonna get GTA.

Bman212121
05-03-07, 01:28 AM
I'm not even arguing with the whole how much space do games take up thing. At the end of the day, BDs are bigger than DVD9s..... What I was saying was that the thread makes it look like the Xbox 360 is gonna make GTA IV crappy.... even if it is "limiting" the game, the interview is from a Playstation magazine and the Rockstar guy went on to talk about that the PS3 isn't perfect either.

Eh... whatever, I love the 360... so I get all defensive I guess. I doubt I'm even gonna get GTA.

:lol2: Just here to complain then right? I honestly doubt they'll have a hard time making it work. I get what you are saying, I do think they will have to tweak some things to make the 360 happy, but it shouldn't effect other consoles or the pc.

The more I think about it, it seems like the limitation is not space, but read speeds. If you remember GTA3 and VC you had to wait for the next part to load so that you could cross the bridge. They solved that issue in SA, but now it might be a lot harder to dodge with high res textures that have to be loaded. Looking at the sizes though, I wonder if music is actually going to cause more of a bottleneck than textures will.