Ok...I admit I got owned by saying Vice City was bigger than GTA 3. It just SEEMED THAT WAY because the missions were more multi-structured. Also, Vice City wasn't in development NEAR AS LONG as GTA 3 was...RockStar was hasty and trying to capitalize on GTA 3's popularity because they didn't know how long their megahit GTA 3 would last in terms of longevity. The problems are this...
1) Crackdown -- open world with Halo 3 beta
2) Saints Row -- it did some things BETTER than GTA ever did...such as weapon aiming and the fun insurance fraud parts of the game.
3) DVD9 -- Of course RockStar won't say that DVD9 is the reason for the smaller city. But it has to be the truth.
I keep reading threads stating this..."Compression methods are so much better now than b4".
That may be true...but the point is that developers have to keep compressing and compressing and compressing their games more and more to fit content onto a DVD9...and YES 720p AND 1080i ARE TO BLAME
See. GTA actually has competition now and RockStar has had financial setbacks. This should've been enough incentive for RockStar to say "We're going to make a GTA game so ridiculously big and great, that any competition that dares to challenge us would be rendered useless"
Call me crazy...Deny it all you want...But compression methods can only go so far. Do you really think that developers have put every bit of content they wanted to put into a game? No, they haven't. Now you may say it is the high cost of developing games these days...but games have cost a lot to develop for a long time, and this just seems like an excuse for the short games we see these days.
LOOK AT HOW SHORT MOST 360 GAMES REALLY ARE THESE DAYS. Ever wonder why most games are shorter? "But, but, but it is the high production cost AvidGamer!" Excuses, excuses. Like I said, games have cost a lot to develop for a long time.
Games are short primarily because of the limitations of DVD9. See, developers can't put in all the content they want...wanna know why shorter games these days are taking longer to develop than they should? It is because many decisions have to be made, and content that developers thought would make it into a game have to be scrapped. In addition, games have to go through the compression process. Do you really think this doesn't take a lot of time? So, there you go. A game can be in development for years, and end up being only 8-10 hours long as a result of the constant handling of the DVD9.
And DO YOU REALLY THINK that a long, 1080p game for 360 is even possible? Hell no...and Tennis doesn't count.
And about MotorStorm...Yeah, it took a lot of gigs because developers didn't have toTAKE FREAKING FOREVER TO COMPRESS THE GAME! If this game had come to 360...we'd still be waiting for it and it would be in development longer as a result.
Compression isn't proving to condense load times. Most PS3 games have better load times than 360.
Remember all the complaints when 360 launched? Remember people saying this? ---- "Where is my 60 FPS!...Why only 30?" Once again...I blame the DVD9.
No wonder Sony is pushing Blu-Ray so hard....because like it or not, it is going to be needed!
AvIdGaMeR444
just like we needed betamax... :roll::roll:
Log in to comment