Slashdot Mirror
360 Limiting GTA IV In Some Ways
Last week CVG had a story from the Official PlayStation Magazine, a print entity partnered with the website, about limitations Rockstar faces on the 360. For almost the first time, we're now hearing about a title where lack of space on the disc and the lack of a guaranteed hard drive may be detrimental to Microsoft's console. "[Rockstar's creative vice president Dan Houser] continued, 'To be honest with you we haven't solved all those riddles yet.' The difficulties aren't limited to working on Microsoft's box, as Houser explains that 'both have enormous challenges' and that 'both have their own particular pleasures and pains'. Rockstar hasn't said anything about a target SKU between the two consoles, but they're currently demoing the game to press running on an Xbox 360 - so we wouldn't worry too much if you've only got Microsoft's console. Look for more on GTA IV in the next few weeks."
One of the contributors at Kotaku suggested that Rockstar simply require the hard drive to play. I think that would be a great solution, but I'd be surprised if Microsoft let them do something like that.
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
Stock Keeping Unit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_Keeping_Unit
That aside, is it acceptable for a game to release for HD equipped consoles only?
No, because no 360 models come with an HD-DVD drive - not even the Elite. And Microsoft has forbidden developers from using the HD-DVD drive for games (thus I'm not sure it's even technically possible to do so the way it's connected and boots).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Wardevil is one of the more recent ones.
You know what, call me stupid but any time I watch a dual-layer DVD on my 360, the point at which it switches layers is practically unnoticeable. Compare this to my year-old standalone mid-range DVD player that takes nearly a full half-second to switch layers.
All I'm saying is that the whole "switching layers" argument seems like complete bullshit to me. I mean, heaven forbid it takes an additional quarter of a second in the loading times...
Would additional space be a virtue? Yes, of course it would be. However, I'll take the smaller medium if not for it's cost, then if nothing else at least for its time as a proven technology.
Optical discs are NOT the wave of the future.
Living With a Nerd
I thought from the very beginning that making the hard drive optional was a step backwards in the system's design.
The original Xbox was a really ballsy system overall. It was the first (commercially successful) console to have a hard drive and internet connectivity built-in. It brought LAN gaming and broadband online gaming to console gamers in a really big way. I thought it was really cool that if I played the same couple of maps or levels in Halo over and over it only had to load them once because Bungie was able to stream the files to the hard drive.
I feel like MS pussied out on the 360's design by removing the hard drive because they took that away from developers. Instead of innovating the console market again, they just seem to be riding on the success that they've already created. Now we're finally seeing a successful multi-platform developer complain about the 360's limitations. I don't think this looks very good for the 360 or for Microsoft.
P.S.: I'm sure the PS3 has development issues too--mainly the long load times as a result of the Blu-Ray disc and still figuring out the Cell architecture. But Rockstar is used to taking crap from Sony, so they're not complaining about it.
You've seen the GTA IV trailer right? The size of the map looks much larger than San Andreas, the texturing, AI and everything else has improved (I can see them using a DVD in texturing alone.) It not like they can even use mutliple layers for the DVD because streaming issue would (probably) kick in.
GTA4 is smaller than SA in land used but is much larger is the terms of textures, models, sound, shaders, and such, not to mention the addition of multiplayer.
If your streaming is designed intelligently enough and your disc layout is also well-designed, this does not have to be an issue.
I also have a hard time imagining that with all of the power involved in the Xbox 360 that procedural textures are outside the scope of the system...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It is not the single layer switch that happens when watching a movie. This is predictable, and always happens at the same place. The head also does not need to move during the layer change, it just reads from the inside to the out on L1 and then switches to L2.
The problem comes from random access reads between layers.
To decrease this issue each layer has to be treated like its own disc. Once the transition is made to L2 you stay there. That means any part of the game engine that is not always in memory has to also be on both layers. Along with any textures, models, sounds, etc. that are used through out the game. So going to two layers does not double the ammount of space available due to having to store a lot of data twice.
I, too, found it much less stressful to simply leave that job on the shelf. In an attempt to provide some perspective, here's a short list of gaming challenges I've run across recently:
- White Knight of the Order of Mihoshi Enthusiasts
Actually, the Xbox 360 game Final Fantasy XI (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/f/finalfantasyXI/ ) is not playable without a hard drive, so clearly some developers are defying Microsoft's rule. Which is a good thing in my opinion.
Plus the original Xbox supported 1080i and 720p. Only the upcoming "Elite" will support 1080 progressive.
All of the 360 models support 1080p over component and VGA. This was added in one of the dashboard updates. All the elite adds is HDMI support.