solidus12
Member
They added a patch to allow you to have one complete installation.If it needed all those installs.. it wasn't running good on PS3.
They added a patch to allow you to have one complete installation.If it needed all those installs.. it wasn't running good on PS3.
They added a patch to allow you to have one complete installation.
Lol no chance, the game will have to be completely remade, 20 hour cutscenes and all, with that much work, they may aswell, remake it fully,They will include it in the MGS Master Collection vol. 2 or whatever it is. It will probably need more extra work than vol. 1, but I'm pretty sure they will do it.
99% of MGS4 videos are in-engine/realtime, rendered on the fly. There are only 2 cutscenes that are pre-rendered. Even the power-point style presentations are in-engine, because otherwise, the game would have been ~ 200 gb.Afaik the game used uncompressed audio and a lot of video could have been done in-engine.
The game was an exercise in filling up a blueray disc to the brim.
And the Xbox version never saw the light of day.indeed, it came only 4 years after it released
Games that lead on PS3 and ported to 360 were pretty much even.First time we have heard it was running "smoothly"...which suggests it may have run better on the 360 like most third party games back then. Its a real shame as its likely the game would have been playable on the x1/series consoles. Maybe even enhanced. But its stuck on PS3. Lets see if Konami do anything with it soon.....
MGSV ran better on the 360 after all:
You'll note that even in basic traversal there is some stutter, and that the Xbox 360 advantage we saw earlier can vanish. It's at this point that the two versions start to feel very similar.
Snake smoking during the install was an essential part of the experience.6 discs would still have been better than a 5 to 10 min install after each chapter like it was on PS3.
changing disc, maybe 20 seconds,
installing new chapter, 10min of watching Snake smoke...
I really don't understand this constant story of "multi discs" being so expensive.6 dvds would have cost them 48 cents.
I dont either. I think lost odyssey had 4 discs maybe?I really don't understand this constant story of "multi discs" being so expensive.
Hell of a game, too!I dont either. I think lost odyssey had 4 discs maybe?
LOL. That version was leaked and of course it worked anything but "smooth". Really Epic only used it as a test of improvements and advances of the UE 3 that Gears always offered with each edition. There was certainly no version proper on PS3.Yup. I played the ps3 version at a event I attended for the company. Ran smoothly.
I honestly think this was party made by epic so Microsoft would shit their pants and buy the IP off them. Maybe not and they did want to release it on ps3 and cash in the extra sales.
it also wouldn't have run on those "arcade" xbox 360 bullshit editions with no hard drive and the ones they shipped with only like 4gb flash memory. Lose/lose scenario for konamiYou should apply for the sales and marketing-position.
Logistically I can see a game shipping on six disc a nightmare. That is collector edition-levels of risk.
I think it would be pretty easy to fall in love with a single platform as a developer. You only have to get your game working on the one system. There's no hassle of needing to find solutions that play nice with everything. You have a single, consistent spec base to work from. There's no mid-project goalpost shift where you now have to support something else as well. A ton of variables just get jettisoned from the equation.Being a platform fanboy while working for a big third party developer seems so weird to me.
Why wouldn't you want as many people as possible to play the game you are likely going to spend years of your life working on?
I guess I get it if you are working for a first party studio and there's that sort of competitivity of making your platform the best and beating the competition. But as a third party studio?
I remember people complaining about how shitty the prerendered cutscenes in XIII looked on the 360Could have been possible, and would have only required 4 discs at the most. For whatever reason they decided to encode the FMV's in MPEG2 which was very inefficient compared to MPEG4-AVC, instead they could use WMV that was supported on the Xbox 360.
Final Fantasy 13 was another game that made full use of the PS3's bluray disc, yet it got ported to the Xbox 360 with minor changes.
I wonder how much love they really had for it:I think it would be pretty easy to fall in love with a single platform as a developer. You only have to get your game working on the one system. There's no hassle of needing to find solutions that play nice with everything. You have a single, consistent spec base to work from. There's no mid-project goalpost shift where you now have to support something else as well. A ton of variables just get jettisoned from the equation.
Came in to say this. After seeing the Volume 1 at the end of that MGS collection I'll eat my fucking hat if Volume 2 doesn't come with 4, and the handheld games.They will include it in the MGS Master Collection vol. 2 or whatever it is. It will probably need more extra work than vol. 1, but I'm pretty sure they will do it.
MGS4 being on the 360 would have meant we could have had an FPS boosted or Res enhanced BC version available right now.
What a waste.
4K60fps MGS4 why wasn't it meant to be?
Oh yeah, the game always had an unlocked frame rate if I'm not mistaken? Even without any enhancements, it would/could have been a 720p/locked 60 like GTA IV is now.
What could have been. Now we're just twiddling our thumbs hoping that an eventual Vol 2. includes MGS4.
MGS4 being on the 360 would have meant we could have had an FPS boosted or Res enhanced BC version available right now.
What a waste.
I was thinking how different things would be if Microsoft would have waited a year so that the Xbox 360 could have launched with Blu-ray support, but I think Microsoft needed that year advantage to really cement themselves in the industry. As beneficial as it would have been to have the now-dominant format, they may have fizzled out entirely if Sony had released their console at the same time.
I am so mad that Microsoft squandered all of their goodwill from the Xbox 360 era in the Xbox One era. The Xbox One is the only console I truly regret purchasing (and I had purchased the oft-scoffed Wii-U). Technological deficits aside, the Xbox 360 was one of my favorite consoles of all time. I think for me, it is:
- PlayStation 2
- Xbox 360
- PlayStation 1
- Xbox Series X
- PlayStation Portable/Vita
- Even with the Vita being considered a flop by many, it had the ability to play PlayStation Portable titles, so it was still a success to me in that regard. If you think of the Vita as a mid-gen refresh of the PlayStation Portable, it's actually pretty awesome.
honestly, there were maybe a handful of games TOPS that made any real use of those Blurays.
what they actually should have done is have an internal HD-DVD drive, because even tho the format failed in the movie market, the larger discs would still have been really good media for games with larger sizes.
I don't think even that would have been needed. The biggest benefit/advantage of the BR was higher bit-rate video files, which 360/PS3 games absolutely used a shit ton of. But ingenious developers found ways around it. Darksiders 1 has a ton of video files but their developer opted to use a better/custom encoder instead of the tried and tested Bink. The end result was the 360 version being on a 6~GB DVD matching the FMV quality of a 20GB PS3 version,
honestly, there were maybe a handful of games tops that made any real use of those Blurays.
what they actually should have done is have an internal HD-DVD drive, because even tho the format failed in the movie market, the larger discs would still have been really good media for games with larger sizes.
The problem is that HD-DVD also came out after the Xbox 360 launched. The Xbox 360 launched at the end of 2005, but HD-DVD didn't come out until the second quarter of 2006. For as much as Microsoft needed that extra year of virtually no competition, it really hosed them in the hardware department, at least for disc drives. They did release a standalone HD-DVD accessory after the fact, but that didn't actually read game discs. It was only so people could play their HD-DVD movies with their Xbox 360. That accessory was "too little; too late" anyway, so it is unsurprising that it wasn't a success. I wondered why the Xbox 360 slim didn't come with an HD-DVD drive, but I figure the reason for that was that it would be too confusing for customers as they would need to release some games on the HD-DVD format, and others on the DVD-9 format. That would have resulted in some P.R. backlash, I'm sure.
One thing that Microsoft did for me with the Xbox 360, though, was to sell me on their controllers. The Xbox 360 controller was my controller of choice up until the Xbox Series controllers. Those controllers beat the hell out of the PlayStation controllers in terms of how they feel in my hands. The PlayStation 5's DualSense controller was the first controller that Sony released which actually felt (to me) like a competitor to the Xbox 360/Series controllers, but I still prefer my Xbox Series controllers. Almost all of my gaming is PC gaming now, and I have two Xbox Series controllers with rechargeable battery packs that I use to play games. I absolutely love them.
that link literally says the PS3 version looks better thoughI don't think even that would have been needed. The biggest benefit/advantage of the BR was higher bit-rate video files, which 360/PS3 games absolutely used a shit ton of. But ingenious developers found ways around it. Darksiders 1 has a ton of video files but their developer opted to use a better/custom encoder instead of the tried and tested Bink. The end result was the 360 version being on a 6~GB DVD matching the FMV quality of a 20GB PS3 version,
the standard was complete and ready way before then tho.
I bet it would have been possible to get a drive into the 360 if they worked with Toshiba.
the first players released in march 2006, so only 4 months after the 360.
I bet the cost was a bigger factor than the launch window of the format.
the video files look better but not to such a degree that it would really matterthat link literally says the PS3 version looks better though
Installing>>>swapping disks.If it needed all those installs.. it wasn't running good on PS3.
Installing>>>swapping disks.
Why do you find it weird? They're gamers just like us with their own biases and preferences. Heck, two of my buddies who are working in the industry at a big publisher with roles as rendering engineer, respectively art director are huge PlayStation fanboys.Being a platform fanboy while working for a big third party developer seems so weird to me.
Why wouldn't you want as many people as possible to play the game you are likely going to spend years of your life working on?
I guess I get it if you are working for a first party studio and there's that sort of competitivity of making your platform the best and beating the competition. But as a third party studio?
What!?That's what happen when Hollywood directors wannabes make games, they don't accept that games are not movies and won't make compromises in cutscenes quality for gameplay or any other more important reason... They could just make them in engine but no, they rather skipped the other way more popular platform lol
Checks URL… nope didn’t accidentally go to GameFAQS.If it needed all those disks.. it wasn't running good on 360.