FFXIII is 32.6GB of movies

[xxbrentonxx]

Final Fantasy Advent Children Blu-ray was on a 50gb Blu-ray disc (Not to mention numerous extras and a 1080p animated episode), so let's assume the main movie is 30-40Gb, maybe smaller.
A blu-ray rip was posted on the internet by a well-known anime group/person named Thora.
He released a 1080p version at 11Gb and a 720p version at 6.5Gb, both with DTS 5.1 and were compressed using the x264 codec. These blu-ray rips look awesome and are very comparable to the original Blu-ray.

Square-Enix says they have 3 Dual-layer DVDs to work with, so that means about 8Gb X 3 = 24Gb. If 6.8Gb is used for the game, then we still have 17.2Gb of space for videos. Now, let's assume that Square-Enix compresses the 32Gb videos to 720p. If Thora was able to compress a 30-40Gb Blu-ray at 720p to 6.5Gb (with comparable quality to the original blu-ray), I'm pretty sure Square-Enix can compress that 32Gb to at most 17.2Gb, which would be more than enough to compare to the original source. So I have no doubts that the Xbox version would have very comparable video quality to the PS3 version.

Exactly and addtionally SE can further compress the 6.8gb used for the game, there is absolutely no need to compress ps3 games but that is almost unheard of elsewhere. SE would keep it at 1080p im sure, if need be im sure it is the audio which would be made lower quality.

I havent tested it but there is a complete version of GTA: SA on the internet compressed to 64kb, ofcourse it does take several hours to decompress but that is still incredible. Im also not entirely sure but i believe the 700mb file is just the installation file, the real game is apparently 4.3gb when installed. Im not sure if the 64kb version works, there is also a 1mb version which a few people have said works. Compression can go a lot further than you think.

 

[ZAFDeltaForce]

What all PS3 fanboys are failing to acknowledge is that the PS3 is one of the first consoles in which the games are not compressed. Plenty of multi platform games take up a full blu-ray disc on the ps3 and one DVD9 disc on the 360, despite this the 360 version is often equal to or superior to the PS3 version. Anyway back when N64 and PS1 were around, the ps1 versions of games could easily be 10 times the size of their N64 counterparts.

That is true.

However, the Xbox360 versions are usually superior to their PS3 counterparts simply because multi-platform developers fail to utilise all 7 processors of the PS3; they only use 1 while 2 cores are used on the Xbox360.

That said, PS3 exclusives are almost always superior to their Xbox360 counterparts in the term of graphics and performance because all 7 cores (or hell, at least more then 1) are utilised.

That is hard to be sure of seeing as how ps3 exclusives will never be run on Xbox360 hardware, and comparing completely different games isnt the best measure of how good a system is.

I believe I never said any of that sort in my post. If you wish to state something irrelevant to mine, please do so on another sentence.

Though I agree, comparing games aren't always accurate cross-platform-wise. Regardless, I recall Uncharted 2 winning awards for having the best graphics, and not Gears of War 2 or whatever.

 

[delta123]

why do people forget Final Fantasy spirits within. that was a great movie CG wise. in terms of story, it was like any other final fantasy.

 

[Joe88]

What all PS3 fanboys are failing to acknowledge is that the PS3 is one of the first consoles in which the games are not compressed. Plenty of multi platform games take up a full blu-ray disc on the ps3 and one DVD9 disc on the 360, despite this the 360 version is often equal to or superior to the PS3 version. Anyway back when N64 and PS1 were around, the ps1 versions of games could easily be 10 times the size of their N64 counterparts.

That is true.

However, the Xbox360 versions are usually superior to their PS3 counterparts simply because multi-platform developers fail to utilise all 7 processors of the PS3; they only use 1 while 2 cores are used on the Xbox360.

That said, PS3 exclusives are almost always superior to their Xbox360 counterparts in the term of graphics and performance because all 7 cores (or hell, at least more then 1) are utilised.

That is hard to be sure of seeing as how ps3 exclusives will never be run on Xbox360 hardware, and comparing completely different games isnt the best measure of how good a system is.

I believe I never said any of that sort in my post. If you wish to state something irrelevant to mine, please do so on another sentence.

Though I agree, comparing games aren't always accurate cross-platform-wise. Regardless, I recall Uncharted 2 winning awards for having the best graphics, and not Gears of War 2 or whatever.

also when the last time a 360 exclusive won GOTY?
2009 - uncharted 2
2008 - MGS4 or fallout 3
2007 - bioshock
2006 - oblivion
2005 - RE4
2004 - HL2
2003 - LoZ- wind waker
2002 - BF 1942
2001 - halo

and any time the 360 has the 360 game of the year award category its always a muti-system game
and I have a pretty strong felling that gowIII or heavy rain is gonna this year goty since MS has nothing in the works right now besides halo reach (yay more whoring the halo name for money!!!)

 

[X D D X]

What all PS3 fanboys are failing to acknowledge is that the PS3 is one of the first consoles in which the games are not compressed. Plenty of multi platform games take up a full blu-ray disc on the ps3 and one DVD9 disc on the 360, despite this the 360 version is often equal to or superior to the PS3 version. Anyway back when N64 and PS1 were around, the ps1 versions of games could easily be 10 times the size of their N64 counterparts.

That is true.

However, the Xbox360 versions are usually superior to their PS3 counterparts simply because multi-platform developers fail to utilise all 7 processors of the PS3; they only use 1 while 2 cores are used on the Xbox360.

That said, PS3 exclusives are almost always superior to their Xbox360 counterparts in the term of graphics and performance because all 7 cores (or hell, at least more then 1) are utilised.

That is hard to be sure of seeing as how ps3 exclusives will never be run on Xbox360 hardware, and comparing completely different games isnt the best measure of how good a system is.

I believe I never said any of that sort in my post. If you wish to state something irrelevant to mine, please do so on another sentence.

Though I agree, comparing games aren't always accurate cross-platform-wise. Regardless, I recall Uncharted 2 winning awards for having the best graphics, and not Gears of War 2 or whatever.

also when the last time a 360 exclusive won GOTY?
2009 - uncharted 2
2008 - MGS4 or fallout 3
2007 - bioshock
2006 - oblivion
2005 - god of war II

and any time the 360 has the 360 game of the year award category its always a muti-system game

Are those your personal GOTY or what? I recall lots of websites giving Mario Galaxy GOTY in 2007. And God of War 2 doesn't seem to fit either... It makes sense if you're just comparing Xbox and Playstation though.

 

[Joe88]

meant to put RE4 as 2004 goty
my bad

but srly
last time MS won was back when the first halo came out in 2001

bioshock was pretty much the undisputed king of 07
it came out shocked everyone with its great gameplay and story

 

[xxbrentonxx]

I believe I never said any of that sort in my post. If you wish to state something irrelevant to mine, please do so on another sentence.

Though I agree, comparing games aren't always accurate cross-platform-wise. Regardless, I recall Uncharted 2 winning awards for having the best graphics, and not Gears of War 2 or whatever.
You did, you said ps3 exclusives are better than their 360 counterparts, since exclusives obviously have no ports then you are ofcourse comparing different games.

also when the last time a 360 exclusive won GOTY?
2009 - uncharted 2
2008 - MGS4 or fallout 3
2007 - bioshock
2006 - oblivion
2005 - god of war II

and any time the 360 has the 360 game of the year award category its always a muti-system game
Its easier to port 360 games to ps3 then it is ps3 games to 360. Most 360 exclusives are either made by, or somehow related to Microsoft and sometimes this means they also end up on Windows PCs losing there "exclusivity". If a game originally developed for 360 has no ties to MS, then its in the developers interest to make a quick port to ps3 making the game "multi platform". On the other hand it is very difficult for a developer who has made a game with only the ps3 in mind to port the game to other platforms.

QUOTE

meant to put RE4 as 2004 goty
my bad

but srly
last time MS won was back when the first halo came out in 2001

bioshock was pretty much the undisputed king of 07
it came out shocked everyone with its great gameplay and story

Bioshocks ps3 port was an afterthought released well after Bioshock was. Bioshock was a "MS" exclusive. If Sony had their own operating system, i wouldnt be surprised if God Of War and other "exclusives" were ported to it.

 

[Ace Gunman]

Folks, lets keep it on topic. Whether or not the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360 has had more GOTY wins has absolutely nothing to do with Final Fantasy XIII.

 

[Bladexdsl]

doesnt surprise me 1 bit pretty much every FF game these days is a damn movie and fuck all gameplay i stopped playing them after 8

 

[Psyfira]

Final Fantasy is a videogame that's like a movie. I thought that was the whole point. You play it for the plot not the gameplay, to that end I don't see why anyone would skip cutscenes on their first playthrough.

why do people forget Final Fantasy spirits within. that was a great movie CG wise. in terms of story, it was like any other final fantasy.

It was, but I didn't click with it because of the story. I think they had problems writing a story that'd fit in 1hr 30, it felt like it started halfway through.

 

[prowler]

Shit, I might not even get this game anymore....I'll wait till its like $30 or $40 buckaroos, maybe even $20

I've seen Final Fantasy 7, 8 and 9 each for £20 here in England.

 

[matt1freek]

I disagree with alot of people here.. alot of people agree that Final Fantasy is a great series BECAUSE of the story. And don't get me wrong your not completely out of line as the stories told by these games are some of the best ever told through the medium.
However the most important aspect of the series for me is the heavy level of customizing, and the side quests.
Much like in 8 where you could spend hours customizing your junctions to get them just right. Then play some cards or look for buried treasure with your chocobo. And then come back to the amazing story at your leisure..
If this game does not have this i will be severely disappointed! you see i do not own a PS3 or a Xbox360 and my intention was to get a PS3 exclusively for this game. If i can't spend at least 40 hours screwing around in menus or riding chocobos im going to be very upset. Or i suppose i could just get Disgaea 3. Prinnies are starting to look more fun than moogles at this point.

 

[Satangel]

Couldn't care less about this game though, I never really liked the Final Fantasy series.
Fantastic looking videos are one thing, but I couldn't stand watching a movie longer then 5 minutes in game, I would die of boredom with this game.

 

[Elritha]

Too much cutscenes will make it look like I'm just watching an expensive, overpriced movie, with just a sprinkling of gameplay thrown in. How long is total gameplay meant to be anyway?

 

[megabug7]

9 hours of movie - doesn't suprise one bit as Square(Enix) are show-offs (I said that back when FFIX was released - which had a fair few cutscenes too).
But they better be short cutscenes/movies (not like MGS4), or I'll just dump the game.

It was ludicrous having to watch a 1+ hour ending, and frankly I want to play a game, not a movie.

If this is more movie than game, then it should be sold as a movie, and not as a game.

I'm actually not looking forward to FFXIII but I'm getting it because I have all the others.
Whether I'll finish it, remains to be seen, but it's highly unlikely.

 

[megabug7]

Final Fantasy is a videogame that's like a movie. I thought that was the whole point. You play it for the plot not the gameplay, to that end I don't see why anyone would skip cutscenes on their first playthrough.

why do people forget Final Fantasy spirits within. that was a great movie CG wise. in terms of story, it was like any other final fantasy.

It was, but I didn't click with it because of the story. I think they had problems writing a story that'd fit in 1hr 30, it felt like it started halfway through.

Don't agree - as with any game gameplay is the most important part. Story is secondary. Graphics merely enhance the product, and don't add anything.

 

[Hadrian]

Fucking crazy.

I really need a current-gen console.
Games really are advancing, eh?

How? Not that much different to the PSX games.

 

[da_head]

sigh. in case you guys haven't heard, this game sucks balls. hopefully versus will be better

 

[Sefi]

Gameplay is what, 40-50 hours? And I'm sure it will have plenty of extra stuff to do in the game that will double that time if you want to do everything. It's a new Final Fantasy game, I would have been more surprised if there hadn't been such a large portion devoted to movies.

 

[Seek01]

It doesn't mean that there is more movie than game, its just that actual the actual game isn't that big. FFXIII probably uses a lot of FMVs, and when animated in 1080p, thats tends to take up a LOT of space.

Its a stretch to say you'll see more movie/cutscene than actually gameplay. But when you account for the battle system, the programming, the renders, the skill effects, thats not that much when it comes to the actual game. But when you count for the voice acting, the FMVs, the cutscenes, that takes a lot. Especially if the FMVs and cutscenes are on the disk more than once to speed up loading time. So essentially the actually movie data part of the games may only be 2/3 of that amount.