• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Final Fantasy XIII Information Thread | March 9, 2010 NA/EU

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zoe said:
wtf, how could anybody think that's a good idea :lol
Click to expand...

I borrowed LO off my friend and his was 4 discs stacked on top of each other.

The 4th disc fell out every time you opened the box.

Dunno if he'd lost the sleeve or if it just came like that. UK here.
 
Zoe said:
wtf, how could anybody think that's a good idea :lol
Click to expand...

Not to mention the disc swapping.

Get Disc 1 from spool
Insert into drive
Remove Disc 1 from drive
Remove Disc 2 from spool
Get Disc 3 from spool
Insert into drive
Put Disc 2 in spool
Put Disc 1 in spool
 
ULTROS! said:
Not to mention the disc swapping.

Get Disc 1 from spool
Insert into drive
Remove Disc 1 from drive
Remove Disc 2 from spool
Get Disc 3 from spool
Insert into drive
Put Disc 2 in spool
Put Disc 1 in spool
Click to expand...


You're right. There's just so much work involved in swapping. I don't think I can handle it!

(I'm still getting the 360 version - Achievements <3)
 
luxarific said:
You're right. There's just so much work involved in swapping. I don't think I can handle it!

(I'm still getting the 360 version - Achievements <3)
Click to expand...

My post was for Star Ocean 4 actually. :lol
 
Kagari said:
Shh, stop making sense!
Click to expand...

seeing as how achievements existed from teh beginning and trophies was implemented through an update, no they aren't the same.

Especially if you've accumulated more achievement points than trophies.
 
imtehman said:
seeing as how achievements existed from teh beginning and trophies was implemented through an update, no they aren't the same.

Especially if you've accumulated more achievement points than trophies.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think both are silly.
 
imtehman said:
seeing as how achievements existed from teh beginning and trophies was implemented through an update, no they aren't the same.

Especially if you've accumulated more achievement points than trophies.
Click to expand...


Pretty much the same to me.
 
Zoe said:
Which won't be any different from the trophies...
Click to expand...

To explicate further (for people who need it), it's a preference issue. So yes, I am going to go with the version of the game that uses the achievement system I prefer. So to me there is a difference. Luckily we all have a choice when it comes to FFXIII - yay for moneyhats!
 
Kagari said:
Honestly, I think both are silly.
Click to expand...

Trophies motivated me to actually play and buy Cross Edge. :(
 
Okay, the PS3 version is 37.3 GBs.

The 360 version cannot be more than 24 GBs, and likely will be closer to 20 GBs.

Is anything getting cut? If the games are equal, I'd prefer to get it on my 360, but that huge size difference is eye-opening.

Of course, I haven't been really following the game lately (spoilers are scary), but what gives? Is it just the coding or whatever?
 
imtehman said:
oh good, i thought you cared about trophies when you said this



thx for clarifying!



i'm sure
Click to expand...

No. The achievement/trophy systems are pretty pointless and especially sad when you get trophy/achievement whores who will play even the worst games just to boost their scores.

Einbroch said:
Okay, the PS3 version is 37.3 GBs.

The 360 version cannot be more than 24 GBs, and likely will be closer to 20 GBs.

Is anything getting cut? If the games are equal, I'd prefer to get it on my 360, but that huge size difference is eye-opening.

Of course, I haven't been really following the game lately (spoilers are scary), but what gives? Is it just the coding or whatever?
Click to expand...

Video and audo have likely been heavily compressed. No more 1080p video likely in the 360 version. Visuals are different too according to various reports. Honestly, if you have a choice, get the PS3 version. Lead platform, etc.
 
Einbroch said:
Okay, the PS3 version is 37.3 GBs.

The 360 version cannot be more than 24 GBs, and likely will be closer to 20 GBs.

Is anything getting cut? If the games are equal, I'd prefer to get it on my 360, but that huge size difference is eye-opening.

Of course, I haven't been really following the game lately (spoilers are scary), but what gives? Is it just the coding or whatever?
Click to expand...

They'll just actually compress the sound/FMVs, which were largely raw on the PS3 release. That'll save most of that lot. I have personally played both and in gameplay saw jack shit difference. FMV unknown, would need to study closely. Square made a point of having both versions running the same area side by side when we saw it, and there was very little difference.
 
Einbroch said:
Okay, the PS3 version is 37.3 GBs.

The 360 version cannot be more than 24 GBs, and likely will be closer to 20 GBs.

Is anything getting cut? If the games are equal, I'd prefer to get it on my 360, but that huge size difference is eye-opening.

Of course, I haven't been really following the game lately (spoilers are scary), but what gives? Is it just the coding or whatever?
Click to expand...

360 DVD's are limited to 7GB (last I heard), so yeah, closer to 20GB total.

There won't be anything cut, so it's the quality of the cutscenes, textures (lol), and audio that are taking the hit.
 
Einbroch said:
Okay, the PS3 version is 37.3 GBs.

The 360 version cannot be more than 24 GBs, and likely will be closer to 20 GBs.

Is anything getting cut? If the games are equal, I'd prefer to get it on my 360, but that huge size difference is eye-opening.

Of course, I haven't been really following the game lately (spoilers are scary), but what gives? Is it just the coding or whatever?
Click to expand...
I've read so many different opinions on this, even from people who played both versions recently.

I guess we really have to wait next month to know for sure.
 
Kagari said:
No. The achievement/trophy systems are pretty pointless and especially sad when you get trophy/achievement whores who will play even the worst games just to boost their scores.
Click to expand...

why do you care?

you sad thats one less sale on the ps3 to use on NPD or something?

people have their preferences, maybe, just maybe, they care about achievements more than the minor graphical differences between 2 versions.
 
Kagari said:
Video and audo have likely been heavily compressed. No more 1080p video likely in the 360 version. Visuals are different too according to various reports. Honestly, if you have a choice, get the PS3 version. Lead platform, etc.
Click to expand...

Sure.
 
badcrumble said:
Someone let me know when the "which platform do I get it on" conversation is over so I have a reason to revisit this thread, thanks.
Click to expand...
Didn't mean to start anything, just wanted to be an informed customer.
 
badcrumble said:
Someone let me know when the "which platform do I get it on" conversation is over so I have a reason to revisit this thread, thanks.
Click to expand...

It can be over right now. Closer to release there will be a separate comparison thread anyway.
 
Einbroch said:
Didn't mean to start anything, just wanted to be an informed customer.
Click to expand...

right now its all just hearsay. all we know for a fact is the 360 version has 3 disks, 2 disc swaps, and the ps3 version is lead platform.

i'm sure there will be a huge feature on digital foundry/eurogamer about the differences prior to the release of the game so i'd suggest you wait for that
 
Kagari said:
Closer to release there will be a separate comparison thread anyway.
Click to expand...

No doubt about it, FFXIII will have more side-by-side comparison features than any other PS360 game.

In a way, it's worked out quite nicely for SE given how much publicity FFXIII is going to get when the landslide of "Face Offs" begin.
 
Einbroch said:
Okay, the PS3 version is 37.3 GBs.

The 360 version cannot be more than 24 GBs, and likely will be closer to 20 GBs.

Is anything getting cut? If the games are equal, I'd prefer to get it on my 360, but that huge size difference is eye-opening.

Of course, I haven't been really following the game lately (spoilers are scary), but what gives? Is it just the coding or whatever?
Click to expand...

A lot of PS3 games put the same data on multiple places on the disc inorder to decrease loadtimes. Also nothing will be compressed in the PS3 version. I doubt anyone will be able to tell the difference betweent the 2 versions unless you have a really expensive surround sound system
 
PSGames said:
A lot of PS3 games put the same data on multiple places on the disc inorder to decrease loadtimes. Also nothing will be compressed in the PS3 version. I doubt anyone will be able to tell the difference betweent the 2 versions unless you have a really expensive surround sound system
Click to expand...

that's what need to be done on 360 too, as art assets for characters, voice acting, some music and other things need to be on all discs.
 
Yeah...Many developers, copy the same.."stuff" on the Bluray discs, to reduce loadtimes and make them similar to loadings on a regular DVD, add to that that they don't compress textures, audio and movies..usually (since some still do it)..

At the same time, good compression is barely noticeable; if done right. In the PS3 version movies are 1080p, while on the 360 version are 720p..which is a huge amount of difference in space; then the reduction of some textures (which will look great anyway) and less of teh same data copied multiple times, can easily make the difference...not to mention audio (music, effects, voices)...

Is like on the N64..Resident Evil 2 on which they compressed over 500MB of data to 64MB, the movies, and still the game managed to actually look better and at a higher resolution...or Conker also witha ll the music, vocie acting, great visuals...and under 64MB.

Things like screen tearing, lighting effects and some others are not related to the compression or size of a game; neither.
 
fernoca said:
Yeah...Many developers, copy the same.."stuff" on the Bluray discs, to reduce loadtimes and make them similar to loadings on a regular DVD, add to that that they don't compress textures, audio and movies..usually (since some still do it)..

At the same time, good compression is barely noticeable; if done right. In the PS3 version movies are 1080p, while on the 360 version are 720p..which is a huge amount of difference in space; then the reduction of some textures (which will look great anyway) and less of teh same data copied multiple times, can easily make the difference...not to mention audio (music, effects, voices)...

Is like on the N64..Resident Evil 2 on which they compressed over 500MB of data to 64MB, the movies, and still the game managed to actually look better and at a higher resolution...or Conker also witha ll the music, vocie acting, great visuals...and under 64MB.

Things like screen tearing, lighting effects and some others are not related to the compression or size of a game; neither.
Click to expand...

God help us all if the 360 version winds up looking better. :lol
 
fernoca said:
Yeah...Many developers, copy the same.."stuff" on the Bluray discs, to reduce loadtimes and make them similar to loadings on a regular DVD, add to that that they don't compress textures, audio and movies..usually (since some still do it)..
Click to expand...

30GB of the disc is for movies alone:
http://pocketnews.cocolog-nifty.com/pkns/2009/12/final-fantasy-x.html

I don't think those would be copied in multiple places on the disc.

(anybody else find it hilarious that there's one lone movie file from July when everything else was built in October? :lol)
 
fernoca said:
Yeah...Many developers, copy the same.."stuff" on the Bluray discs, to reduce loadtimes and make them similar to loadings on a regular DVD, add to that that they don't compress textures, audio and movies..usually (since some still do it)..
Click to expand...
Many being one, so far as I know only Bethesda has admitted to doing this.
 
Visuals from what I've read doesn't seem like it's going to be an issue at all. 1up saying they look on par as well as Garnet Lee. I know IGN said "sharper" but I guess we will all see in a month. Seems pretty minimal differnces as fas that goes at best.
 
I usually play the first final fantasy of each generation just for the graphics and cg. So I only played ff7 and 10. I bought 8 and 10-2 but never played them. Definitely going to get play this one.
 
Jtyettis said:
Visuals from what I've read doesn't seem like it's going to be an issue at all. 1up saying they look on par as well as Garnet Lee. I know IGN said "sharper" but I guess we will all see in a month. Seems pretty minimal differnces as fas that goes at best.
Click to expand...
Not really, if you have a PS3 you should buy that version.
 
LiquidMetal14 said:
Not really, if you have a PS3 you should buy that version.
Click to expand...

Not really. This is what the press has reported. Do you have some explanation otherwise because I'm not seeing it? Outside of audio functions I cannot even use I see no real argument there. If it were a case of like Garnet says a "Bayonetta" then perhaps.


Edit: I guess the bottom line it seems SE has gone out of their way to make both versions competent and in the end I think that is a very wise decision.
 
Metalic Sand said:
Im curious how many people can even use the special features of the PS3 version being on Blu-ray. Especially uncompressed audio.
Click to expand...

I'm certainly enjoying the uncompressed 1080p videos.
 
2qsqhso.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Final Fantasy X - 25th Anniversary
2 3 4
155
545
Signalis replied
  • Poll
[VGC] Final Fantasy 9 character designer, Toshiyuki Itahana, quits Square Enix.
49
999
sigmaZ replied
Since FF XIII, the industry is telling Square what a Final Fantasy is
Opinion  2 3 4
167
2K
Madflavor replied
Happy 27th To Final Fantasy VIII
2 3
111
1K
Rentahamster replied
Final Fantasy IX Remake currently on Ice, according to NateTheHate
Rumor 
17
430
TheLikou replied
Top Bottom