Rojahar wrote...
I'm pretty sure disc swapping is the closest thing to exercise that some of the people complaining about it get.
HAHA That's my favorite stereotype!
Rojahar wrote...
I'm pretty sure disc swapping is the closest thing to exercise that some of the people complaining about it get.
Guest_Tigerblood and MilkShakes_*
Guest_Luc0s_*
Bogsnot1 wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Mass Effect Player wrote...
Disk swapping only happened at specific moments. It's not that bad, its a big after all. Curious did Skyrim of have disk swapping.
Skyrim is only 3,5GB big and fits on 1 disk.
Yet Skyrim has an gigantic open-world, an insane amount of NPCs, an insane amount of quests and 100+ hours of gameplay.
So yeah, go figure....
With an insane amount of recycled assets. You thought ME's "prefab shack/corridors" were bad. Pay more attention to Skyrim next time you play it.
Guest_Luc0s_*
Firesteel7 wrote...
Everything in Skyrim is in engine and in real time. Cutscenes take up some of the largest parts of a game due to their pre-rendered nature. If everything in ME happened in real time, the size would be much smaller, as AI behaviors and reactions are part of classes and the main program, not something that must be added to the program and triggered.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Considering the lack of detail Skyrim has minus any pre rendered cutscenes and I'm not suprised how easy it was to compress down to 3.5 gb. The environment looks worse than Oblivion in some cases.Luc0s wrote...
Bogsnot1 wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Mass Effect Player wrote...
Disk swapping only happened at specific moments. It's not that bad, its a big after all. Curious did Skyrim of have disk swapping.
Skyrim is only 3,5GB big and fits on 1 disk.
Yet Skyrim has an gigantic open-world, an insane amount of NPCs, an insane amount of quests and 100+ hours of gameplay.
So yeah, go figure....
With an insane amount of recycled assets. You thought ME's "prefab shack/corridors" were bad. Pay more attention to Skyrim next time you play it.
No, that's Oblivion you talk about. I think you saw Oblivion for Skyrim and mixed them up.
Skyrim doesn't have much more recycled stuff than Mass Effect 2 does. And even minus all the recycled stuff, Skyrim is still bigger than ME2. All the capital cities together in Skyrim (each capital city being unique and different) are bigger than all of ME2's area's together. And Skyrim is still only 3,5GB while ME2 is 15GB. Go figure.
Guest_The PLC_*
Guest_SkyeHawk89_*
It is for two big reasons:Luc0s wrote...
Bogsnot1 wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Mass Effect Player wrote...
Disk swapping only happened at specific moments. It's not that bad, its a big after all. Curious did Skyrim of have disk swapping.
Skyrim is only 3,5GB big and fits on 1 disk.
Yet Skyrim has an gigantic open-world, an insane amount of NPCs, an insane amount of quests and 100+ hours of gameplay.
So yeah, go figure....
With an insane amount of recycled assets. You thought ME's "prefab shack/corridors" were bad. Pay more attention to Skyrim next time you play it.
No, that's Oblivion you talk about. I think you saw Oblivion for Skyrim and mixed them up.
Skyrim doesn't have much more recycled stuff than Mass Effect 2 does. And even minus all the recycled stuff, Skyrim is still bigger than ME2. All the capital cities together in Skyrim (each capital city being unique and different) are bigger than all of ME2's area's together. And Skyrim is still only 3,5GB while ME2 is 15GB. Go figure.
Guest_Luc0s_*
Firesteel7 wrote...
It is for two big reasons:
No cutscenes period, having the AI have set behaviors for specific points in game takes up very little space, it is just extra functions onto that specific character's class.
No voice for PC. Audio files take up large amounts of space as well, and cutting down costs.
Modifié par Luc0s, 15 janvier 2012 - 02:22 .
Guest_Luc0s_*
jreezy wrote...
Considering the lack of detail Skyrim has minus any pre rendered cutscenes and I'm not suprised how easy it was to compress down to 3.5 gb. The environment looks worse than Oblivion in some cases.
They aren't pre-rendered, but they are pre-blocked, and are basically filmed, though in engine. This makes them more complicated to run than telling certain characters to act in a certain way by using a function that doesn't get called ever, except for this one instance. If you pre-block a scene, even if it's in engine, that takes up space. You can tell the scenes are pre-blocked and recorded because they happen exactly the same way every time, no slight ragdoll differences or body positions, unlike in Skyrim. They are not pre-rendered, so they take up less space, but because of their nature, they still take up more space than Skyrim. I do agree though, Bethesda is godly at compression, which helps immensly.Luc0s wrote...
Firesteel7 wrote...
It is for two big reasons:
No cutscenes period, having the AI have set behaviors for specific points in game takes up very little space, it is just extra functions onto that specific character's class.
No voice for PC. Audio files take up large amounts of space as well, and cutting down costs.
Read my previous post. Not cut-scenes is not a valid argument because ME2 doesn't have cut-scenes either and it's way bigger.
It's true that Mass Effect has more dialogue, so that's probably taking a lot of space. Skyrim has less dialogue, so less space taken up by that.
But in the end, I take Bethesda's word on it that they're just the compression masters. They said the just found a really good and solid way of compressing their games and I believe that. I think Bethesda is just a little better at compression than anyone else (at the moment).
Guest_Mass Effect Player_*
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Yes the textures is what I was referring to when I said lack of detail.Luc0s wrote...
jreezy wrote...
Considering the lack of detail Skyrim has minus any pre rendered cutscenes and I'm not suprised how easy it was to compress down to 3.5 gb. The environment looks worse than Oblivion in some cases.
Lack of detail? Are you kidding me?
Sure, the textures in Skyrim are horrible, but you can't possibly say Skyrim lacks detail. The world is full with little props and assets that really makes the world believable and realistic!
If only those textures were not so damn low-res...
Guest_The PLC_*
Yup, not gonna happen.MarchWaltz wrote...
I want to install the second disk to my drive, then just use the first desk. Not sure if the 360 is capable of doing that.
Actually, I'm pretty sure it is, but it has something to do with piracy I'm sure.
Guest_Mass Effect Player_*
Rojahar wrote...
I'm pretty sure disc swapping is the closest thing to exercise that some of the people complaining about it get.
Modifié par camirish1, 15 janvier 2012 - 02:41 .
Guest_Mass Effect Player_*
camirish1 wrote...
Rojahar wrote...
I'm pretty sure disc swapping is the closest thing to exercise that some of the people complaining about it get.
I wasn't talking about being lazy, it just seems silly that you need to swap disk 2-3 times (depending if you play after the credits) in a single playthrough. Recently saw a twitter post saying the Xbox version will most likely have 2 discs again, so I was curious if it was different this time around.
Edit: Want to clarify, I understand the DRM with Xbox doesn't allow for a single disk to play even with the game installed. And swapping disks is not that big of a problem for me.
Guest_Mass Effect Player_*