| 21 MAR 2007 at 11:49pm |
hlalexSpace Cadet
Posts : 127
Joined: 19 JUL 2004
Status : Online | Mark and psychospiller
I guess neither of you really read what I wrote.
I said it was by choice that I run the stuff I do and I also said I have XP and a DVD burner. Probable had them long before either one of you did. It is by CHOICE that I run Win 98. Everytime I run XP I get so much ad ware that it isn't worth running it to me. And with 98 they don't both it since it is so old no one bothers it any more.
|
| 8 MAY 2007 at 4:48pm |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5586
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Aya (22 NOV 2006 4:09pm)
this has been bugging me for quite some time, so get ready for some serious ranting!
what is it with american publishers and them refusing to release games on dvd, and even turning european dvd games to multiple cds? take some recent games for example, like barrow hill (2cd), moment of silence (4cd), tunguska (4cd) and dreamfall (6cd) - all released as 1 dvd in europe... i mean i could understand maybe a few years ago, when they turned the 1 dvd of silent hill 3 to 6 cds - back then dvd disks were more expensive, and there were still a few ppl left without dvd drives... but today the cost of one dvd disk is lower than 2 or 3, not to mention 6, cds, and practically everyone has a dvd drive - and the 7 ppl that don't, i'm sure can fork over $15 to buy a basic one
so i really don't understand this clinging to cds... in a year or two (and that's a stretch) dvd will be obsolete, and blurays will be the standard... what will happen then? 30-40 cds in a box? or will they then discover the dvd? for a country that is always ahead in technology, this is totally ridiculous and unacceptable
I guess hoping to get a few 50 gig Blu-Ray game discs is completely out of the question then - I also prefer the DVD format and I've never understood the reluctance to distribute them. Overseer on DVD was so much more enjoyable (that damn disc swapping on the CD version drove me nuts). The developers knew swapping was an issue: otherwise they wouldn’t have built in a drive mapping system (for those of us that had CD jukeboxes).
|
| 8 MAY 2007 at 10:55pm |
| Deleted User | Technology is advancing, maybe some people had the same problem in the switch from floppies to CDs, and the same thing in the change from five and one quarter disks to three and a half disks. Anyways, I miss 5 1/4 disks!!! :'(
|
| 13 NOV 2007 at 2:39am |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By Aya (22 NOV 2006 4:09pm)
this has been bugging me for quite some time, so get ready for some serious ranting!
what is it with american publishers and them refusing to release games on dvd, and even turning european dvd games to multiple cds? take some recent games for example, like barrow hill (2cd), moment of silence (4cd), tunguska (4cd) and dreamfall (6cd) - all released as 1 dvd in europe... i mean i could understand maybe a few years ago, when they turned the 1 dvd of silent hill 3 to 6 cds - back then dvd disks were more expensive, and there were still a few ppl left without dvd drives... but today the cost of one dvd disk is lower than 2 or 3, not to mention 6, cds, and practically everyone has a dvd drive - and the 7 ppl that don't, i'm sure can fork over $15 to buy a basic one
so i really don't understand this clinging to cds... in a year or two (and that's a stretch) dvd will be obsolete, and blurays will be the standard... what will happen then? 30-40 cds in a box? or will they then discover the dvd? for a country that is always ahead in technology, this is totally ridiculous and unacceptable
I think that a single DVD is more easily pirated than 6 CDs. Maybe they were thinking about that...
|
| 13 NOV 2007 at 2:41am |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By Butterproof Brush (8 MAY 2007 10:55pm)
Technology is advancing, maybe some people had the same problem in the switch from floppies to CDs, and the same thing in the change from five and one quarter disks to three and a half disks. Anyways, I miss 5 1/4 disks!!! :'(
You live in the past.
The past that Richards arranqued from Suares´soccer field.
The past with the cows and flowers.
So sad.
|
| 23 NOV 2007 at 6:34am |
JimbeauIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 6
Joined: 15 NOV 2005
Status : Online | Originally Posted By hlalex (10 MAR 2007 10:59pm)
Hi
I think the most thing with Americans is that we don't like to be forced into changing. I have many computers and I still run Win 98SE by choice. DVDs are the same way. I have a DVD burner but I didn't change it until my CD rom died and the price dropped to below the price of the CD unit. XP, Vista will be the same way for me. It will be the last straw before I change. I have other systems I can use but 98 is my favorite and it is on my main computer. I will not change to make the world happy. I will change when the time is right for me not when some one say you have to.
Hello folks. This gentleman has a lot of us Americans pegged. I was an avid computer geek starting around 1993 (I think 'Lemmings' started it). I have lost interest in having the latest and greatest in the last few years for several reasons. The pertinent reasons here would be that computer technology reached maturity for most of us several years ago. I remember having to hide the fact that I spent $600 on 16 megabytes of ram for my 486 from my wife. But that ram was sorely needed to play Myst. Today I see game requirements that are laughable, because the graphics capabilities of computers have been more than adequate for years for adventure game play. Frame rate capability for shoot-em ups need more graphics card moxie, but how much better does our equipment REALLY need to be? I haven't crunched numbers, but I'm not sure that today's monitors can reproduce at their native resolution what some game requirements demand. My point is that a lot of us see the continued escalation of computer technology as unnecessary anymore, because Riven, Exile, URU, etc. played just fine on our old 1G processors. Personally, I don't like the 'third person' character perspective (which most likely takes more horsepower) that is being pushed on us in recent years. Many may like it, but many of us don't because it isn't natural for us. So, we are opting out of playing games as much as we used to. I understand that the computer industry has to push the need-for-speed on we consumers to keep itself funded and alive, but it's increasingly becoming 'not my problem'.
|
| 29 JAN 2008 at 7:23pm |
RetrogamerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 84
Joined: 29 JAN 2008
Status : Online | As an American, I can say that no, we don't hate the DVD format. I've often wondered about this myself, and I think I have it boiled down: Price of production. CDs are cheaper than dirt. I can buy a 100 pack of good quality CD-Rs for $12. If I buy a 100 pack of similar quality DVD-Rs, I'm looking at upwards of $30. If a game will fit onto two CDs, it's probably cheaper for a company to go that route. Now, when it comes to 3 or more CDs, yeah, it would make a lot more sense to go to DVD, but maybe they already have a lot of games being printed on only one or two CDs and it would complicate things to go to DVD.
Also...
There are a lot of OLD computers in this country. Generally, for game companies, that doesn't matter. Most games made today cater towards people who bought their computers in the last 2 and a half years or so. But then look at a company that does very well for itself, like Blizzard. WOW runs on computers manufactured five or six years ago, and it has an incredibly large user-base. I know that not all of those people are using cutting edge technology to run their games. It would appear to me that many adventure game companies are taking a similar approach.
Let's look at Syberia 2. Syberia 2 was released in March of 2004. 2Ghz processors weren't uncommon then, and DirectX 9 had been out for a year and a half. Syberia 2's requirements, however, were well below the industry standard. The minimum processor requirement was a 350mhz Pentium II. I don't recall any Pentium IIs being produced after 1999, and yet, five years later, a new game would run pretty smoothly on one. The "recommended" minimum system was an 800mhz PIII, which is still pretty funny seeing how the Pentium III had been discontinued more than a year prior to the game's release, not to mention that the fastest PIII was clocked at 1.4Ghz The memory requirements were even less lofty at 64mb. A computer that I bought in 1999 shipped with 128mb of ram (the "recommended" amount for Syberia 2, btw), and it was pretty cheap. The computer that I purchased in 2004 came with 1gb of ram and, again, was fairly inexpensive. Syberia 2 required a 16x CD drive, but a 24x was recommended. I was quite confident, then, that my 8x DVD drive would handle those two CDs, and it certainly did.
My point here is this: Many adventure games are aimed at a market that may have a slightly aged computer. As my example above shows, a person with a shitty computer made before the year 2000 could play one of the greatest games made in 2004. My computer, made in 2004, is incapable of running FEAR, which was released a year and a half after I purchased my computer.
The people who have these aged computers may not have taken the time to upgrade to a DVD player, but they will most certainly have a 16x cdrom drive, and if they don't, they can find one for free in a cereal box or sitting by the side of the road with a "Will read discs for electricity" sign dangling 'round its neck.
That's not to say that we don't love it when things come out of DVD. I bought The Longest Journey when the "Game of the Year" edition was released on DVD. reamfall (which actually has some relatively high system requirements) was released on DVD in the Limited Edition pack as well as the standard edition on CDs. Steam also released it, so you don't even need any sort of optical drive.
|
| 31 JAN 2008 at 1:01am |
antlerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 51
Joined: 28 NOV 2007
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Agustin (22 NOV 2006 4:16pm)
Our NA publisher also expressed concerns about distributing games in DVD format. It simply looks like it isn't as widespread as many would think in PC. I believe it makes sense - and especially in the adventure realm - there are still some very dated computers out there!
Your kidding right? Concerned about people not having dvd drives? Or forcing the purchase of a dvd drive. Don't buy into that tripe for a minute. If they want to fall on that lame excuse where is the angst over spiraling cost of expanding memory and larger/faster video cards these graphics obsessive game makers love? It does not bother them in the least to require these upgrades with almost every new game release.
It's all about their cost it is likely cheaper to put a game on a couple of cds than a dvd.
|
| 31 JAN 2008 at 5:35pm |
RetrogamerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 84
Joined: 29 JAN 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By antler (31 JAN 2008 1:01am)
Your kidding right? Concerned about people not having dvd drives? Or forcing the purchase of a dvd drive. Don't buy into that tripe for a minute.
It's a pretty good reason, actually.
In 1992, Space Quest 4 was released on CD. I bought it for myself and played the hell out of it. My dad was visiting one day and saw me playing SQ4. He was really interested in it, since it seemed like a more mature video game, so I figured I'd buy it for him for Christmas. He didn't have a cd player on his computer, though, and good quality CD-rom drives were still pretty freakin expensive, so I went to the Software Etc. or Babages (or whatever it was we had in the mall back then) and bought the 7-diskette version that had been released for the Mac in 1991. I think it was on sale and it still cost $40. Many adventure gamers today are much like my father was then. They might not have the latest computer equipment, but they'd still like to play.
|
