Final Fantasy XIII 360 Losing 15GB


Analysis of the content of the Blu-ray disc housing Final Fantasy XIII on the PS3 suggests some unpleasant compromises may be in store for the Xbox 360 version, in spite of assurances to the contrary and what many suspect to be reductions in graphical quality on the PS3 version in order to keep both versions identical.


The BD containing the game amounts to 38GB, whilst the Xbox 360 version has already been confirmed as being packed onto 3 DVD discs (offering an absolute maximum of 25GB or so).

Add to this the fact that each disc will have to duplicate key game resources and the amount of space available to the Xbox 360 version drops even further…

However, concerns over a crippled Xbox 360 version are misplaced – of the 38GB of data on the disc, only 8GB is game data, the rest being given over to sumptuous CG movies (see above), leading to the promise that the in-game elements will be “mostly” identical, whilst the movies simply enjoy far lower data rates to compensate, an admittedly dubious consolation.

Leave a Comment


  • Well saying the xbox 360 is bad in general is just plain ignorant. As for me, im getting FF13 on the PS3 of course. But my x360 library far outnumbers my ps3 by 3:1 (35 to 12). And interface wise, I would rather deal with xbox360’s HUD than PS3’s annoying hud. You dont even have an option to skip the installation proces. And all updates, regardless of size always end up taking 4-10 minutes. And you have to wait for the download THEN wait for the install. where as the whole process is seamless on the x360.

    If there is a good multi-port game it will always go on the 360. I save the ps3 for Blu-ray and exclusive games.

  • i loled at bunch of asses arguing between Xbox n PS3, cant u guys just sit back n enjoy the game? i own a PS3 and i wouldnt wanna compare it with Xbox since i dont own a Xbox but who cares as long as i can play the games i want.

  • i dont know if this has been said, but look at fan subs for this.

    400mb = 22 minutes of bluray rip, at 720p that is almost flawless.

    1gb =22 minutes of bluray rip, at 1080p that is almost flawless.

    compressing the video will barely effect the end result if done right.

  • ChaosAngelZero says:

    My best guess is, while the game will be rendered at 720p on both consoles, full motion video cutscenes are stored in 1080p in the PlayStation 3 version and at the same 720p as the game proper in the Xbox 360 one.

    No big loss anyway, only that movies will look blurrier and the game itself will look crisper.

  • More than likely to be uncompressed cutscene and CGI video footage. It was said that the PS3 version would have 1080p CGI scenes. That could be several gigs of disc space used right there. But even if that’s true, I highly doubt people are going to care THAT much about it. I know I wouldn’t, but then again I’m most likely going to buy the PS3 version anyway.

  • All I know is that they better make the PS3 version as if it were still an exclusive. If they wanna put as much extra content in there then do it. Dont let the ps3 suffer due to the lack of space on the box of death….

  • thats just cause the developers are getting lazy thanks to blu ray what a joke . the is a thing called compression but they dont seem to be using it other wise they could fit alot more data on those discs

  • Typically for many modern games, FMV takes up the most space, followed by audio for voice acting and sound effects, then textures, models, animation data for realtime cut-scenes, then finally the code that holds the whole thing together. Like AI and the graphics engine.

    SquareEnix may be able to offer open world exploration on all the 360 disks, if dialogue, cut-scene animation and the models/textures for things you only encounter once like bosses are cut down by two thirds, in addition to the movies. Plus from what I’ve seen, some locations get destroyed, and can therefore be dumped from later disks as well. So if SE are doing their jobs properly, neither the PS3 or 360 versions should be compromised, by the DVD size limitations carrying over to the PS3, or by disk swapping being required for 360 gamers to play exactly what PS3 gamers are playing.

    As for accusations that the 360 version has hurt the in-game graphics of the PS3 game, you can’t blame DVDs that. The limitation there is always the amount of RAM the machines have, and the White Engine that the game is running on is known to be multiformat anyway, from before the announcement of the 360 version.

  • The 360 version will have 720p encoding, and can only output lossy Dolby Digital 5.1 at 448kbps maximum.

    If the PS3 video files are at 1080p and have LPCM audio, then the limits of the Xbox 360 version will scale accordingly in terms of file size.

  • I own a ps3 and a 360. I could care less about final fantasy teenage rpg garbage. The japanese should be ashamed to make such trivial teeny bopper crap. If any male over the age of 15 buys this ridiculous nonsense he should be arrested immediately. I like my rpg’s mature please. Mass Effect 2.

  • Why can’t they use the game graphic engine for the scenes, instead wasting all that amount of data, oh yeah just to fill up the blu ray disc with unnecesary data and then say it doesn’t fit on one single dvd

  • Why ar epeople getting so bent out of shape about having to change discs?

    Have you all forgotten than FF7-9 required upto disc changes? Never seemed to bother anyone back then & it doesn’t bother me now.

    Also lets take MGS4, having to change disc’s at the start of the next chapter would have been quicker than sitting there for 6-10 minuites while each chapter was installed to the PS3 HDD before it loaded.

    • I’m not against disc changing. The thing with disc changing is that the devs need to plan ahead if they are certain that their game gonna end up with more than 1 disc. They need to do this to avoid multiple disc changing (as in changing the disc back and forth).

      In previous FF, SE already know that they will use CD/DVD for their game, so they design their game with that that in mind. For FF13, it’s supposed to be PS3 exclusive and surely they will design the game with the fact that they can have 50GB of space to play with. Suddenly they announced that it will come to Xbox360.
      Imagine it like this… you need to move a lot of stuff and for that you rent a big truck. Instead of a big truck, you only get 3 smaller truck. With the big truck you have a freedom to just throw your all your stuff into the truck. With 3 smaller truck you must plan carefully on what going into each truck so the trucks could carry all of your stuff.
      And in FF13 case, it isn’t as simple as that since it isn’t just stuffing all the content to DVD but also to make sure that each DVD have the right content to ensure smooth gameplay. I really hope that SE make the 360 version flawlessly without compromising the game itself.

      If they started with a vision that it will end up on 360, then it wouldn’t matter if they’ve got 50GB to play with because they already knows that they need to make it playable on DVD, thus design the game accordingly.

    • What people seems to forget is that it’s mostly linear for the first half of the game. And linear progression doesn’t mean they will ditch the first half of the game completely. So it’s still possible that while you’re in your third disc you want to go to the places that were in the first half of the game.
      The question should be this… whether this linear progression is what SE originally intended or because the need to adapt to the multi-disc version? Can the player trace back to almost every place they visited near the end of the game? If some places are being blocked, is the blocking caused by the natural progression of the story or felt forced? Are there any events in the game that happen just for the sake to block some parts of the game without having any effect on the story?

    • Change that to a lot of PS3 devs…. basically they have less compression because they can. And there is probably a bit of pressure from Sony to fill the disc and the easiest way to do it is to have less compression… Although if you look at it from another perspective, it might be that because the need for multiplatform they must limit how big most devs can make their game.
      So the devs need to fill the BD while it still can fit on DVD. The easiest way to achieve that is to have movies and assets on the PS3 version to have less or no compression at all.

  • For anyone wondering about the load times, it’s virtually non existent, so it’s worthless to compare the drive speed between PS3 and Xbox360 if the PS3 already loads fast enough. If devs really made a game with PS3 as their main platform, then load times shouldn’t be a big problem.
    And again… the movies in the PS3 version is compressed (at least the video part, the audio maybe uncompressed). In case anyone wondering, uncompressed 1920×1080 image at 24bit is about 6MB/image. For movies you need at least 24fps, so 6*24=144MB/s (1.15Gbit/s). An hour of uncompressed movie needs about 500GB of space.

  • The 360 version has already been confirmed to have compressed cutscenes and music.

    The ps3 version is completely uncompressed.

    I don’t see the point in MS paying for a FF13 port, all it’s done is highlight the inferiority of the dvd storage medium, not a good publicity stunt at all.

    • That can’t possibly be completely uncompressed.
      Uncompressed 8-bit 1080p30 has a bitrate of about 125MB/s. So 32GB of video at that quality will amount to about 4 and a third minute of content. And that’s without counting the audio.
      In fact, current optical storage reading technologies aren’t even capable of streaming data at that speed.

    • The only people who care about that are fanboys, though. Your average Joe who doesn’t know shit about this stuff sure isn’t going to care. I think the PS3 version will probably sell a little better, but it won’t be because of this.

      • The ps3 version will sell better in the same way the ps3 version of tekken6 sold better because the fanbase demographic of both titles resides on the playstation. playstation fanboys have been enjoying FF titles since the 7th game in 1997.

        The fanbase is on the playstation, fact.

        Most people buying the 360 version will probably be new to the series or a few ‘I was going to buy a ps3 only for ff13 but I don’t need one now’ crowd.

  • Having both systems cuts down on any weird choices like this. I always intended on buying this for PS3 (just like I always intended to get MW2 on 360).

    Still, this seems like it’ll suck for 360 users.

  • I don’t get all this fanboy crap ‘PS3 is better, Xbox is better Etc….’, its all just pointless dribble.

    I’ve got both systems as well as a Wii & to be honest I think both PS3 & XB360 are as good as each other, neither is really any better in terms of the games.

    PS3 has some great exclusive’s & likewise the Xbox360 has some great exclusives & in terms of the Multi-Platforms there is most often than not no significant difference between the 2.

    Onto the controller’s, I always used to prefer Dual Shock, However now I prefer the Xbox360 pad, mainly the analog stick placement. I think the left stick on the 360 pad been where it is is more comfortable because to me it feels more natural. I also think the triggers are a lot, lot better on the 360 pad.

    Not a dig at PS3 just my personnel preference.

    • In my case i would love to play this on PS3 but since i live in a god forsaken place like bolivia and getting a console is extremelyexpensive (i got my elite for 690$ at taht time), the only good thing are pirate games, well, but its too damm expensive to buy a PS3 and having to pay like 95$ per game when the slim here is ata bout 500$. Since thats the case, the only thing i can do is support the 360 and hope to get a good FFXII. Damm, i would also liked to play Heavy Rain.

  • My only gripe with the PS3 controller is the inward curving trigger buttons, when my hands get sweaty my fingers slide off the buttons, i went and bought some cheap $5 trigger mods that make the buttons curve outwards and suddenly the controller feels alot bigger and sits perfectly in my hands.

  • Btw, the movies already compressed on the PS3. If what SE staff said on SIGGRAPH Asia were true, than the CG movies total amount are 3 hours (the total amount of cut scenes are 9 hours, so 6 hours are rendered in real time). 38GB of movies for 3 hours resulted in bitrate about 30Mbit/s, which is pretty standard for BD movies. You can still get a good result using 3-6Mbit/s bitrate though, so it isn’t impossible for SE to cram those movies into Xbox360 DVD.

    My worries isn’t about the movies, but whether the need to split the game data into 3 disc would affect the flow of the game thus the gameplay itself and if it indeed affect the gameplay, would it affect the PS3 version too.

  • Final Fantasy always has been playstation. No need to switch. It just feels right.

    However if I had no ps3 this would definately be the system seller to get one.

    Mainly my biggest gripe is 360’s controller. It’s atrocious. Which pushes me towards playstation for certain things otherwise I’ buy 360. Not including this game.

    My main gripe with playstation is so-so trophy sopport for major games. How is it even possible to play metal gear solid and have no trophies.

    That would be like Halo with no achievements…

    • Thats funny, because the 360 controller almost seems like the best designed controller to date. You sony fanboys are too stupid to realize that the dated design of the dual shock just doesn’t cut it these days.
      The triggers of the PS3 controller feel so cheap and insensitive. Mind as well keep them as buttons. The sticks are too far in, making it awkward to move with the left stick and do other things with the right. Like aim. Imagine kingdom hearts with the 360 controller, don’t you think the primary action of moving using the closest stick and changing commands using the inner dpad would be so much easier?
      Racing games also benefit from the xbox’s pressure sensitive triggers, while the PS racing games always suck because you’re pressing X to accelerate like an old and dated kart racer. Except its grand turismo.
      Say what you want about the 360 itself, but its almost fact that the controller is the best controller ever made. It was designed with comfort in mind, so if you don’t like it, you’re too obviously a fanboy.

    • Final Fantasy was Nintendo first, why’d they sell out and go over to Sony? Hurp durp. Poor fucking excuse. Final Fantasy has never been “always been playstation”. But what can you expect from a generation that seems to totally ignore the series pre-VII?

      • Don’t even start that knowledge game BS. I was here when final fantasy was first released.

        The context of my speech is from the support of PlayStation 3 given the also known fact PlayStation as a whole has the held the last wave of final fantasy games.

        The ones that were on NES SNES DS gameboy or even that weird CD-i offering are all completely irrelevant and unrelated. Take a couple minutes to digest what people are saying before you start waving your “sic burn” flag around.

        Also try to cope with the fact that not everybody who has something to say is an 11 year old twerp on winter holiday break.

        Example: If someone says 9/11 is the cause of the war or even oil was the cause nobody in their right mind outside of a smart ass would respond with “You’re ignorance is laid bare for all to see, idiot! The war was started by the assassination of Franz Ferdinand. It started in 1914.”

        The concept is the same except the topic is final fantasy and PlayStation.

        If you’re looking for a place to go kick some common knowledge around, I hear Square Enix is looking for people to remind them they used to be Squaresoft.

      • Don’t even start that. I know full well where Final Fantasy started from, I was here when it was first released. The context of my speech is aimed at support for playstation 3 from the history of playstation holding the recent slew of final fantasy games.

        the ones on nintendo super nintendo gamboy DS hell even those awful CD-i computer ones are all irrelevant to this conversation.

        Try taking a couple minutes to digest what was said before rushing to start waving your “sic burn” banner.

        If you hear someone complaining these days about 9/11 started the war or the war is all about oil you don’t immediately say “not true you ignorant idiot, it’s because Franz Ferdinand was assinated. The war was started in 1914.”

        You immediately know the context is about the current iraq afghanistan conflicts. Anybody saying something different would be labeled a smart ass. So try not think everybody who posts is an 11 year old on holdiay winter break from school.

        The situation is similar just on final fantasy.

        • Who cares if you “were there when FF first came out”

          You sony fags keep saying you have these “exclusive” franchises when you really dont. Metal gear included.
          Face it, developers choose the console that’s best for them. They don’t give a shit about loyalty to a console, they’re a business.
          There’s only been 5 PS only FFs, and that’s 7, 8, 9, 10, and 12. I don’t see where this “context” comes from, but I didn’t see nintendo fanboys whining like you do when FF7 didn’t appear on N64 now did they?

    • I guess 7 was your first FF, more reason to hate that game. Now sony fanboys are claiming FF has always been on the PS.

      Reading further it seems i give too much credit to that game, seems the ps was your first console. Believe me kid, you’re just too used to that control scheme, but there are better controlers out there. Don’t take this as an offense, the controler deal is my main gripe with the fighting games community, the Sony controler has become pretty much standar, so it’s harder for me who doesn’t like it, to find people to play with irl.

    • but Halo 1 and Halo 2 have no achievements, and they still are marvellous games. Personally i prefer the 360 controller, especially for RPGs. The play and charge kit means i dont have to worry about battery when i spend hours grinding and the fact that its large enough for my hands to grip it comfortably helps when i play for long periods of time. And somehow, for RPGs that require less input than FPSes, ive developed a lazy mans grip which leaves the controller on my lap and i play one handed.

    • “Mainly my biggest gripe is 360’s controller. It’s atrocious. Which pushes me towards playstation for certain things otherwise I’ buy 360. Not including this game.”

      Funny, the one thing I don’t like about my PS3 is that I can’t use the vastly superior xbox360 controller. The PS3 would be better if the controller wasn’t designed with a five-year-olds hands as the target size.

      • in complete agreement.. i know its all personal in the end.. and all the stats and fudged fanboy data are meaningless when stacked against individual preference.. but ive hated the ps controller ever since xbox reduced the size of theirs.. but im sure to that 5 year old even the 360 controller is too big.. i will openly admit though that the d-pad for ps controllers is way better..

      • the PS Controler/DUALSHOCK has been around for a decade already… why kill a good thing? i own all the controlers from the PS1 (no analog+analoge)to the current DS3s…to all the GunCons.

        Sony has managed to keep the controller the same to benefit the players who supported them over the decades…and thats a great move on their part.

        • Meh, both 360 and PS3 controllers have their faults. For example I’d love to have PlayStation’s D-Pad on my 360 controller but the same time I like how 360’s controller fits better in my hands.

        • I’ve been gaming since the snes. The ps controller layout is pretty much the same as the snes layout. Only added analog and extra shoulder buttons. There is nothing wrong with the controller at all. Everyone who says the controller is bad is pretty much just a xbox fanboy.

          The xbox controller is pretty much the same layout except the swapped the analog and d-pad around. I have no trouble playing with either controller except when it comes to fighting games. I’m just so used to using the d-pad from the snes days for fighting games. And the 360 d-pad is horrible.

          Both the 360 and ps3 controller are decent. And to actually say your thumbs touch each other when using the analog on the ps3 is pure bull shit. You need to get your head outta your ass and actually use the dam controller before you make up crap.

        • “ps3 controller is not suitable to play fps or any other shooting game”

          Do you have any idea how silly this statement is? The vast majority of Japanese gamers HATE FPS or just don’t like them. The PS controller is developed for games that are actually fun.

          Also it’s great for real shooters a.k.a SHMUPs…but then again, Xbox gamers wouldn’t know the joy of having a proper D-pad.

        • huh? Read before you talk. He said he owned all the PS controlers including the Dualshock3 which is for the PS3…duh?

          I personally feel great playing FPS with the PS controler and kick ass. top 20000 in CoD:Mw2, what anon discribed as nostalgic where everything should be where it is. Classic. and i grew up playing MGS and playing MGS4 was no differnt.

          what lies here is the problem, Sony invtented the present day next-gen controler, if anything xbox just copied sony with the 2 analog sticks, rumble, and etc.

          Sony prides itself on labeling their machine a entertainment machine. On the other hand we have microsoft who calls it a Gaming console, which to this point have produced nothing but FPSs and similar type games(Exaggeration, JP games limited to Idolmaster, Dream Club, etc) while Sony and its PS3 have a VARIETY of games for everyone just like the Wii.

          I personally own all 3 consoles, and give sony props on their controler, it has stayed the same and the Consumers/Fans/Critics all agree. Remember when the PS3 first came out with its “Banana” controler? everyone was aghast and devastated and demanded the classic Dualshock back, and sony gave in and changed it back…Sony believes the fans were right, and they are.

        • Huh? Read before you comment. I said i own ALL the PS controlers including the Dualshock3 which is made for a PS3?…Duh… And i do great with it on FPSs.

          Sony labels their machine as a Entertainment machine unlike Microsoft who insists on saying its a gaming console and prides itself on FPSs and similar genres while PS3 enjoys a VARIETY of games and genres for all ages. a controler which fits ALL Roles of gaming and hand sizes…
          which is evident through the same controller design over and over again. Might i add that PS2 fans were horribly shocked when they introduced the PS3 “Banana” which forced sony to re-adopt the classic design.

          I own both PS3 and Xbox and i strongly prefer a PS controller due to its smaller size and portability. i dont want to play with a giant flying saucer all day long.

        • ps controller is good? i bet you never owned a ps3. the analog stick is too awkwardly placed and its really very very soft. ps3 controller is not suitable to play fps or any other shooting game.

      • Not sure what you’re goin on about… As a 30 yr old male I love my PS3 controller, as I did my PS2 controller, and my PS1 controller before that. As the saying goes, if it aint broke, don’t fix it.

        • Yeah the Xbox controller seems big to me also. It’s no problem when it’s only the main button but it becomes really hard to use the triggers.
          On the other hand am only 1,74 and my hands are thin. I see lot’s of people with a lot fatter fingers and hands.
          It looks like each controller is better for different people.

        • The thing why the Xbox360 is failing is because this point. Understand who are playing most of the games. Plus if you really want to compare further, the population of white skin is far lesser than that of Asians.

          Your hands do not get bigger if you grow fat. If you make a claim that your hands grow bigger with more fats, then you contradict the point that your heart also grows bigger.

        • Still undeniable that [at least in developed countries] the current generation is getting sufficient or even too much nourishment. More than the previous generation.

          That means bigger [or fatter] people.

          That means bigger hands.

          Japanese people do have smaller hands in general, but in terms of ergonomics, the 360 controller has the best shape for its intended audience. The PS3 controller may have the best shape for the japanese but this disregards the european and north american markets, countries where obesity is an epidemic and people generally have larger hands.

        • Japanese people, hands in particular, are smaller than most western people. It’s not a shock that a japanese console has smaller controllers, they might optimize them more toward their closest purchasers. They may also base their size more on younger users.

          With that said, I actually like the 360 controller a lot, more than PS3’s. After playing on my PS2 controller for thousands of hours, I also still feel it’s not very comfortable, especially where your palms touch it.

        • Interesting concept.

          To clarify it’s simply the 360 controller is large and fat much like dreamcast with buttons that don’t seem to mesh well. You actually have to use effort to push the trigger buttons and the control pad isn’t designed for fighting games.

          Maybe it’s just me but I can smackdown with the best of them in say tekken 6 of SF 4 on ps3. Put it on 360, and the computer mode on noob easy plays better than me on my best day.

          Heck I even struggled on Resident Evil 5 with 360. Couldn’t beat stage 1 at all. Hard time functioning. Bought it on PS3 and beat that game inside out.

        • I know what he is talking about. When i hold a PS3, PS2 or PS1 controller, my fingers wrap ALL the way around the grip and my thumbs occasionally brush against each other holding the analogs. The controller is smaller than it should be. Deal with it.

          Of course it could be that the current generation is better nourished than the older generation as evidenced by the abundance of tall young people. People of the now have bigger hands, and the PS3 controller hasnt grown to accomodate that. It might have not been broken then, but its broken now.

  • It doesnt prove anything really.

    If you want to be lazy and leave your video uncompressed [which results in a huge filesize and maximum quality], then go for blu ray. But then you will have to deal with the PS3s installing of games because blu ray has such a slow search time [2x speed]

    If you want to take the extra effort to compress your videos [MUCH smaller filesize. Depending on the compression, quality loss will only be noticable on huge full HDTVs] and want to reap the benefits of the DVDs 12x speed then go for DVD.

    As a logical point to make an educated decision on a console, this doesnt prove anything. As troll fuel for inciting fanboy console wars, this means alot.

    Also, its kinda funny that the videos are saved in the .wmp [windows media player] format.

    • Just to point something out, 2x is an arbitrary number based on whatever real number measurement is represented by 1x.

      For example, a read speed of 16x from a DVD is incredibly faster than 16x from a CD. No, this doesn’t stop the Xbox from being able to read discs faster than a PS3, I’m just pointing out a logical fallacy in your claims.

      • Learn to google. People strap on 12x and 2x on their media readers for a reason.

        a 1x DVD reads data at 10.5 Mbit/s

        a 1x Blu-Ray reads data at 36 Mbits/s

        Blu ray reads raw data faster because of its smaller laser.

        DVD however, reads data as a whole faster, because it is CHEAPER to produce 8x, 16x and 24x DVD readers, which read at 8x, 16x and 24x the aforementioned speed respectively.

        Currently the fastest Blu-Ray reader is 12x and those players are ridiculously expensive. [This is the reason that purpose built blu ray movie players cost more than PS3s].

        The PS3 only has a 2x Blu-Ray player.

        Logical Fallacy overruled with fact.

        Furthermore, because the Blu-Ray can hold more data, and it uses a smaller Blue Laser, it takes a longer time to search across all that data. This problem is further increased due to lazy developers not compressing their Blu-Ray data giving the laser a whole lot more data to search through. Developers have been known to do this to show the purported necessities of Blu-Ray as a storage format. If developers make it seem that all the extra storage is NECESSARY, it helps sony in the format war and sony has been known to get developers to fill the extra space with blank filler data to get these results [in the case of Resistance 1].

        • PS3 uses XDR DRAM, which stands for “eXtreme Data Rate”, and is, in fact, almost as fast as you can get, with a 25.6GB/s data rate.

          Loading time is mostly influenced by the speed at which you can read the data from the storage medium, and the time it takes to decompress it.

          And of course they only cared about reducing costs, as it was selling at too big of a loss. They’ve kept removing components and features since the time it was released. They would never bother upgrading something as the BD drive, which is the MOST EXPENSIVE component it has already.

        • That is the issue with Sony I can never understand when they released PS3 slim.

          First they did nothing about that RAM which most likely caused the slow loading time. Now, they still have not found any stroke of innovation to upgrade the BD reader.

          I can only conclude their rational behind this reason as is to lower the producing cost ASAP.

        • One advantage that should be pointed out is that Blu-ray does have a constant read speed, instead of the DVD’s maximum read speed (the maximum value is the one that’s advertised).

          “DVD however, reads data as a whole faster, because it is CHEAPER to produce 8x, 16x and 24x DVD readers, which read at 8x, 16x and 24x the aforementioned speed respectively.”

          I believe this isn’t worded perfectly even though I understand the meaning behind it.
          Essentially, if you were to compare the same read speeds for each (x1 DVD vs x1 Blu-ray), you’d find superior data reading values for the Blu-ray.
          The problem is the higher the read speed, the higher the price the drive is sold for. This is very minimal regarding DVD drives, but for Blu-ray, the price skyrockets.

          Now, the PS3 has x2 Blu-ray read speed which makes it end up with a constant read speed of about 8Mbps.
          This value is inferior to DVD read speeds of x12 which will oscillate between 8.2ish and 16ish Mbps.
          In the end, even with oscillations in mind, the DVD drive will acquire more data than the Blu-ray one.

    • Even on blu-ray video need to be compressed :} to h264. Blu-ray speed or even ps3 horsewpower is to slow for raw uncompressed video data :] . X360 will get just 720p quality movies with lower bitrate . And you dont need uncompressed audio on both consoles becouse audio quality on both hardware is weak (dont expect something awesome from low-end audio codecs in your consoles).

    • hehe u make some great points, and yep funny about the wmp format there.. but in this game’s case, FF13 doesnt require an install so it’s not that bad..

      People just exagerate on just about everything nowadays, it’s simply pathetic.. and to think so many gamers are adults, makes me wonder..


  • This can’t come as much of a surprise, frankly speaking (as an admited ps3 fanboy) I am often surprised by multiplatform games. A blu ray can store so much more and is capable of much better performance and yet they often try and make games the same regardless of platform or sometimes even worse for the ps3. It makes you wonder just how many people M$ has bribed at these studios.

    • Much better performance? Read speeds are pretty much the same compared to DVD assuming sequential reads, performance dies quickly for random access on blurays. Add to that the need now to read much more data, and I can’t see that “much better performance”.

      • Actually I have read somewhere that seeking (for random access) is faster on PS3 compared to Xbox360. The logic is that BR disc have much higher density, thus when you need to read it randomly, it can get to the data faster.
        I believe I read it somewhere on beyond3d forum.

        • access time of the blu-ray drive and constant streaming time is indeed higher on the blu-ray drive.

          why you sometimes have to install a game is because every PS3 has a HDD, and the xbox360 does not and thus u have to hear the loud cry of a dvd drive which will break faster because the game developer didn’t feel the need to force-install anything on the xbox360 (because it’s a cheap piece of crap to start with, and only 50% of the users have a HDD)…

        • Anon 22:52, are you high? Blu-ray read speed at 2x is 72 Mbit/s. DVD read speed for “12x” which is only 12x at the edge of the disc is around 128 Mbit/s. In the center of the disc it’s 6x about 64 Mbit/s. Therefore, even though Blu-Ray is CLV and is 72 Mbit/s across the disc, and DVD is CAV, it’s still slower on average.

        • PS3’s 2x Blu-ray is about 7x DVD speed, and it’s a constant 2x across the disc. 12x DVD speed is almost double, but only on the edge of the disc, on the inside of the disc is drops to 6x: the further out on the disc, the faster the read speed. Therefore at the center of the disc, Blu-ray is faster. So a 12x DVD speed averages to 9x it’s only 29% better.

        • @anon 23:24

          This is the reason why i dont speak about the technological aspects of a console cuz one reason or another you will be wrong and sound retarded after someone corrects you.

          IMO both versions won’t look that different from one another, I will only eat these words if for any reason the 360 does perform significantly less.

        • You idiot a 2x Blu-Ray reader doesn’t even compare to a DVD 2x reader. It’s a lot lot faster. It could very well be faster than 12x DVD or slightly slower.
          When blu-ray readers improve to bigger speeds like 10x and more a DVD reader would need 120x to reach them.
          Learn a little about technology before speaking.

        • 2x reading for a blu-ray is different than 2x reading on a DVD, they are different media formats. While the DVD is indeed faster than blu-ray (at least on the ps3, which uses the very first blu-ray drive commercially available), most PS3 games compensate for that installing the games on the HDD, taking usually less than 5gb of sapce and making the loads almost the same as the DVD or the 360 own HDD (which do not come with all models, while the ps3 one does). The Xbox360 doesnt have anything to compensate for the lack of space on the DVDs except dividing their games on multiple discs, which may not work nicely with all kind of games. As games get bigger and bigger, I really want to see how M$ will handle have all their games on multiple discs.

    • True the blu-ray can store more, but the DVD still has the better performance. There is a reason the PS3 has to install its games. And what you said works both ways, some games have been made worse for the 360 to compensate for the PS3. Some developers even opt to develop for the PS3 first, then to develop for the 360 because its that much easier to develop for the 360 and if done in reverse, it would make the PS3 game function worse than the 360 iteration.

      For a company to make a multiplatform game, as much as possible it needs to make the game as equal as possible or risk the anger of the fans of the inferior game. Its good business sense. You wouldnt want microsoft or sony withdrawing support for your company because you made their version of the game inferior.

      Like ive said many times, console wars are good because it gets both companies to constantly try to improve their services. Sony has shown microsoft the importance of high storage media while microsoft still firmly leads in the online sector [even though you have to pay for xbox live, more people use it than PSN and that is M$ofts business success]. In the end the consumer benefits.

  • “In an interview in Famitsu they state that the video and audio is compressed on the Xbox 360 DVDs while the Playstation 3 version will be uncompressed and appear on a dual-layer blu-ray disc. The 360 version will obviously be released on multiple DVDs.”

    uncompressed audio and video takes up a ton of space and can be compressed and still look very good.

    • Like fanboys care about that… If you don’t watch it from 50 inch TV and from 1 meter away you probally don’t notice any difference.

      Compression was invented to take less space adding more content while maintaining good overall quality but PS3 took step back and decided to use uncompressed A/V

      I don’t see why wouldn’t they compress it. More space, more content… but nooo its all about untouched uncompressed A/V

      • Lots of PS3 games use uncompressed audio, for what reason I don’t know. Perhaps they don’t want to make use of the SPEs to do audio decompression which is practically what they were DESIGNED FOR. Lazy devs. Stupid fanboys. Xbox360 blows, PS3 blows. PS2 and Dreamcast were the last ‘good’ consoles. If you want good modern games, play NDS sadly. My 360 collects dust and my PS3 is just a bluray player.

        • Let me start for u…first..u dont have any of these console(if u do…then u does live under a rock)…second yes that may be said about uncompressed stuff by the ps3 side since bluray is just a huge storage disc base…but that doesn’t take away that compressed files may differ sometime with uncompressed file, lazy dev or no whatever, but u saying…that if someone would want to play any good game go to the nds(sadly…im for u)…LOL ooh son, what did u said there….ds hardly has more appealing game than ps3…-(not to mention xbox)AND U DARE TO SAY THAT…look like u r one of these two option.

          1 – A troll for nature

          2- a guy that live under a rock..or who hasnt play games far beyond of just grabing a ds..or a wii lol. dud U SOO FAIL.

      • the PS3 can still read compressed media/audio right? If anything wouldn’t this be Square’s choice seeing that if they did compress PS3 version having extra space that still wouldn’t reduce the size of the 360 being already compressed that along with having more room for extra content meaning more discs would be required for the 360 version, probably something they didn’t want to do. If anything they might release DLC to rake in more money

        • The cell isnt all that good really. thats why theyre only being made for ps3 theese days. production stopped ages ago for most other applications. It was too much too soon and too complicated. ps3 would have been better with an quad core i7 or somthing like that. programming that would be a sinch compared to the overly complicated cell. My 12 yr old socket a amd pc can stream hd from the net or a disc and its no monster. it even playes compressed 1080p video without issue. my 6month old rig doesnt do hd any better just my apps load qicker and i have 2.5 TB of storage. and i can play newer Really, The Cell is no monster.

        • The reason for uncompressed PS3 version is because compressing HD video would actually cause problems… the Cell is a monster at streaming HD… nothing can even come close to touching it… so you play to the strength of the system and uncompressed HD is playing to the strength of the system. Microsoft however build their system with compression in mind (obviously because of HD videos not fitting on DVD)

        • Well I do notice difference when old and outdated codecs are used with very low bitrate and bad settings causing blockiness and blur.

          Action packed videos are the ones that gets most effected by the compression, todays advanced lossy video codecs like h.264 though are a bit different. Good comprenssion and quality, with some setting tweaking you can squeeze some extra space and quality out of it.

          About the audio though.. If you don’t have extremely good audio system you can’t notice no difference between 320kbps mp3/vorbis vs losless flac. 192kbs is somewhat minimum when it starts to effect the sound with standard audio system (good headphones, stereo etc).

        • you obviously are not that sensitive enough to recognize some changes in quality when comparing compressed vs. uncompressed.

          Try listening to a FLAC-based music file and compare it to an 320KBit MP3.

          But it all also depends on the compression used. But my guess of course is that the PS3 version uses a lossless compression technique and the 360 version uses a lossy compression to lessen the file size more.

    • Player base, multiple good arcade games, dvd player, exclusives and especially multi-player element. Most people who buy Xbox360 is for the multi-player over instead of giving people head in PS home. Besides Blu-RAY isn’t much of an excuse to leave out content.

      Which is better Blu-Ray, DVD or that fucking 1-2 TB harddrive you got in the computer while browsing Sankaku?

      Besides its an actual game machine and marketed that way compared to the PS3 which suppose to solve all your electronics needs as well as world hunger which it doesn’t

        • Anonymous says:

          yeah and that’s why i hated lost oddyssey cuz it freaking loads all the time so i don’t really care about the loading times or DVD vs BD since it can be remedied by installing it.
          And also you do know sony invented DVD. Also they can also use DVD’s on PS3 it’s just that they don’t want to cuz blu-ray has advantages. and i heard that FFXIV will only be released on DVD for the PS3 or it might be just downloadable from PSN.

        • ALL video on blu-ray or DVD is compressed. The difference is that the tracks left down on the blu-ray are so small that increases in disk speed cause an unacceptable error rate. DVD on the other hand is more robust and a good drive can spin up at 50 times normal speed where 4x for DVD is top end.

          This slower read speed for blu-ray causes the slower load times. The advantage is more storage.

          For a multi-media or state of the art game machine blu-ray appears to be the future.

          The XBOX can not do HD 720P 3-D (accepted HD 3-D game resolution), besides the HDMI 1.2 port not having the speed to display double frames at 60Hz, the 10 meg video buffer in the Xbox GPU is not large enough for double frame or even true 1080P.

          The XBOX design was as a low cost 720P game machine and as such the PS3 has a difficult time meeting the picture quality (doable but takes more work)consistently available in Xbox games. This in part because the PS3 was designed with 3-D and new HDMI standards in mind (upgradable vs optimazation).

        • people are forgetting tha fact tht ms are optimizing games for hdd in 2010. a form of super Compression snd cacheing to the hdd so games o dvds can be further compressed. i wouldnt be supprissed to find both versions identical when they come out.

          Are ms really going to allow such a huge franchise be substantially worse on their machine. i dont think so…

        • compression would kill the game on ps3. with the overall slower load times with blu ray decompressing files on the fly would create 10 min loading screens. thats why blu ray movies are so uber, because the data is uncompressed if the ps3 had to decompress movies they would buffer for ages. a much faster drive would cure this but thats not going to happen. i would sooner have a slightly lower qualty (compressed) version than waste my life at loading screens. ill guarantee though that ingame where it matters the xbox will have the edge as usual. if people are complaining abbout 3-4 discs on xbox just install them. ya can always delete when ur done.
          this is just my oppinion as i cant stand the ff series. id sooner watch paint dry.

        • Really anon? I suggest you see the newest post saying how absolute shit FF13 is.
          Not to mention the fact that the blu ray contains uncompressed file formats (wmp? are u fucking serious?). Think about it, the 360 versions of many games are always the ones that load faster and run smoother. This is because of compression, and there is hardly if any reduction of quality the human eye or ear can notice. Most people can’t tell between mp3 and wav so what the hell makes ps3 fanboys think uncompressed is better than compressed?

        • looks like the cap fit in ya head kamanashi.

          on topic

          THE XBOX IS SOOOOOOOOOOO OWNED, i have been watching this game in HQ and i may say, THISSSSSS IS A INSANEEEEEEEEE GAME, I SO LOVE IT, I AINT HIPING IT, BUT I CANT HOLD, that the linea sht that were being said back, will end in about 3 o 4 hour if u go playing quick, but if u want to do it slowly it will take some time, but an´way when u get to the green ground…DUD WOW even ff xii world stay small to what u will be able to walk or run or ride on a chocobo, BEST FF YET FOR ME(the history is seriously good, far better than ff xii, and comparable to ff x). and the town and so, yes there wont be any in the first 4 hours of the game but later on there will be plenty, weapons…not too diverses but yes there will be quite a amount of them for the different kind of weapons that the character spear and so ever.

          this game is just a AAA in all sense, u all jrpgs lover and ff lover will love this. U BET FOR IT.

      • First Posting Idiot says:

        The reason I’m not getting a 360 right now, besides the extra money I’d have to spend on games for it, is the fact that the only thing unique about it are a few exclusives. The most popular of these exclusives involve big guys in armor blowing shit up over and over and over(in America anyway). The few Japanese 360 exclusives that I might be interested seem to be coming to the PS3 anyway, and I rarely buy games when they come out, so the 1 year wait isn’t much of a let down.

        As for FF XIII, The majority of the game being CG movies isn’t going to stop me from buying it.

        Think of it this way:
        Movie theater: $10 = 2.5 hours of entertainment
        FF XIII: $60 = 50 hours of entertainment
        6 times the cost of a movie, for 20 times the entertainment amount.(not counting a second play through)

        Six Movies: $60 = 15 hours of entertainment
        FF XIII: $60 = 50 hours of entertainment
        (even if you match prices, long games like this are still a better investment of your spending money.)

        • I concur with your statement on the whole videogames are a cheaper form of entertainment. However I play on the opposite console, since for me the ps3 is still kind of a far off goal. Got two 360, one elite, one halo edition for significantly less than one ps3 when it was 500 bucks. ( 350 total )

          It breaks down for me like this:

          Movie theater: $12 = 2.5 hours of entertainment
          Halo 3 Multiplayer $60 = 2 years of entertainment

          Of course not everybody like FPSs but we all got our type of cake we like to eat.