[POLL]Multiple Discs: Does it matter?

From past to peresnt we have seen video games that are stored in more than one disc. Back then no more complain about Final Fantasy games being 3-4 discs, Xenosaga II being 2 discs and no one complain about Star Ocean being on 3 discs on the Xbox 360. There are a tons of examples. Thanks to the soap drama events of Final Fantasy XIII (Go look it up yourself), all of a sudden a video game being stored on multiple discs is a bad thing and became the centre of arguments.

My question is... Do you care if a game is on multiple discs? Does it change the outcome on what version you will buy? Just want to enjoy the game on your favourite system? I would like to read your answears.

It does to me. If you a lose and/or break a disc, you're fucked. End of story.

no

No it doesn't matter to me. If anyone complains about getting off their ass every 10 hours to change a disc, then they are just pure lazy and should get out more.

If you voted yes then you probably haven't been gaming very long...People only made a huge deal about multi-disc games this generation. It's ridiculous.

DukemNukem43 wrote:

It does to me. If you a lose and/or break a disc, you're fucked. End of story.

No it doesn't. You change disks all the time when you want to play a different game, changing disks a few more times is no big deal. I'd rather have 4 disks than be forced to do a 3gig install.

Alanski wrote:

If you voted yes then you probably haven't been gaming very long...People only made a huge deal about multi-disc games this generation. It's ridiculous.

I've been gaming since the 90's. SO fuck you.

DukemNukem43 wrote:

Alanski wrote:

If you voted yes then you probably haven't been gaming very long...People only made a huge deal about multi-disc games this generation. It's ridiculous.

I've been gaming since the 90's. SO fuck you.

You're reasoning/logic is completely stupid. Like Stigma said you are GOING to inevitable be swapping discs when you want to play a different game.

Oh and get this....I've never broken any of my Xbox 360 game discs DESPITE the huge reports of disc scratches. And I don't even see how it's possible to lose a game disc if it's always going to be in the same shelf or in the console itself.

It does seem funny to me that only now multi-disc games are too much of a hassle. I guess it didn't matter last gen because both the PS2 and Xbox used DVD amirite? Idiots now use the multi-disc thing as leverage in a console war debate, it's ridiculous.

To us, it's not that big of a deal. To the developers, it's expensive. if developers go over the space of one disk with a game, they will have to pay royalties to MS or whoever patented DVDs. that's why devs don't usually go over 1 DVD. which is a shame seeing as Blu-Ray has a lot of potential.

Not really, I mean I'd rather not. But walking 5 feet to my xbox to change a disc isn't a big deal.

Alanski wrote:

DukemNukem43 wrote:

Alanski wrote:

If you voted yes then you probably haven't been gaming very long...People only made a huge deal about multi-disc games this generation. It's ridiculous.

I've been gaming since the 90's. SO fuck you.

You're reasoning/logic is completely stupid. Like Stigma said you are GOING to inevitable be swapping discs when you want to play a different game.

Oh and get this....I've never broken any of my Xbox 360 game discs DESPITE the huge reports of disc scratches. And I don't even see how it's possible to lose a game disc if it's always going to be in the same shelf or in the console itself.

It does seem funny to me that only now multi-disc games are too much of a hassle. I guess it didn't matter last gen because both the PS2 and Xbox used DVD amirite? Idiots now use the multi-disc thing as leverage in a console war debate, it's ridiculous.

Too bad IDGAF.

Blu-ray FTW!

chobo500 wrote:

To us, it's not that big of a deal. To the developers, it's expensive. if developers go over the space of one disk with a game, they will have to pay royalties to MS or whoever patented DVDs. that's why devs don't usually go over 1 DVD. which is a shame seeing as Blu-Ray has a lot of potential.

I'm pretty damn sure 2 DVDs don't cost more than 1 Blu-ray... But it varies on the quality of the disc that they use and how many layers per disc.


http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000328.htm

I couldn't find the manufacturing costs of DVDs but considering that they aren't even being sold to the public for more than a dollar in most cases I think we can get a pretty clear idea on how cheap they are.


http://www.emedialive.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?CategoryID=112&ArticleID=14071

A single layer Blu-ray disc MANUFACTURING costs range from $1.2 to $1.8. And if devs want to use "teh potential" of a full double-layered Blu-ray that generally costs $2.50 cents.

The whole "DVD is limiting Blu-ray" thing is redundant when most if not all PS3 exclusives don't actually have over a dual-layered DVD worth of actual game content in the first place. DVD is fine this generation because most games don't have that much pre-recorded cutsequences on the disc.

Alanski wrote:

chobo500 wrote:

To us, it's not that big of a deal. To the developers, it's expensive. if developers go over the space of one disk with a game, they will have to pay royalties to MS or whoever patented DVDs. that's why devs don't usually go over 1 DVD. which is a shame seeing as Blu-Ray has a lot of potential.

I'm pretty damn sure 2 DVDs don't cost more than 1 Blu-ray...

Blurayz cost alot of money to make.

Actually it does, and if you read my reread my post which I expanded with sources then you would come up with that same conclusion.

IDGAF

I kind of like having multiple discs. The games with one disc are lonely.

ArcanaOfB3ast wrote:

IDGAF

Can't we have one thread without any spamming or trolling?

DukemNukem43 wrote:

Alanski wrote:

If you voted yes then you probably haven't been gaming very long...People only made a huge deal about multi-disc games this generation. It's ridiculous.

I've been gaming since the 90's. SO fuck you.

Yeah right. Your only a kid, now shut up.

I'm not reluctant to purchase a game that's multiple discs, but if I can find it on one Blu-Ray then I'll most likely buy it on PS3.

changing a disk is not a big deal..at all..you gotta be fucking retarded if you think swaping a disk for 10 seconds is a bad thing...

DukemNukem43 wrote:

It does to me. If you a lose and/or break a disc, you're fucked. End of story.

if you lose and/or break a single disk you're fucked. End of story.

Lykos wrote:

DukemNukem43 wrote:

It does to me. If you a lose and/or break a disc, you're fucked. End of story.

if you lose and/or break a single disk you're fucked. End of story.

True, but there are more discs to worry about when a game is on two or more discs.

TRF wrote:

Lykos wrote:

DukemNukem43 wrote:

It does to me. If you a lose and/or break a disc, you're fucked. End of story.

if you lose and/or break a single disk you're fucked. End of story.

True, but there are more discs to worry about when a game is on two or more discs.

Maybe if you don't take good care of your games.

Don't mind.

Padders wrote:

TRF wrote:

Lykos wrote:

DukemNukem43 wrote:

It does to me. If you a lose and/or break a disc, you're fucked. End of story.

if you lose and/or break a single disk you're fucked. End of story.

True, but there are more discs to worry about when a game is on two or more discs.

Maybe if you don't take good care of your games.

Hey, I'm just explaining DukeNukem43's logic.