[Update: Looks like 1UP was off by just about 100 emm bees ... alright, exactly 100 emm bees. The official XBLA file size limit has been raised to 150MB, not 250MB.]It seems that the upcoming Castlevania: Symphony of the Night will no longer be the exception to the rule -- 1UP's Luke Smith reports that the Xbox Live Arcade file size limit has been bumped up from 50MB to 250MB. The move should allow less agile developers to slip beneath the Limbo pole without winding up in a painfully awkward position. Just ask last year's Lumines Live! how chopping a game into 50MB chunks can make microtransactions even harder to swallow.
Luke also notes that with Microsoft's approval, certain games might even span 450MB. Returning to the earlier Limbo analogy, this would likely be reserved for developers that insist on wearing full suits of armor to the party. The relaxed rules may lead to games becoming more bloated, but the developer is surely better off worrying less about compression and more about, you know, making a good game.
It's worth nothing that owners of the Core Xbox 360 are adversely affected by this decision, as they still find themselves restricted by measly 64MB memory cards (remember those quaint little things?). Microsoft is likely already working on larger memory cards, though even the rumored 256MB variant won't be able to hold many games, much less a 450MB title.
[Thanks, Jonah!]
_thumbnail.jpg "i am 8-bit: 2008")
(Page 1) Reader Comments
Reply
Reply
After completing IPTV software/testing, upgrade to 65nm chip we'll see Ver.2 of 360 premium for summer/fall '07 release and a drop of the Core model.
The regular premium version is now base model with 20 gig harddrive. New premium model has 100+ gig harddrive, IPTV capabilities, quieter (runs cooler with smaller chipset) and maybe more?
2)
Reply
Reply
So, now that I have the CORE, i have to buy the hard drive...hmmm, $99....then subscribe to XBOX LIVE...$50?...hmmmm...$299+$99+$50...that's like $450 roughly. Uhm....and I still get a crap controller?
Shit...I can buy a PS3 for $499...and I get a wireless controller, free online multiplayer and a 20GB HDD??
Whose screwing who??
Reply
Now they have to get rid of those price caps... it probably costs more to develop a 450mb game than a 50mb game... esp. ini the download arena. Otherwise, its gonna be Lumines Live all over again.
Poor poor Core users are left in the stone age again. Just MS givin you guys more choice.
Reply
So, now that I have the CORE, i have to buy the hard drive...hmmm, $99....then subscribe to XBOX LIVE...$50?...hmmmm...$299+$99+$50...that's like $450 roughly. Uhm....and I still get a crap controller?
Shit...I can buy a PS3 for $499...and I get a wireless controller, free online multiplayer and a 20GB HDD??
Whose screwing who??"
1.) You don't need to subscribe to xbox live
2.) Even if you have the wired controller, it's still better than the PS3's controller! I use a wired controller (I have 2 wireless and 1 wired) to save on batteries because I sit so close to the console.
I love stupid misinformation
Reply
I thought the whole Microsoft competitive advantage was XBOX Live, without that you're looking at a no real killer applications for the console. Would Gears of War really have any replay value if you didn't play online? Halo 2? Let get real...you need XBOX Live to get even half the experience.
Reply
Reply
If you bought the core in the first place you were doing without XBox Live Arcade tites to begin with wern't you? Or were you using a 64 MB memory card to do your saved games + the XBLA title you happened to be playing at that moment.
Yes MS should've made the HDD a required part of the 360 but they decided to give people the less expensive option.
In all seriousness, were you expecting to be able to ride out this entire gen without a HDD attached to your console?
You also don't need XBox Live Gold to download/play Arcade Titles(Unless you want to play it online) nor is a wireless controller necessary for play(although I seriously hated playing FFXII and being tethered to the console).
Reply
Reply
Reply
I never said I didn't have live. I'm just saying that it is not NECESSARY to purchase. I've had a hell of a fun time on Gears without going multiplayer. Try beating it on insaine by yourself....That'll keep you busy for some time!
Yes, there is a lot of great stuff on live, and yes, I couldn't imagine not getting it...cuz it would suck for me! But is it absolutly needed...are you forced to get a subscription...NO, you aren't. And that was my point!
Reply
Reply
Xbox Live Gold costs $50/year. Xbox Live Silver is free. The only difference is that Xbox Live Gold allows for online multiplayer. With Xbox Live Silver, you can still download games, movies, demos, TV shows, Trailers, ect... As for needing XBL Gold, that's entirely subjective. I'm mostly a single player gamer. I spend maybe 10% of my play time in online games. Even without the matchmaking though, it's still a great service.
Reply
Reply
Reply
It would appear this was developer driven, and I have to say 'it's about time!'
Now if only Microsoft would listen to the customers seeking larger storage devices.
We want it. Where are they?
I'm not buying another 20GB hard drive if I can help it.
Reply
Reply
Ya hear me? BUM.
Hopefully this will mean Alien Hominid and Castle Crashers will not be completely stripped.
Reply
So, now that I have the CORE, i have to buy the hard drive...hmmm, $99....then subscribe to XBOX LIVE...$50?...hmmmm...$299+$99+$50...that's like $450 roughly. Uhm....and I still get a crap controller?
Shit...I can buy a PS3 for $499...and I get a wireless controller, free online multiplayer and a 20GB HDD??
Whose screwing who??"
I hate to break it to you, but the PS3 is the one with the crap controller. I've had my PS3 for three days, and it is the most aggravating console experience I've ever been through. The controller feels like cheap chinese junk, AND the connection drops out several times during every session RFoM. The menu is overly complicated, and getting to the settings/field/text you want takes 20x longer than on the 360. It is not user friendly what-so-ever, and makes me feel ripped off of my money because it's more like work than play.
Did I mention that trying that trying to partition the hard drive DELETED my game save?
And the free online multiplayer is no good. XBLA has a personality, and isn't a complete graveyard.
After I get Linux running on my PS3, so I can pretend it's useful, I'll probably start playing my 360 again, and continue the search for Wii to complete the collection.
Reply
sounds like someone has been throwing their weight around.
that said... this is good news!
Reply
Reply
But that's still a problem, because I can't transfer my game saves over to a hard-drive!
Reply
ill be so envious of u if u do! please frank please!
check back wit me in a year, after im done playing mass effect, gta4, bioshock, alan wake, fable 2, crackdown, forza 2, graw 2, oh and..um.. halofreakin 3!
muahahahaha
Reply
Reply
No, but Microsoft wants to make some people think they can by offering a box without one.
"In all seriousness," your rebuttal is also bringing down your own reasoning - Microsoft should never have let the 360 leave the factory without a hard drive - acting like it was a "choice" is only making people cough up more money in the long run.
I love my 360, but I never would have bought one without the hard drive. Even the FIRST xbox has a hard drive.
Suicide, I have to disagree with a few things, although I do understand and respect your thoughts on the PS3 - I think the PS3 menu system is excellent, and much faster to deal with than the 360. None of the three new consoles is an amazing example of human/machine interface; the Wii menus need a serious redesign. But the 360 and the PS3 both do essentially the same thing, the same way - you move horizontally to find your catagory, then move up or down to find the specific. The PS3 menu is much quicker to respond and doesn't look like a badly designed insurance website to me. And while the controller is lighter, I like the feel. I wish it had rumble, however...
Now, if the thing had a game I loved other than the MotorStorm demo, I'd be using it more. But I like it - I think the PS3 is going to be awesome... a year from now. This is sorta how I felt when I got my 360 on launch day - maybe a little early to the party.
Reply
Reply
Reply
+1
It's a pity there are no game journalists in the world who could, you know, actually ask MS why this is the case.
Reply
Nice racism there, cool guy.
Reply
Thank you for pointing out that an Xbox AND a harddrive AND a year of xbox live combined is still cheaper than a PS3! Also about 100x as fun.
Also as far as live, I've had 360 since it came out and I just *yesterday* got Live, and only because I beat Saint's Row but still wanted to play it.
Reply
My decision is simple. I go for the 360. Halo is probably my fave game ever. I've always loved Rare's games. Perfect Dark Zero wasn't as good as I'd hoped for but I still think it's great. I babysit my young niece sometimes and she noticed Viva Pinata so I got that as well.
I thought Metal Gear Solid on PS1 was a great game but didn't enjoy MSG2 which I had to lend a friend's PS2 to play. I think Splinter Cell is much better. Ubisoft surprised me graphically with SC games for PS2 but they have always been better on XBoX. They've always "led" on XBoX. Remember obviously these are just my personal preferences. I'm not looking for a debate here.
I come from a PC shooter background really and remember the first Unreal Tournament fondly but after that, whilst Epic's Unreal engines are superb I just couldn't get into UT2003/4 so I'm not bothered about UT2007 really but I liked the look of Gears of War and I'm now going through it for the 3rd time on the hardest difficulty. Good game. Not tried it online yet.
I like the look of Mass Effect which I believe is a 360 only title. Bioshock as well although I'm still not sure if that's 360 only. Sort of interested in Shadowrun as well which being a Live Anywhere, or whatever it's called, game will probably also be 360 only I reckon.
Approaching 40 years of age now I've seen all the consoles come and go. Some I've bought and some I haven't. The last was a N64. But it always seemed as though they all had a fair share of good and bad games.
It's OK if you have the money for all 3 consoles but I don't. Only enough for one along with upgrading the PC.
But I have to say even if I did have the money I wouldn't get a PS3. From what I've tried, quite a few friends have PS2s and I keep up with game news on the web, I thought Ico and Shadow of the Colossus were great but that's about it.
Again I state, as I can imagine what some people are thinking, it's my own opinion. I do imagine that if I was Japanese the situation might be totally reversed. Personally I'm not into many Japanese games. Of recent anyway.
Does anybody else have a similar situation where you only need to get a 360 or a PS3 or a Wii and along with a PC the 2 do everything you want? I don't know if it's coincidence or not. It seems to good to be true. I keep expecting that at some point Sony will show up with a game for PS3 that will interest me but it hasn't happened yet. If it does it will have to be really something. I didn't buy a PS2 just for Ico and Shadow. I got a PS1 because of 3D and about 5 games that interested me after it had been on sale for about 6 months. But I got a XBoX just for Halo originally. And a Nintendo for Goldeneye.
Amen.
Father PupD.
Reply
Reply