random news

[corronchilejano]

2 is a fallacy. You can train a motherfucker(or he can train himself) to hear the differences. Sound compression is not that good yet.

Do yourself a favor and read a bit. The human ear does have it's limitations, and for example, why do you need the full spectrum for a recorded voice? That's just ridiculous.

Supposedly, LAME uses that type of psycho acoustic model when compressing(Might have my terms mixed up a bit here... Been a while since I read this stuff, and I am horrible at remembering names for things.), and we all know MP3s are easily beaten by many, many codecs.

Mp3 is just one of many codings and has only middle quality, even surpassed by Ogg Vorbis. However, even Mp3 encoding is suitable enough for voice recording (which is what I think would take up most space there).

Then again, how much losless audio is being recorded? 80 mins is around 800 mb, and without any compression at ALL (whereas losless codecs get this reduced to around 300mb).

[grinvader]

Tinklebell is one of those things that make you feel shame on downloading hentai to jerk off

Uhm, since when did that require an outside influence?

Dunno.
I was coughing because I caught a cold with all that fapping.


*cough*

[funkyass]

what IST said is true: you can tell the difference. there are qualitative studies that compare compression codecs and rank
them

the short of the matter is this: They are stuck with 25 GB of space, might as well use as most of it as you can without going over.

[corronchilejano]

I thought they'd use 50gb instead with multiple layers.

[Gil_Hamilton]

Lossless audio sounds better. That would be why.

1. I was joking about the losless, meaning that they would use uncompressed audio.

Raw uncompressed would be stupid.
Lossless usually means lossless compression.

2. You can use some pretty good audio compression with minor quality loss (one that the human ear CANNOT HEAR).

In theory. In practice, the differences are noticable on a good setup.

3. Anti-alias? Lighting effects? When do those add up to the ammount of space a game takes? Say FMVs and I'll believe you, and still, such high res FMVs take an insane ammount of space. This is the part I think would make stuff explode.

AA may not increase disk usage, but it certianly increases processor and RAM requirements.


Lighting effects DO add to the amount of space you need. You have to program in lightsource locations and attributes, as well as reflectivity and absorption traits for every object in the game.

Then there's bump-mapping, which applies a second texture to every polygon in the game JUST to simulate detail that isn't in the standard texture map. This one is used solely for lighting calculations.




The point was that there's a reason for lossless audio, just like there is for a lot of other features that add nothing to gameplay, but enhance the game's environment.
And that post was a response to Rashidi's dumbassery, anyways.

[Rashidi]

Lossless audio sounds better. That would be why.

1. I was joking about the losless, meaning that they would use uncompressed audio.

Raw uncompressed would be stupid.
Lossless usually means lossless compression.

lets hope the developer doesn't do something stupidly backward, like something that similiar to those early 90's game that use CD audio track for their background/ambient sound/music
(the probably reason they say Blu-ray doesn't have enoungh space?)

The point was that there's a reason for lossless audio, just like there is for a lot of other features that add nothing to gameplay, but enhance the game's environment.

though i think something like that, were rather overzealously.. superflous

And that post was a response to Rashidi's dumbassery, anyways.

your welcome

[Gil_Hamilton]

Lossless audio sounds better. That would be why.

1. I was joking about the losless, meaning that they would use uncompressed audio.

Raw uncompressed would be stupid.
Lossless usually means lossless compression.

lets hope the developer doesn't do something stupidly backward, like something that similiar to those early 90's game that use CD audio track for their background/ambient sound/music
(the probably reason they say Blu-ray doesn't have enoungh space?)

Except there's no longer a reason. Lossless compression wasn't really feasable from a processing standpoint back then.
That and "CD audio" was the bullet-point of the day. Everyone wanted to claim it.

[I.S.T.]

I thought they'd use 50gb instead with multiple layers.

As I said earlier:

I believe right now you have to get special approval to use the DL discs(I saw a then Heavenly Sword engine programmer talking about how HS almost got the nod to become the first DL game), and DL discs are more expensive to manufacture. Konami may have gone the cheap-ass route on him.

Now, given that if the pattern the MGS games have continues, this game will have much more content than the last, with much of it being bonus mode stuff. Combine that with ultra-high quality audio and the FMVs that Japanese companies love so much, it wouldn't surprise me if they're getting awfully close to the 25 gig limit.

[sweener2001]

if he's honestly running out of space of a single layer, sony would be stupid not to give him 50 GB. and given that this is MGS4, i don't think he'd be left complaining for long. after all, this is sony's own little halo, or mario, however you want to look at it.

so now, he's either complaining so as to get a DL disc, or he really has filled 50 GB with something.

[I.S.T.]

Sony didn't give HS a DL disc, and they fucking published that game.

Something's probably going on behind the scenes that we don't get to know about.

[sweener2001]

heavenly sword isn't MGS, though.