Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits

Anything to do with games at all.
Sarge

PostRage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Sarge » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:03 am

During his Austin Game Developers Conference discussion on storytelling and technology, id Software lead designer Tim Willits the developer is cutting back on the amount of content they would have liked to include in their upcoming shooter Rage. The main reason for limiting the game's content is the Xbox 360's limited disc storage, which allows about six to eight GB of data.

"The PC is limitless in the amount of data you can put on it," said Willits. "The PS3 has about 25GB. But the Xbox 360 roughly has 6 to 8 GB of data. We're hoping we can squeeze the game down to two discs for the 360 version."

According to Willits, the game was supposed to feature several wastelands for the player to explore. Because of the limitations of the Xbox 360's media, they had to cut down the wastelands to only two, which are themselves split into multiple instances. These changes have been made across all versions of Rage, not just the 360 port.

"I wouldn't say the overall story was changed in any way in order to fit on the Xbox 360 version," Willits said, "but how the player experiences Rage's story has been altered." Unfortunately, that means the experience has been altered across all platforms. This is one of the first signs we've received of the 360's older DVD media showing its age, but we expect some fans won't be terribly pleased that it's affecting other versions of the game as well.



Update: Willits released a statement to clarify his earlier statements. While he did admit that instead of having five or six wasteland environments as originally planned Rage will now only have two because of the Xbox 360's DVD limitations (one wasteland for each Xbox 360 disc), these two wastelands will now encompass all the content from the five or six that were originally planned. So no content has technically been "removed" from the game -- but the Xbox 360's storage limitations did cause id to rethink Rage's entire story and structure.


clicky

:(

User avatar
Christopher
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Cambridge

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Christopher » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:43 am

Stop trolling Sarge :x

User avatar
consolegaming
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by consolegaming » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:58 am

suzzopher wrote:Stop trolling Sarge :x


It is a refreshing change to see a negative 360 article for once and its trolling all of a sudden. If anything this is proof that a ps3 game is being cut down because its competitor cannot hold enough data!

Hilarious I say, why don't they just give the ps3 the additional stuff, they got room to burn on the BD-ROM! :mrgreen:

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Peter Crisp » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:00 am

I don't think you are being serious suzzopher but this article is not trolling.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Rik
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Rik » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:01 am

consolegaming wrote:
Hilarious I say, why don't they just give the ps3 the additional stuff,


these two wastelands will now encompass all the content from the five or six that were originally planned. So no content has technically been "removed" from the game

Neogaf: Riky
User avatar
consolegaming
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by consolegaming » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:02 am

Rik wrote:
consolegaming wrote:
Hilarious I say, why don't they just give the ps3 the additional stuff,


these two wastelands will now encompass all the content from the five or six that were originally planned. So no content has technically been "removed" from the game


And you believe that Rik?

If the 360 held 50GB of data they would say something different.

User avatar
Christopher
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Cambridge

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Christopher » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:03 am

Peter Crisp wrote:I don't think you are being serious suzzopher but this article is not trolling.


Of course I'm not serious :lol:

User avatar
abcd
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
AKA: abcd

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by abcd » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:05 am

Come on guys!!!

You're not supposed to post anything that may tarnish the 360!!!

Haven't you read the secret rules?

Image
User avatar
Drunken_Master
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Drunken_Master » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:08 am

I bet consolegaming ejaculated when he read the article.

Image

Prime Directives : Prosecute those who steal memes from other forums. :fp:
User avatar
Cal
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Cal » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:14 am

To be honest, Carmack was signposting this a year ago in interviews. He was quite clear in expressing his concerns about 360's storage issues and even then suggested he'd be rethinking how best to cope with the limitations. I think this is the kind of non-story PS3 fanboys will leap on and Willits' comments can only fan those flames. A pity. One tends to forget just how full of praise for the 360 Carmack has been in the past (and continues to be). Still, I expect every forum and sensation-seeking games site to hype this up to the max as 'another' sign of how 'PS3 development is really getting into its stride now' or some such claptrap...

And so it goes on. And on...

User avatar
consolegaming
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by consolegaming » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:21 am

I think my main point is that even though a negative article is posted look at the number of posters simply ignoring it or simply posting statements confirming they are in denial.

Then we have the anti-sony stuff which gets bombarded by pisstakes and more negative comments. I am not suggesting there is an agenda here, it is simply fact that 90% of this forum own only a 360 and so are naturally concerned about the 360s well being.

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Peter Crisp » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:27 am

To be fair consolegaming the 360 has been out longer and is cheaper so I would expect more people to own a 360 than a PS3. As for the negative PS3 comments just ignore them if they annoy you and try to come up with some arguments yourself that are more than fanboy nonsense.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
FirstSecond
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by FirstSecond » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:29 am

Can someone explain how the PC has limitless storage? if the game is shipping on disc on the PC then surely that also is going to be DVD? is it to do with the cost of releasing multiple discs on consoles or something? If so then I just answered my own question.

User avatar
Rik
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Rik » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:30 am

If you actually read the article it says no content has been lost it has just been restructured to cope with the limit of DVD, original concepts are often scaled back or changed for all sorts of hardware limitations. Nobody is in denial it's just a fact of game development.

Neogaf: Riky
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Peter Crisp » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:33 am

FirstSecond wrote:Can someone explain how the PC has limitless storage? if the game is shipping on disc on the PC then surely that also is going to be DVD? is it to do with the cost of releasing multiple discs on consoles or something? If so then I just answered my own question.


I think the fact that games are fully installed on the PC means that even if a game used 12 disks it would not present that much of a problem. I had many PC games that were on 5 or more disks and a console game would never get away with that.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Shadow
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Shadow » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:36 am

FirstSecond wrote:Can someone explain how the PC has limitless storage? if the game is shipping on disc on the PC then surely that also is going to be DVD? is it to do with the cost of releasing multiple discs on consoles or something? If so then I just answered my own question.


If you release a PC game on 6 DVDs no-one cares, that almost appears to be good value and when it's installed you won't need to swap disks anyway, also it may be the case that they're planning to do a Blu-Ray version for PC as top end PCs tend to have Blu-Ray drives now. If you release a 360 game over loads of disks though, people will complain that their compression techniques weren't good enough, they'll say that the 360 sucks for not having integrated HD-DVD amongst other things.

So basically, there's negative connotations associated with multi-disk console releases which you don't find on PC.

FirstSecond
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by FirstSecond » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:39 am

Ah right, I really dont mind having lots of discs when I buy a game, currently playing Lost Odyssey and the moment you open the case and see all the DVD's makes you think you've got one huge game to play through and seems good value, same with Blue Dragon.

User avatar
Drunken_Master
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Drunken_Master » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:51 am

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/54780

id: Rage Not Cut Because of Xbox 360 Limits
by Nick Breckon Sep 16, 2008 10:40pm CST tags: Rage
The limitations of the DVD medium and Xbox 360 hardware have not forced id to cut content from all versions of Rage (PC, PS3, 360), the studio has told Shacknews.

Following a report that id had removed "significant content" from all versions of the shooter so the game would fit onto two Xbox 360 DVDs, id Software's Tim Willits denied that the Xbox 360 version required the studio to sacrifice its vision for the game.

"There was NO CONTENT removed from RAGE because of the 360--NONE AT ALL," wrote Willits. "We feel the 360 is a great platform and will provide a fantastic Rage experience."

id has previously stated that the Xbox 360 version of Rage will look worse than its PC and PS3 counterparts due to the limitations of the DVD medium. The studio had hoped to circumvent this by spreading the 360 release across three DVDs, though Microsoft's royalty rates apparently make anything beyond two discs financially impracticable.

Willits' unedited response follows:

During my talk today I mentioned that we originally wanted to have around 5 or 6 smaller wasteland environments but later decided instead to have 2 larger wastelands. Mostly because we were going to be shipping on two DVDs for the 360 and felt that it would play better with one large wasteland on each disc so there would be no loading between wastelands. Not loading levels while you drive around is a much better decision regardless of platform.

There was NO CONTENT removed from RAGE because of the 360--NONE AT ALL. Moving from multiple wastelands into fewer but larger wastelands was a far better decision and is actually giving us more gameplay in the game.

We feel the 360 is a great platform and will provide a fantastic Rage experience.


Image

Prime Directives : Prosecute those who steal memes from other forums. :fp:
User avatar
Cal
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by Cal » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:58 am

Tim Willits wrote:...There was NO CONTENT removed from RAGE because of the 360--NONE AT ALL. Moving from multiple wastelands into fewer but larger wastelands was a far better decision and is actually giving us more gameplay in the game.

We feel the 360 is a great platform and will provide a fantastic Rage experience.



:lol: Tim. Put down the shovel and step away from the hole...

FirstSecond
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Rage Held Back By Xbox 360's Limits
by FirstSecond » Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:05 am

So what was the point in this guy saying anything at all? maybe Sony paid him.


Return to “Games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 645 guests