Battlefield 3 on Xbox Looks Awful Without HD Texture Pack

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
No_Remainders said:
Old.

Seriously, why can't the escapist come up with news that isn't a couple of days old? It'd be much better if it was actually current news.
The video was uploaded 2 days ago. How does that qualify as old? Chill man, chill.
 

Dogstile

New member
Jan 17, 2009
5,093
0
0
sravankb said:
BTW, do you guys even know how large the texture pack is?

1.5 GB.

Anyway you look at it - that is really not much. Even a 4GB Xbox will be able to run it.

Good job at making it a sensationalist article by holding back details, dude.
I was thinking this throughout the entire article. It would be nice if you actually gave me the amount it needed in the article escapist :), I was actually concerned for a second.

Cheers Srav, saved me the trouble of finding it myself dude
 

Da Orky Man

Yeah, that's me
Apr 24, 2011
2,107
0
0
Sectan said:
I don't understand why they even have these two different texture packs. Why not have it default for the game?
Because they can't fit it on the disc. You have to download it instead.

Otherwise, it looks like Half-life 2 has comparable graphics to the non-HD version. That's not a good thing, EA.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Sectan said:
I don't understand why they even have these two different texture packs. Why not have it default for the game?
Too big for a DVD9?

I don't know, I'm just guessing.

fix-the-spade said:
The Xbox has very little RAM and relatively limited disk space, textures use plenty of both so this makes sense.

Putting them on the HDD actually makes for a very neat side step although it's unfortunate people with older 360s won't see it that way. Pitfalls of using the cheaper hardware I guess.
Well, they won't see it as a neat sidestep because in their instance, it isn't.

Honestly, the lack of hard drives as a standard held back the 360 early on, and now we're seeing the other side of the coin in terms of loss of functionality.

Microsoft never should have made a model without a hard drive. They should have never made the console take a ridiculous, expensive proprietary HDD, and they never should have tried to play both sides of the fence.
 

Furioso

New member
Jun 16, 2009
7,981
0
0
sravankb said:
BTW, do you guys even know how large the texture pack is?

1.5 GB.

Anyway you look at it - that is really not much. Even a 4GB Xbox will be able to run it.

Good job at making it a sensationalist article by holding back details, dude.
But that's assuming our hard drives are empty enough to hold 1.5 gigs, and for a 12 gig hard drive that has been collecting save data and dlc since the xbox was released that can be a tall order for people who don't want to get rid of the dlc and saves
 

Catalyst6

Dapper Fellow
Apr 21, 2010
1,362
0
0
Hevva said:
Though, that's probably what happens when you design a console game using the PC as your lead platform [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109304-DICE-Battlefield-3-Looks-Better-on-Consoles-Because-Were-Making-it-for-PC].
Grrrr Here I was getting ready to bash the game again, but this happens so rarely that I have to back off a bit. So sad.

So I'll just say this: Why isn't the HD pack mandatory? It's not like you have to compensate for the Xboxes having differing powers, they're all the same.
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
Complaining about poor graphics on the Xbox?

Really? The console came out some 6 years ago, and cost $300, is it really that surprising it's suffering now that the world has moved on?

Fortunate for such a texture pack, I suppose.

Although, even with it, it's not exactly stellar.
 

Frizzle

New member
Nov 11, 2008
605
0
0
Woodsey said:
Frizzle said:
Wow that's bad. Like, really bad. I don't mean to make this sound fanboyish, cuz I was considering an Xbox but: Is the hardware really that far behind the PS3 and regular computers? If i didn't have that texture pack i'd be so pissed.
The issue is disc space.
I do understand that now, but i guess technically my point still stands.
Forgive my ignorance on this part though: Isn't there technology for double-layering and such on DVD's? There's got to be a way to fit everything onto 1 disc.....

And for those saying it's only a little bit of space, this is most likely not the only game people own on their xbox.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Frizzle said:
Woodsey said:
Frizzle said:
Wow that's bad. Like, really bad. I don't mean to make this sound fanboyish, cuz I was considering an Xbox but: Is the hardware really that far behind the PS3 and regular computers? If i didn't have that texture pack i'd be so pissed.
The issue is disc space.
I do understand that now, but i guess technically my point still stands.
Forgive my ignorance on this part though: Isn't there technology for double-layering and such on DVD's? There's got to be a way to fit everything onto 1 disc.....

And for those saying it's only a little bit of space, this is most likely not the only game people own on their xbox.
It would appear not - a number of other developers have had to use multiple discs for the 360 recently.
 

fix-the-spade

New member
Feb 25, 2008
8,639
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Microsoft never should have made a model without a hard drive. They should have never made the console take a ridiculous, expensive proprietary HDD, and they never should have tried to play both sides of the fence.
That's microsoft playing silly buggers, all models of 360 take standard SATA 2.5in drives, nothing at all special about them. You can even take the drive out of it's casing and fit it to a 360slim without any modification.

It's completely possible to fit your own hdd to a 360 enclosure with a little hacking up of parts, except you run into firmware problems that require somewhat legally iffy methods of solving.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
14,719
2,156
118
While this probably does not matter for converters, Battlefield 3 has already lost four potential buyers.

I have three Xbox Live buddies (plus myself) who have been playing CoD since Modern Warfare came out. We thought we would give BF3 a shot...until this was recognized. Now I could be incorrect, but I doubt that if I rented the game from RedBox, I would get both discs I need to run it in HD (Not to mention online pass...). All four of us are now skipping this release.

Sure, it's four people, but how many times will this situation come up for CoD players who back down because of this.
 

masticina

New member
Jan 19, 2011
763
0
0
Seems 2007 called, or more 2006. Eh!

Very odd just very odd really! Why such well weak graphics standard. Lets just hope the HD pack is on the disc.
 

fix-the-spade

New member
Feb 25, 2008
8,639
0
0
Frizzle said:
Forgive my ignorance on this part though: Isn't there technology for double-layering and such on DVD's? There's got to be a way to fit everything onto 1 disc.
There is and the 360 uses it, problem is a dual layer DVD holds up to 8.5GB of data.

A single layer Blu Ray holds up to 25GB (50-128GB for Dual layers and BDXL), BF3 (PC version) is in the area of 20GB, which is what is causing the problem for 360 discs.

I think selling the game on two discs in the vein of Mass Effect 2 would have been a better option, but would probably still have needed a large install file.
 

bluegate

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2010
2,390
987
118
Frizzle said:
I do understand that now, but i guess technically my point still stands.
Forgive my ignorance on this part though: Isn't there technology for double-layering and such on DVD's? There's got to be a way to fit everything onto 1 disc.....

And for those saying it's only a little bit of space, this is most likely not the only game people own on their xbox.
The Xbox360 already uses double layer DVDs, however, a substantial part of that is wasted on anti-piracy measurements. I read somewhere a while back that there is only roughly 6~7 Gb of space on a Xbox360 dual layer dvd because of all the anti-piracy protection and what not.

Now one could try and throw a third layer on the discs, but this would require a firmware upgrade of all the drives in order to make them try and read the disc, and unfortunately, they can't know for sure that every drive would be able to read the new 3 layer system.

Seriously, they shouldn't have gone with an 'old' storage medium for their console. And they shouldn't have released models without harddrives, but then again, this does make people buy their overpriced addons... dirty marketing techniques indeed...
 

Awexsome

Were it so easy
Mar 25, 2009
1,549
0
0
Jesus Christ... I saw this coming. BF3 hyped up majorly and deserves its praise for the PC version.

Doesn't excuse it for a crappy console version. It was built for PC you say? Well PC players ***** and moan over shitty console ports I'll let them hear the same thing in every thread about BF3 when its the other way around.

Looks like MW3 will win in both quality and quantity for 2/3rds of the industry.