Why is it I see so many PC game titles released on 3-4-5 CDs when they can easily fit on one DVD5/9? I can only think of the following reasons publishers might do it, though I have no evidence to back me up, so that's where you all come in: Less expensive: Multiple CDs might still be cheaper than one DVD, whether in actual production or for the master copies in replication. Less convenient for the pirate: It could be more taxing for a person to download three CD ISOs on ShareDonkeyPanch.ru than one DVD ISO image. "OOoh, why can't I just download one? Screw this.." Slow adopting consumers: All right, I do remember seeing adverts for PCs that actually lacked a DVD-ROM. However, if a computer is lacking a DVD-ROM, would you honestly find it fit performance wise (graphics card, RAM, etc)? I'm not playing the graphics whore advocate by saying people are asses for not upgrading, but technology gradually aims for convenience and the last time I checked, one beats three if one can hold everything three can with no negative differences. Honestly, anybody who plays PC games should have a DVD ROM for all it's benefits. And even if you're not a gamer, then you can at least have another storage option.
i think its mostly just for those that dont have a dvd drive, i dont understand why some people are so stubborn about it, its not like they are that expensive either. Its easy to find a dvd burner that also burns d/l discs for $50
Exactly, and imagine what a simple DVD-ROM costs.. Seriously, who doesn't have a DVD-ROM? And for that matter, do they necessarily have the complimentary hardware to play the latest titles?
I use to not have a DVD on my main PC until a year ago and for sure, the graphic card was terrible, it's unlikely that anyone would spend anything on a PC and not have at least a basic DVD drive.
DVD (and specially recordable DVDs) are the one of the most half-assed media ever produced. They re 10 times easier to trash than CDs just by casual use. If I had the chance to get a CD version of a given game versus the DVD version, the CD version would last me longer. Hopefully, publishers still understand this, and retailers probably know it too.
i dont know about you barc0de, but all my discs are in mint condition, they dont even have finger prints... so is all about how you take care of them .
Not really. Statistically speaking, a DVD disc scratched in the process of being spun in a drive (which doesnt usually happen, but does some times, nothing works "perfectly" in real life anyway) is much more vunairable to scratches. Dvd-r/+r disks, even the best ones, have a much worse failure rate compared to even crappy CD-R media
Nope, CD's and DVD's are roughly the same price to manufacture. More CD's == higher cost than a dvd. Not really a factor because most pirated games are split into 15 meg files anyway. Bingo, we have a winner. Even if 90% of people have DVD players in their computer, that still leaves 10% of the gaming public who can't install your game. Why would you purposefully limit your potential buyers by only haveing the game on DVD? Everyone can install off of a CD, only 90% of people can install off of a DVD. True, but unfortunately that isn't the case. Gaming companies have to limit themselves to the lowest common denominator....
I doubt that. I have a binder full of burned DVD+R's that work like a charm, but my old CD-R's are almost all falling aparat due to them not having a secondary layer of plastic to cover the reflective film (ta=hat is, the film peels off on CD-R's, but is protected from doing so on DVD+/-R's). Though, when it comes to scratches i'd say you're correct.
i agreee fab, my dvd rs seem to last better then my cdrs, all the old ones i have scratched up have problems playing half the time. Though with dvd it all depends, if you get a real cheap brand then yeah they stop working easily. However if you get a decent one or high quality they handle pretty well. As for everyone converting over, might be alittle while still. Though the fact that dvd-rs are going as low as cdrs has made the transition a bit easier.
also, if you are into macking backups, you'll notice that doing a backup of a dvd game for pc such as battlefield 2 is a pain in the ass, ripiing cd's is alot easier.
true, but the encyption is getting stronger for cds as well. It takes quite a while to even crack a cd version. I forgot how it works, but it made sims 2 a huge pain to crack for awhile.
This is a symptom of buying and using cheap CD-Rs. It doesn't say anything about DVD-Rs being more reliable. -hl718
It is the Dell effect . People see the 299 dollar computer and they dont bother to get any of the upgrades even though they are well worth it . And almost all base dells just come with a cd burner . Man 299 for a computer I remember when my scuzzy 1x external cd burner was 400 bucks .
You get some pretty decent machines from dell. I once got a p4 3.0 with 512mb for £260 and that was quiet awhile ago. The thing is to upgrade anything with dell would of made a bargain pc cost too much. I can get a dvd-rw for half the price dell want to sell me one for. Hence most people just dont do upgrades when they buy their budget pcs.
Thats not true, I just bought my parents a new dell base model and guess what it came with? A DVDRW. None of the base model Dell's are CD only anymore, they are ALL combo drives. http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/featured_basdt?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs I was overjoyed to see they ditched the "you opened the case, you forfeit your warranty" stuff too. I was able to add a wireless card in and the warranty is still intact :020:
In the uk we still get... Optical Drive 20/48x Max CD-ROM Drive And then to upgrade to anything better..... 48X CDRW Drive [add £23.51] 48X DVD/CDRW Combo Drive [add £35.27 or £1/month1] 16X. DVD +/- RW [add £76.40 or £2/month1] Its just not worth it on a £299 PC... When i can get a a decent LG/NEC 16x speed DVD±RW for £25 or a Lite-On SHW-16H5S 16X DVD±RW DL LightScribe for £30.
