Why DVD is enough for games

[Vandenh]

GamesFirst has a nice article (http://www.gamesfirst.com/?id=1132) with some interesting numbers and some technical reasons why the DVD-9 format should be enough for this generation of consoles.


Undoubtedly, games will grow. However, technology designed to keep them small and compact will grow as well. In many ways, the debate over Microsoft's handling of the DVD9 and HDDVD formats is simply a matter of a red herring. People see it and worry about it, but there is little data to suggest there will actually be a problem with it.
I agree with most of it. Developers will use new techniques to generate assets, it is the only way forward. A lot of (PC) games have pioneered this but it looks like finally consoles have the power to implement it. Sony is almost certainly using Bluray to push the format for movies. I wonder how much they make on a sold Bluray movie compared to a game? Maybe movies just make a lot more sense to them to get those dollars?

EDITOR - Thanks also to Melonman0 for submitting the same story.

[MrMeatshake]

v nice article, thanks for the link. i think the most interesting thing for me was:
Looking over the data, it's fairly evident that in fact DVD9 is not too small for next generation games as much as it was too big for the last generation's.
hm, a big corporation pushing a new format that we don't really need in order to fill its coffers, surely not, sony? nothing like this has been attempted before!! ;)

[Chalex]

And here is a counter-point from Greggman

http://greggman.com/edit/editheadlines/2005-08-17.htm


Is this an over simplification, yes but it's not that far off the mark. To give a very concrete example, Tim Sweeney of Unreal fame told us that a single character in Gears of War uses a 2048x2048 texture. Given that next gen characters need at least a color map and a normal/height map a 2048x2048 texture is 32MEG just for the texture of one single character. Nearly the entire memory of a PS2 or 1/2 the memory of an XBox just to texture one single character. Yes, you can compress the texture, you could also compress the texture on the old systems too. The point is even if you compress them their relative sizes are still going to be 8x to 12x in size which means the data is going to grow 8 to 12 times.

For those of you who don't know Greggman is game developer at Naughty Dog, and just wrapped up work on Loco Roco.



On an unrelated note, I have been up all night and my basment flooded, if there is something wrong in my post point it out an I will correct it, I'm not going to look over anything right this moment :o

[buckfutter]

v nice article, thanks for the link. i think the most interesting thing for me was:

hm, a big corporation pushing a new format that we don't really need in order to fill its coffers, surely not, sony? nothing like this has been attempted before!! ;)

Yeah, and certainly not by every single other company backing either BluRay or HD-DVD!

Also, the article makes a couple of mistakes. Doesn't Microsoft cap the size of 360 games at 7gb to make space for the game storage format and security files? And the straight comparisons they make across generational gaps, developers and publishers are quite silly.

Still, it's safe to say that it won't be an "issue", as some people are imagining it. Developers will work to the space they've got, and games will be designed or scaled to that limitation. Look at the GC; some ports were hurt, yes, but in general was anything done for other systems that was impossible given their data medium? It's only crippling discrepancies like we saw with cartridges vs. compact discs that would really hurt.

[Vandenh]

Chalex.. you totally miss the point.

These 32MB textures will be procedural in the future... so they will take up almost nothing. Procedural texture generation can be thought of as extreme compression. Who wants to make all those silly textures for trees, concrete, wood etc... anyway? Just let the math do it.

[mister_slim]

Well, the first flaw would be that not all 9.4 gigs of space are actually available for data, which the author seems completely unaware of. If I remember correctly, only 7.4 gigs can be used by the game.

Edit:

These 32MB textures will be procedural in the future... so they will take up almost nothing. Procedural texture generation can be thought of as extreme compression. Who wants to make all those silly textures for trees, concrete, wood etc... anyway? Just let the math do it.
I'm going to disagree with you on this and go with Carmack.

[buckfutter]

Procedural synthesis and advanced compression/decompression will actually start stealing CPU attention away from other tasks, though. It's not as simple as saying "But look! This magic technology will make textures obsolete!". There's always a trade off somewhere.

[EvilBob46]

Chalex.. you totally miss the point.

These 32MB textures will be procedural in the future... so they will take up almost nothing. Procedural texture generation can be thought of as extreme compression. Who wants to make all those silly textures for trees, concrete, wood etc... anyway? Just let the math do it.

If this is so easy, then why has Epic's Mark Rein, of the company that produces the most advanced and commonly used next-gen graphics engine and should know the most about the technologies available, still stated that Gears of War will take about some 20 GB when it's said and done?

Maybe Epic is just too "stupid" to know about all this fancy compression technology, or your disregarding factors like CPU usage this stuff requires. Either way though, if the space is not enough for Epic and an Unreal Engine 3 game, you know something is amiss.

[Vandenh]

If I remember correctly, only 7.4 gigs can be used by the game.

8.54GB actually

Procedural synthesis and advanced compression/decompression will actually start stealing CPU attention away from other tasks, though. It's not as simple as saying "But look! This magic technology will make textures obsolete!". There's always a trade off somewhere.

Obviously!!! Until CPU are 1000 times faster it will be a combination of technologies. The point is, that the only way games can move forward, is to use this technology. It is just the next logical step. Games have been trying to become more realistic (first advanced 3D engines, then physics and AI and after that procedural world/asset generation). The *real* world has a nice physics engine and some wicked procedural textures.

I'm going to disagree with you on this and go with Carmack.

A nice deep insight. Hard to argue with arguments like that.

Maybe Epic is just too "stupid" to know about all this fancy compression technology. Either way though, if the space is not enough for Epic and an Unreal Engine 3 game, you know something is amiss.

Ha yes... because Epic are the *only* people in the world that know something about software/games/design... FFS dude... the Oblivion people are doing it and more developers in the future will do it. Do you know who invents these things? Not games programmers but university researchers. One of my friends is a professor in computer graphics and he actually gives lectures to games programmers. The stuff that he is researching usually ends up in games in 5 years (or not at all :)
Can I also point out that the first Unreal game already had procedural textures for very basic stuff like fire/water... the next gen procedural textures can do a lot more and will be used more often.

[Chalex]

Chalex.. you totally miss the point.

These 32MB textures will be procedural in the future... so they will take up almost nothing. Procedural texture generation can be thought of as extreme compression. Who wants to make all those silly textures for trees, concrete, wood etc... anyway? Just let the math do it.These 32 MB textures are CHARACTER MODELS What point did I miss? I don't yet know of a procedural texture generator that can do convincing character models, especially to next generation standards. Feel free to post a link to the one you know of.

[EvilBob46]

8.54GB actually


7.95GB. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360

"Xbox 360 games are set to the standard 7.95GiB of storage available on a dual-layer DVD."

EDIT: GiB a synonym for GB I think? Either way, I'm 100% sure it's 7.xx GB.

[Chalex]

If this is so easy, then why has Epic's Mark Rein, of the company that produces the most advanced and commonly used next-gen graphics engine and should know the most about the technologies available, still stated that Gears of War will take about some 20 GB when it's said and done?

Maybe Epic is just too "stupid" to know about all this fancy compression technology, or your disregarding factors like CPU usage this stuff requires. Either way though, if the space is not enough for Epic and an Unreal Engine 3 game, you know something is amiss.I guess you missed the point too :rolleyes:

[Vandenh]

I don't yet know of a procedural texture generator that can do convincing character models, especially to next generation standards. Feel free to post a link to the one you know of.

True true... character models are not the same as a simple tree... last time I checked humans were actually wearing clothes and other stuff. I won't be long before parts of your precious model (actually it already happens in ANY CGI movie) are indeed procedural in games. Play less games, program more and read more books!

[Vandenh]

>7.95GB. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360

Ha yes.. sorry. I was thinking about the storage of a DVD9 since I wasn't really talking about 360 in general but just the format. DVD9 can store 8.54GB.. I don't know what the 360 does with that missing stuff :)

[Chalex]

8.54GB actually


Optical Drive - As many have speculated, Xenon will not use Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Games will come on dual-layer DVD-9 discs. While the media is the same as that of the current Xbox, the usable space on each disc is up to 7 GB. The drive is slated to run at 12X.



http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/594331p1.html


While the DVD is capable of holding 8.54 GB of data Microsoft told developers they were only allowed to use 7 GB of each disc, much like they are required to have there game support live, 5.1 suround, and 720p.

[Chalex]

True true... character models are not the same as a simple tree... last time I checked humans were actually wearing clothes and other stuff. I won't be long before parts of your precious model (actually it already happens in ANY CGI movie) are indeed procedural in games. Play less games, program more and read more books!It might not be long, but its something the 360 is currently not capable of, and very well may never be ;)

[Lord Dongkey]

I don't feel like re-reading that article - not that it was bad, but time constraint - but I don't recall the guy mentioning that TEXTURE data was the culprit for bloating/growing game data sizes, but rather, it seemed like he was implicating "programming" or coding as the culprit. Now, I'm no programmer, but I'm pretty sure code is considerably smaller than art resources and even .bsp/game world architecture data.

But that's neither here nor there. The idea that DVD9 isn't sufficient for upcoming games blows my mind... seems like developers/artists/everyone gets lazy the more space and resources they have to work with. Just track the bloat in any windows code, and try to optimize XP Pro to run taking under 90 MB of ram vs. the 16MB of previous iterations of the OS... yeah, the new OS has new features, but a clean XP Pro install wants to eat over *200 MEG* of Ram... same kind of trend seems to be happening in games, not to mention the random videos and advertising shit they slapped on Xbox games that took up large chunks of space.

Fact is, you see the best and the worst of what people are capable of when under constraints. If this Next-Gen series of consoles was limited to 4 gig of space on disk, you'd see some really clever developers finding ways to actually use procedural methods to generate light/bump map textures and other such things - because they'd have to. Hell, they're sitting on three rather powerful cores in a dedicated environment with little to no overhead from an OS, you'd think they have the horsepower to make things like that happen.

Then again, how often do modern-day game developers dig into assembler code to optimize the really math-intense/cycle-intensive sections of their code? Maybe they do it all the time, but it doesn't seem that way to me seeing the way many games run nowadays. Path of Neo anyone?

[Vandenh]

It might not be long, but its something the 360 is currently not capable of, and very well may never be

Yes, my friend, could be... that is a different discussion of course. Like I said, my rave is 360 agnostic.

[mister_slim]

Ha yes... because Epic are the *only* people in the world that know something about software/games/design... FFS dude... the Oblivion people are doing it and more developers in the future will do it. Do you know who invents these things? Not games programmers but university researchers. One of my friends is a professor in computer graphics and he actually gives lectures to games programmers. The stuff that he is researching usually ends up in games in 5 years.
There are some nice-looking procedural games out there now. Doesn't mean it's going to be broadly useful any time soon.

[buckfutter]

True true... character models are not the same as a simple tree... last time I checked humans were actually wearing clothes and other stuff. I won't be long before parts of your precious model (actually it already happens in ANY CGI movie) are indeed procedural in games. Play less games, program more and read more books!

I don't think anyone was saying that procedural synthesis isn't where we're headed. One only has to look at a wall very closely to realise that only insane artists would want to handle the kind of detail we can see up close. We're saying that just because the tech is improving doesn't mean the 360 will never cause developers any grief because some wonderful solution is just a month or two away.

[Vandenh]

I don't think anyone was saying that procedural synthesis isn't where we're headed. One only has to look at a wall very closely to realise that only insane artists would want to handle the kind of detail we can see up close. We're saying that just because the tech is improving doesn't mean the 360 will never cause developers any grief because some wonderful solution is just a month or two away.

Sure true. What I am realy saying is that storage is not the way to go. Soon developers will just not have the budget/manpower/time to make games with the amount of assets that people expect in next gen gaming. They will have to look for different ways to solve this (can you imagine what they are going to do in 10 years with assets when we expect 1GB textures/models)?

The PGR3 team already had to outsource the whole texture works for the tracks. Never forget that a lot of procedural stuff has been creeping into games (grass generation is one of the small ones that we have seen last 3-4 years) and it will get bigger, so the size of a game will probably grow slowly because new tricks will keep the size managable and at the same time resulting in more realistic games. Procedural stuff is also not only used for textures... it could be used for almost everything (not with current CPU power of course).

As a games designer I have been very busy with procedural generation of game "parts". Basically you build something that is based on math and set some rules and hope the gameflow will fit in ;) (if not you tweak it) I was expecting something like this from Fable ;) (maybe Fable 2 ;)

Anyway.. nuff said. I think I have made my point and you know at least where I am standing.

[Kelegacy]

Sure, you can live in a small apartment perfectly fine, tripping over the furniture and smelling the catbox from the next room, but it's always nice to live in luxury, with loft-sized rooms and high ceilings, and plenty of space for not only you to stretch out, but a whole cast of your friends as well.

[Chalex]

Yes, my friend, could be... that is a different discussion of course. Like I said, my rave is 360 agnostic.Don't get me wrong, I believe the 360 is capable of a great many feats, but nothing is free. Teaxture compression and procedural synthesis is all fine and good, but really, what does it cost? I wonder what kind of CPU burden would be put on the system when it need to be running Xbox LIVE, the system blade, procedural synthesis on whatever game assets plus physics, AI, and the other what not that goes into a game.

No game will ever be all that efficiently encoded, if having a larger storage medium means they could cut a couple steps out in that list, all the more power to them, it means all that unused horsepower could go to something a little more intresting.

[Vandenh]

Sure, you can live in a small apartment perfectly fine, tripping over the furniture and smelling the catbox from the next room, but it's always nice to live in luxury, with loft-sized rooms and high ceilings, and plenty of space for not only you to stretch out, but a whole cast of your friends as well.

I know you are trying to be funny... but sadly this is totally off-topic, but if you really want... do you prefer to paint all the walls in your big fat mansion yourself or have a robot do it while you concentrate on having a drink with your buddies????

Teaxture compression and procedural synthesis is all fine and good, but really, what does it cost?

Yeah.. but Sony and MS are promising the next gen so their machines better deliver some innovation!!!. Also letting a human do all that also costs $$$ and time developing (and loading times are not free either). There comes a point when development time/cost will not be do-able any more (and that time is coming fast IMHO).

[Chalex]

Sure, you can live in a small apartment perfectly fine, tripping over the furniture and smelling the catbox from the next room, but it's always nice to live in luxury, with loft-sized rooms and high ceilings, and plenty of space for not only you to stretch out, but a whole cast of your friends as well.Exactly.


And to continue going with this, what happens when you decide you can get that 65" HDTV if you are in the luxury apartment then there is more than enough room for it and your friends come gameday.

On the other hand if you live in the small apartment you may end up deciding which you would rather have, the cat or the TV :confused:

[Chalex]

Yeah.. but Sony and MS are promising the next gen so their machines better deliver some innovation!!!I think it would be silly to expect Microsoft or Sony to deliver anything mind blowing at this point, they really do give a shit about giving you innovation, they care about Joe Everybody who buy Madden every year and considers each new years version "innovative"

[drakkarim]

yawn either way. i could care less what technology any console i choose to use uses, seeing how 99.9% of the movies that come out are complete piles of shit, whether it comes on vhs/beta/cd/dvd/hddvd/bluray/pinkray i'm still not going to bother wasting my time or money.

[Reanimated]

Great article. Looks like the Blu Ray tards just got served. I especially like how they point out how games like GTA actually SHRUNK over time.

[doyama]

The main complaint of the space limitation of DVD-9 is really coming from Japanese developers. They're big fans of pre-rendered FMV for cinematics. So the HD requirement on the Xbox360 is a problem because the space requirements for FMV essentially quadruple. North American developers have generally favored in-game cinematics so only are limited by the amount of textures the engine can display.

Generally the amount of textures in a game will be limited by several factors. One is just the grunt work required if you suddenly get 'texture happy'. It makes level design and optimization more difficult. Second is the hardware/engine. Texture swapping means accessing media which is of course slow so you want to minimize this as possible.

Texture compression may help in minimizing space on the media, but you take a performance hit in the decompression part. On chip texture compression was tried by S3 but it never really worked all that well.

Procedural textures are useful if you have some serious space constraints like on a cell phone, or if you want to model organic elements like trees and grass. But again its a performance hit where you're taking away cycles from other elements in the game like AI, sound, physics, etc.

[drakkarim]

I especially like how they point out how games like GTA actually SHRUNK over time.

hehe, pesonally, this correlates directly to the quality of the game over the years. i.e. graphics are crap, stories are crap, content is crap, so yeah, they probably need less resources to create something that is 'less'. the only thing that went up is the prices :)

all in all, give less for more, i would say the GTA guys got the business part of the whole thing down quite pat :)

[Borys]

When the first multi-DVD 360 game ships this year you will admit defeat, Vandenh. Oh yes you will.

[Lord Dongkey]

Innovation is solely the realm of Nintendo at this point. I can't think of an innovative thing Sony or MS have really done in a long while. Sure, you have Katamari, Ico, games like that that come out and are extremely innovative and must-have titles... but that's not Sony or MS in the slightest. God of War? Fun, but evolution. Halo? The horse is dead and being beaten, but it's not too rotten yet to drive people away.

Business rules dictate that evolving a current money-making paradigm is a safer bet than innovating and going with something that has no track record of success. It sucks, but money drives the train, as they say.

[Vandenh]

>When the first multi-DVD 360 game ships this year you will admit defeat, Vandenh. Oh yes you will.

Again totally besides the point.

When Oblivion ships, other developers should hang their heads in shame if they complain about disk size.

>Innovation is solely the realm of Nintendo at this point. I can't think of an innovative thing Sony or MS have really done in a long while

Dude... it is the developers who have to use those 3/7 cores!!! Oh and err... the PS3 is a super computer in a console. The least it can do is procedural textures. Nintendo should do it easily.. they use only primary colors anyway.

[Reanimated]

Final Fantasy 7 was complete shit because it was on multiple discs. I remember thinking to myself "wow, this game is fucking awesome, but having multiple discs totally ruins it!".



Just a note for the sarcastically challenged: the material above is sarcasm.



On a serious note: if Oblivion can fit onto one DVD then anything can. Not to mention that DOA4 has about 30 minutes of high quality 720p cinematics on the disc and it's still only 4.5GB.

[kokyunage]

Not to mention that DOA4 has about 30 minutes of high quality 720p cinematics on the disc and it's still only 4.5GB.

DOA4 is a fighting game. You must be Corky style retarded to think that a fighting game has the same amount of content as virtually any other genre. So, DOA4 is a bad comparison. However, Oblivion is not. If they can fit the game into a single DVD most developers will be able to. This really won't be an issue until mid or late into the lifecycle of the 360.

[Reanimated]

My point had more to do with the cinematics, which is why I specifically point out the... you know... cinematics.

Reading comprehension can be a bitch.

[Noiz]

You beat me to it, Reanimated. Is swapping a disc out after 5-10 hours (or more) of gameplay really that much of a chore? Especially when the extra discs have the boot code on them too so the next time you play you can just load straight from that disc.

Why are people arguing about this so much? I just don't get it.

[thecrazyd]

Why do I have a feeling that if MS were the ones with the larger disk space, then people here would be singing a different tune?

[Kelegacy]

You beat me to it, Reanimated. Is swapping a disc out after 5-10 hours (or more) of gameplay really that much of a chore? Especially when the extra discs have the boot code on them too so the next time you play you can just load straight from that disc.

Why are people arguing about this so much? I just don't get it.

For some games, no, it isn't an issue. But the possibility that some genres and action games may require this is enough to strike fear and loathing into the best of gamers. It's not being lazy, it's the inconvenience and impracticality. I'll spit fire if a GTA game is ever split across discs.

The PS3 has the benefit of next-generation media. You can argue all you want about how stupid Blu-Ray movies are, but for games it is an added benefit. I don't buy DVDs anyway, at least not much, so I'll only be using Blu-Ray media for my PS3 games. It IS next-gen, no matter how much you hate the new formats. The PS3 can still support DVDs, but just in case games do get dramatically bigger, they can fall back on BR discs.

[Kelegacy]

Why do I have a feeling that if MS were the ones with the larger disk space, then people here would be singing a different tune?
Short answer: Yes. Long answer: ...yes.

[Reanimated]

Why do I have a feeling that if MS were the ones with the larger disk space, then people here would be singing a different tune?



My stance would be the same, because the cost of "next-gen" drives being shoved on to people that don't need it is ridiculous. Sony is using it's gaming userbase to subsidize Blu Ray penetration. 95% of gamers do not need Blu Ray, nor will they be able to use it due to the fact that it requires an HDTV with digital inputs (for movies). About 90% of the HDTV's sold to date don't even have the necessary inputs to be able to watch Blu Ray movie content. Yes it will offer more storage for games, but I can tell you this - MOST publishers will ship their games on DVD due to the fact that DVD is FAR cheaper to manufacture.

I would have agreed with them doing dual SKUs so that people who want and can use Blu Ray could get a machine with the drive in it, while people who just want to play games could get a standard DVD unit and not have to pay out the nose for the Blu Ray drive.

[thecrazyd]

I would have agreed with them doing dual SKUs so that people who want and can use Blu Ray could get a machine with the drive in it, while people who just want to play games could get a standard DVD unit and not have to pay out the nose for the Blu Ray drive.
You are making the assumption that they are going to charge exorbantly because of the drive. I doubt we will see anything more then 400.

[sTubbs]

I can not help but think this would be a non issue if MS had just released an HD enabled 360 for $350. Releasing the two skus is one of the dumbest marketing moves ever. It confuses the parents and casual gamers alike, (my friends who work at gamestores say that even these customers are going for the premium, afraid that they are getting shafted by the core), and every core system being pumped out means that there is one less premium on the shelves.

The way I see it is that Blu-Ray might not be necessary, but it will be a nice luxury. Developers may not need that extra space, but it could be interesting to see if they do anything with it. Aside from CG movies of course.

Out of curiosity, how much space are PC games taking up these days? Surely there are very few, if any, that use more than 8 gigs.

[buckfutter]

Innovation is solely the realm of Nintendo at this point. I can't think of an innovative thing Sony or MS have really done in a long while. Sure, you have Katamari, Ico, games like that that come out and are extremely innovative and must-have titles... but that's not Sony or MS in the slightest. God of War? Fun, but evolution. Halo? The horse is dead and being beaten, but it's not too rotten yet to drive people away.

Business rules dictate that evolving a current money-making paradigm is a safer bet than innovating and going with something that has no track record of success. It sucks, but money drives the train, as they say.

Uh, you know that first party Sony developed ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, right? And that when ICO failed to sell worldwide they still put it on the Japanese Greatest Hits line, and funded the far more expensive SOTC?

Whilst I am excited for the Revolution in light of developers success with the DS, it has to be pointed out that innovation has little to do with the hardware provided. Nintendo is making it easier for developers to innovate, as they've been given a new set of tools. It doesn't mean that you'll see more innovative games on the Revolution by default. Sony and Microsoft may not have innovative hardware from the viewpoint of developers or gamers, but that doesn't mean they don't innovate in other fields of the gaming business.

More importantly, innovation does not always equal success. Nor does it guarantee a great game.

[atariv8]

Oh the sad pathetic xbox360...it sad to see that no games will ever be made for the console that will live up to the greatnesss that is the ps3. Why do developers even try to chisel into the stone that is the 360. If they only had 100 GBs of extra space they might of been able to create a great game. I knew you well xbox360...RIP. Sony forgive them for even trying.

[kokyunage]

My point had more to do with the cinematics, which is why I specifically point out the... you know... cinematics.

Reading comprehension can be a bitch.

So is a little bit of common sense. It can be said the reason why DOA4 has room for 30 minutes of movies because it has a low amount of game assets.

[Borys]

The amount of hypocristy and pure bullshit from this post:


I would have agreed with them doing dual SKUs so that people who want and can use Blu Ray could get a machine with the drive in it, while people who just want to play games could get a standard DVD unit and not have to pay out the nose for the Blu Ray drive.

by Reanimated is staggering.

Need I requote your thoughts, Mr "Xbox is Holier Than Thou" Reanimated, from the day MS announced the dual SKU deal?

You were *quite* furious then - it's still in the archives, was it smoke and mirrors? Don't make me embarras your ass, please, and cut the damage control crap.

It's always the same brigade defending the last-generation format (DVD) with their lives. Had Sony go this route you'd flame the living shit out of them for not evolving.

[Schnoogs]

Must be a slow news day if we're arguing about this.

News Update...2 CPUs are enough for games. Oh well I guess the 360 is doomed since it has 3 and the PS3 is really screwed since it has more.

Who cares. If the PS3 comes with more than a DVD player who gives a crap. Yes it might raise the price but then don't buy it.

It is what it is. Next week we'll be reading a similar article stating "Whoops DVD in fact not quite good enough".

Keep the subjective opinions and analysis to game content not to the long time projection of the usefulness of hardware.

[Zurik]

Why are we even using DVDs with such good compression technology? We could still be using CDs.

[Lord Dongkey]

Uh, you know that first party Sony developed ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, right? And that when ICO failed to sell worldwide they still put it on the Japanese Greatest Hits line, and funded the far more expensive SOTC?


First party development != the segments of Sony or MS I'm referring to. I'm more thinking of their hardware and their entire approach to console gaming... and I edited that paragraph after typing and hacked out the part where I mentioned that while it's first party development, that doesn't mean it's the company itself. Anyone can slap a first party logo/branding on a title, for enough money. My bad on that one.

Whilst I am excited for the Revolution in light of developers success with the DS, it has to be pointed out that innovation has little to do with the hardware provided. ... More importantly, innovation does not always equal success. Nor does it guarantee a great game.

Nothing guarantees success or a great game, no, but Nintendo providing those tools is above and beyond any gesture of risk or investment of reputation/money that Sony or MS have been willing to do. They're dumping more power and capabilities into the hardware and leaving the fundamental way we interact with or use the system the same as it's been since the early 80's. Same idea as them dumping money into dev studios and then calling a game 1st party... does the president of Sony or Bill Gates stick their respective heads into dev studios to ensure that their 1st party investments are being developed correctly? To me, that means the IP is that of the dev studios, and the only thing the "1st parties" can claim is that they gave money to qualified people.

Now, don't get me wrong, that helps quite a bit. A world with no ICO, no Halo, etc, would be a world worse off for gamers. I just think the soul/heart of any type of real exciting change/development in the video gaming industry won't come from companies so large and monetarily vested in the entire thing that they're not willing to take risks.

[Schnoogs]

Why are we even using DVDs with such good compression technology? We could still be using CDs.

Cartridges!!!

[Kelegacy]

The amount of hypocristy and pure bullshit from this post:



by Reanimated is staggering.

Need I requote your thoughts, Mr "Xbox is Holier Than Thou" Reanimated, from the day MS announced the dual SKU deal?

You were *quite* furious then - it's still in the archives, was it smoke and mirrors? Don't make me embarras your ass, please, and cut the damage control crap.

It's always the same brigade defending the last-generation format (DVD) with their lives. Had Sony go this route you'd flame the living shit out of them for not evolving.
You learn to live with it and accept it. Sort of like how my father would steal into my room after the twilight hours.

[Reanimated]

The amount of hypocristy and pure bullshit from this post:



by Reanimated is staggering.

Need I requote your thoughts, Mr "Xbox is Holier Than Thou" Reanimated, from the day MS announced the dual SKU deal?

You were *quite* furious then - it's still in the archives, was it smoke and mirrors? Don't make me embarras your ass, please, and cut the damage control crap.

It's always the same brigade defending the last-generation format (DVD) with their lives. Had Sony go this route you'd flame the living shit out of them for not evolving.




Oh god please give me a fucking break. That was for a HARD DRIVE - a part that was heavily requested and used by developers on the original Xbox. That move STILL doesn't make sense. It's not about the dual SKU's for the 360; it's about an integral part of the LAST console not being a STANDARD part of the new console. Totally different situation here with Blu Ray. Embarras me? Oh god please shut the fuck up, dipshit. It's almost unreal that your posts here are at least twice as stupid as the bullshit you post at GAF. Probably because they'd ban your ass over there.

The truly funny thing is that you were all for it when I was jumping on Microsoft's case.

[bean19]

Good article but it doesn't speak to two really big points:

1. You can always change out discs during play. If FF XIII comes out and needs 2 DVDs for all the CG they want to insert, then they'll probably use 2 DVDs because it is not a big deal for players to change out discs every 20 hours of gameplay.

2. Data transfer rates! Load times! It's all about being able to pull data off the disc quickly, and the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are both inferior to the DVD-9 at doing this. So DVD means faster load screens and better streaming.

[bean19]

Oh god please give me a fucking break. That was for a HARD DRIVE - a part that was heavily requested and used by developers on the original Xbox. That move STILL doesn't make sense. It's not about the dual SKU's for the 360; it's about an integral part of the LAST console not being a STANDARD part of the new console. Totally different situation here with Blu Ray. Embarras me? Oh god please shut the fuck up, dipshit. It's almost unreal that your posts here are at least twice as stupid as the bullshit you post at GAF. Probably because they'd ban your ass over there.

The truly funny thing is that you were all for it when I was jumping on Microsoft's case.

I thought this was crazy when they initially decided to do this, but now that I see that the attachment rate for X360 and hard-drives is so high that nearly every one has a hard-drive on their X360, I don't think it is that big of a concern.

[motor]

Ironically, one of the things that will really kill procedural texturing on the 360 is the lack of a required hard-drive. I've done a fair amount of procedural texture generation work (one prototype game I developed used it exclusively) and it can be done and it can generate some really interesting looking stuff, but the speed of the machine isn't quite there yet, a lot of good procedural stuff relies on nxn filters, pixel-to-pixel distance checks, complicated flood fills...This is all stuff that can be done, but it takes a non-negligible amount of cpu. Now if you can cache this stuff on a hard-drive, I think the hardware is at the point where it can be done, but without a hard-drive to cache the results, my opinion is that the hardware isn't there yet.

[Reanimated]

I thought this was crazy when they initially decided to do this, but now that I see that the attachment rate for X360 and hard-drives is so high that nearly every one has a hard-drive on their X360, I don't think it is that big of a concern.



I've since come down a little after seeing the numbers and hearing from devs like Bethesda that are still using the drive, but I still don't think it makes a whole lot of sense. I CAN understand that there are genuinely people that will never NEED the hard drive because they will never hook their console to the internet. Still though, these tards are going to have to buy AT LEAST one 40 dollar memory card anyway, so it makes very little sense to buy the tard pack. Especially when you consider all of the other stuff you get in the premium.

The situation is different with Blu Ray. They are making you buy a device which is useless to MOST people. It will be very interesting to see the ratio of games that ship on DVD vs. Blu Ray. You can bet that only the absolute top tier games will be published on Blu Ray. At least until the manufacturing costs can match DVD, which may be never.

[Reanimated]

Ironically, one of the things that will really kill procedural texturing on the 360 is the lack of a required hard-drive. I've done a fair amount of procedural texture generation work (one prototype game I developed used it exclusively) and it can be done and it can generate some really interesting looking stuff, but the speed of the machine isn't quite there yet, a lot of good procedural stuff relies on nxn filters, pixel-to-pixel distance checks, complicated flood fills...This is all stuff that can be done, but it takes a non-negligible amount of cpu. Now if you can cache this stuff on a hard-drive, I think the hardware is at the point where it can be done, but without a hard-drive to cache the results, my opinion is that the hardware isn't there yet.




Why can't you use system memory?

[Zanzibar]

Sure, you can live in a small apartment perfectly fine, tripping over the furniture and smelling the catbox from the next room, but it's always nice to live in luxury, with loft-sized rooms and high ceilings, and plenty of space for not only you to stretch out, but a whole cast of your friends as well.

Yes, for the low low price of ten times the rent of the small place!!

Seriously, ten times is probably being kind when comparing the cost of a DVD drive versus a Blu-Ray drive.

[Schnoogs]

Why can't you use system memory?

I'm sure you can but I think motor is suggesting that its memory intensive so you wouldnt want to sacrifice you single memory pool for one trick.

[Nite_Moogle]

Final Fantasy 7 was complete shit because it was on multiple discs. I remember thinking to myself "wow, this game is fucking awesome, but having multiple discs totally ruins it!".

Resident Evil 4 was totally ruined for me because it was multiple discs. I agree with the above poster that putting a game on more than one disc is utterly absurd and I would rather pay $100-200 more for a higher capacity drive than for a game that costs $5 more because it has a second disc.

:rolleyes:

[Reanimated]

Resident Evil 4 was totally ruined for me because it was multiple discs. I agree with the above poster that putting a game on more than one disc is utterly absurd and I would rather pay $100-200 more for a higher capacity drive than for a game that costs $5 more because it has a second disc.

:rolleyes:



RE4 didn't even cost 5 bucks more. :)

But you're right, what a pile of shit. And I think I pulled a muscle in my arm when I had to reach for the disc case. I should sue.

[Schnoogs]

RE4 didn't even cost 5 bucks more. :)

But you're right, what a pile of shit. And I think I pulled a muscle in my arm when I had to reach for the disc case. I should sue.

HAHAHAH!


(The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters)

[buckfutter]

First party development != the segments of Sony or MS I'm referring to. I'm more thinking of their hardware and their entire approach to console gaming... and I edited that paragraph after typing and hacked out the part where I mentioned that while it's first party development, that doesn't mean it's the company itself. Anyone can slap a first party logo/branding on a title, for enough money. My bad on that one.

Well, you can't slap a first party logo on a game that hasn't been developed in house by the developers you hired to work in your studios under your supervision. So there is a limit to that reasoning. Innovation in games they fund, develop and produce is still innovation. Miyamoto works in software and hardware for Nintendo... is one half of what he does not innovation? Remember, Sony's also pushing their Eyetoy tech to new heights... the ideas behind what Nintendo are doing are not theirs (or Sony's). It's just that Nintendo has the balls to make it their primary interface, and work with the technology until it's, you know, good. That deserves much respect, but if we're going to split hairs on what innovation is I may as well bring it up.


Nothing guarantees success or a great game, no, but Nintendo providing those tools is above and beyond any gesture of risk or investment of reputation/money that Sony or MS have been willing to do. They're dumping more power and capabilities into the hardware and leaving the fundamental way we interact with or use the system the same as it's been since the early 80's.

One could easily say Nintendo would've been willing to stay with the things the way they were for a lot longer if it wasn't for their competition coming along with the Playstation and, dare I say it, innovating and changing the medium as much as they themselves had once done. If Nintendo had come out on top of this current generation, and had the choice, would they have been so quick to branch out so wildly?

Same idea as them dumping money into dev studios and then calling a game 1st party... does the president of Sony or Bill Gates stick their respective heads into dev studios to ensure that their 1st party investments are being developed correctly? To me, that means the IP is that of the dev studios, and the only thing the "1st parties" can claim is that they gave money to qualified people.

Ken Kutaragi, god bless his nutty soul, used to make everyone at Sony headquarters that worked on the Playstation project and software (i.e. first party games) submit one game idea a day. He and his immediate staff would read them all. This is how Gran Turismo was initially funded. They have at least as much involvement in their games as Nintendo's past corporate heads did. Only recently has an actual ex-games developer come to head at Nintendo. But perhaps that's why things are starting to look on the up and up for them!

Now, don't get me wrong, that helps quite a bit. A world with no ICO, no Halo, etc, would be a world worse off for gamers. I just think the soul/heart of any type of real exciting change/development in the video gaming industry won't come from companies so large and monetarily vested in the entire thing that they're not willing to take risks.

Sorry to bring it back to Sony yet again, but the kind of risks they ran getting into the business were pretty monumental. People on the "bottom" are more likely to take these risks, I guess that's why we need competition from the games companies. Just don't be so sure that Nintendo is instantly more qualified because they are smaller. If their gambit on the Rev pays off, it may be another company turning the tables on them in years to come, much like Sony had to do to take the crown from them in the first place.

I apologise in retrospect if any of this makes no sense, but I'm in desperate need of sleep!

[Kelegacy]

Resident Evil 4 was totally ruined for me because it was multiple discs. I agree with the above poster that putting a game on more than one disc is utterly absurd and I would rather pay $100-200 more for a higher capacity drive than for a game that costs $5 more because it has a second disc.

:rolleyes:
Yes, but the PS2 version was on 1 disc. There was no switching discs whatsoever.

[Nite_Moogle]

Yes, but the PS2 version was on 1 disc. There was no switching discs whatsoever.
The PS2 version was ruined for me because it was only playable on a Sony product I don't own ;)

[bapenguin]

Sure, you can live in a small apartment perfectly fine, tripping over the furniture and smelling the catbox from the next room, but it's always nice to live in luxury, with loft-sized rooms and high ceilings, and plenty of space for not only you to stretch out, but a whole cast of your friends as well.

That's the problem with so much software today. Bloatware and unoptimized. We need to get back to the days of trying to fit something into 640k of memory.

I don't think we'll see the XBox 360 "running out of space" for quite some time, and even then we'll only be seeing a few games that need to be on multiple discs.

[motor]

Why can't you use system memory?

Because, high-quality procedural texture generation isn't fast enough to do in real-time yet, but with good prediction I can do the procedural generation for a room you won't be in for another few minutes and run it at a low enough priority that it won't impact frame rate. But where do I store that great texture I've made? If I store in in system memory then I have to reduce the number of textures I'm showing you in the room your currently in.

It's a little more complicated then that, but that's the basic idea.

[Schnoogs]

Because, high-quality procedural texture generation isn't fast enough to do in real-time yet, but with good prediction I can do the procedural generation for a room you won't be in for another few minutes and run it at a low enough priority that it won't impact frame rate. But where do I store that great texture I've made? If I store in in system memory then I have to reduce the number of textures I'm showing you in the room your currently in.

It's a little more complicated then that, but that's the basic idea.

They've done this for years....Unreal 1 did it. So I guess the word high quality is subjective so perhaps Unreals approach wasn't high quality enough.

[xanthome]

If Microsoft could have shipped an xbox360 with nextgen drive they would've, but they couldn't (cost, standards issues). Now us devs will just have to deal with it. I just hope their "security features" for 360 aren't as fucked up as their disc layout for xbox was. Anyone with a big compressed wad file for their game will remember XLO Tetris!

It will be enough, because it has to be. Publishers want single layer over dual layer and single disc over multi-disc (Multi-disc sucks for developers, does it ever, I speak from experience).

[RMan]

I thought this was crazy when they initially decided to do this, but now that I see that the attachment rate for X360 and hard-drives is so high that nearly every one has a hard-drive on their X360, I don't think it is that big of a concern.
Yes, but keep in mind that's among the ultra hardcore. The early adopter purchasing of extras is always FAR higher than the lifetime average. No matter what the ratio of core units is, the vast majority of games will be developed for the lowest common denominator only, and likely the only real reason games like Oblivion are even using the hard drive is because they already did the work to make it run well on it, and only fairly recently (in terms of the entire dev cycle) got word that there will be 2 skus.

Couldn't agree more with you about load times though, I'd say that's a far greater concern for me than improved detail offered by the greater storage. Few things pull me out of the experience like long load times.

As far as game devs bitching about the size of the media, it is mostly a marketing thing. They'll scale the assets to the platform they're putting it on, the main reason they throw out these big numbers is because it sounds impressive (My game's got the biggest footprint, and you know what they say about games with big feet!). Standard song and dance, really.

[Reanimated]

Because, high-quality procedural texture generation isn't fast enough to do in real-time yet, but with good prediction I can do the procedural generation for a room you won't be in for another few minutes and run it at a low enough priority that it won't impact frame rate. But where do I store that great texture I've made? If I store in in system memory then I have to reduce the number of textures I'm showing you in the room your currently in.

It's a little more complicated then that, but that's the basic idea.




I got ya. Maybe this is where them deciding to put in 512MB of RAM instead of 256 comes in to play. Mabye devs will block out a chunk of memory for storing procedurally generated textures without having to significantly reduce the quality of what you're looking at.

You know a lot more about it than I do, so I'm interested to hear what ya think. I always thought that if they removed the HDD, that they should have stuck in a GB of RAM. However, I don't know what the break point is for when more memory just becomes a slow down rather than an asset.

[Schnoogs]

(Multi-disc sucks for developers, does it ever, I speak from experience).

You need to clarify that. Multi-disk sucks for consoles without hard drives. PC games often have 3 or 4 CDs that simply get moved to the hard drive.

[baz]

The day procedural asset generation is faster than loading off a disc I'm all for it. Anything that makes load times shorter is good, anything that makes them longer is bad. Much worse than having to swap a disc every 5 hours is having to wait a minute every 10.

[RMan]

The day procedural asset generation is faster than loading off a disc I'm all for it.
Yea, well, although procedural assets have their place, it's a pretty small one and the idea that they'll have a significant impact on the average game's asset creation is way off base. Procedural assets simply lack the control necessary in more traditional methods, in terms of textures they're useful for creating, say water or other animated effects, natural textures where control isn't real important, or simple materials. Even when it works, it comes at the expense of a greater chance of breaking between platforms, generally far more trouble to create, and requires a good level of coordination between artists and programmers.

[Demo_Boy]

If you need 8 Gigs of space for your content, then you don't have enough gameplay.

Discuss.

[player66]

Developers are soo f'king lazy, they'll always demand to have more space so they can continue to do a crappy job of code optimization and performance improvement out of their title.

[baz]

Developers are soo f'king lazy, they'll always demand to have more space so they can continue to do a crappy job of code optimization and performance improvement out of their title.

Yeah dude, this so has nothing to do with code optimization and performance improvement. Anyway, being a games programmer aint easy, you get paid less than other programmers, work to tougher deadlines and work with some pretty hard problems. All that and you have to work the creative aspect as well.

[Schnoogs]

, being a games programmer aint easy, you get paid less than other programmers.

Maybe game content programmers but engine programmers get paid well.

I'm sure Carmack and Sweeney are hurting at the bank ;)

[baz]

Maybe game content programmers but engine programmers get paid well.

I'm sure Carmack and Sweeney are hurting at the bank ;)

Yeah, but Carmack is a majority share holder, and I'm pretty sure Sweeney has major stock in Epic. I was just defending games programmers from a pretty pointless attack. Programmers unite! (I'm not in the games industry though :D)

[bean19]

The situation is different with Blu Ray. They are making you buy a device which is useless to MOST people. It will be very interesting to see the ratio of games that ship on DVD vs. Blu Ray. You can bet that only the absolute top tier games will be published on Blu Ray. At least until the manufacturing costs can match DVD, which may be never.

I think that even the top tier games (hell, especially the top tier games) will be released on DVD as oppossed to Blu-Ray but due to wanting better game performance (as oppossd to economics).

Also, I don't think that it is useless. I totally think that one of the selling points that will make me feel better about buying a PS3 is that I will be able to rent and play HD movies on it.

[mister_slim]

I thought this was crazy when they initially decided to do this, but now that I see that the attachment rate for X360 and hard-drives is so high that nearly every one has a hard-drive on their X360, I don't think it is that big of a concern.
Well, the point is that developers can't depend on it, even if 99.8% have a hard drive. I still think MS made the right choice though.

Ken Kutaragi, god bless his nutty soul, used to make everyone at Sony headquarters that worked on the Playstation project and software (i.e. first party games) submit one game idea a day. He and his immediate staff would read them all. This is how Gran Turismo was initially funded. They have at least as much involvement in their games as Nintendo's past corporate heads did. Only recently has an actual ex-games developer come to head at Nintendo. But perhaps that's why things are starting to look on the up and up for them!
This is still one of Nintendo's major problems. NoA and NoE don't have enough freedom to produce their own products. That was one of the problems with Geist, that a NCL guy was altering the direction of the game to make it more palatable to Japan, though it ended up not being released there. They really need to expand NST in to a major development house, and let NoA and NoE fund some interesting western development. I think a large part of the PS2's success in Europe is due the quality work that SCEE does and the freedom they're given.

[Reanimated]

I think that even the top tier games (hell, especially the top tier games) will be released on DVD as oppossed to Blu-Ray but due to wanting better game performance (as oppossd to economics).

Also, I don't think that it is useless. I totally think that one of the selling points that will make me feel better about buying a PS3 is that I will be able to rent and play HD movies on it.




That's good for you. You are part of the .01% of the population that actually has the television/inputs for it.

[buckfutter]

Well whatever happens, we have numbers from Kutaragi of what he expects from BluRay use for games. During the launch period, only 26% of PS2 games used the DVD format. Five years later, 95% used the DVD format. I don't see it being exactly the same as this situation, you can't make such cross generational comparisons when there's so many other factors to consider, but to extrapolate what I've said before to the PS3, if you give developers something they will eventually make use of it, for better or worse. The 360 may provide problems for some developers, but in the end they will simply adapt to the platform. Same goes for the PS3. The overall effect will only be visible in multiplatform ports, depending on just how lazy/ambitious the developers are.

[bean19]

Well whatever happens, we have numbers from Kutaragi of what he expects from BluRay use for games. During the launch period, only 26% of PS2 games used the DVD format. Five years later, 95% used the DVD format. I don't see it being exactly the same as this situation, you can't make such cross generational comparisons when there's so many other factors to consider, but to extrapolate what I've said before to the PS3, if you give developers something they will eventually make use of it, for better or worse. The 360 may provide problems for some developers, but in the end they will simply adapt to the platform. Same goes for the PS3. The overall effect will only be visible in multiplatform ports, depending on just how lazy/ambitious the developers are.

I can already see myself buying the FF XIII port for the X360 because it's not on Blu-Ray and I want to avoid load times. ;)

Just kidding of course, they are too smart to do that. Data transfer rate is so much more important than switching out DVDs every 10 to 20 hours of play.

[SMES]

I can honestly say that having a game on 3 or 4 discs is fine and dandy. I really don't care about switching game discs.

It bores and annoys me that this is even an issue for anyone. Switching discs? Seriously? This is the great debate of the "Next Generation"?

It was stupid when people complained about FF7 being on 3 CDs, and it will be just as stupid when people complain about FF13 being on 3 DVDs.

Edit: Sorry if someone said this already. I'm post 86 though, so it's not like anybody cares at this point ;)

[buckfutter]

I can already see myself buying the FF XIII port for the X360 because it's not on Blu-Ray and I want to avoid load times. ;)

Just kidding of course, they are too smart to do that. Data transfer rate is so much more important than switching out DVDs every 10 to 20 hours of play.

All kidding aside, we don't know how fast the drive in the PS3 will be. And the seek times of a 2x Blu Ray drive exceed that of a 12x DVD drive, whilst the sustained transfer is lower, so it's not so cut and dry. Also, if the DVD fits an uncompromised version of a game also on a Blu Ray disc, then texture decompression will possibly even load times out.

We just don't know how any of this works in practice until we, you know, actually have something to base our opinions on.

[bean19]

The seek times don't nearly make up for the data transfer rate.

Seek time is milliseconds, data transfer rate is the difference between 30 second load screens and 2 minute (or one minute if they do a 2x Blu-Ray instead of a "standard" Blu-Ray - which is unlikely with the technology so new).

Plus, there is the other argument that most games don't get near the capacity of a DVD, and even if they do it looks like multiple DVDs will be less expensive for publishers than Blu-Ray discs (although this is cutting a fine point and they are only saving a very small portion).

The thing that might get them to release on Blu-Ray is copy protection, but I think they'll avoid this if they don't want to be the "load screen" system.

[buckfutter]

So you know how much it costs to produce a Blu Ray disc and a game case in comparison to two DVDs and a non-standard game case?

Seek times are actually quite important for games that stream data load. This importance lessens the more well ordered/organized data is to begin with though, so it isn't a useful "advantage".

It's widely thought that Sony will ship with a 2x drive. This gives them around 70% the sustained speed of a 12x DVD. Personally I don't expect them to go higher or lower than that, but the tech does exist in a production-mature form for 4x drives. They could feasibly go with a 1x drive, as the fact that Blu Ray films stream at 1.5x does not indicate that a 2x is the minimum; a 1x drive when reading a movie stream as opposed to data actually operates at 1.5x. Expect final word on all this late February, if we're lucky.

And it would be my belief that the reason most games don't exceed a single DVD is because, well, they were designed for systems with DVD drives. Like I said, developers will (eventually) use what they're given, even if only to a minimal extent. If a PS3 game will fit on a DVD then it'll likely be put on a DVD, so if a multiplatform title is uncompromised in a single disc 360 version, then the load time isn't an issue because the game will in all likelihood arrive on a DVD for the PS3 and not on a BR disc.

You failed to address my point about texture decompression, too. But whatever.

[bean19]

Blu Ray Drive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray) - 22 - 25 Gigabytes Storage - 4.5 Mb/sec transfer rate

DVD-9 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvd) - 7.92 - 8.5 Gigabytes Storage - 15.75 MB/sec data transfer rate

If they go 2x on Blu-Ray that will be a 9 MB/sec transfer rate.

Let's say both of these have to fill 512 MBs of RAM on a load screen. DVDx12 will do so in 32.5 seconds. About half a minute.

Blu-Ray will do so in 114 seconds (113.77). Nearly two minutes.

Blu-Rayx2 will do so in 57 seconds (56.88). Nearly a minute.

They've got to make an affordable architecture, and this leads me to believe that they'll simply make games for their DVD and avoid the Blu-Ray altogether.

While games CAN get huge, there really isn't any incentive for moving to a larger file storage, as the larger load times make for a decrease in the play experience for the end user. They could still make huge games and just put them on separate DVDS. Earlier this year, many people have gone over the VERY largest games out for the PC (as these have traditionally been much larger than games for consoles). I'll hunt down the list if I must, but only about 7 games came close to going over the storage of ONE DVD, and if you exclude MMOs that would need to use the HD, that number goes down to 2 games. . . one of them was UT2K4 and I forget the other one.

In any case, I want shorter load times and separate DVDs if games get larger. Changing discs is so much better than waiting for load screens constnatly.

[bean19]

You failed to address my point about texture decompression, too. But whatever.

Okay, show me where there is information that says that Blu-Ray is better at texture decompression? I assume you mean that textures will not NEED to be compressed if they are on Blu-Ray and this will save some time.

However, I think that you are incorrect. . . I don't really have the engineering chops to say this for sure, but my understanding is that decompression works so that the load is shifted to video RAM and/or the processor. For instance, they use compression to load more information onto the RAM (the compressed textures) and then the decompression process is performed at that point by the processor onboard the GPU or the main processors. Thus, the load times would remain the same as the same amount of information has to be loaded up from the Blu-Ray or the DVD.

Even if this is incorrect, the net effect is that the Blu-Ray still has to load up 512 MBs of data (compressed or uncompressed) at the same time that the DVD has to do so and there is still a huge difference in load times. Besides data compression and decompression has gotten super fast, but I guess we can't test this unless we were to burn a compressed texture to a DVD vs. a compressed texture to a Blu-Ray, and then vs. an uncompressed texture on a Blu-Ray. Still, considering compression technology, I suspect we are talking about the difference between 1 to 5 seconds. . . as compared to 1 1/2 minutes.

As for streaming and data-finding, well we've been over that. . . it is the difference of milliseconds, your bottle-neck is going to be the pipe on that. I don't have figures on it, but if Blu-Ray is even twice as good as DVD in locating data on the disc, it would only gain a few milliseconds here and there. The net effect even compounded with searching for data over and over in a streaming situation would be negligible compared to the overall difference in the data transfer rate.

Games will be on DVD. All of them. . . for both systems. Game developers are too smart to do otherwise.

Then again, there is always someone who is dumb, and there is always someone out to promote new technology come hell or high water, so they may do one or two on Blu-Ray. . . and it will be a mistake.

[baz]

We have no idea what the speed of the blu-ray drive will be on the PS3, so any load time comparison is fair useless at the moment.

[buckfutter]

Both Rockstar and Mark Rein of Epic are looking to use Blu Ray. Rein goes so far as to say that they will be using up "most of the room" on Blu Ray for future titles. Rockstar simply made a very flimsy comment about using the "streaming capabilities" of CELL and Blu Ray in building their next gen engine. Far from solid info, but the interest is there.

Also this is limited by how much you trust Rein, but it was his opinion that they'll hit something like 20gb compressed with UT2K7. Probably says more about how Epic creates content than anything else.

We will see games on Blu Ray. Whether it'll be like the PS2 with 26% of games using a DVD at launch and moving onto 95% in 5 years isn't clear. I sincerely doubt the numbers will be as high as that at either comparable stage of the PS3 lifespan, but don't count out a game developers ability to see potential and use it. With no PS3 games to compare, and no final drive specs, we can only guess at what this means for load times.

[bean19]

We have no idea what the speed of the blu-ray drive will be on the PS3, so any load time comparison is fair useless at the moment.

Sure we do. Check out the wikpedia links.

[mister_slim]

Sure we do. Check out the wikpedia links.
You know the speed of the Blu-Ray drive in the PS3?

[baz]

Sure we do. Check out the wikpedia links.

What mister_slim said; we know how fast a 1x blu-ray drive will be, but we don't know how fast the PS3 blu-ray drive will be. Is it 1x,2x,4x? Until we know that then the load time argument is invalid.

[mister_slim]

2x's are supposed to be shipping soon, by the way.

[bean19]

What mister_slim said; we know how fast a 1x blu-ray drive will be, but we don't know how fast the PS3 blu-ray drive will be. Is it 1x,2x,4x? Until we know that then the load time argument is invalid.

Well a 4x isn't existing yet, and the system is still suppossed to come out in March, so we can compare to whether or not it will be the 1x or 2x. Both of which are much slower than the 12x DVD.

Don't get me wrong. I will buy a PS3 and I'm looking forward to the games, I'm just hoping that developers are smart enough to separate DVDs so that we have load times that are about two or three times faster.

Changing DVDs out every now and again is a lot faster than waiting for a load screen to take an extra 30 seconds (if Blu-Rayx2) or an extra 90 seconds (if Blu-Rayx1).

[Kelegacy]

Well a 4x isn't existing yet, and the system is still suppossed to come out in March, so we can compare to whether or not it will be the 1x or 2x. Both of which are much slower than the 12x DVD.

Don't get me wrong. I will buy a PS3 and I'm looking forward to the games, I'm just hoping that developers are smart enough to separate DVDs so that we have load times that are about two or three times faster.

Changing DVDs out every now and again is a lot faster than waiting for a load screen to take an extra 30 seconds (if Blu-Rayx2) or an extra 90 seconds (if Blu-Rayx1).

I lost my second disc to Chrono Trigger. I can't play the game now, unless I buy a new copy. Multiple discs have that negative attached to them, as well. I think I misplaced my FF8 disc for a long time and I panicked for months until I eventually found it. However, I guess if you lose a game that is on one BR disc, you'd be equally as screwed; either way, you can't play the game.

[bean19]

Kel - Well, true. . . but I put my games back in their cases. I don't think I've ever lost a game. I even have a CD case for PC games that do not come with a jewel case.
So that isn't a concern for me personally.

Still, I guess we all have our own personal kinds of forgetfulness. I'm terrible at learning names, and I have to keep a schedule or I'll miss appointments.

[Crenor]

It's funny many people forget or do not know that the XBox only gets 6.2-6.4gb out of a 8.4 gb disk. There is 1gig per layer of security protection on each disk that cannot be used at all for anything. I have herd it is not so big on the Xbox360 but it is still there.