DVD Vs Blu Ray Discussion: My disc is bigger than yours

Winckle wrote:So guys how about gaming on the PC. No discs needed at all!

PCs aren't for gaming.

cooldawn wrote:

suzzopher wrote:It's just a shame that Blu Ray reads so slowly.

Yeah...people do say that but then it doesn't matter these days. The way I understand it is that the PS3 reads, processes and outputs the information very quickly. As I said before Uncharted 2 and God of War III seem to lead the way...showing that the tech inside PS3 is more than capable of providing AAA games without any concessions.

At the end of the day it's up to the other developers to get on-track. I can understand where costs impede progress but I can't understand why people are saying this and that can't be done on PS3 when, clearly, it is doing it.

It can be done for some types of game. Maybe not for others. Why does Heavy Rain require an install? Maybe what the game's actually doing in terms of streaming data needs it, whereas what's going on in Uncharted/GOW works completely differently? You're implying that there's one-size-fits-all here, but I don't believe that for a second.

Drunken_Master wrote:

TheTurnipKing wrote:

cooldawn wrote:Games get bigger...more space required. Who'd of thought.

Bigger, eh?

Is now a bad time to point out that David Braben and Iain Bell squeezed 8 galaxies into an 8 bit machine?

Did those machines have aslow, sequential based storage media? If so, then that's your answer!!!

Are you trying to imply that tape is superior to Blu-ray?

Elite only made use of the tape while loading initally - nothing was loaded during play.

My point is largely that clever use of procedurally generated assets can reduce the amount of storage required for a game significantly.

wtfisthisshit.jpg

I cannot believe some of you actually thing MS aren't holding back the games industry.

Also the disk limitation is leading to more and more dlc that should be on the disk anyway!

Mind blowing thread here. Suddenly mandatory installs are a concession (when everyone installs their 360 games without fail.) I'm disappointed when PS3 games don't use them. I want faster load times.

Also the fact that games which are built with DVD in mind don't have a problem is hardly proof that DVD is not a limiting format. It's merely one they take into consideration from the off. Games are definitely getting bigger. Dragon Age's compressed textures and Mass Effect 2 say hi. Both games which were definitely built with the 360 in mind.

Hell, even Forza 3s on 2 disks.

Harry Bizzle wrote:Mind blowing thread here. Suddenly mandatory installs are a concession (when everyone installs their 360 games without fail.) I'm disappointed when PS3 games don't use them. I want faster load times.

Also the fact that games which are built with DVD in mind don't have a problem is hardly proof that DVD is not a limiting format. It's merely one they take into consideration from the off. Games are definitely getting bigger. Dragon Age's compressed textures and Mass Effect 2 say hi. Both games which were definitely built with the 360 in mind.

Hell, even Forza 3s on 2 disks.

Mass Effect 2 was, but Dragon Age was designed as a PC title. Early Edge previews offer proof.

Jaguar XJ220 on the Amiga 500 means I will never complain about having to swap a disk.

Admitedly, my drug addled brain is not great at remembering details from my childhood, but I'm pretty sure that game required not one, but TWO disk changes...not once in a while...BUT FOR EVERY RACE.

*Shudders*

This thread is terrible, but an amusing read.

I like to scracth my DVDs and Blu-Rays and then see which will continue to play.

DVDs always lose this contest to the superior Blu-Ray. Xbox 360's use DVD ergo the 360 is an inferior machine to the Playsation 3 (which uses Blu-Ray.)

My conclusion is that at the current rate of DVD scratching incidents at home (upwards of 150% since the release of MW2), current DVD manufactures will not be able to meet the demand needed to replace these broken discs thus Blu-Ray manufacturers will be able to dominate the market.

Harry Bizzle wrote:Mind blowing thread here. Suddenly mandatory installs are a concession (when everyone installs their 360 games without fail.)

Au contraire, I don't install most Xbox titles.

At present, I believe the only game I actually have installed is Mass Effect 2 (and technically Burnout Paradise, but that was bought online, and I don't actually have a disk)

consolegaming wrote:Also the disk limitation is leading to more and more dlc that should be on the disk anyway!

Actually, that's largely a dickish anti-preowned industry move by game publishers. By "giving away" that DLC with the initial release, it ensures that pre-owned buyers have to pay something to them if they want the "full experience".

Eighthours wrote:

cooldawn wrote:

Rik wrote:

Calling you out here because we all know that is utter bullshit. Games that require an install are generally games that have been coded early in the systems life-cycle or developers that can't be bothered to put in the effort...it has absolutely nothing to do with the technology. Many games...in fact many/all (can't be arsed to check) Sony 1st party titles...you know, those ones that are actually pushing the hardware...seldom require an install.

I just can't believe you even considered saying that

Calling me out , I just had Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 and Heavy Rain in the last two weeks, both require installs.

Were they programmed early in the systems life? So believe, I said it and it's true.

So what about Uncharted 2 or God of War III? Massive games...in terms of raw data...that pushed the system yet no install. Maybe though you are suggesting that previously released games couldn't be re-engineered to run without an install...which would be ridiculous, right.

The newest Ratchet also required an install, did it not? New games like Bioshock 2 and Battlefield Bad Company 2 have them. Assassin's Creed II, also. It's only a small minority of PS3 games that don't require them, including some of the first party stuff, but given that other first party games (Heavy Rain, as Rik mentioned) do still require the install, it's hardly laziness.

Let's just call it, shall we?: Your "point" is ass.

I think you have completely missed the point. I didn't say games don't require an install. I'm trying to say there are plenty of games that do not. Some developers have and some developers have not been able to maximise the system potential shown by those games that do not require an install.

What about the biggest multi-format franchise in the industry, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2? That games does not require an install. Actually, thinking about it, the original Call of Duty: Modern Warfare didn't require an install either and back in the day that game looked fantastic. gooseberry fool...how did they manage to do that back in 2007?

So is my point still 'ass' when it has been shown in 2007 a multi-platform developer didn't require an install and in 2009 and 2010 the systems biggest games, in terms of raw data...we are talking many GB's here..., still have no need for an install?

Do you understand the difference between the fact that some developers do require an install and the fact that PS3 can run massive games, games bigger than all those you mentioned above, without an install? There is a key difference here but I think you know that already.

Eighthours wrote:As for this LA Noire thing, it does look like we're moving towards the tipping point for a small number of big-budget games, where disc space becomes an issue. But Red Dead Redemption's on one disc, so for sandbox games it's all about the way early production works. In LA Noire's case, it seems to have been designed as a PS3 game, hence the problems.

But it's hardly harming developers, is it? You really need a mega-budget game with extreme scope to run into issues.

Developers have the ability to work around said issues but I'm sure if you ask them if they want more disc space to play with or a HDD as standard they would say yes. I mean who wouldn't?

What the frig are you on about? Are you saying that just because Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 1 + 2 doesn't require an install, all other PS3 games shouldn't?

Eighthours wrote:

cooldawn wrote:

suzzopher wrote:It's just a shame that Blu Ray reads so slowly.

Yeah...people do say that but then it doesn't matter these days. The way I understand it is that the PS3 reads, processes and outputs the information very quickly. As I said before Uncharted 2 and God of War III seem to lead the way...showing that the tech inside PS3 is more than capable of providing AAA games without any concessions.

At the end of the day it's up to the other developers to get on-track. I can understand where costs impede progress but I can't understand why people are saying this and that can't be done on PS3 when, clearly, it is doing it.

It can be done for some types of game. Maybe not for others. Why does Heavy Rain require an install? Maybe what the game's actually doing in terms of streaming data needs it, whereas what's going on in Uncharted/GOW works completely differently? You're implying that there's one-size-fits-all here, but I don't believe that for a second.

OK so I disagree with you here. From my point-of-view I think people can do anything with 0's & 1's if they try hard enough so I can't see why games like Bioshock 2 or Assassins Creed II are unable to use adequate streaming technology. I'm pretty sure, considering the type of game both of those are...exploratory action adventures..., if you give the tech used in Uncharted 2 and God of War III to 2K and UBISoft they could pull it off easily. Of course the basis of the code will be completely different but in that type of situation there would be no need for an install and it would look better largely due to the streaming technology.

That's essentially why Uncharted 2 and God of War III look so good...because the streaming technology means there is absolutely no need for an install yet it's pushing around many GB's of data.

Last line of comic suits this thread. The rest is for cheering up people who read this absymal thread.

*gains Karma*

This is pretty much right at the heart of what Gabe Newell was talking about for the PS3. It's possible to get good performance out of the PS3, but at the expense of multiplatform development.

cooldawn wrote:OK so I disagree with you here. From my point-of-view I think people can do anything with 0's & 1's if they try hard enough

Time and money are the factors here. It might be technically possible, but not financially.

Subjectivity or Objectivity.

I'm not sure which one I want, but some of you lack it in frightening levels.

consolegaming wrote:I cannot believe some of you actually thing MS aren't holding back the games industry.

Also the disk limitation is leading to more and more dlc that should be on the disk anyway!

look at windows 7 and dx 11... it's holding it way way back

Hang on, looking at me getting all technical.. you mean holding the toy business back?