Like I said, there are optimizations that can mitigate my hypothetical case, but there may still be situations where you want to write and read data, so the "it can fill memory in 2 seconds" scenario isn't always the case. And if I'm not mistaken, PS2 uses a CAV 4x DVD drive. Most drives less than 8x are CAV because the CLV multiplier is 2.4x. As long as your data is packaged properly to decreasing seek time, you should be able to hit those speeds. And it should be doable anywhere on the disc, and it should be at least common for initial boot up.
Sony's Cross-Generation Game Messaging [2021]
- Thread starter eastmen
- Start date
I don't see any use case where you need to write and read at high speed at the same time. Write is important for systemic game with persistent world. When an event arrive in the game world and it needs to be save you did at this moment. This is not an HDD you don't need to wait, write is fast too.
OK. I mean, I gave a hypothetical example, but it's fine if you can't see it. And yeah, write is fast. But you have a finite amount of bandwidth. So if you are writing that's bandwidth you don't have for reading. It's really that simple. Actually, it might be more complicated. There might be a performance penalty for writing and reading. I've not looked deep enough to know if Sony's SSD can read and write in the same cycle.
Wouldn't the changes actually be extremely small data sets since your not storing textures or video or even audio ?
I don't speak only of the Sony SSD but SSD in general for persistent world write when the event arrive and you will never have a problem. It can be a much slower SSD. Again if devs are clever they can write out of extreme case like teleportation and in this case you don't saturate the bandwidth. There is even a system of priority queue for this inside the API. Mark Cerny told it and it was in the patent of the SSD.
Teleportation can work too with a slower SSD for example a 1 or 2 GB/s even without compression it will just take longer to do it. What take 1 seconds can take 10 or 5 seconds, this not as long as a HDD.
Last edited:
Silent_Buddha
Legend
There's nothing new about portals like that. The level of graphics in the region beyond the portal is much more graphically detailed in R&C than previous games that have used portals, but the portal tech and gameplay is nothing new.
But that's what I've been saying. Hardware enables new levels of graphics and presentation, but they almost never enable new types of gameplay that is not possible on previous hardware generations.
Yes, it's visually very impressive, but it isn't doing anything new other than being more visually impressive.
Hell, I don't even see R&C doing as much with portals as Portal (2007) (being able to manipulate and control things through portals) or Prey (2007) being able to shoot and kill things on the other side of the portal while still not going through the portal. In Prey you could also go through portals to enter a completely new world.
The only thing that has changed is that the graphics on the other side of the portal is obviously massively more detailed in R&C, but then they really aren't doing much with the portals than that. And that's a shame, because portals can enable some really cool game play as seen in 2007's Portal and 2007's Prey.
And while those are some of the first useages of portals in game play, there's nothing preventing someone from using portals in 1996 era hardware. Had John Carmack thought of it, he could have easily implemented portals into Quake. Had he thought of it, he likely could have implemented it in Doom back in 1993.
Regards,
SB
Did I say it will make AAA developer innovate into their title? I just say it let dev do what they want and they can do anything without diminishing graphical fidelity. I don't expect AAA devs to be innovative like I said it make like of dev easier and I expect indie dev to do good looking game and use it as a mechanism inside gameplay.
The hardware is important but it is the dev who can try to exploit it. Maybe one dev will want to innovate and want at the same time to push graphical fidelity now this is possible.
Do you remember ultima online and the rune book portals ? You used to be able to go to an area and make a rune and then from anywhere in the world use that rune and instantly appear in that area or make a portal for you and your friends to walk through
Same thing
FYI I am only stating its a feature that we have had in the past. Ultima online released in 1997 . Your looking at what an ultra ata 33 hard drive running at 5400RPMs and maybe getting 10MB/s transfer rates ? But hey the ultima online world is many many times bigger than in size than the ratchet world .
What's old and forgotten becomes new again
Its a flat repetitive 2D world with old gameplay mechanics.
Whats next? Are we going to compare Atari games zero loading times with the minimal loading times of XBOX X and PS5?
Oh look we had zero loading times in the past therefore loading times today are nothing special.
Thats a superficial way of looking at things.
No developer is going back into making these old games to solve loading and streaming problems.
We have to see games based on what they are doing and how they function today.
Based on how big games are today and the variety of their assets, game design was limited by memory and streaming bottlenecks and was translated to inconvenient gameplay experiences or ideas were just scrapped.
We can finally experience modern games with smaller loading times, richer worlds and game designs that wouldnt be possible.
Is it revolutionary despite what 30 year old games did? Yes. Why? Because games are different and more advanced today.
Last edited:
Its a flat repetitive 2D world with old gameplay mechanics.
Whats next? Are we going to compare Atari games zero loading times with the minimal loading times of XBOX X and PS5?
Oh look we had zero loading times in the past therefore loading times today are nothing special.
Thats a superficial way of looking at things.
No developer is going back into making these old games to solve loading and streaming problems.
We have to see games based on what they are doing and how they function today.
Based on how big games are today and the variety of their assets, game design was limited by memory and streaming bottlenecks and was translated to inconvenient gameplay experiences or ideas were just scrapped.
We can finally experience modern games with smaller loading times, richer worlds and game designs that wouldnt be possible.
Is it revolutionary despite what 30 year old games did? Yes. Why? Because games are different and more advanced today.
Ratchet and clank is a repetitive 3d platformer that has been around since 1990 with the launch of Alpha waves on Atari ST or jumping flash in 95. The portal system is nice but i don't see anything revolutionary. Also fyi ultima online is still played to this very day by a large amount of people 24 years after its launch. Still the best mmo ever made and still has the revolutionary portal system with instant travel which as far as I know no other MMO has.
Yeah, maybe. It depends on how much you are writing. In my example of a destructible world, if you are writing the state of millions of physics objects so you don't need to recalculate their state when you warp back, then that data could be theoretically infinite. And if world 2 has an equal amount of destruction that needs to be loaded, then you could become IO limited. And if you are writing anything, that's at minimum bandwidth not available to read.
I recognize that I've given an extreme, non-optimized example. But it is only an example for those who think IO will never be a limit on PS5 ever.
OK, so if it's so easy and such little data then why did we need an elaborate, custom, super fast SSD at all.
I mean it seems like your over estimating how big it would be vs the size of textures and audio that would be used. I believe it would all be coordinates and damage states that would be written and a lot can be done in a few megs of data .
You could also send it out to ram and then write to the drive if you need it. Loading textures in and out of storage would take up much more bandwidth
Because 1 second is better than 10 second or even 5 seconds. On commercial website there is a rules everything needs to be under 4 seconds or people lose patience for example. Faster is always better.
https://comradeweb.com/blog/importance-of-web-design/
I think it’s really have to visualise and understand what the tech brings to the table until someone grabs it by the balls as it were. Sony seem to be dipping a toe at best, in a couple years hopefully we’ll start to understand but for now games are having to be design with last gen shackles.
I don’t think anyone has ever said such a thing.
What it’s doing is allowing you to completely change an environment within a couple of seconds. Now imagine open worlds where you are not technically limited to the assets you can use - they can be as varied as you like.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
While somewhat similar, they aren't the same as the portals used in Portal, Prey and R&C. Those allow you to at a minimum dynamically look through them and view the other side of the portal as if you were there instead of standing in a different room, country, or world.
What Ultima Online had was basically just teleporter pads. Portals were an interesting innovation in 3D rendering as it introduced the idea of rendering a space that was non-contiguous or non-local as if it were contiguous to the player's current location.
It's a clever trick that was non-obvious until it was done, and then it was obvious.
Regards,
SB
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I made a fair bit of game gold selling portals to specific places to players in EverQuest.
Similar threads
