Alternative distribution to optical disks : SSD, cards, and download*

[specwarGP2]

Remember game prices can change based on the size of the game for developers. You have a game that needs only 8 gigs . Fine that game might sell for $50 or $60. A game needs 32 gigs that game may have to cost $70 or $75. We have that today without a capacity change. You have banjo for $40 coming out while you have gears coming out at $60. I'm sure for some if there was no load time and no long install for MGS4 they would have paid $70 for it. Same goes for gears of war 2 with me. If you could give me 0 loading time on gears 2 and it cost me $10-$15 more I would buy it

This is a price sensitive market and I doubt most people are willing to pay $10-$15 per game for no load time. If people are on the fence about which console to buy, they'll choose the system with the cheaper games. If they own multiple consoles, they'll buy the cheaper game.

Just like how id doesn't want to pay MS the extra royalty for a 3rd disc for Rage, other publishers will avoid the larger capacity SS media and cut down features so their games can stay at a certain pricepoint. Furthermore, I'd say certain publishers will avoid SS media altogether because of the inherently high cost to manufacture and the possibility of being stuck with millions of dollars of unsold inventory if a game bombs. This is why Sony needs to be onboard. Otherwise the platform(s) using SS media as a content delivery vehicle looks very unattractive to publishers in terms of costs/risks when there is a proven alternative. IMO, of course

 

[fehu]

What is the actual cost of a dual layer bluray and the expected cost of a mlc very low cost 16GB unit in 2011/2012?
Mlc run at up to 100MB/s and read on the lower model up to 25MB/s, and in my opinion for storage purpouse it's damn fast.
They are starting to become popular thanks to the umpc and netbook, and samsung yet presented some low cost model.

Maybe they can't be used instead of bluray (also if NDS suggest that solid state memory it's a good media for games), but can be good and cheap for caching purpoise.

 

[MfA]

My guess is that 16 GB will cost 5-10$, and the BR disc costs so little it's not worth taking into account, the speed will really depend on the manufacturers ... if they keep just pushing up the page sizes and only increasing the interface speed very little it will be hard to make a cheap low capacity high speed drives (it's easy for large drives at the moment, since they use so many ICs).

PS. don't expect decade long data retention from that cheap MLC flash in a couple years time BTW. They won't stand up to that like the carts of old.

 

[fehu]

Ok maybe aren't ssd, but NDS can enjoy low acces, reasonable bandwith, profitable price, and durable data retention.
Why can't MS and Sony use a similar kind of media for content delivery?

Maybe if they by 2012 change the gamer's habit about installations, we will see only a faster bluray drive and a lot of mass storage.
Resolving the problem about media price and loading times.

In any way i'd like to see some GB of cache between the hard disk and the mai memory.

 

[one]

Ok maybe aren't ssd, but NDS can enjoy low acces, reasonable bandwith, profitable price, and durable data retention.
Why can't MS and Sony use a similar kind of media for content delivery?

Maybe if they by 2012 change the gamer's habit about installations, we will see only a faster bluray drive and a lot of mass storage.
Resolving the problem about media price and loading times.

In any way i'd like to see some GB of cache between the hard disk and the mai memory.

NDS carts are 256MB. Are they sold far cheaper than 1.8GB UMD today? Nope.

 

[eastmen]

NDS carts are 256MB. Are they sold far cheaper than 1.8GB UMD today? Nope.

NDS games though are $20-35 while psp games are $30-45 depending on game. So it seems to me that you can produce ssd for far cheaper. Look at all the advantages the nds cards enjoy over the umds .

This is a price sensitive market and I doubt most people are willing to pay $10-$15 per game for no load time. If people are on the fence about which console to buy, they'll choose the system with the cheaper games. If they own multiple consoles, they'll buy the cheaper game.

In one generation the market took on a $10 price increase. Why can't they do the same next gen ? Also you can end up with a much cheaper console all around without a bluray / dvd drive included inside . It would affect everything in the console positively.

Just like how id doesn't want to pay MS the extra royalty for a 3rd disc for Rage, other publishers will avoid the larger capacity SS media and cut down features so their games can stay at a certain pricepoint. Furthermore, I'd say certain publishers will avoid SS media altogether because of the inherently high cost to manufacture and the possibility of being stuck with millions of dollars of unsold inventory if a game bombs. This is why Sony needs to be onboard. Otherwise the platform(s) using SS media as a content delivery vehicle looks very unattractive to publishers in terms of costs/risks when there is a proven alternative. IMO, of course

Compression tech is allways advancing and next gen will be no diffrent. The royalty is in addition to the cost of the disc. I'm sur we have people on the ps3 trying to cut back and keep games single layer to avoid the cost hit of a dual layer bluray. Just like i'm sure at some development house someone is switching out expensive coffee for maxwell house brand to save a few bucks . You make ssd cost sound very high when it doesn't have to be that way. $5 for 16 gigs is not a huge expense and its the same capacity as two dual layer dvds. In 2010 the bluk cost for 32 gigs could be lower than $5. Where does your price increase arguement go then. The market for ssd is still continuing strong , dispite what has been said by others ,I still see prices inching downwards and new capacity announcments. In a few weeks it went from $50 for 16 gigs of sdhc to $40 . I'm sure by this holdiay you will find it on sale for sub $30 price points. In 2010 higher capacity flash will replace the 16GB cards at the same price range. Dispite what others say , if these things were not making them a profit at hte price points they are , they would stop making them.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The trouble with the UMD comparison is UMD's proprietary and complex nature. It's a custom format in a custom case that needs to be assembled, pricing it well about a straight optical disk print. Also it's clear the PSP pricing is realtively the same as DS with only the media cost difference - UMD's aren't going to cost $10+ per disk!

 

[fehu]

a definitive cut from optical media it's out of discussion

they can't completely broke compatibility over previous gen
and they can't avoid to not cut out movie playback

so when you yet have a bluray onboard it's difficult to justify extra r&d/material cost

a return to cartdrige ca have ups, but many down too

much depends on the cost per GB around the 2012
memory chip cut in half price/gb in about a year and half, so an initial suffering choice can turn to be right after a few year
plus if you make a middle budget title you can go for a very cheap 8GB unit
but will the sh risk for the first years?
and for a nextgen title 16 or 32GB are enought or we risk an N64 syndrome?

 

[eastmen]

why , this gen we see xbox originals for download. Why can't they offer xbox 360 originals for download. As for movies , is it that big of a deal , bluray players are already at $300 in another 2 years they will be under the $100 mark I'd wager. Also my nes , super nes , ps1 didn't play movies. As for bluray compared to flash ram its extremely slow in both transfer and seek times. As for price you cna run the gauntlet in pricing structure. Your right htere is no need for a carnival game type set up to come on a 32 gig sd card. It can come on a 4 or an 8 or whatever is cheapest. The risk doesn't have to be there the first year either . Xbox 360 games are on dl dvd which is 8.4 gigs and apparently 7GB of that is useable for games. So a 16GB sd card would offer double the capacity. Each year into the generation we will see higher capacity sd cards . At some point in the generation we may see flash ram at greater capaictys than bluray. Would bluray then be the n64 syndrome ? At the end of next gen when you cna have 128gigs or 256 gigs for $5 bucks would a 50gig optical disc be the limiting factor ?

There are so many options and there are alot of postives with flash . The only real negative is cost and capacity at the start of the gen.

 

[specwarGP2]

In one generation the market took on a $10 price increase. Why can't they do the same next gen ? Also you can end up with a much cheaper console all around without a bluray / dvd drive included inside . It would affect everything in the console positively.

Games have retailed for $40-$50 since SNES, ~15 years. I don't think after 5 years of games retailing for $60, that consumers will be receptive at all to games that retail for $70-$75.

Not including an BD drive may benefit MS, but certainly not Sony. Furthermore, I'd argue that having a BD drive (movie playback) would be a bullet point in Sony's favor if MS next console doesn't.

Compression tech is allways advancing and next gen will be no diffrent. The royalty is in addition to the cost of the disc.

And next gen will be no different where there will be cases where compression is not an option. Case in point: RAGE. As for the royalty, what difference does it make if it's a cost on top of the additional disk. My point is that if costs go up as the size of media goes up, developers would rather scale back the game rather than eat the cost or pass the cost onto the consumer.

I'm sur we have people on the ps3 trying to cut back and keep games single layer to avoid the cost hit of a dual layer bluray.

That's news to me. AFAIK, other than MGS4, there hasn't been a single game that comes close to maxing out a BD25. Which games were scaled back from BD50 to BD25?

You make ssd cost sound very high when it doesn't have to be that way. $5 for 16 gigs is not a huge expense and its the same capacity as two dual layer dvds.

BD: $0.50 x 1m = $500k. Flash: $5.00 x 1m = $5m.

That doesn't look very high to you?

In 2010 the bluk cost for 32 gigs could be lower than $5. Where does your price increase arguement go then. The market for ssd is still continuing strong , dispite what has been said by others ,I still see prices inching downwards and new capacity announcments.

It could be lower, but then again it could be higher. Whatever it is, it will always be far more expensive than BD during the same timeframe.

. At some point in the generation we may see flash ram at greater capaictys than bluray. Would bluray then be the n64 syndrome ? At the end of next gen when you cna have 128gigs or 256 gigs for $5 bucks would a 50gig optical disc be the limiting factor ?

I don't think so since there have been 200gb BD prototypes since 2006.

 

[specwarGP2]

Sorry, double post :-/

 

[eastmen]

Games have retailed for $40-$50 since SNES, ~15 years. I don't think after 5 years of games retailing for $60, that consumers will be receptive at all to games that retail for $70-$75.

Not including an BD drive may benefit MS, but certainly not Sony. Furthermore, I'd argue that having a BD drive (movie playback) would be a bullet point in Sony's favor if MS next console doesn't

I paid alot more than $60 for my n64 games. Aside from that in the usa at least a next gen game is only $20 more than portable games. The market can easily eat another $5 per game.

Also the ps2, ps3 and xbox are the only 3 consoles in the 7 generations of consoles that have movie playback capablity. I don't see an xbox next having any problems esp if the live serivce continues to grow.

And next gen will be no different where there will be cases where compression is not an option. Case in point: RAGE. As for the royalty, what difference does it make if it's a cost on top of the additional disk. My point is that if costs go up as the size of media goes up, developers would rather scale back the game rather than eat the cost or pass the cost onto the consumer.

Rage uses compresion. Even with Bluray cost goes up as the size of the media goes up. Of course with bluray you only have 2 options. What happens next gen if you want more than 50 gigs.

That's news to me. AFAIK, other than MGS4, there hasn't been a single game that comes close to maxing out a BD25. Which games were scaled back from BD50 to BD25?

I dunno , i'm sure someone out there knows

BD: $0.50 x 1m = $500k. Flash: $5.00 x 1m = $5m.

That doesn't look very high to you?

Depends . Is the flash the better solution for my game ? can the market absorb a $5 price increase ?

It could be lower, but then again it could be not. Whatever it is, it will be far more expensive than BD during the same timeframe.

And it will be much faster , no scratches , and a smaller compact design

I don't think so since there have been 200gb BD prototypes since 2006.

sweet 8 years and still nothing but prototypes. Is there any 200gb disc working in todays drives ? Or is this going to be a special disc only for the ps4 drives , which of course means higher production costs doesn't it ? esp if only few games need it.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

IMO Digital Downloads is the way to go. Speeds are getting faster and faster and in the next few years I expect a huge increase in speeds. I work for an ISP and can see this happening depending in which country you live. Looking at Finland , Japan and even in the UK and the US and here where 100Mbps lines are the norm for house holds, once this becomes standard throughout the world, DD will be the main media source.

US

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Looking at Finland , Japan and even in the UK and the US and here where 100Mbps lines are the norm for house holds

Ha ha ha ha ha! The highest norm here is 24 Mbps for a few lucky locations. Most people on broadband have a peak 8 Mbps line, of which, because of distance from the exchange over copper wires, they'll get far less, and then add contention into the mix... There isn't a proper fibreoptic infrastructure in the UK and there won't be. No-one wants to spend out on it - that report shows how cheap-ass BT won't invest because they make as much money now off our leasing the lines. There's no profit in it for them, so the service can go hang for all they care.

A download service for next-gen would have to be an optional extra. With all the consoles out there now, a good half never go online even with the option of quality download games. It isn't mainstream enough to be reliable, and the infrastructure isn't there to be reliable. Perhaps, at best, you could offer two SKU, with and without hard medium, so those who don't want to pay for a BRD drive or flash-card reader have the option to just download content. But you're still going to need lots of games on a physical media if you don't want to lose half the market.

 

[obonicus]

Not just that, but Comcast is putting in a 250GB limit starting in October. ISPs just aren't on-board with downloadable delivery.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I believe in the UK that's it's only that one Village/Town that has 100Mbps since it's for experiment purposes atm. That's still good since at least they are experimenting.

I stay in South Africa, the local limit set here by the main Telco is anything from 1Gb to 10Gb with the speeds ranging from 384Kbps to 4Mbps so I know all about slow internet with download limits.

That said, if you read what I was saying, you'd see that I was implying in the future. Although as I've stated, in Japan and Finland it's becoming standard. In the UK and US, well things are looking bright.

US

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But for future, we're talking about the next generation, in a few years' time. I think it was about 3 years from 8 megabit broadband trials by BT to broad availability, that is still very patchy. These trials involve laying new cables, which means adoption will be far slower. Even by the end of the PS4 era, the likelihood of mainstream super-fast broadband being ubiquitous to elliminate the need for physical distribution seems quite remote to me. Certainly for the PS4 era, physical distribution is going to have to fit in the machine in some form or other.

 

[Rangers]

Not just that, but Comcast is putting in a 250GB limit starting in October. ISPs just aren't on-board with downloadable delivery.

250GB would not be much of a limiter..I mean theoretically you could buy 10 25GB games a month with that. Very few probably buy 10 games a month..

 

[obonicus]

250GB would not be much of a limiter..I mean theoretically you could buy 10 25GB games a month with that. Very few probably buy 10 games a month..

Yeah, but you're also doing everything else under that umbrella. It's not 250GB just for games. But I think what's more important is that everyone's talking about downloadable stuff but no one's cut a deal with the ISPs -- they're just going in a completely different direction. As far as they're concerned, they're not making money off any of this content they're not selling themselves (I'm not saying they should, but I'm sure they want to).

 

[archangelmorph]

Too slow and too small -- HDDs are here to stay.

Compared to what?

the 20GB 2.5" currently sitting in my Xbox360 at home..?

I'm pretty sure 16GB on-board flash with an optional HDD wouldn't be very unreasonable next gen (or alternatively 8GB flash, used for caching, system & user profile data, firmware updates etc, w/ an additional 40-80GB HDD for user content as standard). Wouldn't be that expensive & i'm sure we could find some novel use for it..

Also 10-15K RPM HDD would not only drain far too much power but would offer very little gain considering how much you'd lose in $/GB over 7200 RPM..