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

[function]

True true... although if Sony goes optical then i can't see how MS will be able to compete against it with games distributed on flash carts. The system on it's own offers little "percievable" benefit to the average gamer, yet brings with it restrictions that could be considered anti-consumer. And that's not even talking about the added entrained cost of flash-based distribution media over BR discs.

Yeah. I wouldn't see the primary motivator as being to make things better for the consumer, but to give MS and potentially publishers things that they want. You could push the whole no install / superior loading and streaming angle for consumer PR purposes while pushing a low RRP for the system. While also using content blocking clauses on multi-platform games I guess.

If MS goes flasg-cards and Sony uses BR discs, gamers will flock to the system that offers cheaper games. MS would never want to be in that kind of position imo. The difference between MS's next system and Sony's would have to begin and end with the HW in the box in terms of the factors and features that could possibly influence consumer purchasing decisions. Or at least extend outward in their favour.

And this is where publisher support would be essential. You'd price the the cart games competitively with the optical versions on PS4 and undercut very slightly with DD or shop kiosk downloaded versions.

Why would MS and the pubs do this? Because (and this is the only reason I can think of) the carts would offer them a chances to take a chunk of second hand market revenue while simultaneously pushing customers to a DD model where media costs are zilch, profit margins are higher, inventory management is a none issue and the second hand market is exterminated. If you ran the numbers and the sums came out in favour of doing this then I could see it happening.

The second hand market seems to make publishers and engine licensors seethe with billions of dollars of perceived rage! Maybe they'll try and do something about it that's more involved than handing out unlock codes on a peice of paper with every new game.

MS has too much foresight and common sense to choose to put themselves in a weaker position to Sony, strictly speaking in the area of choice of distribution media. The only way I can see them choosing solid state-based media is if they somehow know that Sony is doing that, or if all three platform holders collude together with publishers, the likelihood of which i would warily question.

Yeah, everything being as it is now I don't think MS would do it. But if publishers see it as being in their interests then (and only then) maybe it could fly.

 

[manux]

Why would MS and the pubs do this? Because (and this is the only reason I can think of) the carts would offer them a chances to take a chunk of second hand market revenue while simultaneously pushing customers to a DD model where media costs are zilch, profit margins are higher, inventory management is a none issue and the second hand market is exterminated. If you ran the numbers and the sums came out in favour of doing this then I could see it happening.

Wouldn't it be better to to subvent digital downloads with that money instead of building factories+distribution chain for flash based memories(+pay for the higher per GB price). There are plenty of people who could do DD for most if not all games if there is good enough incentive(i.e. price). Imagine how much those AAA games cost on flash that already come on 2-3dvd's and that are bound? to grow bigger next gen.

 

[function]

If you add flash to console motherboard is there really difference between ssd/flash? I don't think so. Flash as cache is similar if not the same hdd replacement as SSD. Soldering to motherboard just saves some cost off the base model. Especially so if the base model would have had hdd otherwise a la ps3.

I'm probably using words interchangeably when I shouldn't be.

What I'm talking about is selling physical copies on something solid state that has high bandwidth and better than mechanical HDD latency - perfect for low load times, streaming and next gen virtual texturing.

This way the base console wouldn't need to have a fast SSD to buffer lots of data from the bluray drive and/or HDD. The base console could be sold without an optical drive, without a HDD, and without it's own internal fast area of flash cache or slow ram - the base console would only need 8GB (for example) of slow, dirt cheap flash memory for the dashboard, dashboard updates, save games and online service information (the 4GB of lash on the basic Xbox 360 is too slow for Battlefield 3 to actually run off).

As an upgrade (or part of a more expensive SKU) you sell a HDD module that also incorporates an area of *fast* flash memory (e.g. 32GB) to mimic the performance of the carts - higher than optical bandwidth combined with lower than mechanical HDD latency.

The optical drive is for backwards compatibility of physical copies of games, DVD playback, BluRay playback and other stuff that you want to offer but that you don't want to burden every console with for the lifetime of system.

 

[function]

Wouldn't it be better to to subvent digital downloads with that money instead of building factories+distribution chain for flash based memories(+pay for the higher per GB price). There are plenty of people who could do DD for most if not all games if there is good enough incentive(i.e. price). Imagine how much those AAA games cost on flash that already come on 2-3dvd's and that are bound? to grow bigger next gen.

It's too early to alienate retail by killing off physical copies of games, and if you make digitally distributed copies of your game too much cheaper then you will kill off retail support (and therefore your platform). You also don't want to kill the second hand market IMO as that will make your platform much less attractive to millions and millions of your customers; it's far better to make a profit from that market if you can.

Cart size might be an issue for some games, although 2GB is probably enough for Kinect Party Avatar Dance Party Family Party 2.

 

[manux]

The optical drive is for backwards compatibility of physical copies of games, DVD playback, BluRay playback and other stuff that you want to offer but that you don't want to burden every console with for the lifetime of system.

I'm pretty sure mass storage is must for next gen(video rental, music rental, PSN/Live purchases, etc). Here SSD will be cheaper on long run than regular hdd. Have 2.5" hdd as an extension option for power users. (hence SSD installation/cache is given and a side effect of the better design to begin with and not an extra cost. SSD of reasonable size might be cheaper than the HDD on current gen basemodel ps3)

4-6x CAV blu-ray drive wouldn't be expensive, consume lot's of power or be unreliable. It would also be 2-3times faster than ps3 solution now. It also is constant speed for whole disc and there is no layer change penalty(unless games go for 50GB discs). It would also spin on constant velocity which would simplify design+motors and use less power than going crazy with optical(like xbox360 did with it's dvd drive).

25GB discs cost 1$ to reproduce including the profit and shipping for manufacturer(I linked to this earlier on this thread, it was orders of 25000, ordering million discs should be even cheaper). It will take bloody long time(if ever) that flash can compete. Any money put to subventing flash is just wasted(compare to subventing dd only...). Remember, it's not just the price of flash chips, you also need to built the factories assembling+copying data to those cartridges and once your console is done you probably are bound to close those factories costing some money again.

Why not just bet Digital Distribution will take off and bring additional sku which is DD only if cost saving is number 1 thing to do... Maybe DD only not on launch but before next gen is over somewhere around 2024

Btw. Who manufactures ps vita flash carts? I wonder who stands to profit for flash distribution, is it sony or is it outsourced? Sony at least manufacturers its own blu-rays tipping the scale to something else than 1$/25GB.

If game sizes don't grow(i.e. stay around 8-16GB) then boosting blu-ray to to 6x for example should give 3x more streaming perf for same game sizes. Pretty neat? If game sizes do grow more than 3x perf will be worse than this gen optical but also the game sizes are so huge there is no way to distribute them on flash media with reasonable price(i.e. 24-48GB carts)

 

[Prophecy2k]

Why would MS and the pubs do this? Because (and this is the only reason I can think of) the carts would offer them a chances to take a chunk of second hand market revenue while simultaneously pushing customers to a DD model where media costs are zilch, profit margins are higher, inventory management is a none issue and the second hand market is exterminated. If you ran the numbers and the sums came out in favour of doing this then I could see it happening.

But both MS and game publishers have to rely on VG retailers to sell their console/carts/house kiosks etc. The moment you move to jeapordise their primary revenue stream (i.e. used game sales) is the moment those relationships turn nasty.

If all platform holders said "f*ck it! f*ck the retailers", and went this route then the retailers wouldn't really have much of a leg to stand on, and so rather than go out of business, I could definitely see them downsizing their businesses and remaining in operation taking whatever scraps the platform holders and publishers throw at them.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to be the case as Sony have already expressed on numerous occasions their view that physical distribution is needed next-gen, and by extention, considering BluRay is their own IP, they'll more than likely use BR in their next console.

MS would then have a very difficult time trying to persuade publishers to effectively stab their retail partners in the back. As doing so would only empower Sony and those publishers who choose not to do so, as they will win greater retailer support and thus inevitably go on to sell more software.

 

[manux]

But both MS and game publishers have to rely on VG retailers to sell their console/carts/house kiosks etc. The moment you move to jeapordise their primary revenue stream (i.e. used game sales) is the moment those relationships turn nasty.

I bet there are people who would still buy a coupon from retailer which can be redeemed for money(points), game or somesuch digital content online. Not everybody has credit card or wants to use the credit card online. Also there is the bunch of people who could buy the coupon as a gift for grandson or whatever.

edit. and please make those coupons nfc enabled+reader to the console to make redeeming them super easy.

 

[function]

I'm pretty sure mass storage is must for next gen(video rental, music rental, PSN/Live purchases, etc). Here SSD will be cheaper on long run than regular hdd. Have 2.5" hdd as an extension option for power users. (hence SSD installation/cache is given and a side effect of the better design to begin with and not an extra cost. SSD of reasonable size might be cheaper than the HDD on current gen basemodel ps3)

I think there's still a segment that won't need mass storage next generation, or that could get by with e 32GB USB pen drive for most stuff. Over the course of the generation that segment will probably shrink, but if you don't have to eat the cost of a HDD in every system that's probably desirable.

4-6x CAV blu-ray drive wouldn't be expensive, consume lot's of power or be unreliable. It would also be 2-3times faster than ps3 solution now. It also is constant speed for whole disc and there is no layer change penalty(unless games go for 50GB discs). It would also spin on constant velocity which would simplify design+motors and use less power than going crazy with optical(like xbox360 did with it's dvd drive).

Averaged over the whole disk a 4 - 6X CAV bluray drive should be less than 2 or 3 times (respectively) faster than the PS3 drive (a 4X CAV drive should actually be slower at the inside edge of the disk) and if ram increases by 4 or 8 times it'll be out of its depth without at least a partial HDD install. If you're tied to having a bluray drive and a HDD in every system then that's a big chunk of money, especially if you also want DVD and Bluray playback.

25GB discs cost 1$ to reproduce including the profit and shipping for manufacturer(I linked to this earlier on this thread, it was orders of 25000, ordering million discs should be even cheaper). It will take bloody long time(if ever) that flash can compete. Any money put to subventing flash is just wasted(compare to subventing dd only...). Remember, it's not just the price of flash chips, you also need to built the factories assembling+copying data to those cartridges and once your console is done you probably are bound to close those factories costing some money again.

You can't subsidise DD without killing off retail support though, so I think that's not likely this upcoming gen.

Why not just bet Digital Distribution will take off and bring additional sku which is DD only if cost saving is number 1 thing to do... Maybe DD only not on launch but before next gen is over somewhere around 2024

A DD only console wouldn't work for offline customers (or those with bandwidth caps) - offline customers would still be left paying a for a HDD that was required to prop up the optical drive though (and it could still suck for streaming compared to a cart!). A cart socket on the other hand, adds almost nothing to the cost of a console if a user ends up being download only ...

Btw. Who manufactures ps vita flash carts? I wonder who stands to profit for flash distribution, is it sony or is it outsourced? Sony at least manufacturers its own blu-rays tipping the scale to something else than 1$/25GB.

I assumed Sony manufactured their own Vita memory sticks but I don't know for sure. It's a nice little enterprise if you can get away with it.

If game sizes don't grow(i.e. stay around 8-16GB) then boosting blu-ray to to 6x for example should give 3x more streaming perf for same game sizes. Pretty neat? If game sizes do grow more than 3x perf will be worse than this gen optical but also the game sizes are so huge there is no way to distribute them on flash media with reasonable price(i.e. 24-48GB carts)

Streaming performance may not increase that much in reality. Solid state would have a hard time matching > 25GB though, especially early in the generation. Squaresoft might want to stick to bluray ...

 

[manux]

Averaged over the whole disk a 4 - 6X CAV bluray drive should be less than 2 or 3 times (respectively) faster than the PS3 drive (a 4X CAV drive should actually be slower at the inside edge of the disk) and if ram increases by 4 or 8 times it'll be out of its depth without at least a partial HDD install. If you're tied to having a bluray drive and a HDD in every system then that's a big chunk of money, especially if you also want DVD and Bluray playback.

PS3 drive is constant read speed for whole disc, there is no variation. I don't see any reason to change that up to 6x blu-ray. More than that and I think cav will be lost and max speed will be only hit on outer rim. This is in stark contrast to dvd drive in xbox which is not CAV and there is pretty harsh penalty on layer change(+perf degradation on inner rim). I see 25GB blu-ray as very reasonable thing to have for predictable streaming tasks and that SSD takes care of random stuff. If there is proper SSD to act as cache I wouldn't see even 4x drive as a problem.

 

[function]

But both MS and game publishers have to rely on VG retailers to sell their console/carts/house kiosks etc. The moment you move to jeapordise their primary revenue stream (i.e. used game sales) is the moment those relationships turn nasty.

If all platform holders said "f*ck it! f*ck the retailers", and went this route then the retailers wouldn't really have much of a leg to stand on, and so rather than go out of business, I could definitely see them downsizing their businesses and remaining in operation taking whatever scraps the platform holders and publishers throw at them.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to be the case as Sony have already expressed on numerous occasions their view that physical distribution is needed next-gen, and by extention, considering BluRay is their own IP, they'll more than likely use BR in their next console.

MS would then have a very difficult time trying to persuade publishers to effectively stab their retail partners in the back. As doing so would only empower Sony and those publishers who choose not to do so, as they will win greater retailer support and thus inevitably go on to sell more software.

Actually I'm advocating MS and publishers taking a role in the second hand market and most definitely not trying to kill it off in a single violent strike!

If MS can get used game retailers to pay them and their publisher partners a cut of the $30/$40 second hand retail price in exchange for resetting licenses / activations they can also offer a service where carts get flashed to the latest patched version of the game (great for offline gamers) and even where they can provide new manuals, labels and covers. Carts make a massively more appealing second hand prospect than scratch-happy optical disks.

If carts are re-writeable then the innards could even be recycled and re-shelled / repackaged to provide retail copies of newer or more popular games. Retailers could possibly earn more by selling them back to MS than putting them on a 99c clearance.

 

[manux]

I think there's still a segment that won't need mass storage next generation, or that could get by with e 32GB USB pen drive for most stuff. Over the course of the generation that segment will probably shrink, but if you don't have to eat the cost of a HDD in every system that's probably desirable.

It's probably cheaper to integrate that 32GB flash to motherboard than implement reader+have third party memory card with casing + profit margins for retailer+manufacturer+distribution. As a bonus of integrated flash/ssd devs get a proper fast cache with same level of minimum performance on each box that can be depended on to be available. Ask devs if they would like to have that SSD there on every machine to solve some of those random read problems I think it could give very noticeable advantage to a console having SSD compare to console not having it. Popup, texture quality, unique content per frame etc. Integrated flash doesn't need to be too big, there is always the option to add 2.5" vendor locked premium priced HD.

 

[manux]

You can't subsidise DD without killing off retail support though, so I think that's not likely this upcoming gen.

Isn't Vita doing this already? Games from PSN are cheaper than if bought from store?

 

[Blazkowicz]

with an SSD you run into the issues of deleting games to make room for new ones, redoing a lengthy install. or a partial one.
a HDD is an order of magnitude bigger, so if it is present everywhere you can have your open world game with 20GB or more of streamed content.

and you can store many of them without having to reinstall anything ever.

 

[function]

PS3 drive is constant read speed for whole disc, there is no variation. I don't see any reason to change that up to 6x blu-ray. More than that and I think cav will be lost and max speed will be only hit on outer rim. This is in stark contrast to dvd drive in xbox which is not CAV and there is pretty harsh penalty on layer change(+perf degradation on inner rim). I see 25GB blu-ray as very reasonable thing to have for predictable streaming tasks and that SSD takes care of random stuff. If there is proper SSD to act as cache I wouldn't see even 4x drive as a problem.

The PS3 drive is a CLV drive - it spins faster when it's reading the inside edge. When it's reading the inside edge it should be spinning faster than a 4X CAV drive does, and almost as fast as a 6X CAV drive. Anything faster than a 6X CAV Bluray drive could end up generating unwanted noise, although maybe 8X could be okay if it's well put together. The DVD drive in the Xbox 360 is a CAV drive btw.

Startup times for games would be quite long if you only had 4X drive, even if you had enough cache for a whole 25GB (and Bluray read speed would drop as you moved inward on the disk).

 

[manux]

Startup times for games would be quite long if you only had 4X drive, even if you had enough cache for a whole 25GB (and Bluray read speed would drop as you moved inward on the disk).

And this would assume binary sizes grow more than blu-ray speed. Which does exactly what to flash based distribution?

 

[manux]

with an SSD you run into the issues of deleting games to make room for new ones, redoing a lengthy install. or a partial one.
a HDD is an order of magnitude bigger, so if it is present everywhere you can have your open world game with 20GB or more of streamed content.

and you can store many of them without having to reinstall anything ever.

And 2.5/3.5" hdd prices will never scale so console can hit 99$ mark. Then console manufacturer is either stuck with replacing hd later on with flash(no random read benefit) or keeping console expensive. Power users can always upgrade additional mass storage just like this gen.

Doesn't xbox360 already do some pretty smart on the demand installation/caching? Why not just reuse the same thing for next gen but have SSD there instead of HDD.

 

[manux]

The PS3 drive is a CLV drive - it spins faster when it's reading the inside edge. When it's reading the inside edge it should be spinning faster than a 4X CAV drive does, and almost as fast as a 6X CAV drive. Anything faster than a 6X CAV Bluray drive could end up generating unwanted noise, although maybe 8X could be okay if it's well put together. The DVD drive in the Xbox 360 is a CAV drive btw

Oh, sorry, I mixed up the terms

 

[Blazkowicz]

And 2.5/3.5" hdd prices will never scale so console can hit 99$ mark. Then console manufacturer is either stuck with replacing hd later on with flash(no random read benefit) or keeping console expensive. Power users can always upgrade additional mass storage just like this gen.

Doesn't xbox360 already do some pretty smart on the demand installation/caching? Why not just reuse the same thing for next gen but have SSD there instead of HDD.

eh, we didn't think of that possibility
manufacturer releases a 1TB HDD based console in 2013/2014, then a cheap model in 2018 with 256GB flash. with option for 512GB or even 1TB flash as a luxury SKU.

you can have it both ways, SSD could be the power user option just as on PC.

the argument seems to be about which kind of convenience we prefer as default. fast storage or huge storage.
my opinion is that huge storage is nice, else you would end up streaming from the bluray anyway.
or huge storage means, no need to cut your game into linear sections as I fear you might do no matter how intelligent is your caching.

 

[-tkf-]

In practice seek times and potentially faster burst reading speed(assuming price is no object). PS VITA is ofcourse example where flash sucks just real bad.

But how would that influence games? Faster loading... check, but what about the actual games..?

 

[3dilettante]

I don't follow what you are asking.
A platter-based hard drive stores data and writes it.
A flash-based game cartridge would store data and write it.

They do the same thing; it's just that one is potentially faster at it than the other, so some things would be faster.