Can Xbox 360 get back the missing GB from it's DVD?

[Laa-Yosh]

Ive always said it and i still stand by it, going with DVD will eventually bite Microsoft in the ass.

Not going with DVD would've bitten them in the ass from day 0. So - as it's been discussed to death, really - they've made the better choice; they were the first to the market and they still have a substantial lead over the PS3 because of that.
And as time goes on, the size of MS's ass will continue to grow and thus that eventual bite will hurt less and less...

 

[pipo]

Also, if the alternative means 'you have to do an install first' I'm not sure PS3's BR is that much better.

Multi GB installs for retail games? I actually would prefer swapping (although I agree it wouldn't work for GTA).

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If the install improves loading times, I'd prefer that myself. On aggregate the install would probably use less time than a few extra seconds each time a game loads an interior or whatnot, and you can more readily go get a cup of tea to get past the minutes of install than soak up the extra seconds loading with distractions. Mid game a delay is more intrusive.

 

[Neb]

Crysis is not that texture heavy talking about high-res texture files. It is instead really shader heavy since a lot of the texture detail is made up by shaders doing several detail layers on top of the base texture.

Far Cry with its ~3.5GB has quite a lot of different unique textures. Many unique normal maps for different scenes (quite some scene variation in this game ~equal to Uncharted scene difference IMO). So Far Cry didnt take up so much space compared to many games now but the texture res/detail rivals many this-gen games.

Now GEoW for PC with lots of uppgrades (default PC enhancements by devs) to the textures (1024*1024 and 2048*2048) textures and installed size is 10.5GB

 

[pipo]

If the install improves loading times, I'd prefer that myself.

But it would be optional in that case, right? That's fine with me.

I play a lot of games at the same time (read: for a long time ) and like to pop in an old game too every now and then. Combine this with installed demos, downloadable games and movies...

The plug and play aspect of consoles has always been one of the main reasons I prefer those to PC gaming.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Though I agree with the sentiments of 'just go' on consoles versus PCs, those days are sadly long-gone. We have to put up with buggy releases getting patched and all the other nonsense. The only plus side is no hardware/software conflicts, in theory. As game installs are straight-forwards, the gains are worth the offset of the extra short delay IMO. I would have preferred HDD installs and shorter loading times on a few last-gen games, that's for sure!

 

[Arwin]

I'm certainly very happy with how the HDD installed version of GTA runs. I've never yet had the feeling I was waiting for something to load. Everything transitions very smoothly and I'm never taken out of the game on account of loading (or saving, for that matter). I liked that alot about Uncharted too, which did some wonderful things with the HDD caching.

 

[Platon]

I don't get why there is not option for the xbox users to do the install thing. OK, make the game playable without the HDD but is it that difficult for the game to detect the HDD and if it is there give you the option to install if you want, which could have potential positive effects such as pop in reduction and so on...

 

[Arwin]

I don't get why there is not option for the xbox users to do the install thing. OK, make the game playable without the HDD but is it that difficult for the game to detect the HDD and if it is there give you the option to install if you want, which could have potential positive effects such as pop in reduction and so on...

I expect they don't want to test multiple versions, in either case. So on the PS3 they only make a HDD install version and they only have to test that one version. On the 360 they only make the disc-only version and they only have to test that version. It's such a big game so that's understandable and saves a tonne right there. Smaller games do it for similar reasons though, I'm sure of that.

However, if games make a habit out of it, it could make it troublesome for regular users and I think the firmware should be expanded with features that allow you to clear the cache / hdd install, automatically suggesting the game you've least played / played the longest while ago first.

Also, I'm sure they could easily do stuff like allow character customisation and several other things while installing stuff to the HDD or even virtual training tutorials or what not to make that more interesting.

 

[betan]

I'm certainly very happy with how the HDD installed version of GTA runs. I've never yet had the feeling I was waiting for something to load. Everything transitions very smoothly and I'm never taken out of the game on account of loading (or saving, for that matter). I liked that alot about Uncharted too, which did some wonderful things with the HDD caching.

Yeah, GTA4 install is totally worth it for me, especially after games like HL2, Probably the best streaming engine.

I think primary advantage of HDD caching on Uncharted is easier sync with less memory though.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Crysis is not that texture heavy talking about high-res texture files.

It is, and not just because its textures are relatively high-res, but because the additional shader work requires additional maps...

 

[Asher]

I expect they don't want to test multiple versions, in either case. So on the PS3 they only make a HDD install version and they only have to test that one version. On the 360 they only make the disc-only version and they only have to test that version. It's such a big game so that's understandable and saves a tonne right there. Smaller games do it for similar reasons though, I'm sure of that.

The last I heard, the 360 version uses the HDD for caching in GTA4 when it's connected. It just can't pre-install.

 

[-tkf-]

But it would be optional in that case, right? That's fine with me.

I play a lot of games at the same time (read: for a long time ) and like to pop in an old game too every now and then. Combine this with installed demos, downloadable games and movies...

The plug and play aspect of consoles has always been one of the main reasons I prefer those to PC gaming.

This is a good argument, maybe the best there is

On the other hand i would like to get the best from the games i play now and i would prefer not giving up that "just because" someone wants to have many games installed at the same time. In regards to Plug&Play i prefer Console games because there still is very little trouble compared to PC games. Not to mention some PC games that uses copy protection that will break other stuff.

 

[paawl]

I don't get why there is not option for the xbox users to do the install thing. OK, make the game playable without the HDD but is it that difficult for the game to detect the HDD and if it is there give you the option to install if you want, which could have potential positive effects such as pop in reduction and so on...

There is a MS presentation floating around in which they mention that the 360's disk cache is automatic. Once you access a certain texture, sound clip, or whatever from the disc, it will be cached to the HDD (if you have one) and read from there until it is ejected from the cache by another, more recently used item. I don't recall how big the cache can get, but I suspect the reserved space is part of the reason why a freshly formatted 20 GB hard drive only has 14 GB available. Maybe 1-2 GB are reserved for cache?

Incidentally, I think that more developers are taking advantage of the HDD than you know. Bungie, for instance, stated that Halo 3's audio was "optimized" for hard disk users, and that those without hard disks may not hear as many in-game sound samples due to the limited rate at which they can be streamed from the game disc.

 

[vazel]

There is a MS presentation floating around in which they mention that the 360's disk cache is automatic. Once you access a certain texture, sound clip, or whatever from the disc, it will be cached to the HDD (if you have one) and read from there until it is ejected from the cache by another, more recently used item. I don't recall how big the cache can get, but I suspect the reserved space is part of the reason why a freshly formatted 20 GB hard drive only has 14 GB available. Maybe 1-2 GB are reserved for cache?

Incidentally, I think that more developers are taking advantage of the HDD than you know. Bungie, for instance, stated that Halo 3's audio was "optimized" for hard disk users, and that those without hard disks may not hear as many in-game sound samples due to the limited rate at which they can be streamed from the game disc.

I don't believe that automatic caching thing for a second. All you have to do is play Mass Effect and have textures pop-in again and again in a scene no matter how many times you replay it. It's pretty obvious from streaming problems that games don't make much use of the HDD(A recent example, GTAIV on the x360 and PS3). And if the HDD was used to a meaningful effect the developers would surely flaunt it as a marketing point to gamers.

 

[AlNom]

There is a MS presentation floating around ...

http://download.microsoft.com/download/d/0/8/d088c617-41c0-41b2-8728-787c4615d5f6/Effective%20Game%20Disc%20Usage.zip

I don't recall how big the cache can get, but I suspect the reserved space is part of the reason why a freshly formatted 20 GB hard drive only has 14 GB available. Maybe 1-2 GB are reserved for cache?

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1126903&postcount=144

There seems to be a bit of contradiction or perhaps confusion between the support site and the Gamefest slides. The support site says 2GB for BC and 4GB for 360 game cache/other system items. The slides say 2GB for game cache, although that may imply an upper limit per game. So in the worst case scenario, only two game titles will be cached at the same time.

I don't believe that automatic caching thing for a second. All you have to do is play Mass Effect and have textures pop-in again and again in a scene no matter how many times you replay it. It's pretty obvious from streaming problems that games don't make much use of the HDD(A recent example, GTAIV on the x360 and PS3). And if the HDD was used to a meaningful effect the developers would surely flaunt it as a marketing point to gamers.

The way the caching is handled is automatic. The developer still has to turn it on or specify what is cached/removed. It also detects when the HDD is not present. The slides I've linked should explain.

When I was messing around with some Xbox discs a few years back, I noticed some had directories labeled as cache (or similar) - these files are copied to the Xbox HDD. Nowadays it's more tricky to handle the HDD-less case and HDD-present case while still maintaining good streaming performance. A disc layout optimized for caching to the HDD may not be as optimal for streaming in-game.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I don't believe that automatic caching thing for a second. All you have to do is play Mass Effect and have textures pop-in again and again in a scene no matter how many times you replay it. It's pretty obvious from streaming problems that games don't make much use of the HDD(A recent example, GTAIV on the x360 and PS3). And if the HDD was used to a meaningful effect the developers would surely flaunt it as a marketing point to gamers.

Try playing oblivion with and without hdd.. Automatic caching is definately in there in a lot of games. You can even clear the cache, and notice differences in performance.

 

[assen]

Try playing oblivion with and without hdd.. Automatic caching is definately in there in a lot of games. You can even clear the cache, and notice differences in performance.

This doesn't prove it is _automatic_, as in "developer calls a function and it works from there on".

 

[vazel]

Try playing oblivion with and without hdd.. Automatic caching is definately in there in a lot of games. You can even clear the cache, and notice differences in performance.

Oblivion had its hdd use announced as a feature of the game. We know for a fact it uses the hdd.

We can see in two second party games(Mass Effect and Gears of War) obvious instances of the limitations of the game loading off the disc in the form of texture pop-in. And we can compare in GTAIV the pop-in in the x360 version when compared to the PS3 version. Maybe a lot of games do use automatic hdd caching but it clearly doesn't do as much for performance as installations.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

We can see in two second party games(Mass Effect and Gears of War) obvious instances of the limitations of the game loading off the disc in the form of texture pop-in. And we can compare in GTAIV the pop-in in the x360 version when compared to the PS3 version. Maybe a lot of games do use automatic hdd caching but it clearly doesn't do as much for performance as installations.

1. Both Gears of war and ME streams everything no matter if you have a HDD or not, thats the way their engine works apparently.

2. Ofcourse HDD caching doesn't do as much for performance as installations. With installations you usually copy the entire content on the disk to a harddrive. Since the harddrive reads faster than a disc (or you could even read from disc and harddrive at the same time) its allways going to be faster than something which o nly caches a gigabyte of information at best.