David Jaffe: I Would Not Have Included Blu-ray in PS3

[function]

I'd say you're too quick to write BD off just 5 months after the launch of PS3 with only a couple of 1st party titles out there. I remember DeanoC's comment about the size of Heavenly Sword...

Perhaps I didn't communicate my point too well. I didn't write off BR (I think it's a cool technology to have in a console). I was trying to write off much of the debate surrounding the size (in GBs) of Resistance - it's a rallying point for both "sides" if you will, and it doesn't deserve to be.

I don't think BR will have a significant impact on games this generation, simply because while filling a DVD is really, really easy, filling a DVD (or multiple DVDs) with high quality assets is really, really expensive.

Anyway, if you've got the space you might as well use it. That doesn't mean you actually need (as in, require, with no alternative) that space to deliver the game. PS3 developers would have to be mad not to make use of BR's space, even if it's just to make life easier, speed up loading, or not clean up their build so thoroughly before release (etc).

 

[Arwin]

Of course everything I write is only my assumptions.
I don't know why you wrote about multiplatform games - DVD is also affecting 360's exclusives. I could also write that PS3's architecture is limiting cross-platform games (of 360 erchitecture), if you want to spin it that way.

I'm not spinning anything, I'm pointing something out to you. If you are going to make a multi-platform game for 360, PS3, and who knows even PC, you're going to have a much easier time designing it to be able to work with DVD, especially while the PS3 market is still small and not that competitive in terms of sales. Multiplatform games similarly favor the 360 right now because they can target both 360 and PC, and those combined are still much larger than the PS3 market. It is therefore understandable that Microsoft pushes the Games For Windows, at least for a while, not just for Vista.

Eventually though PS3 exclusive games appear that use the platform's strength more fully, and multi-platform games will have to step up to be able to keep up with PS3 exclusives. And multi-platform game publishers targeting the same demographic and genres, will start competing with each other by better using their platform's features.

I think PS3 games have different certifications in different regions despite being region-free. FWIW there are multilanguage free-region 360 games, too (Viva Pinata).

We were discussing the advantages for Resistance, where there was (at least in theory) a choice between having more than one DVD and/or multiple regionalisation masters and press runs, or BluRay all-in-one. Viva Pinata just illustrates that this advantage exists even within the context of the DVD platform.

 

[aselto]

I'm not spinning anything, I'm pointing something out to you. If you are going to make a multi-platform game for 360, PS3, and who knows even PC, you're going to have a much easier time designing it to be able to work with DVD, especially while the PS3 market is still small and not that competitive in terms of sales. Multiplatform games similarly favor the 360 right now because they can target both 360 and PC, and those combined are still much larger than the PS3 market. It is therefore understandable that Microsoft pushes the Games For Windows, at least for a while, not just for Vista.

Eventually though PS3 exclusive games appear that use the platform's strength more fully, and multi-platform games will have to step up to be able to keep up with PS3 exclusives. And multi-platform game publishers targeting the same demographic and genres, will start competing with each other by better using their platform's features.

The thing is, games can still be splitted into 2 or more discs. Splitting games is of course time and resource consuming, but it can be done. I don't remember anyone complaining on RE4 on GC or writing how it was inferior to PS2 version because of having to switch discs. That's why DVD isn't really hindering games' design IMO.

In general I absolutely agree with function.

We were discussing the advantages for Resistance, where there was (at least in theory) a choice between having more than one DVD and/or multiple regionalisation masters and press runs, or BluRay all-in-one. Viva Pinata just illustrates that this advantage exists even within the context of the DVD platform.

I still think Viva Pinata came through certification in every region it was published and I think it is the case with PS3 games, too (logistics and law reasons).

 

[archangelmorph]

The arguement of Blu-ray vs DVD can be long-winded and pointless when left un-tamed..

You want my take..?

(Tough, you'll get it anyway..)

Blu-ray is an "advantage" to games in terms of the technical & production benefits (faster read speeds, no need for multi-disc file organsitation, all-in-one localisation) as well as a possible benefit to game design (i'm sure some wacky dev could dream up a game which is fundamentally based around what Blu-ray has to offer.. Whether they would bother is another matter..)

Blu-ray is by no means "a necessity" for games at the moment but depending on how the scope and scale of specific game genres evolve (or spring up anew) in the future then (relative to that specific genre) it very well could be..

Sure you could argue that this may not happen due to the cost of filling up all that space, but developers grow more and more ambitious with each passing year and eventually some will reach a point where the scope and scale of there games won't translate well to DVD disc capacity (maybe this gen, maybe the next)..

However as long as there are markets for certain genre's of games which technically (and traditionally) don't require masses of disc storage due to the nature of the scope and scale of the game (I say traditionally because these genre's may change in the future also..) then there will always be titles which don't justify high density storage such as Blu-ray and thus, will continue to provide a counter arguement for those who don't feel that the cost of Blu-ray in the PS3 is a valid/significant/appreciated one..

 

[scooby_dooby]

I'm going to repeat myself:

You're wrong here. Had the PS2 launched with CD, it would've been evident within the first year that the medium was clearly inadequate.

Fact is, games on 360 look damn good, MS has proven that disc space is not a major barrier to creating great looking next generation games.

Now, whether that will change in 3-4 years is debateable, but at that point it will be too late in any big swings for either console, so the advantage of BR is somewhat negated. In order to have a meaningful impact on the success of the console, BR would need to show a tangible quality difference in the first couple of years.

You're vastly overstating the advantages of BR. Your arguments would've been a little more plausible in 2005, but this is 2007 and we're seeing things play out before our eyes. BR is providing no large advantage, DVD is not proving to be a big disadvantage, and the pricetag is being rejected by consumers and 3rd party developers are jumping ship.

BR may end up being PS3's saving grace, but it's also the very thing that has placed it in this situation.

 

[Gradthrawn]

You're wrong here. Had the PS2 launched with CD, it would've been evident within the first year that the medium was clearly inadequate.

Considering that, for the first year, many games launched on CD with the PS2 I think you overestimate how quickly any so called "inadequacy" with the medium would have shown.

Fact is, games on 360 look damn good, MS has proven that disc space is not a major barrier to creating great looking next generation games.

Several games on the DC "looked damn good," and they weren't on a DVD. So, Sega has proven that disc space was not a major barrier to creating great looking games for that generation. Yet, you clearly state that a CD would have been quickly proven inadequate on the PS2.

And we go around and around...

 

[scooby_dooby]

Several games on the DC "looked damn good," and they weren't on a DVD. So, Sega has proven that disc space was not a major barrier to creating great looking games for that generation. Yet, you clearly state that a CD would have been quickly proven inadequate on the PS2.

Well, believe whatever you want dude. 360 has what, 120+ games now? The 2007 lineup looks every bit as good as the competitor, so I think it's safe to say that on these consoles, with only 512mb of RAM, it's becoming obvious disc space is not a signifigant barrier. We're not talking 'several' games here, we're talking hundreds.

Despite all the endless arguing to the contrary over the last couple of years. It seems to me people are clinging to this argument while it's being proven wrong right before their eyes.

 

[Jesus2006]

Well, believe whatever you want dude. 360 has what, 120+ games now? The 2007 lineup looks every bit as good as the competitor, so I think it's safe to say that on these consoles, with only 512mb of RAM, it's becoming obvious disc space is not a signifigant barrier. We're not talking 'several' games here, we're talking hundreds.

Well looking at how small many 360 games actually are, i think it's save to say that discspace is or will become a limiting factor (see Gears for example).

Btw. of those 120 games i can only count about 5 which really interested me, the rest isn't worth mentioning IMO. Quantity doesn't mean quality and is also not a hint that DVD might suffice this generation, since a huge amount of those games were ports or mulitplatform (polished "last-gen engine") games which did not really stress the DVD.

 

[Vic]

You're wrong here. Had the PS2 launched with CD, it would've been evident within the first year that the medium was clearly inadequate.

Fact is, games on 360 look damn good, MS has proven that disc space is not a major barrier to creating great looking next generation games.

Now, whether that will change in 3-4 years is debateable, but at that point it will be too late in any big swings for either console, so the advantage of BR is somewhat negated. In order to have a meaningful impact on the success of the console, BR would need to show a tangible quality difference in the first couple of years.

You're vastly overstating the advantages of BR. Your arguments would've been a little more plausible in 2005, but this is 2007 and we're seeing things play out before our eyes. BR is providing no large advantage, DVD is not proving to be a big disadvantage, and the pricetag is being rejected by consumers and 3rd party developers are jumping ship.

BR may end up being PS3's saving grace, but it's also the very thing that has placed it in this situation.

Dont you think you're overstating this a bit? Sure Sony would have sold more if PS3 was cheaper, but its still outsold 360 despite its higher price. And developers jumping ship? 360 came out first, and therefore is getting more mulitplatform titles. Hardly rocket science. However, by way of first and second party developers, Sony has more games in development than MS and Nintendo. And this is where Sony can do its damage. If PS3 first-party games start to look bigger and better than their 360 equivalents, then the pendulum will swing their way. Certainly in terms of their bottom line, Blu-ray is helping Sony a lot, while MS has gone down the peripheral route. The question is, does the periperhal/accessories route have as much potential as Blu-ray to rake in the cash for MS? Even when Blu-ray becomes cheap, Sony will be able to justify PS3's higher price in comparison to 360, so its margins should be better than MS's.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Dont you think you're overstating this a bit? Sure Sony would have sold more if PS3 was cheaper, but its still outsold 360 despite its higher price.

Actually it never once outsold 360 in the same month, which is the only meaningful comparison.

In terms of the bottom line it should help Sony alot, which is why I clearly made the distinction between the succes of PS3, and the success of Sony as a company. BR seems a good move for the company, but no way has it turned out to be a good move for the system.

Totally agreed on the 1st party front, Sony has many more IP's, and should have many more games in development, though frankly, when you look at the actual lineups announced, MS is leading the pack. I guess we'll have to wait until 2008 for Sony to pull out the big guns.

PS3 should be right in my price range by then!

 

[Arwin]

Well, believe whatever you want dude. 360 has what, 120+ games now? The 2007 lineup looks every bit as good as the competitor, so I think it's safe to say that on these consoles, with only 512mb of RAM, it's becoming obvious disc space is not a signifigant barrier. We're not talking 'several' games here, we're talking hundreds.

Come now, how is any of this even remotely relevant? There are thousands of games on the PS2, with only 32mb of RAM. You could compare this with the PS2 vs the Xbox, with the latter having a built in HDD. The latter could be used for caching and improve the games considerably, but that was hardly done. Then again, that one game was Halo 2, without which Xbox would have had, well, probably a visibly smaller install-base than GameCube.

The PS3 is what will have to show whether or not BluRay actually makes games look better and/or allow them to be larger, or are enhanced over games on the 360 in any way. The PS3 is only just out, and however well the 360 might be doing, you'll have to allow for at the very least one year for the PS3 to come up with BluRay validating games. It only takes a few important games to show why it matters, and there are a fair number of candidates. God of War 2 already maxed out its first disc for just the game, for instance, and Heavenly Sword being a similar game will probably be pretty large.

Again, yes, sure, you could do it on multiple DVDs. But what if Heavenly Sword is a success and the sequal takes up 50GB? 7 discs? And what if it were a game where you could go back to all the different levels looking for bonus items you missed, stuff like that. Swap-mania?

Despite all the endless arguing to the contrary over the last couple of years. It seems to me people are clinging to this argument while it's being proven wrong right before their eyes.

That's the thing. The Wii shows that you can sell a console with last-gen hardware features plus one innovative controller. God of War 2 on PS2 shows that you can get pretty amazing graphics even out of a last-gen console. It all proves very little.

The only thing I will be able to agree with you on, is that it does take one or two great BluRay only or BluRay enhanced titles, or PS3 games being cheaper on BluRay, or whatever, to validate the claim that BluRay enhances gaming. Probably if Sony isn't able to show this at least in one or two games before 2008, it will become less and less important. But they definitely do at least have until then to prove this point.

 

[Ben-Nice]

In terms of the bottom line it should help Sony alot, which is why I clearly made the distinction between the succes of PS3, and the success of Sony as a company. BR seems a good move for the company, but no way has it turned out to be a good move for the system.

Yep. It might be a good business decision for them but from a strictly gaming perspective all it did was raise the price of the console. Sometimes I wonder what would have happen if they would have dropped BR drive and instead added 256 MB more ram to the console.

 

[pegisys]

If PS3 first-party games start to look bigger and better than their 360 equivalents, then the pendulum will swing their way

I don't think that will actually do much to help, if most of the games people want to play ends up on the 360. The xbox had many games(1st and 3rd party) that looked better then the PS2 counterpart but people never jumped ship because the PS2 had more games people wanted to play overall

another thing is that BluRay will probably not do much to make 1st party games look better because I'm sure MS will have many 1st party games that will be just as polished and built around the limit of DVD. PS3 games may be longer or have more content, but I doubt they end up looking to much better if at all.

 

[Diamond.G]

Obvious Circular Argument

Is Sony still one of the major BR replicator owners? Why not stop subsidizing BR movie replication fee's? It seems like Sony stands to make more money from BR for movies than they would from games. Show ppl that They want both to succeed. Drop the price.

BR as a format needed PS3 to include it. Check old post at AVS about how everyone should wait for the PS3, BR is gonna take off when the PS3 comes out, etc. Then Sony gets put in an interesting situation. Now they can't drop the price too low too fast cause the PS3 is a BR player (in the eyes of all thier competitors and shareholders). It is an interesting pricing game to be played. One that we all get a part of.

 

[Tap In]

...

Despite all the endless arguing to the contrary over the last couple of years. It seems to me people are clinging to this argument while it's being proven wrong right before their eyes.

Well since PS3 games are not looking or playing better than 360, since online is not yet as robust, since the price is higher and monthly (NA) sales are lagging behind 360 (and Wii WW by a mile), there really is not much more to "cling to" than Blu Ray at the moment.

hopefully, when the price drops on PS3, the games start looking at least as good on multiplatform and perhaps even better on 1st party, big name games are released and sales improve, we can stop having this silly argument as there will be more valid reasons to defend the PS3.

OTOH, some people are married to Blu Ray as a movie format and just want it to defeat HD DVD. (which is strange enough that someone wants a format to beat up another format).

 

[scooby_dooby]

Come now, how is any of this even remotely relevant? There are thousands of games on the PS2, with only 32mb of RAM. You could compare this with the PS2 vs the Xbox, with the latter having a built in HDD. The latter could be used for caching and improve the games considerably, but that was hardly done. Then again, that one game was Halo 2, without which Xbox would have had, well, probably a visibly smaller install-base than GameCube.

The PS3 is what will have to show whether or not BluRay actually makes games look better and/or allow them to be larger, or are enhanced over games on the 360 in any way. The PS3 is only just out, and however well the 360 might be doing, you'll have to allow for at the very least one year for the PS3 to come up with BluRay validating games. It only takes a few important games to show why it matters, and there are a fair number of candidates. God of War 2 already maxed out its first disc for just the game, for instance, and Heavenly Sword being a similar game will probably be pretty large.

Ok, granted we have to wait a while to see if BR will pay off in games, it's too early to say. But, I do think 360 games are pushing the HW extremely hard off of DVD, and that at least proves that it is not a limiting factor in pushing these consoles to their limit.

Again, yes, sure, you could do it on multiple DVDs. But what if Heavenly Sword is a success and the sequal takes up 50GB? 7 discs? And what if it were a game where you could go back to all the different levels looking for bonus items you missed, stuff like that. Swap-mania?

You can always make extreme 'what if' scenarios, but are they realistic? 50gb for a game on a console with 512mb of ram? Be realistic man. Silicon Knights is stating Too Human is the largest game they've ever made by far, it looks amazing, and they're doing it in < 7gb. It shows what can be done with a little(alot?) effort. GTA4, also coming in at < 7gb. Developers are proving daily they can make it work on DVD.

That's the thing. The Wii shows that you can sell a console with last-gen hardware features plus one innovative controller. God of War 2 on PS2 shows that you can get pretty amazing graphics even out of a last-gen console. It all proves very little.

The only thing I will be able to agree with you on, is that it does take one or two great BluRay only or BluRay enhanced titles, or PS3 games being cheaper on BluRay, or whatever, to validate the claim that BluRay enhances gaming. Probably if Sony isn't able to show this at least in one or two games before 2008, it will become less and less important. But they definitely do at least have until then to prove this point.

Wii has shown you can sell last gen tech for 6months, 6-10 years? We'll have to wait and see.

And on your last point, I already agree BR can 'enhance gaming', I would never argue otherwise, obviously more space is a good thing and opens some doors for developers, this doesn't have to be proven. My point is, a handful of 'enhanced' games is going to do jack for the success of the console, especially if they come out 3 years down the road. In the end BR will have a net negative impact on the success of the console because of all the problems it caused in the first couple of years.

Sony really should've added some additional RAM imo, would've been money much better spent. But, it wouldn't have benefitted the company as a whole nearly as much.

 

[Vic]

Actually it never once outsold 360 in the same month, which is the only meaningful comparison.

In terms of the bottom line it should help Sony alot, which is why I clearly made the distinction between the succes of PS3, and the success of Sony as a company. BR seems a good move for the company, but no way has it turned out to be a good move for the system.

Totally agreed on the 1st party front, Sony has many more IP's, and should have many more games in development, though frankly, when you look at the actual lineups announced, MS is leading the pack. I guess we'll have to wait until 2008 for Sony to pull out the big guns.

PS3 should be right in my price range by then!

Err...what I said was that it had outsold it to date, which is the most important factor.

And I would suggest that 2007 will be pretty even. PGR 4, Halo and Bioshock look nice, but I cant see why there's all the hype surrounding Too Human (which so far look shite in concept and graphics) and Mass Effect (which probably wont even sell because its on Xbox). PS3 has GT5, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, R&C and MGS4.

I think people underestimate the speed at which technology moves. Compression only gets you so far, and 7GB just isnt a lot of space. MS's big blunder was the no-HDD Core pack. If they had included one, media format would be less of an issue. As it is, MS has a problem to solve. Another SKU...?

 

[Vic]

Well since PS3 games are not looking or playing better than 360, since online is not yet as robust, since the price is higher and monthly (NA) sales are lagging behind 360 (and Wii WW by a mile), there really is not much more to "cling to" than Blu Ray at the moment.

hopefully, when the price drops on PS3, the games start looking at least as good on multiplatform and perhaps even better on 1st party, big name games are released and sales improve, we can stop having this silly argument as there will be more valid reasons to defend the PS3.

OTOH, some people are married to Blu Ray as a movie format and just want it to defeat HD DVD. (which is strange enough that someone wants a format to beat up another format).

So you would prefer a 10-year format war?

Surely if one has a PS3, he/she is likely to want Blu-ray to win over HD DVD? Though I would suggest that you are hoping the other side wins...

 

[Jesus2006]

Well since PS3 games are not looking or playing better than 360, since online is not yet as robust, since the price is higher and monthly (NA) sales are lagging behind 360 (and Wii WW by a mile), there really is not much more to "cling to" than Blu Ray at the moment.

Games looking better are already out, see Motorstorm. EU Launch numbers overtook both Wii and Xbox 360 launches (see other threads). And PS3 sold more than 3 million consoles WW in just about 4 month (and only 2 areas, EU just started), 360 took 1,5 years to just reach the 10th million, so im looking forward to a quite bright future

hopefully, when the price drops on PS3, the games start looking at least as good on multiplatform and perhaps even better on 1st party, big name games are released and sales improve, we can stop having this silly argument as there will be more valid reasons to defend the PS3.

Also multiplatformers looking "much better" (quote from Gametrailers HD review for Oblivion on PS3) or better (FN3 and others) are already out, it just depends on the developers to put enough efforts in it to make them shine (though much more look worse currently because of bad porting).

 

[Tap In]

...Though I would suggest that you are hoping the other side wins...

Wrong.

I couldn't give two chits who wins the stupid HD format. I'm just a consumer I have no vested interest in that crap. Personally I'm leaning toward digital distribution as I do not care for physical media.

...

yea, you keep clinging to that