LONG Load Times. The Future of PS3 Games? - IGN

Person A: "I think PS3 will have a 4x BR drive."

Person B: "It's possible, but what made you come to that conclusion?"

Person A: "Oh well because they already have 6x BR working in the labs."

Person B: "Yeah but things working in the labs can take a while to come to market. Also stuff in labs don't have to worry about costs."

Person A: "Well there have been 2x BR writers out in the market for 3 years now."

Person B: "Yeah but how come they don't have 4x writers after 3 years?"

Person A: "Don't know, I just think PS3 will have 4x BR drives."

Person B: "...ok..."

 

There's a fair bit of personal conflict and insults cropping up. Vysez will be here with his stick if you're not careful!

Though Sony lose money per system, you don't seem to have factored in money they make on software etc. Every PSP sold isn't $100 loss for Sony, but $100 initial loss on hardware, with $20 taken in initial games. Over the next year with more games sold, UMDs (though why anyone buys them ) and their online content that's just starting up, that $100 will be made back with interest. That is afterall the whole point of these machines, much as we might like to delude ourselves they exist for our entertainment. So it's not a matter of how much money Sony lose on hardware, but how long it takes to recover that money and get into profitability per system. By the time PS3 launches PSP as a platform will most likely be breaking even, with enough software sold to cover the losses of PSP unit sales. Maybe even the platform will be profitable by then? PSP can potentially be scrubbed from the equation if this is the case.

Then it's a matter of PS3, how quickly it loses money, and how quickly it recovers money. That's the balancing act. The existence of 2x and 4x BRD-ROMS doesn't look unlikely so the decision will possibly be there as to which speed drive to include.

All we really have is a possibility that PS3 will ship with either a 1x, 2x or 4x BRD drive. No-one knows for sure. Each can speculate from their own POV. But arguing till you're blue in the face over an unknown seems somewhat crazy. Why aren't people comfortable with unknowns? Why can't they just think 'could be this or that, I'll wait and see?'

If someone wants to believe PS3 will launch with an 8x drive, let them. When it launches with a 1x drive they get disappointed but no-one's hurt. Likewise if someone is adamant PS3 can only launch with a 1x drive, no-one's hurt by them believing that. If the PS3 does launch with a 1x drive, it doesn't change the nature of the universe. Neither would it launching with a 16x drive.

Maybe someone people need reminding of the Forum FAQ?

 

Some people just hate anything positive about the PS3, simple as that. (not naming names)

Also Shifty, you have to account for the fact that the PS2 is a goldmine for Sony right now. The PS2 is going to account for a lot of the hardware losses on the PSP and PS3 when they initially launch.

Also, I don't think Sony will mind losing a lot of money on their initial hardware sales. If UMD/Blu-Ray/Cell become standards, Sony will have a license to print money.

 

And some people hate it when SONY is shown to be vulnerable just like every other company. (not naming names)

SONY is bleeding money left and right.

 

Guys come on don't get this thread locked!

 

I give up, after all, there's mostly speculations on these boards and not that much proof so i guess that wishful thinking is what we base most of our opinions here on. Though imo, there's much more likely that there's a problem with manufacturing millions of 250-300+ million transistor GPU's at 500 MHz then there is making millions of 2x BlueRay players.

 

Sorry, but it should be more like

"Person A: I think it's possible that the PS3 will have a 4X BR drive"

"Person B: impossible, got any proof ?"

Wrong again, should be

"Person A: Cause there haven't been any reasons to make a 4X BR drive since there's absolutely no demand for it. Because of the very simple fact that there are no PC BR drives available where speed would be of any importance.

PS Yes, i know that it's a really silly discussion but i think it's rather fun DS

 

That doesn't make any sense since we're talking about BURNERS. You don't think moving a HD recording from a HDD to a BR burner at 4x is needed?

 

Yes, it is. But as i said, there are no PC BR players on the market yet. What i meant by no demand is that there is no demand for faster recording speeds for the devices that do exist, that is, standalone recording devices. And certainly not reading speeds which is what we're most interested in in this case.

 

What do you mean? 2x BR burners/recorders have already been out there for 3 years now. Why are they selling 2x burners if 1x burners are sufficient? Doesn't make any sense. Why are they not selling 4x burners?

 

Maybe i've missed something, but where are those 2X BR burners/recorders ?

 

Ah there's the problem. The standalone BR recorders currently on the market can record at 2x and some of them have built-in hardrives too. There are no burners for PC even though they could've made them this year or last year.

 

Not that i don't believe you but do you have a link for proof ? (and yes JVD, demanding proof is ok when we're talking about something that's supposedly out on the market )

Edit: i found a review of a external player for the PC, a testsample from Sony.

http://testcentret.idg.se/produkt.asp?pID=5046

Apparently rather loud. Three times bigger then a external DVD recorder. Write speed of 6.5 Mb/s. That's 2x if i'm not mistaken.

Anyway, the important thing is that BR players aren't available for the PC yet and that's where the speeds are going to be of most importance. And thus, i believe that faster BR drives aren't really going to take of until they're available for the PC.

 

Well since everyone don't read swedish. Lets see an english review of the drive.

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Reviews/Specific.aspx?ArticleId=12700&PageId=0

 

Someone please clue me in on something...

Reading through the site... the drive has a burst read speed of max 160MB/s, which is HUGE compared to the max sustained of 11MB/s. How does burst and sustained factor in to loading games?? Is it just an inocuous number or does it have some meaning?

 

I think the burst speed simply comes from how fast the cache and databus could send out the data, if that data happened to just be sitting in the cache already.

 

I think that's the case too randy, but I'm not too sure tbh. As for how that applies to games, that depends a bit on big the cache is; my guess is "not very" though, and thus it would hardly apply, sadly. Does anyone have some clear info on whether the number relates to the cache, and if so how big the cache is?

Uttar