*merge/rename* The Importance of an H.D.D. (e.g. caches, streaming etc)

[cthellis42]

To be clear, I was asking for 360 games to see whether persistent data of any interesting size is allowed by Microsoft (for the games that are supposed to work on Arcades as well, and besides DLC).

I don't have my own 360 to check, but I haven't seen a similar "Game Data Utility" on a 360 blade, so I couldn't tell you. (Maybe I'll spend a bit more time searching at my friend's later on.) It rather seems like MS isn't permitting anything major use like that right now (obviously I am excluding downloaded content from these remarks), though you seem to be able to build up one of spots allocated to temporary cache, and as long as a different game doesn't need it you'll have access to it later. Since it doesn't seem like too many 360 games are using even THAT right now, it gives a good advantage to the games that do right now.


On the matter at hand, I certainly think it would be a boon to have an install option on both the 360 and PS3, but we run into problems too much is mandatory. Obviously more on the 360 since some people may be missing a hard drive in general, but if it becomes habitual on the PS3 you'll quickly run into storage limits on the 20GB's, and be sucking up serious storage from everyone else as well, who may have gotten the large drive for their OWN purposes. DMC4 I can KINDA-sorta see because it's their first major multi-platform release, and a major-enough title that they don't want to see delays, but seeing it in HSG5 is more worrisome because it was out earlier, makes this seem more like a "desirable trend," and it's a PS3-only game published BY SONY! (Admittedly, they might have felt a bit of pressure to try to get it out in the "10th Anniversary" time period, so it'll be more a telling point if a mandatory installation makes it through to NA/EU. A BAD telling point.)

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what the transfer rates are between the HDD and various possible flash cards on the PS3? If a game were offering optional cache space, would it also be cool/better to be able to dedicate a spacious-enough card to the task?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't have my own 360 to check, but I haven't seen a similar "Game Data Utility" on a 360 blade, so I couldn't tell you. (Maybe I'll spend a bit more time searching at my friend's later on.) It rather seems like MS isn't permitting anything major use like that right now (obviously I am excluding downloaded content from these remarks), though you seem to be able to build up one of spots allocated to temporary cache, and as long as a different game doesn't need it you'll have access to it later. Since it doesn't seem like too many 360 games are using even THAT right now, it gives a good advantage to the games that do right now.

I recall it being mentioned as being similar to XB1, with 2 GB's shared by three games, but I could just be making that up. You couldn't expect much more than that from the 20 GB drive though if download content was expected for the HDD. 20GBs would be far too tiddly in that case - 40 GBs is pushing it on PS3. And further to that, doesn't Linux installation require a miniscule partition for the PS3OS (if you want the space for Linux)? In which case how do game installs work then?

 

[AlphaWolf]

Penny Arcade has weighed in on the DMC4 load times.

I now own both versions of Devil May Cry 4, and I can tell you that the benefits of the twenty-one minute install are completely irrelevant. I spent over a hundred and twenty dollars to learn this bit of trivia. I love to hear talk online about load times which are "twice as fast" on the Playstation 3. It's very easy to double a small number. If you have two cents, and then you find two more, that doesn't make you a rich man.

 

[AlNom]

I recall it being mentioned as being similar to XB1, with 2 GB's shared by three games, but I could just be making that up. You couldn't expect much more than that from the 20 GB drive though if download content was expected for the HDD. 20GBs would be far too tiddly in that case - 40 GBs is pushing it on PS3.

On Xbox, it was three partitions of 750MB, another partition of 500MB for the system files, and almost 5GB for game files/saves and music (Total ~8GB).

On 360, there's the large partition for media, downloads, game saves/profiles, themes. Microsoft's website actually states there is a 2GB allocation for backward compatibility and another 4GB for game caching. The game cache partition is more flexible this time, allowing one title to use more than another; [strike]for Xbox, a game was still limited to the 750MB despite another game using next to nothing by comparison.[/strike] edit: Xbox games had to use 750MB partitions rather than an arbitrary size.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/911593


And no, there's no way of checking the 2GB or 4GB partitions. The user can only assess files that one downloads to the large partition.

 

[scooby_dooby]

So what happens to 20gb ps3 owners with a moderate amount of data on their hdd's? If they have only 9gb free and want to actively play both dmc4 and hot shots golf, does that mean they will have to delete the other games install data and go thru the 20 minute install every time they want to play?

That's what I was wondering...could potentially be extremely annoying.

 

[scooby_dooby]

for Xbox, a game was still limited to the 750MB despite another game using next to nothing by comparison.

Though some games, like Halo, would actually use 2 of the 3 caches. I noticed this when browsing the cache folders via FTP one day...

 

[AlNom]

Though some games, like Halo, would actually use 2 of the 3 caches. I noticed this when browsing the cache folders via FTP one day...

Ah... I stand corrected then.

Do you know if Digital Extremes cached all of Unreal Championship ? The game itself was fairly small IIRC.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Ah... I stand corrected then.

Do you know if Digital Extremes cached all of Unreal Championship ? The game itself was fairly small IIRC.

Not sure, I rented that game briefly, but it wasn't really my cup of tea.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What sort of install sizes do we have relative to release schedule? Could it be that after a while Sony realised they'd drop the 20 GB and allow more freedom for devs? 20 GBs with large installs does seem pretty short-sighted.

 

[PARANOiA]

Though DMC4 is pretty much a single-player game, I think it will be a norm for forthcoming online-oriented games to use HDD installation (GT5P, HSG5) for constant patching and fast loading in online matches that are hard to optimize on a fixed optical disc.

I firmly disagree. This is one reason consoles are so popular over PC's... you pop in the disk and play, not worrying about system requirements or whatnot... and yes, requiring 5gb of free space is a system requirement, regardless of a user's ability to clear it off al will.

I think the PS3 will be more flexible in this space than either MS or Nintendo. I certainly think it will be the exception rather than the rule though - your use of the term norm though (meaning more games will install than will not) I can't see as being true in any future generation unless we move to a DD only model.

 

[_phil_]

That's what I was wondering...could potentially be extremely annoying.

not over-reacting here?
just delete some.

 

[AlphaWolf]

not over-reacting here?
just delete some.

I know I play several games concurrently, and I'm pretty much the sole user of my consoles, in a family you could have several people using it, each potentially having some of their own titles. If you had to do a 20 minute install regularly that would be a very big problem. If full installs are to become the norm even 40gb is way too small a drive.

 

[betan]

I'd like to thank all those 360 owners for protecting us, 20GB PS3 owners, especially considering there aren't many of us left.

But don't you worry, here is our preferences :
No HD usage <<< temp cache < persistent cache << visible install << background prefetch/install

And for the record, having to free up some space is nowhere near as annoying as loosing temp cache because you happen to try another game between sessions.

 

[Arwin]

I personally prefer whatever Uncharted is doing.

 

[_phil_]

I personally prefer whatever Uncharted is doing.

yes ,perfect ellegance.

 

[one]

I firmly disagree. This is one reason consoles are so popular over PC's... you pop in the disk and play, not worrying about system requirements or whatnot... and yes, requiring 5gb of free space is a system requirement, regardless of a user's ability to clear it off al will.

I think the PS3 will be more flexible in this space than either MS or Nintendo. I certainly think it will be the exception rather than the rule though - your use of the term norm though (meaning more games will install than will not) I can't see as being true in any future generation unless we move to a DD only model.

I wrote "for online-oriented games". The more seriously games take online, the more they become MMO-like. "Game 3.0" is hard to reach without HDD. Hence the need of HDD. I don't believe easy-to-go was the main factor of consoles gaining on PC, that's a byproduct of cost restriction in consoles of the past. They had to be without rewritable storage due to cost reasons and lower cost enticed people, not the other way around.

The definition of gaming on consoles and console itself is ever changing. After the demise of single-player PC gaming, the next target consoles aim at will be PC MMO players. In a not so distant future, PC MMO may be thriving only in developing countries where buying multiple kinds of computers is not common or bandwidth cost is not cheap enough.

PS3 also has Home installed in HDD, it can save developers to create their own online infrastructure and may save some HDD space for each game too. In that case, games are plugged into Home to be a part of MMO-like experiences.

As for old-school games with a rich single-player campaign as the main feature, Blu-ray is good with HDD caching. But devs can be lazy, Genji 2 at the PS3 launch that didn't use SPEs at all had a 4GB install option. If they had chosen to be even more lazy, they could've made it required.

In addition to GT5P and HSG5 I mentioned already that are building online communities, I'm curious about MGS4 which has the Starter Pack of Metal Gear Online included.

 

[patsu]

What is NaughtyDog doing in Uncharted regarding HDD usage ? I only read about Insomniac's texture streaming approach.

I can see some progress in HDD usage this gen. It was called a "money-losing component" last generation. I'd like to see the following developed further:

* As media jukebox - playing music and "regular" games from HDD (like Warhawk and GT5P). Software-wise, it enables a whole generation of CHEAP and superb games like PixelJunk Monsters, Everyday Shooter, etc. Hardware-wise, HDD is built into every PS3, so the potential market is growing rapidly. I really hope they enable gigabit NAS connectivity, I think it would be very useful. Still waiting for that DVR feature in US though

In a similar way, the built-in HDD also enables and encourages MMO games !

In a related direction, it's also about how PS3 allows remote parties to access these media (via RemotePlay and Home). While a Blu-ray game like Lair can be played remotely, it is PSN games will make the concept shine because the entire game library can potentially be accessed (instead of just one game that happened to be in the Blu-ray drive). We will have to wait for the national/global network infrastructure to improve though.

Also, by storing stuff in files on the HDD, it makes game saves/personalization more accessible. On PS3, these files can be exported/copied (rather than memory cards). On 360, the entire HDD is portable. Games like Unreal and Halo 3 enabled user mods. When Home and LBP are released, we will see the impact of HDD-based user generated content too.



* As an integrated storage pipeline - In its simplest form, it's like how DMC4 caches data (statically) from Blu-ray. In more advanced form, the HDD becomes part of the dynamic storage management/streaming framework. Like how texture is streamed from Blu-ray and HDD at the same time in R&C. Fafalada seems to imply that HDD will get even closer to the rendering pipeline because of megatextures (?).

[EDIT: Software-wise, Sony should release a high level "open source" framework for managing the storage hierarchy. Insomniac's system sounds like a good start. I don't know enough to understand whether id's megatexture approach replaces or complements Insomniac's mechanism]

Hardware-wise, I am curious about the solid state drives in laptops these days. And how they may affect consoles 5 - 10 years from now.


Many people criticized the built-in HDD 2 years ago. I am most curious to see if Sony can make more money from the built-in HDD.

 

[cthellis42]

What is NaughtyDog doing in Uncharted regarding HDD usage ? I only read about Insomniac's texture streaming approach.

Other than using general cache space that any game can access? Seemingly nothing. Naughty Dog seems to rock continuously.


I'm not going to provide commentary this thread, but expound upon my other and toss up some more info. I'll start with the 360 info, since that's shorter. Looking for possible dedicated data caches, I couldn't find anything in particular. The only place I could find related info is on the System blade > Memory > Hard Drive, where Games was the only major tab. Unlike the "Save Data Utility" versus "Game Data Utility" versus "seeing the game itself in the Game menu" separation on the PS3, the 360 tosses all pertinent data into this one menu. Saved Games (which also includes thins like in-game screenshots), downloaded content, XBLA games... I could see no other labelling, nor any major data block that looked like a scrap of content pulled from the disk for speedier reference than on the DVD. Total size, though, seems to amount to a pretty small portion of the drive. My friend has 6.5GB free, 1.2GB in the Games directory, and 50MB in assorted other stuff (mainly Themes); under 8GB of a 20GB drive? Sheesh...


Now PS3 is MUCH harder to tabulate... so much so that it makes me wonder if the obfuscation is on purpose instead of the usual "we haven't bothered to make it more convenient for the user yet." You can't find overall HD usage totals except in System Information (In Settings > System Settings; for my friend, 27 of 55GB free), and meanwhile your specific section totals can't be tallied, as getting "Information" on any of the folders doesn't tell you their total size, but just how many files are contained therein. (Useful, I swear!)

He's got a different bracket of Game Data than I do, so here are some new totals (in MB):
DMC4 - 4834
Assassin's Creed - 1349
Rock Band - 540 (he has fewer songs than I do)
Time Crisis 4 - 2453 (this one I know was an optional install)
Folklore - 107
Oblivion - 629
Virtua Fighter 5 - 128 (this seems to be the automatic stuff, but you CAN optionally install a larger dedicated chunk)
Full Auto 2 - 1721

That's a total of about 11.7 GB, which is larger than his ENTIRE games directory otherwise, which includes all his PSN downloaded games, PS3/PSP titles, demos... Those added up to 8GB. He has no locally stored videos or music, so the only other stuff is game saves (37, and even being generous and giving them 2MB apiece, that doesn't amount to much) and the Game Data I didn't take down because it was smaller than 100MB. (Which, again, can't amount to much.) Oh, and Warhawk (789 MB), since we all knew that one already. By my calculations, that's 21GB or so.

Being generous and giving it 22GB just for various things I might have missed, that's under by about 6GB of his "what I'm using right now" total. (27 of 55 free = 28 used.) Now a 60GB "marketing storage" drive would amount to a bit over 58GB as far as "actual storage" goes, right? I have to assume that some of the top end is dedicated to the OS and certain system specifics, probably giving us that 55GB partition (whether it is a dedicated partition or not), of which another 6GB or so doesn't seem to be accessable EITHER... What's in it other than the space dedicated to the general cache? (Seems a bit poor to tell us that we have "55GB available" if we really DON'T have it available, though. I guess they're playing fast and loose so they don't get a bunch of customer complaints about the storage totals, but at least the 360 is straightforward about it in the HD menu.)


So the Game Data blocks are definitely there in a lot of cases, can definitely take up substantial room, are questionably "optional" (I think a lot get installed simply as a matter of course), and don't call much attention to themselves. Will the least-used blocks remove themselves automatically if you get under a certain data total so that they still qualify as "optional, in an odd fashion?" I don't know, but they certainly count when you're downloading content or transferring files, so even if they WOULD, they're still making the user think they have less room than they actually do. They certainly don't auto-delete over time, else my friend's Full Auto 2 block would have been gone long ago. (Rental which he picked up right after he got the console, shortly after release.) Do some potentially NOT install if you don't have enough free space left? Do some prompt you to remove data?

Dunno, as neither he nor I have ever been close to data capacity. Experiments for the future, I suppose. ^_^

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That's an awful lot of data going on them PS3 drives...

 

[AlNom]

under 8GB of a 20GB drive? Sheesh...

what? You must have missed something... Out of the box, there's 13GB free...