PS3 Strategy/Confidence Retrospective

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the interest of data-gathering, here's some comments from Naughty Dog on use of HD and BluRay in Uncharted.

Primarily the whole experience is enabled by the use of the hard drive. If we did not have the hard drive then we could not present the game in the seamless load free way that we are. After you start until you turn the console off and go eat your lunch and come back there is not going to be another load time and you can play the game from start to finish. That was really key to us something that we established with Jak and Daxter and it keeps you immersed in the experience. As soon as you hit those load screens, as soon as you have to take that break, you may put the controller down, you may do something else we really just want to engross you in this experience. So, the hard drive really helped with that. The other thing that we've got going for us is the Blu Ray. We filled that thing up to 24 plus gigs, it was right at the end where we were literally running out of place where we were having to start pulling some stuff out, we ended up fortunately finding this unused cache of audio lines we were able to pull out to save some space so we could get everything in that we wanted to get in. I'm not going to stand here and say it would have been impossible to do on DVD but it would have been a different game, it really would have. It could have looked worse, we would have had to make concessions in terms of our compression. We would have had to spend a lot more developer resources focusing on how to get it on the disk when we could have been creating the game, making it more fun, making it more beautiful. So I'm really happy just to have that. We're still on single layer and this is our first game out of the gates. So I highly suspect that on our future games we'll even go to a double layer and we're going to even start putting more than 24-25 gigs into a single game.
Click to expand...
source: http://palgn.com.au/article.php?id=9225&rss=1&title=Naughty+Dog+Interview+Part+One
 
Is dual layer disc much more expensive?

Naughty Dog said:
it was right at the end where we were literally running out of place where we were having to start pulling some stuff out
Click to expand...

It seems like going with a dual layer disc was not an option at this stage.
 
Dr Evil said:
Is dual layer disc much more expensive?
Click to expand...

Doesn't look like the jump in cost is too bad. And considering we are talking about $60 games... the jump in cost seems pretty negligible.

"Blu-ray replication costs Plant #2 (Blu-ray only) I received quotes on Blu-ray single layer (25GB) replication at plant #2 between $1.35-$1.45 USD per disc on runs of 25K or more.

Blu-ray DL (50GB) was quoted between $2.15 - $2.25 per disc on a 25,000 quantity run.
Click to expand...
(source)
 
There are important other factors for a developer though, like having in-house BluRay burners for testing that may still be single layer, non-trivial layer change / streaming issues during coding (I've heard they're not so bad on BluRay as on DVD, but I'm sure there's still some penalty?), and so on and so forth. A last minute change to BD50 would have very likely meant delays, and if you can easily avoid it, then why bother?
 
Arwin said:
In the interest of data-gathering, here's some comments from Naughty Dog on use of HD and BluRay in Uncharted.
Click to expand...

On the HDD - Great! And I'm all for a seamless experience, because it's better. But, recent hits like Zelda and RE4 were far from free from loading times. Do the general public and reviewers really care?

Hint: check out the scores and awards for these titles. It's a 'nice to have'. Nothing more.

On the use of BR - I'll wait till the reviews / screens / vids. You can fill up any storage medium. Let's see what they've done in terms of visuals and audio first.

Considering the data they say they need I'm expecting quite something. :p
 
pipo said:
On the HDD - Great! And I'm all for a seamless experience, because it's better. But, recent hits like Zelda and RE4 were far from free from loading times. Do the general public and reviewers really care?

Hint: check out the scores and awards for these titles. It's a 'nice to have'. Nothing more.

On the use of BR - I'll wait till the reviews / screens / vids. You can fill up any storage medium. Let's see what they've done in terms of visuals and audio first.

Considering the data they say they need I'm expecting quite something. :p
Click to expand...

He makes a point of this himself:

I'm not going to stand here and say it would have been impossible to do on DVD but it would have been a different game, it really would have. It could have looked worse, we would have had to make concessions in terms of our compression. We would have had to spend a lot more developer resources focusing on how to get it on the disk when we could have been creating the game, making it more fun, making it more beautiful.
Click to expand...

Maybe do a 180 and take the review scores and turn them down a notch or 3 if this had been a game on a DVD based PS3 without DVD.
 
We both could never prove that of course. Neither can the devs.

I'm sure next year we'll see some multi platform titles that will surpass what they are doing though.

From my point of view, I've seen a couple of claims from devs on this matter. The games so far didn't support their claims though.

Superiour format != Superiour experience.

And that's all that matters here.

-tkf- said:
He makes a point of this himself...
Click to expand...

That's why I said I'll be keeping an eye on Metacritic. He just raised his bar above the best looking / sounding / fun games on other platforms. The PS3 game shopper in me hopes he's right. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pipo said:
On the use of BR - I'll wait till the reviews / screens / vids. You can fill up any storage medium. Let's see what they've done in terms of visuals and audio first.

Considering the data they say they need I'm expecting quite something. :p
Click to expand...

What exactly has the use of BR got to do with reviews / screens / vids? You won't find anything there. It's statet pretty understandable of what the pro's are of using BR over DVD yields: Less time thinking about how to use the (limited) space available, which in turn benefits other aspects of the game. There's not much more to say on top of this.

pipo said:
From my point of view, I've seen a couple of claims from devs on this matter. The games so far didn't support their claims though.

Superiour format != Superiour experience.
Click to expand...

...and games on older generation consoles didn't yield a worse experience either. The experience isn't directly linked to the medium - but the medium, as well as all other aspects of the hardware combined yield a potential that developers can use (or not) to make the best of it that's within their capabilities. A faster processor helps, so does more space available etc. If developers say that more space has given them an advantage (even if it's only time), then there's little point doubting them on that.
 
Arwim posted this in defense of the BR strategy for gaming, which he feels is vital for this gen.

It seems you and I agree the medium doesn't make a lot of difference for games. Of course it's easier when you've got more space. But the 'developer resources' point can be argued about for almost anything (e.g. better tools, CPU/GPU choice, etc) on any platform.

And I don't doubt the developers at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pipo said:
It seems you and I agree the medium doesn't make a lot of difference for games.
Click to expand...

The only thing I disagree with, is the notion that Blu-Ray needs any form of defence. Anyone with a little bit of technical understanding can think of possible advantages that more storage yields. The example above by a developer (one out of many) is but little, simply a specific example on how it has helped them.

Does it mean games will be better and suit everyones taste? No, that's quite an absurd argument. Does it mean games can be made better as more storage yields more potential? Clearly, yes it does.

If "better" is a form of saving time that can be used in different areas, so helping making the gaming experience more convinient (no changing discs), to being able to putting "more" on the disc or simply reduce loading times is really up to each and every developer to utilize.

Fact being: More storage is a potential that can be used - exactly in the way a faster processor can be used to do more or better.
 
Phil said:
The only thing I disagree with, is the notion that Blu-Ray needs any form of defence.
Click to expand...

You're pointing at the wrong guy then. I'm all for it. I just don't feel it will make a huge difference in games compared to other platforms.

Going even further: PS3 as a console might have been better of with a DVD drive, an earlier launch, a lower price point and more sold units.

Dunno. But vital for games? I don't think so.
 
The only reason that this discussion is raging as much as it is right now is because of the diode problems. If that hadn't happened, then we'd probably have the same discussion but now with the lack of software at launch playing a more prominent role and the difficulty of programming for Cell catching more flack.

Anyway, onto more important matters. The 40GB version is confirmed by the German magazine C't to contain 65nm Cell and 65nm RSX. They also measure 60W less power consumption and note that it uses about 60 Watt less than the former models, which in turn leads it to be quieter: 0.5 - 0.8 Sone (C't were also the source of some previous reliable Sone measurements).

I look forward to reading the original article, but suffice to say that there's a good chance the 40GB model is really quite a lot cheaper to build. More here: http://playstation-disorder.com/comments.php?blog_id=996&
 
pipo said:
You're pointing at the wrong guy then. I'm all for it. I just don't feel it will make a huge difference in games compared to other platforms.
Click to expand...

Huge difference is a very relative and subjective term. To some, huge is but simply a seamingless world without loading times. To others, it may be more room for more varied textures throughout the game... etc. You either appreciate that the potential is there (and being used in some cases), or you don't.

One thing is quite clear though: Multi-platform titles won't really use this potential to any real benefit. If you want to see it being used - 1st/2nd party games or exclusives are the answer. This game (Uncharted) is one of them and more will follow. You simply won't find a black or white answer where there isn't one.

pipo said:
Dunno. But vital for games? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Nothing is vital! We could be still playing on cartridges after all... Seriously, this talk is all too comparable with the talks back when the PS2 launched and included DVD instead of sticking with CDs (or perhaps using an enhanced CD -> GCD for a bit more storage) or the talk about the HD in the Xbox while the PS2 didn't have one. Been there, done that. Lets move on, shall we?
 
pipo said:
Dunno. But vital for games? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Judging from the Wii there are a lot of stuf in the PS3 and 360 that are not vital to games.

However, my bet is that in the long run the capacity of the BluRay-drive will turn out to be the biggest differentiator for high profile PS3 console exclusive titles compared to the exclusives on the other two platforms.

If that will be key to the success of PS3, or if it was the right decision of Sony to include the BRD I don´t know. I am just happy that someone is pushing the envelope of technology.

I have sensed a lot of hostility toward the PS3 from some American posters here on the board and I can see from the charts that the PS3 is not selling very well in the NA. At the same time I can see it is doing very well here in Europe. It would be really interesting to see what those differences in consumer behaviour really boils down to.

Perhaps it is cultural differences similar to those leading to the 360 doing so poorly in Japan? Perhaps the high initial price has scared American consumers away, while Europeans are used to getting ripped off, or Americans are just cheaper? (j/k) I hope someone present a study on it.
 
Crossbar said:
Perhaps it is cultural differences similar to those leading to the 360 doing so poorly in Japan? Perhaps the high initial price has scared American consumers away, while Europeans are used to getting ripped off, or Americans are just cheaper? (j/k) I hope someone present a study on it.
Click to expand...

I thought it was true that americans are more price-sensitive?

Also I don't see how one could put it down to cultural differences considering american consumers are lapping up the Wii (faster than the 360) nearly as fast as they did the PS2..
 
You'll also see near-white hasn't done Microsoft badly, though if they'd chosen brilliant white like Wii they'd clearly be in a stronger position than they are now.

Okay, we're not taking this seriously, but I do wonder how much colour can actually affect perception? If white is the new black, black devices will have an extra (subconscious) stigma to them. On just first looks, that ever important first impression, standing next to each other the Wii might well be getting first dibs of consumer interest, just because Nintendo chose the new in colour. A change of colour might be bizarrely effective at generating consumer interest. :???:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top