Resistance: FOM fits on a standard DVD, Blu-Ray game uses 17gb of garbage padding!

[CEO]

none so far, but there is a game where they need 3 dvds to put all the features in.

Holy Cpt. Obvious. So Storys are mere features nowadays... Holy FUCK.
So do we have to put in all 3 DVD's @the same Time, so we can USE all the features at once?

@Ontopic

I was wondering myself how Resistance could not be a DVD9 Game. Must be the FMW in MPEG2@HD.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The game also doesn't seem to use that many textures as most of the levels look one-two coloured(brownish or gray).

Regardless of a muted pallete, the images are still 24 bit colour. Being brown or grey doesn't reduce the amount of space textures take up, any more then being blue or technicolour would!

I haven't seen the game myself, but some screenshots have shown high detail in the textures when up close. If that level of quality if faily consistent throughout the game, with variety of building, trees, and other scenery detail, I can see how assets would make up a lot even if the results are subtle enough that people don't notice.

 

[Sankari]

What games have been released that have missing features on the xbox360??

You are missing the point COMPLETELY.

The point is, the developers have planned the games blu-ray in mind. And it might require some feature cutting for them to fit on DVD. God forgive us, if FFXIII even fits on 1 blu-ray disc going by Square's history. 1080p CGI, here we come.

 

[Nesh]

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/26/resistance-17-75gb-of-garbage/



Sony misleads its fanbase yet again. Resistance would have fit just fine on a standard DVD since in reality it takes up less than 5gb of space, not 22gb. Not surprised here.

Thats weird. Pushing the data to the outer edges to get faster read times? I thought the opposite happened on the outer edges->slower read

 

[TurnDragoZeroV2G]

Thats weird. Pushing the data to the outer edges to get faster read times? I thought the opposite happened on the outer edges->slower read

Linear velocity will increase with radius given that the angular velocity doesn't decrease too much while reading from the inner edge to the outer edge.

Blu-ray is CLV anyhow.

 

[Nesh]

Linear velocity will increase with radius given that the angular velocity doesn't decrease too much while reading from the inner edge to the outer edge.

Blu-ray is CLV anyhow.

Now listen. Dont use all that complicated nerd mind confusing talk at me. Its killing my brain and its pissing me off. You hear?
j/k


I dont understand what you just said though

 

[London Geezer]

Now listen. Dont use all that complicated nerd mind confusing talk at me. Its killing my brain and its pissing me off. You hear?
j/k


I dont understand what you just said though

Basically you have two kinds of drives:

One drive (CAV) spins at the same speed all the time (angular velocity). Meaning that the laser head goes through "more space" when it's in the outer parts of the disc, and "less space" when it's in the inner parts. This means that the transfer speed (linear velocity) will not be the same depending on where your data is on the disc: when you're at the outer borders, you get higher transfer speed. So a typical 12X is quoted as a 12X maximum transfer speed drive, but can only achieve that transfer speed in "optimal conditions", meaning when it's reading data from outer parts, when the speed "inside" the disc is much lower, depending on the drive. Some go down to 5X...

The other drive (CLV) spins the disc at different speeds depending on where the laser head is. This makes the transfer speeds (linear velocity) constant, because in the inner parts of the disc, the disc spins faster to make up for the lower transfer speed you'd get in a CAV drive. So the PS3 drive has a constant 8X speed wherever the laser head is.

In the case of the 360 and the PS3 drive, the top speed achieved by the 360 (when the laser head is in the outer part of the disc) is higher than the constant transfer speed of the PS3. However the lower transfer speed achieved when the head is reading data from the inner part of the disc is lower than the PS3 speed.

 

[22psi]

We can debate to death the merits of a bigger disk, but at the end of the day it just gives devs an option to do things differently.
The whole debacle stinks of 'see I was right! nah nah nah!' syndrome. The 360 gained a year, the PS3 gained a bigger disk. End of story.

I admit I've been tempted to jump on the bandwagon too, but at the end of the day it would be a hollow victory.

stop padding your posts with cool pics!

 

[pakotlar]

Now listen. Dont use all that complicated nerd mind confusing talk at me. Its killing my brain and its pissing me off. You hear?
j/k


I dont understand what you just said though

He is saying basically that on a disk, the outer edge rotates faster than the inner edge, and that velocity (angular velocity) increases linearly from the inner edge outward. It's physics baby!

edit: this is all with relation to a stationary perpendicular standing observer obv. (aka laser or something else)

edit2: I had the wording backwards. Since CAV has constant angular velocity, linear velocity on the outer edge will always be greater on the outside edge (r2) compared to the inside edge (r1). The difference in velocity (and therefore data transfer) is proportional to the difference between r1 and r2.

 

[Nesh]

So if I understood correctly: In order to maintain the same read time, because the distance gets bigger the more you get to the outer part of the disk the speed should be faster to catch up.

But still that doesnt explain why should someone whether its on DVD or BR would want the data to be on the "outer" parts of the disk.

If its BR the speed adjusts itself to maintain the same read time on all areas. On DVD its supposed to get slower read times because of the disk's bigger periphery size on the outer parts right? So I dont get the logic "used to push data to the outer edges of the disk to improve read times"

Its more logical to have data on the inner parts of the disk where less speed is needed to achieve a certain read time

 

[scooby_dooby]

On DVD its supposed to get slower read times because of the disk's bigger periphery size on the outer parts right?

Nope, other way around. Faster read times on the edge of the disc because the velocity is higher the further away you are from center.

In other words, you have to have higher RPM as the head moves towards the center of the disc to have the same read speeds throughout.

Why resistance would need to push stuff to the edges, that I dunno as I though the BR drive was CLV.

 

[London Geezer]

So if I understood correctly: In order to maintain the same read time, because the distance gets bigger the more you get to the outer part of the disk the speed should be faster to catch up.

No, the distance is bigger so the spinning can be slower. It's inside that the speed needs to be faster to keep up with the outer parts.

But still that doesnt explain why should someone whether its on DVD or BR would want the data to be on the "outer" parts of the disk.

Cause it's faster!

If its BR the speed adjusts itself to maintain the same read time on all areas. On DVD its supposed to get slower read times because of the disk's bigger periphery size on the outer parts right? So I dont get the logic "used to push data to the outer edges of the disk to improve read times"

Cause it's faster outside!

Its more logical to have data on the inner parts of the disk where less speed is needed to achieve a certain read time

Nope, linear speed is lower in the inner parts and higher in the outer tracks if angular velocity is the same.

 

[Mmmkay]

*sigh*

There's no 'padding' in the sense that data is being pushed to the edge of the disc. There are just 32MB files which sit between each FMV.

 

[London Geezer]

Why resistance would need to push stuff to the edges, that I dunno as I though the BR drive was CLV.

Yeah, that statement was either so advanced that we didn't get it, or the guy seems to be awfully confused

 

[Nesh]

Nope, other way around. Faster read times on the edge of the disc because the velocity is higher the further away you are from center.

In other words, you have to have higher RPM as the head moves towards the center of the disc to have the same read speeds throughout.

But thats what I find confusing. Its not just about the speed the disk is turning. Its also the distance of the area its reading. For example its easier and faster for the laser to read a periphery of 3cm than 10cm.
It doesnt need the same spinning speed to read a 3cm periphery
it may be spinning faster on the outer edge to catch up but there is still the distance.

ok now I am more confused.

 

[London Geezer]

But thats what I find confusing. Its not just about the speed the disk is turning. Its also the distance of the area its reading. For example its easier and faster for the laser to read a periphery of 3cm than 10cm.
SO ok it may be spinning faster on the outer edge but there is still the distance.

ok now I am more confused

hehe ok it's simple physics...

Take a piece of string. Hold one end in your hand and make the other hand turn 180 degrees. Does the outer part cover more apace than the inner part? Yes. Is the angular speed the same? Yes.
Therefore when you have constant spinning speed, the outer tracks "move" more than the inner tracks, which means read speed there is faster.

If you wanted the read speed to be the same across all parts of the string (or disc), the angular speed for when you're in the inner tracks needs to be faster to keep up with the fundamental advantage the outer tracks have.

 

[Nesh]

hehe ok it's simple physics...

Take a piece of string. Hold one end in your hand and make the other hand turn 180 degrees. Does the outer part cover more apace than the inner part? Yes. Is the angular speed the same? Yes.
Therefore when you have constant spinning speed, the outer tracks "move" more than the inner tracks, which means read speed there is faster.

If you wanted the read speed to be the same across all parts of the string (or disc), the angular speed for when you're in the inner tracks needs to be faster to keep up with the fundamental advantage the outer tracks have.

Thats the same physics logic I use in my mind but I understand the opposite results. The smaller the string the faster I get from one side to the other using the same speed

edit: Wait probably its something else you should have told me to get it. There are more data to read on the outer edge because of the bigger periphery. So there are more read data as a final result unlike the inner part. If thast the logic then I think I got it

edit2: Did I miss something again?

 

[London Geezer]

Thats the same physics logic I use in my mind but I understand the opposite results. The smaller the string the faster I get from one side to the other using the same speed

How can you understand the opposite

Not sure how to explain it more, i'm all spent!

You need to "read" the whole thing from the other perspective.

When angular speed is constant, linear speed changes: take the string, keep one end between your fingertip and the table, and make the other end go 180 degrees. How much space does the end of the string cover? Is it more than the space covered by a point 2cm from your "centre"? YES!

So, when the disc spins at the same speed, the outer tracks cover much more space than inside, yes?

Which means that if that "space" was in fact "information", in the time it took the "inner track" to read its part of data, the "outer track" would have read A LOT more data, yes?

That's the principle. When angular speed is the same, you can read more data in the outer tracks in the time it takes for the inner tracks.

This is a CAV drive, like most DVD drives and like the 360 drive.


On PS3, you have a CLV drive. Angular speed is not the same across the disc, but transfer speed is: this means that if you use the same example, if you wanted to cover as much space in the "inner track" as you did in that 180 movement for the outer track, you'd probaby have to go round a few time! Which means your spinning speed in the inner track needs to be much faster than for outer parts, to catch up.

 

[Nesh]

How can you understand the opposite

Not sure how to explain it more, i'm all spent!

You need to "read" the whole thing from the other perspective.

When angular speed is constant, linear speed changes: take the string, keep one end between your fingertip and the table, and make the other end go 180 degrees. How much space does the end of the string cover? Is it more than the space covered by a point 2cm from your "centre"? YES!

So, when the disc spins at the same speed, the outer tracks cover much more space than inside, yes?

Which means that if that "space" was in fact "information", in the time it took the "inner track" to read its part of data, the "outer track" would have read A LOT more data, yes?

That's the principle. When angular speed is the same, you can read more data in the outer tracks in the time it takes for the inner tracks.

This is a CAV drive, like most DVD drives and like the 360 drive.


On PS3, you have a CLV drive. Angular speed is not the same across the disc, but transfer speed is: this means that if you use the same example, if you wanted to cover as much space in the "inner track" as you did in that 180 movement for the outer track, you'd probaby have to go round a few time! Which means your spinning speed in the inner track needs to be much faster than for outer parts, to catch up.

Ok that means I got it. The information part is what I needed to get it

btw: Thanks for puting up all the effort to explain I really appreciate it

 

[London Geezer]

Ok that means I got it. The information part is what I needed to get it

btw: Thanks for puting up all the effort to explain I really appreciate it

No prob!