The all new Carmack-inspired disk and HDD installation discussion thread* (spin-off)

[Arwin]

Mod : This thread is a spin-off from the Sony Retrospective thread. It covers disc capacity, load speeds, HDD installs, and general data transfer talk regarding loading game files. A lot of this has been covered in previous discussions. Please use the search engine.

John Carmack has singled out a reason that may push PS3 beyond the 360 in terms of graphics (i.e. another one for my collection):

"Right now, the PS3 version of id's upcoming shooter, Rage, will offer superior graphics performance on PS3 than Xbox 360. Not because of sheer horsepower, but because of storage. The game is shaping up to be a three disc game, a costly proposition due to Microsoft's licensing fees. Textures would need to be compressed "to fit the game's assets on two DVDs."

 

[-tkf-]

John Carmack has singled out a reason that may push PS3 beyond the 360 in terms of graphics (i.e. another one for my collection):

You should keep you collection somewhere so it could be easily linked, do you collect 3rd party titles that use more space on the PS3 than the 360?

Afaik the GTA:4 was 11GB on the PS3 vs 7GB.

 

[Geo]

John Carmack has singled out a reason that may push PS3 beyond the 360 in terms of graphics (i.e. another one for my collection):

Methinks that's John's way of trying to get MS to tweak a business relationship rule. I did not realize that licensing fees were per disk rather than per title.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

John Carmack has singled out a reason that may push PS3 beyond the 360 in terms of graphics (i.e. another one for my collection):

Notice "right now"; talking about this in public is Carmack's way of forcing MS to allow them to expand to three disks.

Result: X360 version may still end up looking better.

 

[-tkf-]

Notice "right now"; talking about this in public is Carmack's way of forcing MS to allow them to expand to three disks.

Result: X360 version may still end up looking better.

The result is that the game will NOT be limited by the storage capacity on a 7GB DVD. If this yields a better result it´s awesome, it´s also a "what if" for every game that had been produced to date within these limits.

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find. This is the first time a first class developer has been absolutely honest and haven´t hidden behind the usual PR armor of fluff. Even Dan Houser wrapped his comments a bit into candy paper.

 

[kyleb]

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find.

What are you trying to argue here, that delaying the launch and upping the costs to use an HD optical media format would have been good for the 360?

 

[woundingchaney]

The result is that the game will NOT be limited by the storage capacity on a 7GB DVD. If this yields a better result it´s awesome, it´s also a "what if" for every game that had been produced to date within these limits.

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find. This is the first time a first class developer has been absolutely honest and haven´t hidden behind the usual PR armor of fluff. Even Dan Houser wrapped his comments a bit into candy paper.

I think you are kind of lumping so many together. Most statements I have seen at this forum and many others suggest that in various instances 7GB will of course not be enough and multiple disks will have to be used though these instances are not or will not be the mainstream solution as the majority of titles should fare fine on a single disk.

In this instance of MS royalties and the third disk we would need to assume that 2 dvds hasnt been enough for various titles and titles of course would need 3 disks. Given that this is really the first we have ever heard of MSs royalty policy there is no specifics available (surely the whole issue is breaking NDA so its doubtful we see any specifics). We dont know if royalties are applied to "every" game disk or for titles varying in their amount of disks (as to say not additional royalties for 2 disks but another royalty for 3 disks).

Unless of course you are just trying to breed animosity and hostility amongst the forum goers.

 

[NRP]

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find. This is the first time a first class developer has been absolutely honest and haven´t hidden behind the usual PR armor of fluff.

It's also amusing when PS3 fans start calling JC a "first class" developer (instead of a lazy, archaic old fool who is out of touch) the minute he says something positive about their platform of choice.

 

[Nesh]

They called him a first class developer?

 

[joker454]

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find.

The size of a dvd isn't really a limitation. What is a limitation though is not allowing hard drive installs to be required. Once they allow that then *poof* the dvd size issue is totally gone since you can ship with two discs and require that one be installed.

Carmack is one of many applying pressure in this regard, although he's extra awesome because he spanked MS publicly Of course, he's just purposely shaming them in a very public forum to force their hand (he is one of the few that can get away with it). I suspect MS will eventually buckle and be forced to allow mandatory installs.

 

[-tkf-]

The size of a dvd isn't really a limitation. What is a limitation though is not allowing hard drive installs to be required. Once they allow that then *poof* the dvd size issue is totally gone since you can ship with two discs and require that one be installed.

Carmack is one of many applying pressure in this regard, although he's extra awesome because he spanked MS publicly Of course, he's just purposely shaming them in a very public forum to force their hand (he is one of the few that can get away with it). I suspect MS will eventually buckle and be forced to allow mandatory installs.

And that would be the solution, and play right into the hands of the other group that have been on the case on the mandatory installs so many PS3 games require.

What are you trying to argue here, that delaying the launch and upping the costs to use an HD optical media format would have been good for the 360?

No that would only have been good for the PS3

My point is that there has been plenty that went through great lengths to make a point that 7GB was enough. Just as there has been plenty of negative comments about required installs.

And now it turns out (unless JC is lying) that Microsoft did what they could to encourage developers to avoid using more than 1 DVD and they even punished those that did. And the main reason was not to look old compared to the PS3.

 

[PARANOiA]

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find. This is the first time a first class developer has been absolutely honest and haven´t hidden behind the usual PR armor of fluff. Even Dan Houser wrapped his comments a bit into candy paper.

*Oh come on*, TKF. As has been pointed out, all it took was for Carmack to make a single positive comment on the PS3 to the general Sony fanbase to stop calling him stupid and lazy, and elevate him to "first class"

As has also been pointed out, this is less about disc size limitations and more about MS's royalty costs on multi-disc games. Good on him for airing this little piece of dirty laundry out there.

As for the DVD vs BR comments, I think now we're further along since the initial debate, it's even more relevant to show that MS was wise to launch the 360 with DVD instead of waiting for HD-DVD to be ready, as has generally been the thoughts of most reasonable-minded people on the board.

The "need" for BR this gen has also to date been pretty much nil, as I originally posted almost a year ago. The games that "couldn't be done on DVD" so far amount to a couple of titles, only - and even they are questionble (uncompressed audio vs lossless compression as an example). The added real-world slow transfer speeds of BR discs vs the faster DVD version of games have pretty much meant the only way PS3 games have been able to have comparable load times to 360 games have been requiring installs. MSG4 even had you installing after each freaking level, of all things. If you were a gamer to buy a decent amount of games, you'd regularly be needing to wipe your installs and reinstall if you felt like a quick game of Hot Shots Golf, as an example, even with a 60Gb drive. And even with installs, PS3 versions are still loading slower - check the SCIV comparisons. And people are telling me BR is "needed" this gen? What a load of rot.

So in my mind, as much as you seem to think otherwise, I remain a firm believer in DVD looking to be pretty much fine for this gen. Multi-disc games are working out with no problem at all (except for MS's stupid royalty schemes, it seems), and I'm still strugging to find more than a couple of games which "need" BR in any meaningful way. Two years on and Sony gave up the gaming crown for this? They can only hope the movie sales pick up at a better rate so the format really will be the "next DVD" (although news is that it's not) or it was a wasted venture.

If I had one wish, though, it would be to release more of the DVD space away from the absurd copy protection schemes. People are playing pirated games on 360's now, even with a large chunk of each disc taken out. Copy protection schemes rarely work in any way which doesn't hurt the legitimate consumer, and this looks like another example of that. Sigh.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

What i find amusing is that the typical "7GB is enough" speakers haven´t been anywhere to find.

It takes an independent, self-funded studio to risk making that amount of assets and hope to make a profit on the resulting game. Remember, Rage requires large storages because every texture will be unique - even GTA4 doesn't have that.

 

[patsu]

What a pathetic post, TKF. As has been pointed out, all it took was for Carmack to make a single positive comment on the PS3 to the general Sony fanbase to stop calling him stupid and lazy, and elevate him to "first class"

As far as I can see, -tkf- mentioned "first class developer" in passing in his post. Surprisingly, I couldn't find anyone else using the same description on Carmack on google, let alone "general Sony fanbase" ;-)

John Carmack is a well-respected, cross platform developer and business owner. For whatever reasons, I see many on GAF still consider him a PC game developer. This is nothing new though.

As has also been pointed out, this is less about disc size limitations and more about MS's royalty costs on multi-disc games. Good on him for airing this little piece of dirty laundry out there.

As for the DVD vs BR comments, I think now we're further along since the initial debate, it's even more relevant to show that MS was wise to launch the 360 with DVD instead of waiting for HD-DVD to be ready, as has generally been the thoughts of most reasonable-minded people on the board.

Definitely, this is clear the moment HD DVD's died at the beginning of this year. It is unfortunate that Microsoft wasted significant amount of resources on the add-on and software.

The "need" for BR this gen has also to date been pretty much nil, as I originally posted almost a year ago. The games that "couldn't be done on DVD" so far amount to a couple of titles, only - and even they are questionble (uncompressed audio vs lossless compression as an example). The added real-world slow transfer speeds of BR discs vs the faster DVD version of games have pretty much meant the only way PS3 games have been able to have comparable load times to 360 games have been requiring installs. MSG4 even had you installing after each freaking level, of all things. If you were a gamer to buy a decent amount of games, you'd regularly be needing to wipe your installs and reinstall if you felt like a quick game of Hot Shots Golf, as an example, even with a 60Gb drive. And even with installs, PS3 versions are still loading slower - check the SCIV comparisons. And people are telling me BR is "needed" this gen? What a load of rot.

While I don't think Blu-ray is an absolute need so far, I think it has its advantages. A few developers have praised the legroom it gives them (It's nice not to worry about space issues).

I think Carmack is the second person who commented on DVD's space limitation. Over here: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/48474, Mark Rein also dropped similar hint:

"We may have fewer maps on the 360 version," Rein admitted when discussing the upcoming shooter in the presence of a GamesIndustry.biz reporter. "[The PlayStation 3's] Blu-ray has definitely given us a lot of legroom."

They are both probably complaining about MS's per-disc royalty at the same time. The 2 factors go hand in hand.

Besides texture streaming, NaughtyDog's Uncharted also streams 12 streams of audio from Blu-ray (in DTS) simultaneously. As such Uncharted is often praised for its sound effects.
There is no load time in Uncharted too.

OTOH, for a 2 character game like SCIV, I think it may not be a Blu-ray showcase.

So in my mind, as much as you seem to think otherwise, I remain a firm believer in DVD looking to be pretty much fine for this gen. Multi-disc games are working out with no problem at all (except for MS's stupid royalty schemes, it seems), and I'm still strugging to find more than a couple of games which "need" BR in any meaningful way. Two years on and Sony gave up the gaming crown for this? They can only hope the movie sales pick up at a better rate so the format really will be the "next DVD" (although news is that it's not) or it was a wasted venture.

Too early to tell.

The survey included SD TV owners (Not sure how many amongst the 1000 respondents).
"The lukewarm response can be attributed to the fact that consumers don't see a big enough benefit to justify the cost of switching to a high-definition player, which in many cases would require buying a TV that supports HD content."

HDTV is replacing SDTV in stores. The format has only been unified this February. Give them some time to regroup. They have been doing rather well so far (though could be even better). In the mean time, Blu-ray recorder sales has surpassed DVD recorder sales in Japan. We will have to see how Europe and US perform end of the year (or beginning of next).

 

[one]

The "need" for BR this gen has also to date been pretty much nil, as I originally posted almost a year ago.

When talking about this gen, not 2005-2008, you should become forward-looking - especially when Carmack is a developer of an engine which can be licensed to dozens of developers including those in the PC sector. Add to that, Rage won't even need GTA's free-roaming style to justify its storage requirement. Console specs are fixed, but contents production technology is advancing every day, unless payment at a sweat shop in China gets a sudden rise due to the Beijing Olympic Games. Competitors in the engine business will offer the same features. That's the effect of a comment uttered by a so-called "first-class" developer regardless of our subjective view on Carmack.

 

[-tkf-]

*Oh come on*, TKF. As has been pointed out, all it took was for Carmack to make a single positive comment on the PS3 to the general Sony fanbase to stop calling him stupid and lazy, and elevate him to "first class"

I called him first class because i think he is in a league of his own. If he would develop exclusively for the PS3 i think he would do stuff very few would be able top copy. But it´s not a secret that he hates the PS3. Which in my view makes his "BR is the only real advantage the PS3 hardware got" count for more than it does from Insomniac, for example.

As has also been pointed out, this is less about disc size limitations and more about MS's royalty costs on multi-disc games. Good on him for airing this little piece of dirty laundry out there.

Yes for his game and comments your absolutely right.

As for the DVD vs BR comments, I think now we're further along since the initial debate, it's even more relevant to show that MS was wise to launch the 360 with DVD instead of waiting for HD-DVD to be ready, as has generally been the thoughts of most reasonable-minded people on the board.

I dont think they had a choice, and i agree. I find their Arcade/no-hard drive decision to be wrong though, that was arrogance and has a cost on games.

The "need" for BR this gen has also to date been pretty much nil, as I originally posted almost a year ago. The games that "couldn't be done on DVD" so far amount to a couple of titles, only - and even they are questionble (uncompressed audio vs lossless compression as an example). The added real-world slow transfer speeds of BR discs vs the faster DVD version of games have pretty much meant the only way PS3 games have been able to have comparable load times to 360 games have been requiring installs. MSG4 even had you installing after each freaking level, of all things. If you were a gamer to buy a decent amount of games, you'd regularly be needing to wipe your installs and reinstall if you felt like a quick game of Hot Shots Golf, as an example, even with a 60Gb drive. And even with installs, PS3 versions are still loading slower - check the SCIV comparisons. And people are telling me BR is "needed" this gen? What a load of rot.

Every game can be done on a DVD or a CD, it´s just a question of compromises and game design. But with these revelations i think there has been even more compromises done than was needed, just to "prove" that 1 DVD was enough. The very few times something has been aired it´s been fluffed up or there has been a "clearing up the confusion" PR release later. You have a point on the install stuff, but i think it´s something that we have to get used to. Go for the 250GB harddrive and buy some time or do as we were used to in the "old days" on our PC install delete. And this is gonna be happening for the 360 as well.

The DVD vs BR speed would need a developer to explain the differences and reasons, we had a lenghty thread on the BR speed vs DVD speed in theory and it was a draw afaik. I think it varies wildly on different titles.

So in my mind, as much as you seem to think otherwise, I remain a firm believer in DVD looking to be pretty much fine for this gen. Multi-disc games are working out with no problem at all (except for MS's stupid royalty schemes, it seems), and I'm still strugging to find more than a couple of games which "need" BR in any meaningful way. Two years on and Sony gave up the gaming crown for this? They can only hope the movie sales pick up at a better rate so the format really will be the "next DVD" (although news is that it's not) or it was a wasted venture.

If I had one wish, though, it would be to release more of the DVD space away from the absurd copy protection schemes. People are playing pirated games on 360's now, even with a large chunk of each disc taken out. Copy protection schemes rarely work in any way which doesn't hurt the legitimate consumer, and this looks like another example of that. Sigh.

You know as well as i do that there is way more to the delays and costs on the PS3 than just the Blu-Ray drive, it was a major part but no the sole reason.

Microsoft did an excellent job with their 360 blitz launch, Sony got caught up in their arrogance and didn´t expect such an early launch and they fumbled out of the gate with a PR campaign that was easy food for the internet trolls.

I still find it hard to believe that the PS3 is "only" 5.5 millions behind the 360 now. But thanks to a great amount of luck (goodbye HD-DVD) a very nice price and AAA titles they have gained a momentum that i think will make them equal to Microsoft. The Wii is gone though

Blu-Ray is a long term thing, it will be here for a longer time than DVD or VHS and make Sony and everyone else in the Blu-Ray camp alot of money.

I thought another of the reasons for the 2GB loss on the discs were part of the transfer speed?

Edit: Thanks for giving me a chance to respond mate

 

[PARANOiA]

As far as I can see, -tkf- mentioned "first class developer" in passing in his post. Surprisingly, I couldn't find anyone else using the same description on Carmack on google, let alone "general Sony fanbase" ;-)

John Carmack is a well-respected, cross platform developer and business owner. For whatever reasons, I see many on GAF still consider him a PC game developer. This is nothing new though.



Definitely, this is clear the moment HD DVD's died at the beginning of this year. It is unfortunate that Microsoft wasted significant amount of resources on the add-on and software.



While I don't think Blu-ray is an absolute need so far, I think it has its advantages. A few developers have praised the legroom it gives them (It's nice not to worry about space issues).

I think Carmack is the second person who commented on DVD's space limitation. Over here: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/48474, Mark Rein also dropped similar hint:



They are both probably complaining about MS's per-disc royalty at the same time. The 2 factors go hand in hand.

Besides texture streaming, NaughtyDog's Uncharted also streams 12 streams of audio from Blu-ray (in DTS) simultaneously. As such Uncharted is often praised for its sound effects.
There is no load time in Uncharted too.

OTOH, for a 2 character game like SCIV, I think it may not be a Blu-ray showcase.



Too early to tell.

The survey included SD TV owners (Not sure how many amongst the 1000 respondents).
"The lukewarm response can be attributed to the fact that consumers don't see a big enough benefit to justify the cost of switching to a high-definition player, which in many cases would require buying a TV that supports HD content."

HDTV is replacing SDTV in stores. The format has only been unified this February. Give them some time to regroup. They have been doing rather well so far (though could be even better). In the mean time, Blu-ray recorder sales has surpassed DVD recorder sales in Japan. We will have to see how Europe and US perform end of the year (or beginning of next).

I don't really see you addressing much to counter any of my concerns, so I guess I can assume you agree with me that for the most part DVD is fine in nearly all scenarios for gaming this gen, and generally gives a better experience for gamers..

And while we don't need yet another "DVD vs BR" thread (I mentioned my comments specifically in relation to the benefit to games) I don't really think pointing out DVD recorder sales is worth much when you don't quote DVD player or indeed DVD movie sales comparatively. Ask yourself how are they working out, and whether you think the cost to Sony in the gaming realm was worth it.

When talking about this gen, not 2005-2008, you should become forward-looking

Which of "to date" in my sentence wasn't clear?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Can we please not talk about 'general fan-bases'. 'General fan-bases' is an over-broad, inaccurate generalization. They are both immeasurable in their population and activities so we can't report what the 'general fan-base' is doing, and irrelevant to the board which doesn't have a 'general Console X fan-base' but has individual named members. If someone here has said something you disagree with, discuss the matter with them personally. Don't attribute their remarks to a wider population, at least not without getting prior confirmation that this person is an official, affiliated Spokesperson for the 'general fan-base' and their expressed opinion are representative of that 'general fan-base's consensus!

 

[one]

Which of "to date" in my sentence wasn't clear?

Then you fully agree in my comment even with your following sentences like this?

So in my mind, as much as you seem to think otherwise, I remain a firm believer in DVD looking to be pretty much fine for this gen. Multi-disc games are working out with no problem at all (except for MS's stupid royalty schemes, it seems), and I'm still strugging to find more than a couple of games which "need" BR in any meaningful way. Two years on and Sony gave up the gaming crown for this? They can only hope the movie sales pick up at a better rate so the format really will be the "next DVD" (although news is that it's not) or it was a wasted venture.

or are you cherrypicking?

 

[PARANOiA]

I called him first class because i think he is in a league of his own. If he would develop exclusively for the PS3 i think he would do stuff very few would be able top copy. But it´s not a secret that he hates the PS3. Which in my view makes his "BR is the only real advantage the PS3 hardware got" count for more than it does from Insomniac, for example.


Yes for his game and comments your absolutely right.

I dont think they had a choice, and i agree. I find their Arcade/no-hard drive decision to be wrong though, that was arrogance and has a cost on games.


Every game can be done on a DVD or a CD, it´s just a question of compromises and game design. But with these revelations i think there has been even more compromises done than was needed, just to "prove" that 1 DVD was enough. The very few times something has been aired it´s been fluffed up or there has been a "clearing up the confusion" PR release later. You have a point on the install stuff, but i think it´s something that we have to get used to. Go for the 250GB harddrive and buy some time or do as we were used to in the "old days" on our PC install delete. And this is gonna be happening for the 360 as well.

The DVD vs BR speed would need a developer to explain the differences and reasons, we had a lenghty thread on the BR speed vs DVD speed in theory and it was a draw afaik. I think it varies wildly on different titles.



You know as well as i do that there is way more to the delays and costs on the PS3 than just the Blu-Ray drive, it was a major part but no the sole reason.

Microsoft did an excellent job with their 360 blitz launch, Sony got caught up in their arrogance and didn´t expect such an early launch and they fumbled out of the gate with a PR campaign that was easy food for the internet trolls.

I still find it hard to believe that the PS3 is "only" 5.5 millions behind the 360 now. But thanks to a great amount of luck (goodbye HD-DVD) a very nice price and AAA titles they have gained a momentum that i think will make them equal to Microsoft. The Wii is gone though

Blu-Ray is a long term thing, it will be here for a longer time than DVD or VHS and make Sony and everyone else in the Blu-Ray camp alot of money.

I thought another of the reasons for the 2GB loss on the discs were part of the transfer speed?

Edit: Thanks for giving me a chance to respond mate

Thanks for clarifying calling JC "first class". Seems some others here may be in denial of that fact

As for installs, I personally strongly disagree with mandatory installs... having to "put up" with it on consoles isn't something I'm looking forward to. I definitely don't see this as something coming to 360 - there has been no talk at all other than baseless speculation - and I sincerely hope it stays that way. It may be fine for someone who buys one or two games a year, but as someone who picks up 15+ games a year, even the 120gb 360 drive would full. Poor 20gb PS3 owners who have manual installs now. At least they can upgrade by themselves if they have a little know-how.

Next gen might be a bit different given we're probably looking at a huge RAM to assets ratio, though who knows what's up for the future? The Xbox 1 method (caching in background to the mandatory HDD) certainly seems like the smartest way forward for me, even if they fluff it somehow, like making you sit through the first intro movie while the game loads or something, and deleting it after you change every three games or so. God knows what they expect a genuinely "non-technical" user to try and delete game caches manually in a few years, though maybe that's just not the PS3's target audience (in what would be a huge shift in target audience from the PS1/PS2).

On speeds of BR vs DVD, I think any theoretical discussions are pointless when there been no games on both systems to my knowledge that load faster on PS3 without requiring a mnaual install. Any discussions around potential benefits of CLV vs CAV don't really matter of no one has been able to pull out a superior BR game. There will always be those that make it work better than others (Naughty Dog as an example) but that's pretty pointless when the vast majority of game makers will produce an inferior result on a BR disc vs a DVD disc. ND AFAIK were producing similar results on DVD, anyway, so it's not like they're using BR as an advantage - they're just not letting it be the roadblock so many others are.

Anyway, with the 5.5m "gap" Sony is staring down to get out of last place this gen, it's a position in my mind they shouldn't have been in. I see BR as the biggest cause of that, and it's a shame. If you actually read posts I made around 2005/2006, I was planning a PS3 purchase because I expected it to be "the next PS2"... it's a shame they hamstrung themselves so badly, and in a sense they've pushed the market away from most of what made the Xbox vs PS2 rivalry so intense - there aren't that many exclusives left to make owning both systems worthwhile just yet (at least in my mind, and that's not really something that needs another debate!).

As for the 2gb leading to transfer speeds... I haven't heard anything about this - anyone got anything to add?