Well, one, you've put forward a general argument that some games may need more than a DVD's space and they can't span discs. Can I see this happening? Possibly. Has it happened yet? No. Is anything on the horizon? Not that I know of. Can I throw scenarios at you which prove DVD is superior from what we've seen? Yes - those scenarios are on the shelves today. So please, put your "maybe sometime in the future there's a possibility that something can justify this" on the shelf.
The all new Carmack-inspired disk and HDD installation discussion thread* (spin-off)
- Thread starter Arwin
- Start date
I'm just not sure why you are so confident that things will be the same in 5 years just because things are like this today. Games take years to produce, what you are seeing now is what were designed in the last year or before. Essentially what you are arguing in this "PS3 Strategy/Confidence Retrospective" thread is Blu-ray is useless for games while Carmack who issued zero critical comments about Microsoft in 5 years has just said it is useful for games. And your basis? "Those scenarios are on the shelves today." If you walked up to Carmack and patted his back then said "don't worry, the scenarios are on the shelves today" after he gave a speech to tell the industry outlook, he'd just give you a blank stare.
woundingchaney
Regular
Carmack's issue are more with MS's royalties than dvd tech, he simply wants to utilize another dvd without paying royalties. The manufacturing is not making the issue not economically viable, it is the royalties.
He came out and specifically stated such. Though if he had more room on dvd this wouldnt be an issue though its not as if dvd is making the title impossible.
I find it odd that Rein's comments have surfaced given that the 360 version released with more content on disk than the PS3 version (and is reported to be visually superior). Of course Im sure the audio is not of the same quality.
He came out and specifically stated such. Though if he had more room on dvd this wouldnt be an issue though its not as if dvd is making the title impossible.
I find it odd that Rein's comments have surfaced given that the 360 version released with more content on disk than the PS3 version (and is reported to be visually superior). Of course Im sure the audio is not of the same quality.
Last edited by a moderator:
All I'd say on the Blu-ray issue is that it would have been better for Sony in these early years if from before the PS3's launch they had been developing credible and practical use cases for the technology on the software side rather than simply putting it in the machine and crossing their fingers. In the end the usefulness of extra data capacity in driving some substantial improvement (like visuals) will IMO be proven. I think it is beginning to be proven now, ironically enough, via iD's direction. But it's a pity Sony couldn't have brought forward these uses by investing more time up front on the software side in how to make substantial use of one of its best differentiators. They should have been the ones coming up with productivity tools for generating unique assets everywhere, for example, and they should have been disseminating them among developers from an early stage so that more games highlighted a very genuine need for more data capacity. As is, they're leaving that in the hands of the Gods, probably hoping iD's engine and asset pipeline becomes popular in the mid to late cycle of the hardware's lifespan.
Slight side note, but I'd love to see what this kind of approach tied to a heavily PS3 tuned engine (from, say, ND), could do on the visual side. If I were in charge of software strategy at Sony, I'd be putting at least one team to work on this approach and sharing it with developers. Heck, they should go crazy and churn out 100GB of data for the game - or 2 BD discs. A genuine need for more than one Blu-ray disc would render arguments about simply using multiple DVDs on other platforms increasingly weak.
Slight side note, but I'd love to see what this kind of approach tied to a heavily PS3 tuned engine (from, say, ND), could do on the visual side. If I were in charge of software strategy at Sony, I'd be putting at least one team to work on this approach and sharing it with developers. Heck, they should go crazy and churn out 100GB of data for the game - or 2 BD discs. A genuine need for more than one Blu-ray disc would render arguments about simply using multiple DVDs on other platforms increasingly weak.
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).
I think there was a game mentioned recently that did require a Harddrive no sure if it required a install, but it´s the first step in that direction. And there is plenty of reasons why this gonna happen, it´s not just all related to the DVD size. I believe that development of a multiplatform game is easier if you know that a certain chunk of the game will be installed on a harddrive. Leaving more easy things to the DVD/BR drive like simple streaming of videos and or loading of new levels.
I am guessing that the BR drive has scenarios where it´s hurting more than the DVD drive and as you mention yourself, it´s a developer question.
I think it´s wrong to say that there hasn´t been a superior BR game, you can argue that there haven´t been a 3rd party game on the PS3 that took advantage of the BR drive to it´s advantage. But i don´t think it´s something we should expect to stay that way, JC´s comments is a strong hint of what will come.
I think Sony is in the same boat as you, that they shouldn´t be where they are, but they screwed up and Nintendo got very lucky. A year ago i think it looked very bleak for the PS3 but no so any more and there are many great games to played in the future. Not to mention even more BR movies to be watched
The 2GB thing was mentioned as a way to pad the inner parts of the disc in order to gain a higher minimum transfer speed.
Not only that.
The 360 version was delayed for about a year. Naturally, they have substantial time to optimize the visuals further, and create more content (I believe the 360 version still lack modding though). I remember there was another Rein interview that indicated so. What it may (or may not) imply is that the PS3 version is not optimal also.
Given ample time and determination, it may be possible to solve these teething issues. But as Rein put it, Blu-ray has more leg room.
I didn't realize there was a concern in your original post
With a HDD and Blu-ray in every PS3, I don't think it is impossible to create a rich game and yet has no load time (See NaughtyDog and Insomniac). What we are seeing in some cross platform projects may be the same old issues of grappling with PS3's esoteric architecture, larger OS memory, and immature tools in a cross platform environment. As a result, they have no time to optimize the loading further.
The only reason Blu-ray and DVD recorders are used in Japan player marketshare is because they are the only form of player sold in Japan. It is the player sales of Japan. Blu-ray seems to have caught on pretty well over there (Blu-ray "Macross Vol. 1" sold 45% of entire release in Japan, compared to a high of 20-30% for specific best selling titles in the west).
As for whether it works out, I am still rather positive about Blu-ray, especially if it gives Sony additional funds to invest in gaming in the future (Remember MS has a cash cow but Sony does not). Should Blu-ray gain mainstream adoption, it will also help to drive PS3 cost down faster. These are all long term play (as people put it, PS3 is a marathon runner rather than a sprint runner).
Carmack said:
As developers gain more experience and PS3 user base continues to rise, they will get better at it. As I highlighted, it is still too early to judge Blu-ray.
EDIT:
Thanks for clarifying calling JC "first class". Seems some others here may be in denial of that fact
Blame Google for it.
And the fact that your prior allegation is wrong.
I think having hard disk install has its advantages. Just like PSN games, a player can get to a commonly played game easily without swapping disc (e.g., meet online with a group of friends and play a couple of installed games seamlessly). It may be a little ahead of its time due to the relatively lower HDD capacity in circulation right now. But more people may gravitate towards it by the end of this gen. As for mandatory and partial hard disk install, we will have to see what the future hold for 360.
This is similar to how Insomniac does it.
By bringing up the "theoretical argument", you're contradicting yourself here. Unless we have the same PS3 game released on DVD and Blu-ray at the same time, it may be wrong to claim that Blu-ray has no advantage. Perhaps some released exclusively on Blu-ray are already impossible on DVD (or require one year delay). The parity between 360 and PS3 games may be due to a combination of other factors.
As for NaughtyDog's usage of Blu-ray, they did take advantage of it to produce superior result: http://arstechnica.com/journals/thu...-naughty-dog-co-president-christophe-balestra
The 5.5m gap is due to Xbox 360's one year+ headstart in the market (and ready software !). Even without Blu-ray, I think Sony may still launch late due to immature software. As I recall, the early SDK was buggy even near the delayed PS3 launch.
Then again, the past few months have been pretty good to PS3 (They are gaining and the game division made money). I don't see them as failing so far. The challenges are great but it is still too early to conclude this gen. I think there are still twists from all 3 vendors.
I don't think Sony made any mistakes with their hardware,the choices of including a blue-ray drive and a standard HDD are already starting to show some advantages and will continue to grow and differentiate the PS3 from 360. It will pay off in the long run.
The mistake Sony made was not including excellent development tools.
The mistake Sony made was not including excellent development tools.
I am inclined to agree. Looking at Intel's Itanium, it is extremely difficult to introduce a brand new CPU architecture and establish it in the market. A whole lot of supporting tools and community are needed. I think STI are doing very well so far. Within a short time (2-3 years), they have created a young but growing ecology of Cell developers and products. I hope their management stays steadfast on this path. Cell still look competitive compared to breakthroughs in other areas.
As for Sony's mistake in dev tools, I think they should have improved their development environment in the PS2 era. And then work closely with IBM and nVidia to specialize the debugger and code generation for Cell and RSX early.
Now they are paying the price, and probably feverishly trying to catch up to feature requests and bug reports.
As for Sony's mistake in dev tools, I think they should have improved their development environment in the PS2 era. And then work closely with IBM and nVidia to specialize the debugger and code generation for Cell and RSX early.
Now they are paying the price, and probably feverishly trying to catch up to feature requests and bug reports.
Moreover, beyond tools for the processors, tools that harnessed a key differentiator (blu-ray) toward a substantial competitive advantage.
They knew for a long long time what at least 2 of the 3 or 4 main components of PS3 would look like, but it seems there was precious little investment of thought upfront about use cases. It was a case of handing the hardware over to developers in the confidence that they would ultimately validate their technology choices - and maybe they will in time - rather than presenting that validation themselves to accelerate the process.
I hope and think they've learned from the PS3's evolution. From recent Jack Tretton and Shu Yoshida comments it sounds like developer and software input around will be a much greater factor in the gestation of 'playstation 4'. I think they need to invest as much in differentiating tools and software use cases for their next machine as they do in hardware (and maybe by leveraging the hardware heritage of the PS3 i.e. cell etc. they'll be able to do that).
If they stay true to the Cell Cpu they will have gained alot just by doing that.
Right now, it's done after the fact by Insomniac's tech presentations and the sharing of technologies between the studios.
I am hoping Sony can platformize their PS Eye tools too (I am looking at the object recognition one in particular), and some of KZ2 goodies, that were also used in Uncharted and R&C.
I am hoping Sony can platformize their PS Eye tools too (I am looking at the object recognition one in particular), and some of KZ2 goodies, that were also used in Uncharted and R&C.
It's worth to remember another comment from Carmack, about the increasing difficulty to find capable level designers. I kinda interpret this as trouble with content production, but that might just be a result of us having a constant fight with production deadlines too.
Kinda strange that you've skipped this comment, though.
Again, I'm not sure what you're on about, one. You're a smart guy, but you're struggling to follow the conversation I'm having (with someone else) about what we've seen this gen to date.
Also, are you saying Carmack is implying Rage can't be done on 360? Are you disagreeing with the assertation that he's simply playing the royalty game? Because if not, you're agreeing with me (albeit in the most facetious way possible) that multiple DVD's work in a majority of scenarios where DVD is becoming a limitation - in itself a tiny percentile of games this gen.
I think there was a game mentioned recently that did require a Harddrive no sure if it required a install, but it´s the first step in that direction. And there is plenty of reasons why this gonna happen, it´s not just all related to the DVD size. I believe that development of a multiplatform game is easier if you know that a certain chunk of the game will be installed on a harddrive. Leaving more easy things to the DVD/BR drive like simple streaming of videos and or loading of new levels.
I am guessing that the BR drive has scenarios where it´s hurting more than the DVD drive and as you mention yourself, it´s a developer question.
I think it´s wrong to say that there hasn´t been a superior BR game, you can argue that there haven´t been a 3rd party game on the PS3 that took advantage of the BR drive to it´s advantage. But i don´t think it´s something we should expect to stay that way, JC´s comments is a strong hint of what will come.
I think Sony is in the same boat as you, that they shouldn´t be where they are, but they screwed up and Nintendo got very lucky. A year ago i think it looked very bleak for the PS3 but no so any more and there are many great games to played in the future. Not to mention even more BR movies to be watched
The 2GB thing was mentioned as a way to pad the inner parts of the disc in order to gain a higher minimum transfer speed.
As for the games that require a HDD install, that's entire FUD. It was a misreport, and it's something that "the other camp" love to spread like wildfire ("hey guys, we have a crappy process, but the 360 seems to be going that way too!".) Again, if you can name examples of this game requiring an install, raise it. To my knowledge, the only exceptions have been an MMO (FFXI) and that football manager sim.
As for BR, it's fine to say "you can't compare a multiplatform game because they're in essence different. Tell that to anyone in a store though
"Sure, the PS3 loads slower in most cases, or requires you to set aside time (and HDD space) upfront for an install, but it's not fair to compare". I don't think that it's flying in real world examples.Unless Sony take the good work a small few have been able to get out of the PS3 and give it to everyone, so the EA's, UBI's and whatnot can begin making their multiplatform (and exclusive) games run as if they didn't have BR as a handicap, it will remain exactly what it is - a handicap.
I guess my manta on this one is this: don't try and convince me with how it might be or could be - I'm more interested in how it is. And how it is isn't very good from my view as a gamer.
As for the many others claiming it'll bite the 360 in the ass... that may be the case - or may not, since there's only one machine that doesn't have DVD this gen, and that is currently the loss loser globally. By the time this starts becoming a widespread problem (ie, a frequent concern and not an oddity), I expect to be talking about the next gen already.
The PS3's "10 year plan" would be a good idea... if it was as successful as the PS2. Here's a hint: it's not, it will never be. Keep in mind the PS2 is in what, it's 9th year now? You really think you'll be looking forward to BR advantages in PS3 over the 360 when we'll likely be 2-3 years into the PS4/Xbox whatever/Wii Dance Mania Edition?
As for BR, it's fine to say "you can't compare a multiplatform game because they're in essence different. Tell that to anyone in a store though
The thing is who told you the slower load time is due to Blu-ray ? The fact that the data are cached/pre-installed on HDD could also mean that load speed is not the issue. Couldn't it be due to the smaller available memory ? ...such that some data needs to be recalculated or re-read in at super fast rate because it has been flushed out of memory ?
In the grand scheme of things, 2 seconds additional load time is not going to change any big picture. Afterall I may hate disc swapping more than waiting for just 2 more seconds.
Sure, but you'd rather wait 20-30 minutes for an install than 10 seconds to swap a disc, right?
The installs may not be associated with Blu-ray though. They may be a remedy for the memory limit (which may indeed affect 360 too if the level is large enough).
We have seen great PS3 games with no load time and no preinstalls on PS3 (and streaming from Blu-ray at the same time). Hopefully as the OS memory shrinks and the developers become more experienced, more of them can find better ways to tackle the issues on hand (whatever they are).
We have seen great PS3 games with no load time and no preinstalls on PS3 (and streaming from Blu-ray at the same time). Hopefully as the OS memory shrinks and the developers become more experienced, more of them can find better ways to tackle the issues on hand (whatever they are).
How would being on the hard drive remedy a memory problem? The hard drive is no replacement for memory. The speed advantage of a hard disk over DVD or blu-ray (especially the relatively slow HDD's in the consoles) seems fairly minimal compared to the speed of memory.
So you agree with me that disk swaps are better than mandatory installs? Great.
And let's stop beating around the bush here. Are you stating that the mandatory installs, generally slower load times, and other factors are purely due to memory limitations on the PS3 rather than the slower read times from disc? Yes or no?
Similar threads
