The disadvantage is you can't just grab any of your 50 game discs, shove them in and play them. (clarification: unless you have hard disk space for 50 game installs.) This is the normal usage pattern for a console, and it breaks down when installs are mandatory and take a non-trivial amount of time.
The all new Carmack-inspired disk and HDD installation discussion thread* (spin-off)
- Thread starter Arwin
- Start date
You could say it was the normal pattern for the old consoles (50 games?). Now you have a mandatory download on patches before you connect online as well. You also have DLC. things changed, the harddrive is here to stay.
The normal pattern on a console will be to keep space free on the harddrive. Thankfully harddrive prices are down
First party games don't load off optical disk any faster, they just get around it by hiding it with cutscenes, or requiring a mandatory hdd install. As for the slow load part, the short answer is I don't know...disc data layout, etc, is not something I deal with day to day. What I've heard though from asking around is that in a mano-a-mano optical drive showdown, the 360's plain old dvd drive loads faster. I just now did a test here as well, timing the load time on both machines straight from disk with same day builds, and the 360 loaded ~9% faster.
One thing I've learned coming from the days of 15" inch monitors that only display 13.5", or 250mb tape backups that only really back up 90mb, is to not believe whats printed on paper anymore. I go by what I see in the field. The word on the "grapevine" that I hear is that the blu-ray drive is indeed slower in game type applications. Putting on my +120 Hat Of Speculation, maybe the blu-ray optical head assembly is heavier? Maybe it needs more settle time after is has performed a seek? Maybe there is more error correction and/or re-reads going on? I don't really know what it is. Then again, with a hard drive being standard it mostly makes it all moot anyways.
Shifty Geezer said:
Just put the 747, er, the 360 in a closet. That's what I did
Fortunately the days of drone are just about over now that optional complete game installs are almost here.szymku said:
I personally don't care, one time installs don't bother me at all (except the Metal Gear install every act, I hated that) But then again my 20gb PS3 has a 160gb drive
I pity those with 60gb PS3's though, must be a royal pain in the ass to have to manage installs, delete some to make room to replay another game then have to wait yet again for it to install, etc. Gotta wonder what that does for disk fragmentation over time as well. At this point. anyone buying a 60gb or less PS3 should really swap it out right away for at least a 120gb drive, especially if they ever plan to use it for videos, music, etc. Even I hit the limit this weekend on my 160gb drive, I had to delete an hd home video to make room for GT Prologue to be able to install
Just put the 747, er, the 360 in a closet. That's what I did
At this point. anyone buying a 60gb or less PS3 should really swap it out right away for at least a 120gb drive, especially if they ever plan to use it for videos, music, etc.
Except the 360 install is the whole disc, not the relevant data, which will be 50% fat I bet. I don't have an issue with the PS3 install, just make them optional.
The BD drive in the PS3 is almost silent when in use, which trumps a few seconds in loading. I look forward to the 360 install mechanism, but I have an Elite, I pity the tens of millions of 20GB owners.
BTW I upgraded my 60GB PS3 to 120GB for like $25,
for over the counter competition.I don't know that I have a problem with Microsoft charging per disk royalties. It ensures that developers and publishers work to optimize their games to use the fewest number of disks possible. Compression has more benefits than simply disk swapping. It can decrease load times, decrease bandwidth required, improve frame-rate, etc.
And what would happen if they didn't. IMO, there would certainly be a greater number of multi-disk titles. And I doubt that would equate to a superior experience from an end-user perspective.
All in all, I think both Sony and Microsoft have taken rational approaches based on their technologies. MS gained a launch advantage and will soon hit the $199 price point with their decisions to go DVD and optional HD. Sony can provide move value and has the longer product lifespan. And you can't blame Carmack for trying to do what he can for himself and iD. It's the circle of life.
And what would happen if they didn't. IMO, there would certainly be a greater number of multi-disk titles. And I doubt that would equate to a superior experience from an end-user perspective.
All in all, I think both Sony and Microsoft have taken rational approaches based on their technologies. MS gained a launch advantage and will soon hit the $199 price point with their decisions to go DVD and optional HD. Sony can provide move value and has the longer product lifespan. And you can't blame Carmack for trying to do what he can for himself and iD. It's the circle of life.
What makes you think that? Comments to date have indicated that the process is "smart", ripping unique data only. An example given even included Lost Odyssey, which won't rip duplicated content across discs - if they can do that, I'd say there's little value in ripping duplicated content on a single disc game to give "50% fat" as you've termed it.
Of course, until MS get their head of of their arses with HDD pricing, I'm guessing the feature will be minimally used, or encourage the "hack" jobs of swapping the drives yourself. I'm tempted, but I'm not sure if it's a Live-ban or not. Either way, the proprietary HDD nonsense MS is running with is just plain crappy compared to the "off the shelf" ability Sony went with this gen.
Here's an idea for MS: release a HDD "shell" for a nice profit (say, $20 for a plastic case) that lets a user pop whatever drive they want in. That way, bitching is reduced, and the users win with even faster load times than they have today, and you still have a nice profit line. I'd bet the profit of this device would greatly exceed those of the 120gb HDD add-on, purely on the volume of sales (ie, lower profit per unit but higher net profit based on more units sold).
Last edited by a moderator:
Even so they will rip FMV, music, etc. Things that will have little impact on loading time, of course avoiding the spinning of the DVD is the point. So the best of both worlds is the way some PS3 games do it; install (optional) of the data which impacts loading and stream the rest from the near silent BD drive.
How is this different from what almost all 360 games already do when a hard drive is present? Other than you seeing it and waiting for it to complete.
I'm not qualified to speak about how the 360 caching compares to an install, but I can say the 360 DVD drive is not all that silent
Chris123234
Regular
Anyways, it's obvious that Microsoft made poor design decisions when they built the 360. I absolutely and completely refuse to ever play any game that requires disc swapping. I've refused to do it ever since the original playstation came out and I will continue to skip these games going forward. I'll wait for the PC port if need be.
I'd gladly wait a couple more seconds to load if I don't have to ever disc swap.
I can hear my Xbox making noise from just turning of the power strip its attached to
I'd gladly wait a couple more seconds to load if I don't have to ever disc swap.
I'm not qualified to speak about how the 360 caching compares to an install, but I can say the 360 DVD drive is not all that silent
I can hear my Xbox making noise from just turning of the power strip its attached to
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you have any thoughts on anti-piracy measures? i.e. What's to stop an individual from just renting a bunch of games as opposed to buying them (besides the obvious HDD space limitation)
With XBLA games, they've tied content to an XBL profile, but I doubt that they've implemented individual "CD-Keys" for existing disc titles. People could just share discs ala older PC games. They would have to move to authentication ala Windows/MS Office...
Hey, you there. Yes, you. Shhh, come here I got something nice for you.
/me opens coat and shows AlphaWolf a PC.
Do you have any thoughts on anti-piracy measures? i.e. What's to stop an individual from just renting a bunch of games as opposed to buying them (besides the obvious HDD space limitation)
They would have to move to authentication ala Windows/MS Office...
They could just damaged the disc once installed. Maybe damaged it in a certain way to show its been installed.
Do you have any thoughts on anti-piracy measures? i.e. What's to stop an individual from just renting a bunch of games as opposed to buying them (besides the obvious HDD space limitation)
They would have to move to authentication ala Windows/MS Office...
I'd be fine with some sort of online authentication. As for space, I only need about 5 games on my drive. They should offer larger drives for those who want more. It seems they don't want to confuse people with multiple versions of things, but I think power users would snap up a 320GB drive, or a $50 enclosure DYI kit.
Hey, you there. Yes, you. Shhh, come here I got something nice for you.
/me opens coat and shows AlphaWolf a PC.
There's a pretty limited number of PC games that offer that off the shelf. My number one pet peeve with PC games is hunting down my own patches and stuff.
I'm not qualified to speak about how the 360 caching compares to an install, but I can say the 360 DVD drive is not all that silent
True, but PS3 installs don't really do anything either from a noise standpoint since the BR drive is already fairly silent.
Chris123234 said:
What decisions were those? It seems to me that "future" multi-disk titles will likely avoid the swapping issues by being able to install the additional disk(s) content onto the hard drive. Not sure if already released titles will be updated to validate ownership using only disk one, but I'm willing to bet future titles will.
It was the prudent design decision for a 2005 console, not a poor design decision. BD wasn't really feasible as a console medium until 2007; the few PS3 launch units made available in 2006 were pushing the boundaries of mass production at the time. As for HDD installs, we can wish that MS had made the "disk image" optional installs available at launch, but forcing installs to be optional was not obviously a poor design decision. It hasn't been shown to have held back either the games or sales to date.
That was the one of the few cool things to come out of the modchip scene for the PS2: being able to copy whole DVDs to a PS2 HDD.
True, but PS3 installs don't really do anything either from a noise standpoint since the BR drive is already fairly silent.
Agreed, but coupled with the standard HD and optional installs you get the best of both worlds. The 360 install via the OS is very welcome just from the noise standpoint, but I doubt it's very efficient from a storage one.
Do you have any thoughts on anti-piracy measures? i.e. What's to stop an individual from just renting a bunch of games as opposed to buying them (besides the obvious HDD space limitation)
They would have to move to authentication ala Windows/MS Office...
Random checks, "insert disc 1 from Halo 4". Failing to do so will disable the game and put one warning on this install. 2 Warnings and the game is deleted and has to be installed all over again. The sneeky thing is this random check would cover ALL installed games, so lets say you fire up Burnout, it could still ask for disc 1 from Halo 4.
Take a patent on the idea and lets share the royalties.
Similar threads
