What are the odds that 9 GIGs WON'T be enough for Next Gen?

[SanGreal]

and i did give a good example how use the full space of a Hd-dvd/BRay.... for the time being, it would be usefull to keep the compression near Zero or none at all. Very good for loading times (that dont depend just in the Drive speed, but the cpu speed to decompress stuff also)

Yes, but like I said that only makes HD-DVD/BR a better solution. That doesn't make DVD an inadequate solution.

 

[dskneo]

Yes, but like I said that only makes HD-DVD/BR a better solution. That doesn't make DVD an inadequate solution.

yes sure.
priorities then!... space OR loading times (if compression very big, as i suppose it will be).

either way, i only win for having HD discs. So do you

 

[Magnum PI]

And yes, I agree, drugs are bad!

What with the drug ?

Do you suggest I'm taking drugs ?
Do you confess some bad habit ?
Wrong thread ?

Or just a bad try at being humoristic ?

 

[Sonic]

Keep it on topic guys. It would be a shame to see this thread get locked.

 

[Farid]

Ok, great arguments *thumbs up*

What with the drug ?

Do you suggest I'm taking drugs ?
Do you confess some bad habit ?
Wrong thread ?

Or just a bad try at being humoristic ?

...

Let's just leave it at that.

Now. Must. Keep. On. Topic.

 

[Shogmaster]

The claimed WMV9 2 hours of HD on 4 GB is a fallacy. That bitrate doesn't even approach HD broadcast quality. Especially on content that is low luminance or low saturation (an inherent weakness of MPEG-4). Getting that kind of bitrate on standard-definition video with MPEG-4 is certainly within DVD quality, though.

Fifth Element WM9 HD 1280x720 23.97fps 126min 4.32GB



My free version of BSPlayer only let me capture crappy JPEG, but this looks more than fine, especially on my friend's Samsung 46" 720p DLP RP HDTV.

 

[Magnum PI]

...

Let's just leave it at that.

Now. Must. Keep. On. Topic.

You are hypocritically claiming you want to end the debate while laughing at me with the so-ironical title "Ok, great arguments *thumbs up*".

You couldn't leave it at that, you absolutely need to end our little debate to your advantage.

I thought you were a moderator here because I saw some threads locked by you.

But now I have some doubts about that because when you should be the cold-blooded man calming down the debate you instead make inappropriate remarks.

With all due respect this behaviour has little to do with moderation.

 

[Farid]

Ok

You are hypocritically claiming you want to end the debate while laughing at me with the so-ironical title "Ok, great arguments *thumbs up*".

You couldn't leave it at that, you absolutely need to end our little debate to your advantage.

I thought you were a moderator here because I saw some threads locked by you.

But now I have some doubts about that because when you should be the cold-blooded man calming down the debate you instead make inappropriate remarks.


With all due respect this behaviour has little to do with moderation.

Honestly, I don't know what I can answer to this kind of rant.

I mean, you're the one who decided to take at heart this trivial discussion to the point of punctuating one of your post with patronizing remarks such as "m'kay".

Seeing that I decided, on my part, to cool off the ambiance and address, politely, all the points you brought forth, I even did admit that the wording of my first in this thread reply was probably misleading which in its turn may explain this confusion, and then I did add a lighthearted joke WRT the the "Drugs are bad M'kay" used in the South Park TV Show.

Obviously, the joke did cool off no ambiances at all, since that the only thing that you quoted from my whole post was this South Park reference.

By the way, lighthearted TV-Show jokes are not inappropriate remarks. At least, not in this forum.

Next time, if you have any other concerns that you need to express, please do use the PMs or the Site Feedback forum, thanks. This kind of discussion, in the Console forum, could only lead to threads being locked.

PS: The last lines of your post were completely uncalled for.

 

[mckmas8808]

Fifth Element WM9 HD 1280x720 23.97fps 126min 4.32GB



My free version of BSPlayer only let me capture crappy JPEG, but this looks more than fine, especially on my friend's Samsung 46" 720p DLP RP HDTV.

You can at least show me a pic from the DVD verison also for comparison.
And like somebody said early, we don't know the future so we can't say 7.4 Gigs (guys please stop saying 9 gigs when IT'S NOT) will be enough. It is hard for me to believe that games will go from 2 to 6 gigs this generation and go to 5 to 7.4 gigs next-gen.

 

[PARANOiA]

You can at least show me a pic from the DVD verison also for comparison.
And like somebody said early, we don't know the future so we can't say 7.4 Gigs (guys please stop saying 9 gigs when IT'S NOT) will be enough. It is hard for me to believe that games will go from 2 to 6 gigs this generation and go to 5 to 7.4 gigs next-gen.

#1 The smallest games this generation did not start at 2gb. I'd like to see a chart of game sizes in 500mb blocks. I would bet nearly allo (say, 75%) are LESS than 2gb.

#2 Games next gen don't have to be limited to 7.4gb. Remember Final Fantasy VII? That was measured in GB, and amazingly enough, it came on CD!

I think it was summarised clearly enough in the post that said it won't be a problem in 99.9% of games.

And that 0.1% better be a freakin' good game, since you'll likely be paying an extra $50 for the HD drive built into the cost of the machine.

 

[nickguy94]

In fact, it you want a example of a current generation game that has already surpassed the data storage peak of the Xbox 360's capacity(7.4 Gb's, not 9 Gb's), look no further than Champions of Norrath. It used a Dual-layered DVD, and actually used about 8 Gb's of data.

Now here's the thing I don't get. People say DVD will be enough, but if you look the history of gaming industry, every generation was ushered in by a new storage medium with a higher storage capacity. It went from low-storage cartridges to higher-storage cartridges and CD-Roms to DVD-Rom's and now to Blue-Ray. Every new generation has required more storage capacity. How can people honestly say this generation will be different? As with every new generation, the complexity, the polygon counts, the texture resolutions, and the number of textures applied to every model increases.

Just look at the increasing amount of data developers have put on game discs this generation. You look at the PS2 launch, and games were using only one CD-Rom, yet now every game that comes out on the PS2 is DVD, and in some cases are Dual-Layered DVD's. And that's within the same generation, with no increase in the hardware. Now can you guys honestly say that even though we quadrupled the amound of data that we developers put on our game discs within the same generation, that we won't at least quadruple the amount of storage data when we move into a new generation? That's why I'm completely confident that developers will embraced Blue-Ray, and it will be perfectly common to see games using 15-20 Gb's of storage space, granted it probably won't be that high within the first year though.

 

[Tap In]

You can at least show me a pic from the DVD verison also for comparison.
And like somebody said early, we don't know the future so we can't say 7.4 Gigs (guys please stop saying 9 gigs when IT'S NOT) will be enough. It is hard for me to believe that games will go from 2 to 6 gigs this generation and go to 5 to 7.4 gigs next-gen.

well you are entitled to your opinion but I really doubt MS would put the thought and long range planning into this launch that they have, and NOT consider ALL of the pitfalls of their decisions.

They weren't just a bunch of yahoos sitting around on the Internet speculating on the future of gaming and what their decisions mean.

I'm pretty sure they have it figured out.

 

[zidane1strife]

As I said at ga gt4, iirc, used up a dl-dvd. A game with ps2-low-res textures(compared to pc-xbx, and especially next-gen), 4k~ish poly car models, iirc, and probably similar low-geometry complexity for tracks. A next-gen game of gt4'ish proportions say gt6, would seem to be virtually impossible on a single dl-dvd, and could take 3 or more dl-dvds... and actually it'd be impractical you can't have your cars and streets split up like that. I'd say GT4 would probably be at least 2 dl-dvds if it were using xbx 1-lvl h/w.

Regarding the pc space, Half Life 2, which doesn't use fmv as far as I can tell, takes more than 4GBs of space in a Hdd, IIRC. The game seems to have very very limited model variety, and it appears to recycle a few areas/lvl-designs alot. The game is also on the short side from what I've heard 10-15hrs. Now this is a game below the lvl-detail/area-model variety/length expected for next-gen, and it doesn't appear to use any fmv at all(or EVEN many voice overs gameplay-to-story ratio's quite high, as far as I've gotten.), yet it fills most of what we've available(assuming, 7.4GB is right).

I mean a game like say ffvii, assuming they keep the model-area variety, do voice-overs, and add a few extras, would seem to exceed 2 dl-dvds without use of fmvs(which ain't probably gonna happen, this is square the king of fmvs, so make it at least 3dl-dvds). That is basing it off the HL2 info, if a few sub-next-gen-par models/areas(as far as I can tell) take more than 4GBs(assuming it's not filler)... I can't see any game with substantial variety in the model/area-lvl department fitting in 7-8GBs~, again judging by HL2's size(and again, assuming there is no filler-rndm stuff.).

I also think part of the reason dvds have sufficed for most this gen. is due to the ps2-lowest-common-denominator factor. This has kept geometry complexity low and texture size small with infrequent use of multi-textures for most games(remember most dev.s don't approach the konamis/polyphonys/naughtys in harnessing the power of the ps2.).

 

[SanGreal]

In fact, it you want a example of a current generation game that has already surpassed the data storage peak of the Xbox 360's capacity(7.4 Gb's, not 9 Gb's), look no further than Champions of Norrath. It used a Dual-layered DVD, and actually used about 8 Gb's of data.

You're right about this game, though I highly doubt it needed to be that big, which is the point.

Now here's the thing I don't get. People say DVD will be enough, but if you look the history of gaming industry, every generation was ushered in by a new storage medium with a higher storage capacity. It went from low-storage cartridges to higher-storage cartridges and CD-Roms to DVD-Rom's and now to Blue-Ray.

Every new generation has required more storage capacity. How can people honestly say this generation will be different? As with every new generation, the complexity, the polygon counts, the texture resolutions, and the number of textures applied to every model increases.

In past transitions there was a lot more going on than increased detail and resolution. You had the transition from 2d to 3d, the transition from text to voice, etc.

Just look at the increasing amount of data developers have put on game discs this generation. You look at the PS2 launch, and games were using only one CD-Rom, yet now every game that comes out on the PS2 is DVD, and in some cases are Dual-Layered DVD's. And that's within the same generation, with no increase in the hardware.

FF7 was released 3 years before the PS2 and is bigger than a large number of recent games.

Now can you guys honestly say that even though we quadrupled the amound of data that we developers put on our game discs within the same generation, that we won't at least quadruple the amount of storage data when we move into a new generation?

This is a fallacy, see above.

That's why I'm completely confident that developers will embraced Blue-Ray, and it will be perfectly common to see games using 15-20 Gb's of storage space, granted it probably won't be that high within the first year though.

Time will tell

 

[mckmas8808]

In past transitions there was a lot more going on than increased detail and resolution. You had the transition from 2d to 3d, the transition from text to voice, etc.

Isn't next-gen transition going to be going from Standard def to High-Def?

#1 The smallest games this generation did not start at 2gb. I'd like to see a chart of game sizes in 500mb blocks. I would bet nearly allo (say, 75%) are LESS than 2gb.

#2 Games next gen don't have to be limited to 7.4gb. Remember Final Fantasy VII? That was measured in GB, and amazingly enough, it came on CD!

I think it was summarised clearly enough in the post that said it won't be a problem in 99.9% of games.

And that 0.1% better be a freakin' good game, since you'll likely be paying an extra $50 for the HD drive built into the cost of the machine.

Wow are you some kind of fortune teller or something? 99.9% of games are you serious? How can 2 Japanese devs comment on the space of dl DVDs before completley making a launch window game, yet 99.9% of every game on every console will be less than 7.4 gigs.

I'm sorry but I'm forced to not believe that. I going to listen to the devs on this one. I will be nice to hear from our ol pal DeanoC with HS about how much space that game will take. I'm guessing some where between 4 and 6 gigs.

 

[nickguy94]

You can't list FF7 as a reference, that game used more FMV than almost any game that generation or this generation, that's why it took up 4 CD-ROMS. You can't list games that heavely use FMV because that's a unfair comparision with games that have absolutely no FMV. You look at Champions of Norrath, and you have absolutely no FMV in that game, yet it took up 8 Gb's. Yeah that game didn't need to be that big, but then again I guess customization to your character doesn't matter to you. That game literally had thoasands of armor and weapon peices, but are you saying you didn't want those?

And as someone mentioned about me, the transition to High Definition doens't count in your book? In fact, the transition to High Definition is going to require so much more of increase in data storage than the transition from 2D to 3D.

 

[SanGreal]

As I said at ga gt4, iirc, used up a dl-dvd.

You recall incorrectly. GT4 is ~5gb

A game with ps2-low-res textures(compared to pc-xbx, and especially next-gen), 4k~ish poly car models, iirc, and probably similar low-geometry complexity for tracks. A next-gen game of gt4'ish proportions say gt6, would seem to be virtually impossible on a single dl-dvd, and could take 3 or more dl-dvds... and actually it'd be impractical you can't have your cars and streets split up like that. I'd say GT4 would probably be at least 2 dl-dvds if it were using xbx 1-lvl h/w.

See above, and why would GT4 be 3 dl-dvds if it were an xbox game? Forza managed just fine, at a mere 3gb infact. For more evidence that this theory is invalid look at GTA:SA. On PS2 it was 4.5gb. The Xbox version has better graphics and is gb.

Regarding the pc space, Half Life 2, which doesn't use fmv as far as I can tell, takes more than 4GBs of space in a Hdd, IIRC. The game seems to have very very limited model variety, and it appears to recycle a few areas/lvl-designs alot. The game is also on the short side from what I've heard 10-15hrs. Now this is a game below the lvl-detail/area-model variety/length expected for next-gen, and it doesn't appear to use any fmv at all(or EVEN many voice overs gameplay-to-story ratio's quite high, as far as I've gotten.), yet it fills most of what we've available(assuming, 7.4GB is right).

This doesn't prove anything. Instead find a PC game that requires more than a DVD's worth of space.

I mean a game like say ffvii, assuming they keep the model-area variety, do voice-overs, and add a few extras, would seem to exceed 2 dl-dvds without use of fmvs(which ain't probably gonna happen, this is square the king of fmvs, so make it at least 3dl-dvds). That is basing it off the HL2 info, if a few sub-next-gen-par models/areas(as far as I can tell) take more than 4GBs(assuming it's not filler)... I can't see any game with substantial variety in the model/area-lvl department fitting in 7-8GBs~, again judging by HL2's size(and again, assuming there is no filler-rndm stuff.).

I disagree that it would exceed 2 DL-DVDs, not that it matters considering the original was 3 disks to begin with.

I also think part of the reason dvds have sufficed for most this gen. is due to the ps2-lowest-common-denominator factor. This has kept geometry complexity low and texture size small with infrequent use of multi-textures for most games(remember most dev.s don't approach the konamis/polyphonys/naughtys in harnessing the power of the ps2.).

That explains multi-platform games, but not xbox exclusive games.

The PC shows us that you can have a high-res modern game without being limited by DVD at all. So other than HD FMVs, what is the problem?

 

[Nicked]

FF7 was released 3 years before the PS2 and is bigger than a large number of recent games.

FF7 has the entire game code on each disk (you can change disks mid-game and see for yourself), the FMVs are just swapped. So you had maybe 1.5gig of FMV on those discs. This gen we have games over 3 gig and the only FMV they have is the company intros while the game loads and maybe a short ending FMV. Thats a 6x increase in code/assets.

#2 Games next gen don't have to be limited to 7.4gb. Remember Final Fantasy VII? That was measured in GB, and amazingly enough, it came on CD!

No one was happy to swap discs 2-3x for the FF games (or RE4 on GC ). All the people saying its not an inconvenience/doesn't matter is lying. Having a next-gen format would be a huge plus.

As I have said before, give developers more space, they will fill it up.

 

[PARANOiA]

To summarise:

• Sony fans insist it won't be enough space
• Xbox fans insist it will be enough

Sound about right? :|

 

[SanGreal]

You can't list FF7 as a reference, that game used more FMV than almost any game that generation or this generation, that's why it took up 4 CD-ROMS.

I don't see why not, considering the leading reason for needing a next-gen drive seems to be FMVs. However, if you wish replace FF7 with FF8, FF9 or any other 3-4 CD PSX game.

You look at Champions of Norrath, and you have absolutely no FMV in that game, yet it took up 8 Gb's. Yeah that game didn't need to be that big, but then again I guess customization to your character doesn't matter to you. That game literally had thoasands of armor and weapon peices, but are you saying you didn't want those?

BGA (which was a CON clone) managed this on xbox just fine at ~3gb or less if I'm not mistaken

And as someone mentioned about me, the transition to High Definition doens't count in your book? In fact, the transition to High Definition is going to require so much more of increase in data storage than the transition from 2D to 3D.

Outside of FMVs, no it does not count in my book unless someone can tell me why the PC (which has been HD for years) is somehow immune to this amazing high definition disk requirement.