What's your opinion on Blu-ray technology?

[Graham]

How do those figures compare with modern console games though? If you take an XB or PS2 game weighing in at 3 GB, is that all uncompressed audio and textures? Or are they using MP3s and JPGs already? If most of the current assets sit on the disc with no compression, sure there's loads of scope for getting more on disc. If they're already compressed this gen, next-gen the compression isn't likely to make the files much smaller because there's only so much compression you can actually apply. Unless there's a case to believe that where current gen uses say 3:1 compression for the average for assets, and next gen compression will be 10:1, the increase in game content should be met with a proportional increase in disc space requirements. 5x the assets ~ 5x the disc space needed.

Well that of course is an excellent question, one I can only speculate on. The numbers I originally posted were already guesses afterall.

The thing is, taken the other way, if you have a game that takes up 8gb on a dvd, assume that the game has a 50% data redundancy and is using an average of 4x compression already, then you can guess that game has 22gb of uncompressed data. That is already a *huge* amount of data. If the game lasts 6 hours, then you can think of that as an average of nearly 4gb of new content every hour. Thats simply mindblowing...

Of course thats just wild speculation and throwing numbers around

However I'll look at oblivion again... Puts things into perspective

the .bsa format that oblivion uses (according to this) is quite simple. It's just a collection of files, each being zlib (zip) compressed. So the compression is fairly simple.

The textures in oblivion, from what I can tell when playing, are DXTC, probably mostly without alpha, so thats about 3x compression ratio, with zip compression you gain maybe another 3x compression (from testing some dxtc images I have).
The oblivion texture .bsa is 1.2gb, so we can make a rough guess that oblivion has 10gb of uncompressed textures. Thats about 2,500 1024x1024 uncompressed textures... Given the mech commander stat, one would wonder how many of those are not used.

Audio is where things get interesting. From what I can tell, oblivion apparently has '50 hours' of dialog. Personally I don't really believe this, as after spending some 80 hours playing the game I'd say I've heard around 4 hours of audio. At best... I'll save all the calculation, but it looks to be around 80kbps audio. This would be around 8:1 compression if the original audio is 44khz 16bit mono, which pretty much falls into the mp3 category quite nicely. However that is assuming you believe the 50 hours number. If it were 10 hours, then things change signifcantly, and it could easily be .wav files in there.
Overall though it's 1.7gb of voices.

Sound effects I'd definitly think were .wavs, as if there were 8:1 mp3, you'd be looking at 10 hours of sound effects, which is rediculous.

Mesh's are interesting too.
700mb of mesh's, all zip compressed. The game apparently includes '1000 modeled objects', which no doubt vary from coins to castles. But an average of 850kb compressed, say, 1mb uncompressed is quite expected. One would expect that also includes detail models, so maybe 1/2mb of the highest detail.
This seems about right, as the directX 'knot' model is 1.5mb, and thats 45k triangles. So given that no doubt oblivion stores a lot more data, you may manage 10k/triangles per mb, so an average of 5,000 triangles per mesh is quite reasonable.

Sure thats a very round-about way of getting a figure, but I guess it works.

So overall you get the following ratio:

per 100mb,

18mb for meshs
32mb for textures
50mb for audio

In a 4gb game.
it's interesting, but I still can't help wonder about the '50 hours' thing.

I still stand by my original thoughts that dvd is enough. The problem with assuming that we can double or quadruple the content evident in oblivion is that is assuming you can:

a) afford to make it
b) stream it efficiently (oblivion struggles here considerably)
c) actually display it at decent performance (given oblivion stresses extrmemly high end PCs already, I'd doubt it - thats also assuming the 360 version uses the same content)

I'd also consider oblivion something of an extreme case of content overload too

 

[Fafalada]

If current gen is wasteful on space

It's not - load time sensitive data is heavily compressed in vast majority of cases.
The only places where current gen may sometimes "waste" space are streaming audio and video content - because they both have minimal requirements for disc transfer speed - so it's simply a matter of what can be fit on the disc.
Eg. - if you can fit all your video on the disc in highbitrate MPEG2, you're not going to experiment with lower bitrate formats, because there's no reason to.

And if you already have automated tools you don't need to find ways...

There's no automated way to do lossy compression of everything - you'll always be balancing space vs. quality.
And lossless compression gives no guarantess for compression ratio, so you still have to verify results and again, balance things to fit by hand.

I'd take media with 1/2 the size and latency over media with 10x the size ond twice the latency.

I agree about wanting faster speeds first - but isn't this going a bit extreme? - 1/2 the size of current media would be like 2.2GB

 

[NANOTEC]

To take your example, if you have a disc with 10x the capacity and 2x the seek-time, what happens to seek-time if you replicate your data across the disc 10 times more than on the other one?

What happens to your capcacity? It gets used up by repetitive data and defeats the purpose of having more capacity for more content in the first place.

A BD has roughly 3X the capacity of DVD...

Some top flight engineers left Sony and formed Optware.

Um..no.

There's no automated way to do lossy compression of everything - you'll always be balancing space vs. quality.
And lossless compression gives no guarantess for compression ratio, so you still have to verify results and again, balance things to fit by hand.

For an experienced artists, they'll already know where that threshold is. They don't need to sit down for days figuring this stuff out. There are also plenty of automated tools for compressing audio which takes up a big chunk disc space and textures which takes up a lot of space too. Batch conversion and compression for audio and images takes but one mouse click on my workstation.

 

[Bad_Boy]

A BD has roughly 3X the capacity of DVD...

???

 

[DarkRage]

Keeping it simple...

What about delivering a game in 2 DVDs?

Just in case it is needed. Top productions with huge data could be delivered in more than 1 DVD. It wouldn't be such a great deal. Only exception I can think about it can drives some design changes in games like Forza2, where it would impose some constraints on what circuit to play next on a campaign mode... not a big deal.

Blu-Ray has nothing to do with games. It is just about the huge royalties business for films. MS is receiving royalties with both iHD and mainly with VC-1, which can be used by both formats. Not with the hardware.
Optional HD-DVD is just for damaging PS3. You can choose. Do you really want to bet who is going to be the winner and spending your hard earned money in buying films on a doubtul format? Fine, you have the choice.
With PS3 I don't have the choice. Of course I will buy it, but I am having to pay more, and wait more, just for a business which had nothing to do with games, and for a war I don't want to fight into. I would rather prefer having PS3 right now, and 100$ cheaper.

 

[Ty]

For an experienced artists, they'll already know where that threshold is. They don't need to sit down for days figuring this stuff out.

I didn't know artists dealt with compression of their assets.

Batch conversion and compression for audio and images takes but one mouse click on my workstation.

I'm pretty sure this does not exist for games yet. Maybe one day, but not right now. Therefore you are still left with doing it "by hand".

 

[one]

Keeping it simple...

What about delivering a game in 2 DVDs?

Just in case it is needed. Top productions with huge data could be delivered in more than 1 DVD. It wouldn't be such a great deal. Only exception I can think about it can drives some design changes in games like Forza2, where it would impose some constraints on what circuit to play next on a campaign mode... not a big deal.

Blu-Ray has nothing to do with games. It is just about the huge royalties business for films. MS is receiving royalties with both iHD and mainly with VC-1, which can be used by both formats. Not with the hardware.
Optional HD-DVD is just for damaging PS3. You can choose. Do you really want to bet who is going to be the winner and spending your hard earned money in buying films on a doubtul format? Fine, you have the choice.
With PS3 I don't have the choice. Of course I will buy it, but I am having to pay more, and wait more, just for a business which had nothing to do with games, and for a war I don't want to fight into. I would rather prefer having PS3 right now, and 100$ cheaper.

Yeah, let's stick to GD-ROM in DC and mini-DVD in GC...

 

[Inane_Dork]

My opinion on Blu-Ray technology is this: it's pretty much the best optical format I can rationally expect, and its technology is collectively superior to HD-DVD. The problems, IMO, are not with the tech. The tech is fine. It's more than fine. The problems are with a need for a new optical medium, the pricing of the medium and the sheer confusion surrounding the particulars of actual use of the medium.

 

[one]

My opinion on Blu-Ray technology is this: it's pretty much the best optical format I can rationally expect, and its technology is collectively superior to HD-DVD. The problems, IMO, are not with the tech. The tech is fine. It's more than fine. The problems are with a need for a new optical medium, the pricing of the medium and the sheer confusion surrounding the particulars of actual use of the medium.

Do you expect PS3 can have a competitive edge against competitors without Blu-ray?

 

[Inane_Dork]

Do you expect PS3 can have a competitive edge against competitors without Blu-ray?

I don't see how the optical drive of the PS3 is integral to its success as a video game console. It may sell more units as a BR player + PS3 combo, but that doesn't necessarily make the PS3 a stronger platform. There are plenty of areas the PS3 can and will have an edge in not including BR (if BR is indeed even an advantage, which is not exactly a given).

 

[NANOTEC]

I didn't know artists dealt with compression of their assets.

Some do some don't depends on what you're doing and what you're doing it for. Maybe not at your company since your company doesn't believe the tools exists or doesn't have people smart enough to design inhouse tools.

I'm pretty sure this does not exist for games yet.

Speak for your own company.

Maybe one day, but not right now. Therefore you are still left with doing it "by hand".

Maybe one day at your company. Wouldn't it be funny if proprietary tools from my company were stolen for use by someone from your company? Wouldn't it be kinda funny if ILM's proprietary technology were stolen for use by another company?

 

[one]

I don't see how the optical drive of the PS3 is integral to its success as a video game console. It may sell more units as a BR player + PS3 combo, but that doesn't necessarily make the PS3 a stronger platform. There are plenty of areas the PS3 can and will have an edge in not including BR (if BR is indeed even an advantage, which is not exactly a given).

Really? AFAIK according to some people on this forum a layperson can't appreciate those other areas as other parts such as CPU/GPU/etc in PS3 are roughly the same as those of Xbox 360. Since it's not a sports game, it's perfectly legitimate to bring in whatever weapon they find useful to kill off others.

Aside from the appeal to consumers, I think BD is well accepted by publishers who are sensitive to piracy.

 

[Ty]

Some do some don't depends on what you're doing and what you're doing it for.

Ok, I can buy this.

Maybe not at your company since your company doesn't believe the tools exists or doesn't have people smart enough to design inhouse tools.

Are you trying to get banned again PC-Engine? Seriously, your immaturity shows in every other post of yours.

Speak for your own company.

Instead of being a wise-ass, why not simply give me the name of this tool?

Maybe one day at your company. Wouldn't it be funny if proprietary tools from my company were stolen for use by someone from your company?

Funny? No, that would be sad and unlikely (my company is pretty strict about software piracy).

Wouldn't it be kinda funny if ILM's proprietary technology were stolen for use by another company?

You mean your company stole this tool from ILM?

 

[NANOTEC]

Instead of being a wise-ass, why not simply give me the name of this tool?
Funny? No, that would be sad and unlikely (my company is pretty strict about software piracy).You mean your company stole this tool from ILM?

You don't seem to get it...what I'm saying is that some companies develop proprietary inhouse tools..and no there's no name for it..why would it need a name? Hey maybe we should design a logo for it too eh?

Maybe this is news to you but for those companies that design their own inhouse tools, it's business as usual. ILM is just an example.

 

[Lycan]

"What MS is saying to the world is HD-DVD discs are unnescessary for GAMES"

With all the respect I owe you Scooby, sticking with DVD's in the case of Microsoft has nothing to do with the reason you seem to suggest. They actually did this because :
1) They wanted not to get costs skyrocket as to avoid another Xbox financial distress.
2) They couldn't have included for they chose to hit the market prematurely... :smile:

 

[Titanio]

What happens to your capcacity? It gets used up by repetitive data and defeats the purpose of having more capacity for more content in the first place.

It doesn't defeat the purpose if you're using it to an advantage elsewhere. If you need a certain seek capability, and your data fits within a certain limit, replicating it across the disk to try and achieve that seek capability is as valid a use of that capacity as anything else.

A BD has roughly 3X the capacity of DVD...

To concretise things, 360 discs have a capacity of 7.5GB (I think?), BD has a capacity up to 50GB, which would be a 6-7x difference.

 

[NANOTEC]

It doesn't defeat the purpose if you're using it to an advantage elsewhere. If you need a certain seek capability, and your data fits within a certain limit, replicating it across the disk to try and achieve that seek capability is as good a use as that capacity of anything else.

To concretise things, 360 discs have a capacity of 7.5GB (I think?), BD has a capacity up to 50GB, which would be a 6-7x difference.

It's nice to dream about single disc 50GB BDs..ok now back to reality-->25GB ~ 3 DVDs.

 

[Titanio]

It's nice to dream about single disc 50GB BDs..ok now back to reality-->25GB ~ 3 DVDs.

In reality, single-disc 50GB BDs will be available for some time before PS3 launches.

 

[NANOTEC]

Not for games..

again back to reality

i'm surprised you're still continuing to argue this iffy point

 

[Titanio]

Not for games..

Obviously they won't be available for games before PS3 launches, no. But how do you know they won't be available by that time, for games? I'm not saying they'd be as available, initially, but either way they'll be very available for the bulk of PS3's life.

Not for games..

again back to reality

i'm surprised you're still continuing to argue this iffy point

What's so iffy about it? I was using ERP's numbers, which doubtless related to some theoretical disc used purely for example, anyway. The claim made was that streaming capacity was more important than storage capacity anyway, but my point is that they both can be linked, or so it is suggested. I didn't get a reply to that, subsequently, so I'll use Braben's comments as a guide, in the absence of disagreement.