Jump to content

PS3


FA sear
 Share

Recommended Posts

I thought I saw an article a couple years ago that stated the PS3's blueray was only for movies, and that the games would still be on regular DVDs. I am concerned about this because if blueray takes over as a format, then could it not be possible that this transition could affect the gaming industry too? Would that not make 360s obsolete?

I know that there are many of you on this forum that know much more about gaming than I do, so I am just wondering what your thoughts are, or if you already have information on this subject that you could shed some more light on.

Edited by FA sear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obsolete in that they use archaic technology, yeah, but no, it wouldn't make 360s obsolete in the sense that nobody makes games on it anymore.

Gamecube used minidiscs, n64 used cartridges, dreamcast used something proprietary, ps2 and xbox, I think, had different types of DVDs they could use...

Publishers will make games on whatever format each platform uses. I wouldn't expect the xbox3 to use DVD, though, if Bluray wins the way it's looking like it will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only real issue is if the console is also used to watch movies. Then compatibility with whatever they have at Blockbuster or Netflix becomes an issue. I presume making a plug-in Blu-Ray drive for old 360's (and simply shipping new ones with the B-R built in) would be a fairly straightforward exercise, providing it's compatible with existing 360 games.

Respectfully

krise madsen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bizarre Creations was asked why the last PGR didn't allow for day and night versions of the maps. They stated DVD9 did not have room for the textures. Rockstar also stated they had to trim GTAIV in order to fit the game on DVD9. It isn't as simple as changing discs because now the publisher has to be willing to spring for the money for the 2nd or 3rd disc and the more expensive multi-disc case. The parent console maker has to be willing to allow the extra disk. For consoles with no HDD, you will now have to repeat certain items on the second disc such as textures and audio since the resident memory only has so much room.We are alreay seeing the situations where games aren't trimming 4 Gigs but rather a few hundred Megs up to a Gig or so. And by that I mean multiplatform games because obviously 30GB PS3 games aren't trimming anything.

Mark Rein stated that UT3 on the 360 may have to be cut down due to DVD9 size limitations. The only thing stopping the situation from being more apparent is multiplatform development and the attempts by studios to make all versions equal. Apparently Epic isn't a company that needs to do the same-same dance.

LA Noire is a PS3 exclusive. The Dev Team spoke about the size alone being prohibitive to the 360. As the size and complexity of titles increase you will see more and more of this sort of thing. The second PS3 exclusive from Rockstar which some believe to be GTA5 is specifically utilizing Bluray because of Rockstar's desire to build a massive world. Some games on the PS3 in development have moved well beyond the 30GB mark. And they use uncompressed audio. Uncharted alone used 23GB. Mass Effect was less than 7 GB. How big would the game have been had you actually been able to visit more than a few worlds, had the worlds you could visit not all looked like butt ugly low res Nevada landscapes, and had the dialogue system actually work as originally claimed.

The next consoles will be out too soon to use strictly digital downloads. Technology will be too immature for that. Then there is the entire issue about people wanting to physically own certain items. The next consoles will have to possess some degree of backwards compatibility and they will need to play the next gen movies on a physical medium. MS may hedge their bets on video downloads but right now the LIVE HD versions are not even close to true HD. MS will have to either license Bluray or give up that feature and part of the claim. They are in a hard place and they know it. But Peter Moore stated if Bluray won MS would support it.

For those that want to buy movies you will need a physical medium for quite a few more years. Otherwise you can forget about items like the 5 disc Bladerunner set on download. Not feasible to get that in the next 5-7 years.

Edited by Hatchetforce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow that's amazing.

sometimes I just wish dev-maker would concentrate on the quality vs quantity of features their jamming into the game. I guess their afraid they may get criticize for having the same textured wall of one building to the next vs having the player concentrate on the game itself.

stucco walls are stucco walls.

birch wood is birch wood

water is water

COD4 texturing is kewl but I'm after the tons spawning enemy AIs. Oooohhh look at that trail smoke of the RPG...BOOM! I'm dead. Ok that's kewl after a few rounds but...c'mon already.

COD4 rock this time IW. :thumbsup:

I was wondering how Rockstar is managing to jam all of NY in one disc <_< I can only imagine if they would release something to San Andreas scale. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are in a hard place and they know it. But Peter Moore stated if Bluray won MS would support it.

I saw news as early as about 6 months ago from MS that they had accepted that BlueRay was beating HDDVD and they where looking at an BlueRay version in the same case as the external HDDVD available today. But that still won't save them as games for the 360 must be playable without the external drive or they won't sell very much. Same problem with them releasing a version without any HD at all, which was even more stupid as that limits 360 games to work without HD swap of any kind. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bizarre Creations was asked why the last PGR didn't allow for day and night versions of the maps. They stated DVD9 did not have room for the textures. Rockstar also stated they had to trim GTAIV in order to fit the game on DVD9. It isn't as simple as changing discs because now the publisher has to be willing to spring for the money for the 2nd or 3rd disc and the more expensive multi-disc case. The parent console maker has to be willing to allow the extra disk. For consoles with no HDD, you will now have to repeat certain items on the second disc such as textures and audio since the resident memory only has so much room.We are alreay seeing the situations where games aren't trimming 4 Gigs but rather a few hundred Megs up to a Gig or so. And by that I mean multiplatform games because obviously 30GB PS3 games aren't trimming anything.

Mark Rein stated that UT3 on the 360 may have to be cut down due to DVD9 size limitations. The only thing stopping the situation from being more apparent is multiplatform development and the attempts by studios to make all versions equal. Apparently Epic isn't a company that needs to do the same-same dance.

LA Noire is a PS3 exclusive. The Dev Team spoke about the size alone being prohibitive to the 360. As the size and complexity of titles increase you will see more and more of this sort of thing. The second PS3 exclusive from Rockstar which some believe to be GTA5 is specifically utilizing Bluray because of Rockstar's desire to build a massive world. Some games on the PS3 in development have moved well beyond the 30GB mark. And they use uncompressed audio. Uncharted alone used 23GB. Mass Effect was less than 7 GB. How big would the game have been had you actually been able to visit more than a few worlds, had the worlds you could visit not all looked like butt ugly low res Nevada landscapes, and had the dialogue system actually work as originally claimed.

The next consoles will be out too soon to use strictly digital downloads. Technology will be too immature for that. Then there is the entire issue about people wanting to physically own certain items. The next consoles will have to possess some degree of backwards compatibility and they will need to play the next gen movies on a physical medium. MS may hedge their bets on video downloads but right now the LIVE HD versions are not even close to true HD. MS will have to either license Bluray or give up that feature and part of the claim. They are in a hard place and they know it. But Peter Moore stated if Bluray won MS would support it.

For those that want to buy movies you will need a physical medium for quite a few more years. Otherwise you can forget about items like the 5 disc Bladerunner set on download. Not feasible to get that in the next 5-7 years.

That really gives me some info to think about. I am glad now that I did not go out an buy that HD DVD player, as this is the first I have heard that MS would possibly support Blueray (I know, I do not keep up with this stuff too much). I think I will take a sit back and wait even longer stance and see what happens. I am not pressed in regard to buying the next gen console, so it won't hurt me to wait a bit longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about this issue, the more I think that MS should just bite the bullet and start offering Blueray drives with all of their new 360s. The LEAST that MS should have offered is a standard HD drive for both gaming and movies.

The way it looks right now, the 360 is severely handicapped by the inferior medium MS has chosen. What a shame, because as far as processing power goes, it appears that the 360 CAN go head to head with the PS3. What a shame.

Edited by FA sear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily like Hilary Goldstein but if you want to hear something brutally honest and factual about the Microsoft postion listen to the IGN podcast here:

http://www.n4g.com/ClickOut.aspx?ObjID=108049

It says what I have been sounding since last year. Jump forward to the 1 hour and 4 minute mark and listen to what they say about the tough position MS is in. It is ugly for MS, really ugly. One thing they do get wrong is that a PSN ID functions across all PS3 titles just like a Live gamertag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats about the one thing i agree with. MS should have used a HD on all the x360's. The Disc space thing is a give or take kind of thing. Sure it would be nice, but is it needed to still have great games NO. Will it stop amazing games from being made NO. Could it hold back some stuff back? Sure, but thats still really yet to be seen and most likely only going to be a problem towards the end of the life of the system. As for some of the disc space stuff thats been said aint the full truth. bizarrecreations proved it false. As for UT3 well that one i doublt also sure it could be true, but since they where maken it first for the PC. I believe they would of done a single DVD9 even if the disc space thing wasn't even a issue to begin with for the PC. Only trouble i see here is the x360 not haven a HD standered again if there was anything to complain about and even still for this case its not. As for the GTA5 type games since there really aint that many are going to be the ones that disc space really could be used. Did it hold anything back im not sure! Yet for now for the most common made games, beyond games like RPGS and GTA type games Disc space really aint a issue. The Sony PR BS is blowing out the disc space with buffers zones for faster reading times and uncompressed data to get to the overly large sizes. Is all the extra space maken games look better than whats on the x360 the simple answer is NO. The x360 is keeping up and still doing better for the most part.

The only trouble the x360 really has this Gen is the Hard Drive. As for the Disc space sure it can be a problem, but only for a small amount of games and even still most can use more than one disc if need be. All in all besides the HD problem expect to see the x360 and PC games staying mostly about the same. The PC games aint really going to get much larger just becuase the PS3 can. Well not until HD DVD or Blurays are standered there also and by that time this Gen is going to be over anyways. So if you realy want to worry about Disc space watch the PC games. Once they start going over a DVD9 on a normal base than its time to worry not before hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever a developer says something less than positive about a title and platform on which they are working - like the case with PGR - and then later attempts to recant said statement I never buy the second statement at all. It's called damage control. And as regards PGR look at what made it onto the disk. Or rather didn't.

And they are not the only devs to remark on DVD9 issues. For all of the hubub lately about GTAIV development and the PS3 Rockstar also commented that they were having difficulty adapting GTAIV due to limited space on DVD9. It ceased to be an issue when they trimmed the game. Platforms should free developers talents not cripple them. This is one of the reasons they were happy to make 2 exclusive titles for the PS3 as they can finally create the huge streamed environment not possible without both Bluray and an HDD.

Games are growing. That is an undeniable fact. I like Mass Effect. But it is nothing like they claimed it would be. The exploration is very limited and the dialog tree actually isn't an all encompassing free flow situation that was predicted. Had they made the game they first led us to believe would be possible then the 6.45 GB they used would have stretched far beyond the 8.5GB available on DVD9. Add to this the fact that there are other things a high capacity disk brings to the table. Items like uncompressed audio that Bluray allows.

Stating that DVD9 games won't be great is true. I am looking forward to several 360 titles. But that statement is only valid in light of current games and not by comparison. And we know how this industry is built on comparison. No game gets considered alone. Look at the advances that have been made in the past 5 years. As soon as those games appear that demonstrate even more clearly than now why DVD9 lacks then suddenly those great games on DVD9 seem...less great. Nothing done on any other platform equals the facial animations and cutscenes witnessed in Heavenly Sword. Many people recognize this while some choose to ignre it as a matter of convenience.

Not to sound too much like a fanboy but the fact is the developers are just now getting their heads around the PS3, parallel processing, SPU bound hardware physics, and distributed AI. As this happens the game experience will grow exponentially. It is already happening. If people that criticize certain titles actually took the time to play them and see what was offered they might walk away a more than a little amazed. Uncharted is a beautiful example of what added disk capacity can add and what cannot be achieved without it. And now devs discuss going beyond single layer Bluray. I look at the AI in Uncharted and I am amazed. I own Bioshock and personally I think little of it compared to what the developers did with Uncharted. The game felt more like playing against human opponents and less like machine generated AI. And that is a cornerstone of the immersion process.

Given proper credit PS3 games are already visually moving beyond what the 360 is producing. As I stated above lighting in Uncharted is the new standard. Ratchet and Clank anyone? Eye popping visuals. No, a far younger machine is proving to be the bane of Microsoft's existence and it is already doing it in the visual department. The 360 has gotten by so far by using developer familiarity with the platform and the fact that developers are also less familiar with the tools and techniques needed to utilize a very different platform. With a smaller install base by and large the PS3 received poor attention in the 3rd party dev department. This is easily seen in multiplatform titles where the PS3 has either received a port or a hurried version at best. With sales growing like they are - and the PS3 actually outsold the 360 in 2007 - this slight edge won't last. It won't hold past the middle of 2008 on multiplatform titles. Several multiplatform games already look better on the PS3. This site is well familar with GRAW2 and owning both versions it was easy to see the lighting and physics in the PS3 version shine.

The situation is rapidly reversing itself and actually falling in line with predictions made by analysts before the launch. No amount of attacks by EGM will make a difference now. Sony stumbled hard out of the gate. I shook my head and laughed at them falling on their ass. They got a lot of bloody noses. But they picked themselves up, dusted themselves off and helped devs focus on the platform while the marketing department got it into high gear.

Everyone has an opinion and none are necessarily invalid. But if we stick our finger up in the air and look at what developers and more particularly publishers are beginning to say it is easy to see which way this dog fight is going.

Edited by Hatchetforce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what your saying Hatchetforce and to a point i agree. But im not blinded by the Sony PR BS. I know in due time it will become a problem, but with only 3 to 4 more years left this Gen and even the PC world aint going beyond DVD9 yet. I know the x360 will put out games just as good as the PC will for the rest of this Gen. Well at least what the graphics card can handle. So if the only company (Sony) going beyond DVD9 im not to worried. The x360 will still be with what is coming out on the PC world in game sizes for the most part. Besides its not like the devs of game companys really want to spend more time and money maken games larger than DVD9 when its already taken to much time and money to make a DVD9 size game. It just aint cost worthy for most the companys to add more and spend more time doing it when they aint maken more money on it. There are some out there wanting more and needing more, but yet again most of these games can still be brought out on more than one DVD9 if need be so whats the problem there? Also must the devs saying they need more space at this moment are employed by Sony. Not all but must, and even still the BS PR are over stating facts. Its sloppy design where they dont need to be neat, full of Buffer zones and unconpressed files just to say we need Bluray. When you clean it up take out the buffer zones and compress the files. It just about fits on a DVD9 fine. Again not all, but more than your willing to ammit im sure.

Again i know by the end of this Gen it may be a full time problem, but until the PC world sees a need to go larger. I see most of this as Sony PR maken you try to buy there system and nothing more! Plus if you really think about it 1 out of 4 game systems (Wii, x360, PC and PS3) if the PS3 is the only one usen the extra space. Do you really believe the other 3 are going to stop getting games? Do you think all the game companys want to use the extra space just to be on one system? PC might pick afew up, but at a cost $ to make more than one DVD's. I still dont think the PC world is ready for the game sizes the Sony PR are tring to pull off ether. What are they saying around 15 to 30+ gigs, plus theres talk of even more for just one game? How many DVDs that going to take for the PC guys? Are you as a PC gamer going to want to install most of that on your HardDrive? I highly doubt it! I am not saying the extra space is bad by any means. Its great and a good step forward. It just aint needed all that much this Gen when you factor everything in! So like i said before, for me i aint worried about game size until i see it becomen common in the PC world and not just Sony's!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you know what I am saying. After all you imply is that I am blinded by Sony PR so with that tact you are off the mark of what I am pointing out. No, unlike some on this board I have experienced first hand all three major consoles. Not at a kiosk, not at a 'friend's' house. Here in my home. I have also experienced, or better yet I should say I have been subjected to Microsoft's hideous design and even worse customer service. Thrice fold. To this day I sit with a $129 repair bill and two months of Live never covered by MS despite promises. Not much of a bargain when you consider how much more the 360 costs than the PS3. Yeah, that's right. If I say I bought my console for 4 years it really doesn't begin to show it's full abilities without Live or PSN. So take $44 a year for Live (Amazon.com price) and add that to the current $349 price for a 360. Suddenly $525 seems a little to much for a console with no HD player, no built in Wifi, no internet browser, no swappable HDD to a size of your choice etc etc etc ad nauseum. The issues with Live are even more disturbing considering what happened over the holidays. And it keeps popping up. Tonight everyone was getting kicked off HALO, games were lagging out, and the level load times were so ridiculous half the team quit before spawning.

The PC can drive beyond DVD9 because they know they have a HDD to depend upon. They can still rely on some degree of compression. Also placing two disks in abox for PC and using the second one just for the install isn't the same issue as doing it for the 360 which can't be guaranteed to have a hard drive. Want to see how not having one in a 360 works? Ask the people with a 360 Core that bought Burnout Paradise. No online MP for them. It is only going to worsen this year. It won't be 3-4 more years.

Devs welcome the chance to be able to move beyond the restrictions of DVD9. Look at any one of them that have had the chance to do this and they have been ecstatic. It eases a great many issues for them when disk space is no longer an issue. It is more cost effective for companies not to spend time trying to work compression or trying to decide what they have to cut or looking at the design phase knowing they have a limited amount of space with which to work.

Saying that the devs that state they love the extra space Bluray offers only do so because they work for Sony and that the fact of their employment somehow invalidates the truth of what they are saying isn't a decent criticism. If it were I could turn that same logic around and say that any dev working for MS is lying when they say they don't need more space. Except the truth is some of the devs that are doing work for MS are saying it would be easier with more space. Your comment that devs are using the extra space to be sloppy is also just a baseless attack. I think the guys from Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerrilla, Rockstar , and a host of other people not bound by the need to make the PS3 version identical to the 360 version would heavily disagree and probably find your comment insulting.

Where are your facts that say most devs wanting more space are employed by Sony and this is the reason they make such claims? With the way the complexity of games is growing I can't believe you made that comment with a straight face. Did you stop to listen to how it sounds? The one's that are not making the comments are too worried about their jobs or else figure it isn't their place. But it is on the far side of Far Side to think they wouldn't like and couldn't utilize more space.

The Bluray drive has long load times when copying info to the HDD. But these issues aren't there during standard level loading in games. Doing an install isn't required. I run UT3 and I didn't do the install and my load times are great. You don't have to do the install. Even if you do it is a 1 time deal. How can it be bad if load times mean that much to you? It beats the 360 load times so it still gives you an option MS can't. So again, where is the downside? It is amazing people want to attack an option MS can't give you. If anything the 360 should get the boot to the head for not even offering that option. A person's logic is skewed if they are attacking Sony for offering an option no one else does. People really need to listen to that podcast. Those guys are dead on about a great many things including the movie downloads as well.

When you have games moving over 2OGB, it isn't sloppiness and buffer zones. Buffer zones were used in one of the launch titles but even there the actual data was over 11GB. That isn't sloppiness.

It may not become common in the PC world as doubtless many of the games that avail themselves of the capacity of Bluray won't see a PC publication. MGS4 is predicted to be over 40GB. Killzone 2 will no doubt move to dual layer since one level uses over 2GB. And already Naughty Dog is working on the Uncharted sequel and at GDC we will likely see the first actual play of Resistance 2. The 8 player coop has already been gamed by the guys from Game Informer and the 60 Player MP has very solid net code. And those are jyst a few of the titles we know more than a bit about. Titles like Heavy Rain and some very revolutionary facial software will certainly need the resources.

With new programming techniques coming out that do require space it will be a must. I remember the situation when the first games came out that required Hardware acceleration for 3D rendering. I heard a lot of people moaning saying they wouldn't get a 3D card. They said they would wait. How long do you think they held out?They didn't hold out 3-4 years for the next gen. No, not even close. As soon as GLQuake added support for Hardware in their engine it was over and it ended very very quickly.

@Sup. I know what you are saying but it isn't a requirement. See my remarks above.

Edited by Hatchetforce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said Bluray was bad. And i stand by the messy coding and buffer zones saying, sorry if you disagree! Also for implying being blinded by Sony PR well not really what i was aiming for towards you, but maybe if i did in a since thats becuase i see you over on N4G being heavy on the fanboy from time to time so it slipped out that way. Sorry again for that one its just passed veiws i may have seen from you there if thats what it was at all. And all i ment about disc space, is if only one company is usen it theres no worries for the x360 or the PC or even the Wii for that matter when it comes to game size. Sure the PC can install, but not at what Sony is tring to push out even if you use one disc to stream aint happen! Plus if you want to go there the x360 can use multiable DVDs too just cut up into sections like its always been in the pass! Bluray is nice and is welcome, but when it comes to what games come out on other systems besides PS3. Size doesn't really matter when its mustly only one usen it. If you ask me and this is just me here. The only system in trouble is the PS3 at this point when it comes to size. Its ether the dev go exclusive and go wild or stay within the limits of every other system out there including PC and they stay about 1 DVD like it or not. The x360 will be fine along the same lines as whats coming out for the PC since the PC aint usen that large of space ether. Maybe except a small few like RPGs and afew others. Its not common there and it aint changing anytime soon!

One last time sorry if it looked like any kind of insult to you. Becuase it really wasn't. Its just the disc space thing on the other systems aint in any real trouble no matter how you want to spin it. It just gets old when you only hear one group saying it and the rest aint and doing just fine on 1 DVD! Is more space nice, Yes i agree 100%! Yet until PC takes comfort in going larger i see no issue with game size sorry! Sad part is im willing to bet, that in 3 to 4 years when the next gen starts. The PC world still aint going to be upgraded and ready for that size of games. Sorry just dont see it happening. It toke many many years before even DVD drives bacame standered on must PC's. So in the future when we get a PC port we may be saying how they cut corners by only usen 2 or 3 DVD's instead of 10 or what ever the disc size limit is than! Next gen is maybe the first time all consoles will be ahead of must PC's in tech for must of that gen if not all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no spinning needed. Facts, as my best friend says, are stubborn things.

I like parts of Mass Effect. I say parts because that Mako is ridiculous. I do not know who from Bioware came up with that but it is a joke. But look at the worlds you get to explore. Outside of Ilos and the Citadel every world is either ice and snow or it looks like the Nevada desert. Why? You cannot say the game wouldn't have been better served by some decent textures and a passable lighting engine. And it gets worse. In order to be able to explore the unknown in space as was discussed by Casey Hudson during E3 and such, you have to be able, well, explore. But what do we really get? As it is you can explore one small are a of each world barely a kiometer or two square. And these are only the worlds you get to land on. Most solar systems, and there aren't really that many in ME, allow the player to land on one world. You get to read about the rest of the planets though. Does that qualify as a consolation? Hardly.

Now look at the lush environments in a game like Uncharted. Sorry but that fact alone shows what a little disk space can do. Did it matter to me? Absolutely. I have been following Mass Effect since it's announcement. As an avid sci-fi reader I was hoping for something extraordinary. I can live with the texture pop ins, the slow often sub 30 frame rate, the ridiculous elevator covered loading times (which could have been solved by uncompressed levels or a HDD) but I can't tolerate the lack of true exploration, actual variances in dialogue outcomes, and really subpar AI. All of these could have been resolved with one word. More.

Don't think disc space will make a difference. Your opinion. Have fun with it. But when large games start hitting the PS3 and the 360 gets a severely trimmed version it will make a difference. In order to reach what will be the larger install base, making the same version of multiplatform games won't last. Well there's always DLC on Live.

Just to be clear I like parts of Mass Effect, but here is a good look at the game - and a damn funny look as well - if only because the guys is so right.

http://www.gamealmighty.com/nc/video-view/...t_Video_Review/

In order to build the game that Mass Effect was planned to be rather than the game we recieved they needed at least double the disk space they had. What the guy points out in here isn't made up or selective. It is the norm for the entire game.

Edited by Hatchetforce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL you are worth a good laugh! And you still only speak half the truth and even fail to read what i wrote in full. Only hear what you want to hear out of it i guess. This is the last time i repley back. One more time with mustly the parts i hope you read this time. Yes Bluray is great and all of its disc space, but even with all the great things you can do with it. The other systems are going to do just fine without it. If you want to admit it or not. Could they be better with it sure, i never disagreed with you there once in any of my threads if you read them! Sure it would do wonders for some games and i wish it did have bigger disc space. Yet for other reason as said before the other systems will finsh this gen just fine without it even if they could of been better. Oh you may be right somewhere down the road about the larger install base, but for right now that still goes to the PC, Wii and x360. The PS3 is still yet to get there by a long way in last! Yet im still willing to bet it will get up there its just a matter of how long before it matters. Anyways im done with this and this whole DOOMs day crap. Man this stuff is for the trolls!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is all a very good lesson about the problems of early adopters (even though the xbox has been out for 2 and a half years).

I remember on fathers day one year the ps2 and xbox had both dropped in price to $199 and my wife wanted to spend her hard earned money she earned taking care of a families 5 crazy kids on one of the consoles for me for fathers day. She asked me which one I would rather have and I imediately said the ps2. Xbox was still somewhat new to the scene and I really hadn't done my homework like I should have done. Some of the things I learned later that made me somewhat regret my decision were the following:

1. Controller ports: The ps2 only had two controller ports whereas the xbox had 4 right out of the box. This was before online gaming for the consoles were mainstream so when I played the James bond games and timesplitters games with friends we had to get the controller adapter so everyone could play ($40).

2. Ethernet port: When more and more games started to include online play the xbox really had the advantage in that it already had an ethernet port. I had to buy yet another adapter ($40) to connect my ps2 to the internet.

3. Hard Drive: A lot of people laughed at the xbox when they included a 8 gig hard drive in their console saying it would never be used. Well, certain games were released that needed the HD space so there were a few games that were released on the xbox that never made it to the ps2 because of the space. Socom did support extra map content eventually but you had to go out and buy the sony HDD ($100). I also remember some of my favorite games like timesplitters future perfect being better on the xbox in that you were able to have more players online and they offered larger and better patches on the xbox version because of the hard drive. GR2 for xbox had coop and other features and the ps2 version did not.

I think now the opposite might be happening with MS and Sony. MS hit the market first with less features and sony spent a little more time making sure they had components that would be up to date with the times for the next several years.

I see what dead preacher is saying though. More disk space is nice, but will it A) hurt the xbox at all? No one really knows or has valid proof at the moment. Just speculation. And B) will we ever see the majority of the games on the market utilize this large amount of disk space during the lifespan of these two consoles? Again really no way of knowing. Kind of a wait and see sort of deal.

I ask myself though this question, will developers even try to use as much space as the blu ray disk has to offer? It seems to me everything is done on a tight money and timeline budget. I think it will really boil down to developers looking at the cost/benefit aspects of trying to create material to fill up that space.

Like Hatchet said, Sony has really stumbled with this release but I think they really felt the pressure of trying to release a console a whole year after the competitor but I think the year helped them. HDMI right out of the gate is nice on the ps3. MS did learn it's lesson and now includes it on theirs. I know several people who buy the ps3 solely for the blu ray player. I know a lot of people on the xbox side said they were thankful that MS didn't force an HD format down their throats, but I think people are starting to realize how practical it was to actually include the blu ray player. Everything seems to be going HD and those with the ps3 are well ahead of the game.

As far as games go, the 360 still seems to be the mass producer and the one that games cater to the most but I think that the ps3 is right there behind them. I'd really like to play uncharted and I think that in 2008 you will see more and more ps3 exclusives that will start to pull Sonys popularity back up.

I'll state it again though, only time will tell. This is why I'm waiting until next holiday season to make a final decision on the ps3 although I feel right now I will most likely purchase it to have a blue ray movie player.

Interesting comments though from everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the situation is somewhat reversed. But not completely. The reason being that the name Playstation is the heaviest hitting brand in the console industry. Microsoft didn't have that going for them when the Xbox premiered. Their original plan was to lose money on everything related to the first Xbox. They stated this going in to the fight. And they did lose on it. And when they were through they shafted customers and dropped support for that box cold. Their original comments about continued support with games and the like ala PS2 never happened.

Just as much as Sony took their time, so Microsoft rushed and pushed a console out the door that gave them the lead and some wonderful sales. But it wasn't built to last. The flaw that a former member of the design team states will eventually lead to every 360 failing forced MS into a billion dollar warranty before they wound up with Federal Trade Commission Intervention. Right now the vast majority of 360s on the market are the first generation design. The death rate hasn't slowed. Two on my cul de sac died in the past 5 days. Even the new Falcon chipsets are showing a higher than normal drop. There is a good look at the mistakes and issues here: http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/digital...ives/129866.asp The guy is legitimate and in a later article showed his award from MS presented to designers.

The console also was not engineered for longevity in the application department. And by application I mean being able to apply it to future technology and vice versa. What I am saying is the features in the 360 were not built with continual innovation for the life of the console in mind. Trying to engineer new ways to squeeze performance out of a console is not the same as finding ways to expand on latent capabilities designed into the console from the beginning. In a very large way the 360 is throttling back development in the industry rather than promoting it. The Wii of course is doing the same thing but in a different manner by usurping the focus of dev teams.

Look what a tight lead publishers and even the upper hierarchy of a dev team keep on their people. They just don't talk openly about issues. By the time a complaint reaches the public ears it is usually something that has been boiling down deep for a while. That's why the disc size issues matter. By the time people in the public hear about it is like an iceberg with the biggest part unseen.

The HDD is an issue. Lack of an HDD for streaming was a horrendous mistake. Microsoft's use of proprietary HDDs not only induced uneeded cost - that $120GB HDD has a ridiculous price tag - it also limits choice and player freedom. Sony was smart and used an off the shelf drive that a player is free to swap out with an SATA laptop drive of any size. The HDD matters. My first 360 drive filled up quickly. I found myself having to delete all but one demo in order to make space for a movie download. It was a large download for the HD version which isn't true HD in the first place. HDD size is an issue in that regard. By E3 this year, Sony will announce their movie and music download plans and expand on IPTV as well. With the movie and music studios they outright own they are already in a good position before involving other companies. The HDD will get usage.

Regarding Bluray disk space, as long as developers insist on making identical or as close to identical as possible versions of the same title it won't matter. Then it becomes a case of the 360 choking back development on a title that could have provided a much broader experience. The review for Mass Effect I linkled above was funny in some ways. Regrettable in others. If you listen to what he says about exploring the alien worlds the laughter goes away. The handful of worlds you get to explore are barren. Except the first map and Ilos there is no flora or fauna. No plant life. Animal life? No. Two planets do have a large creature that pops out of the ground in 1 engagement each but that is all. Nothing. As I stated, Nevada without Vegas. And all done in low res textures. Now add hi res textures, a vast expanse to explore, make just half of the worlds filled with alien life - to include AI routines, beef it up. Look at the experience the player could have enjoyed and look at the the disc size needed to allow exploration of more than 2 kilometers of desolate wasteland on more than 1 planet per solar system, and give the player 40 solar systems or so. That would be an experience. There is a reason people talked about Mass Effect as Game of the Year and then when it actually launched all of that talk fell by the wayside. As I said I like parts of it but it could have been a landmark.

If you get the chance to play Uncharted jump on it. I haven't played another game where you can fool the AI - not the way you glitch game AI - but in the same manner you fool people. The gunplay is the best I have experienced and you can replay a situation and really have a blast changing tactics and watching the AI do the things a person would do. But of all the titles I gamed last year Heavenly Sword was the most cinematic and deserving of a movie translation. The moment when Nariko chooses to draw the sword of a god and in doing so damn herself is one of those great moments in game making. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlj9y1do4U Poor quality video but the only one out there. And yes the game is more than 7 hours. That was one of the best attack campaigns in anti-game marketing as regards trying sway the public on the length of that game. I am a big HALO fan. If you know some of my past posts on this board it is obvious. I was running it last night. But it took longer to beat Heavenly Sword than it did HALO 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not near as clear cut as that. Mass effect is the product of a disorganized art team more than it is disk space. Uncharted looks amazing, yes, and some of it's techniques could only work on a ps3 -- at the same time, the ps3's hard texture memory limitations heavily impacted the look of the game.

The install is necessary on some games. Devil May Cry 4, for example, competently streams the game on the 360's disc drive. Bluray, however, is far too slow, and as such an install is necessary.

Is it a bad thing if your disc speed is so slow that certain games can't be streamed, and require a 20 minute installation? Very.

Would an optional (much faster) install be nice on the 360? Of course, but microsoft decided to cheap out on the hard drive.

Does the ps3 have more graphical rendering power? Yes.

Do the hard limits on video ram result in harsh texture size limitations on the ps3, resulting in much lower res images than the 360? Yeah, they do.

Honestly, the only way we're going to get a good game console is if we find some way to weld them together. For every strength each console has, it has an inept and amateur weakness. You can say all you want about bluray disk space, but when the final game comes out those giant 3mb textures would chug the system to a crawl, so the space can't actually be used for art.

And while the 360 can push more video memory, easily, it's overall lower rendering power is a limitation.

The ps3's cell processor is amazing, and allows for a lot of specialized calculations and incredible speeds...

However, with only one main core, the versatility of it is nothing, and in most cases it's actually inferior to the 360's very workable three cores.

HF, deadpreacher, if you want to argue that one console is better, tunnel vision googling and research will find plenty of facts to make your points. However, if you look at the big picture, they're both amateurish and inept in their own isolated ways.

And uncharted is the result of an incredible art team, not a magic supercomputer. It's an insult to their staff to claim that the ps3 made that game as beautiful as it is. It simply didn't. They used some ps3 specific techniques, sure, but they would have made just as incredible looking of a game on the 360. Good artists make good art, not good consoles.

To end this with a bit more brevity, a solution to the ps3 devil may cry installation, courtesy of Penny Arcade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the PS3's graphics chip alone and allocated memory it does suffer. Devs are beating this issue though. The rendering process is being assisted in new ways by the Cell. This has been shown, proven, and well documented by Guerrilla in a series of technical papers that are finding their way to other PS3 devs. Guerrilla is heavily assisted by Sony for other reasons than the fact they own them and Killzone 2 is a high vis title. Guerrilla is not just building a game but also breaking ground on techniques for other developers. Seb Downey has spoken about this before.

Stating the Cell is a single core is an elementary simplification and hardly justifying of the reality of the architecture. The fact is the live Killzone 2 demo last year at E3 was 2 GB level. That was what I said. Who said anything about 3GB textures? You did. If you want to jump into the discussion at least quote people correctly instead of making implications or inventions that are not there.

I don't believe Dead Preacher or I Googled anything. We mention specifics but out discussions are more broad based. You are missing that. And it isn't disorganized art responsible for Mass Effect's issues. Game it and it becomes evident the issue is way beyond that. It is obvious art was driven by system limitations. Not the other way around. Look at the art for the game and then what actually went into the game. I don't think the game ever gets over 30 fps and many times drops quite below that. Texture pop ins are rampant. So in this case it is apparent the system, or at least Bioware's ability to program the game engine for the system drove the artwork. Not the other way around. As it stands in it's current form the system/engine wouldn't handle higher res textures or larger maps. Or a host of other requirements who's absence leaves the game feeling bare in far too many areas.

It is hard to say the PS3 memory limits result in lower res images when images have looked better on the PS3 in several cases and now more often as the platform receives the sort of focus formerly reserved for 1st party PS3 titles or 360 titles which multiplatform devs gave priority.

To state Uncharted's great gameplay is the result of a great art team and not a total effort is pretty insulting to the entire dev team. Let's be clear, the insult is yours. You allocate the art team was responsible for the game - stiffing all of the other work that was part of the total package. Of course you have always had this art issue in your mind and it shows up in numerous posts. I am saying the talent and patience of the entire dev team allowed them to make that game. The PS3 had the capability but it took them (ND) to use it. No, you are quite wrong here and the person providing the personal attack on Naughty Dog is you. Your claims go directly against Naughty Dogs two recent interviews. So if you are correct then they are a liar. Is that so?

If Uncharted was so heavily impacted you wouldn't know it. And again, Naughty Dog remarked on this. But again, you must be correct and they are simply Sony mouthpieces. Unless a 360 dev team or Sup states something about the PS3 then all other sources are paid public information efforts. There is barely a title out there that looks like Uncharted in motion. I wasn't aware you had played so many PS3 titles - and not a kiosk or some 'friend's' house. Because if you have been looking just at movies or items you Googled, well...

Placing Penny Arcade as a source of reference is a joke. Anyone that has been in the gaming community a day knows this and understands their aim.

I am so glad you butted in here to clear things up. As usual people have a discussion on this board and you come in insulting people and that ends anyone's involvement. Ever wonder about that? Thanks to you returning to your previous ways, Like Dead Preacher I am out of here. It is obviously time to start rebuiding the list of people on ignore.

Edited by Hatchetforce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily like Hilary Goldstein but if you want to hear something brutally honest and factual about the Microsoft postion listen to the IGN podcast here:

http://www.n4g.com/ClickOut.aspx?ObjID=108049

It says what I have been sounding since last year. Jump forward to the 1 hour and 4 minute mark and listen to what they say about the tough position MS is in. It is ugly for MS, really ugly. One thing they do get wrong is that a PSN ID functions across all PS3 titles just like a Live gamertag.

Hmm, some of that was actually a bit painful to listen to. If everything in that broadcast does come true, then MS truly has a world of hurt that is around the corner waiting for them.

Hatchet, I read your subsequent posts and I am getting the impression that it is not only the software medium that is the issue here. Is the PS3 also superior in terms of processing power? Is the current scenario such that, even if MS had started out with a blueray drive in the 360, the PS3 would still beat it out with superior processing power?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...