Well i know i have been wondering what is the point of Blu-ray? Now i own a ps3 and i have some blu-ray movies which look really good, but i want to know what is the point of putting games on blu-ray? I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4, but no one else seems to be taking this advantage. Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point? All movies are 1080p but games come in at random numbers Why is this?
blu-ray wtf???
This topic is locked from further discussion.
plus the scratch resistant and a huge plus in my book.
plus the space is there wether they use it or not it is still available.
plus all laguages on one disk = easier to manafacture the disk instead of having to deal with differant contries.
plus i noticed the slow speed on the disk drive (but more information off the disk than dvd's) = less heat and straint on the machine.
Sorry to tell you-But Blu ray are not scratch resistant!plus the scratch resistant and a huge plus in my book.
plus the space is there wether they use it or not it is still available.
plus all laguages on one disk = easier to manafacture the disk instead of having to deal with differant contries.
plus i noticed the slow speed on the disk drive (but more information off the disk than dvd's) = less heat and straint on the machine.
GARRYTH
[QUOTE="GARRYTH"]Sorry to tell you-But Blu ray are not scratch resistant!plus the scratch resistant and a huge plus in my book.
plus the space is there wether they use it or not it is still available.
plus all laguages on one disk = easier to manafacture the disk instead of having to deal with differant contries.
plus i noticed the slow speed on the disk drive (but more information off the disk than dvd's) = less heat and straint on the machine.
sizzlingdviper
Even though they can get scratched, there is a clear layer that protectects the actual layer with the data.
Well i know i have been wondering what is the point of Blu-ray? Now i own a ps3 and i have some blu-ray movies which look really good, but i want to know what is the point of putting games on blu-ray? I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4, but no one else seems to be taking this advantage. Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point? All movies are 1080p but games come in at random numbers Why is this?
njean777
I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4
More developers have and are using BD's room, however Konami is the most forward about this. I'm sure all of the new games coming out will use it (Killzone, White Knight, etc.) and there are some now that we just don't know that do use more than 10gb. I would expect later games to use the full 50 gb. What you must understand is that it takes time for developers to exploit new technology. Sure PS3 had all of this stuff from the get go, but it would not be considerate to expect immediately (or even after a while) for the maximum capacity of a console to be used. This is one reason why many people say PS3 is future proof (well for the HD format). I'd rather have the technology available for it's full life, than never to have it at all.
Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point?
Dunno if it's a problem. However please elaborate about the games not runnin gon full 720p? (Which ones?)
Movies are just videos. Games are real time interactive programs that output video. It's up to the game developer to be able to program the game to output at a certain resolution. Like I said before I'd rather have it than not have it at all. In the near future you'll be glad PS3 can do all of this. In a nutshell, thin kabout the future and not the now.
Well i know i have been wondering what is the point of Blu-ray? Now i own a ps3 and i have some blu-ray movies which look really good, but i want to know what is the point of putting games on blu-ray? I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4, but no one else seems to be taking this advantage. Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point? All movies are 1080p but games come in at random numbers Why is this?
njean777
Buy a SNES and then ask yourself "why put games on a disc, like CD or DVD?"
Then, sell your PS3 and don't ever touch a game console again. Ever.
The thing is developers are not taking advantage of the HD format in games. The main reason being is they really don't fully understand how to develope on the format. It's going to take longer than before for developers to really start using what they have in front of them.jimm895
Wrong - the main reason devs aren't using the full 50GB on all games is because of inferior systems like the 360, which are limited to 9GB DVDs, which then becomes the devs' limit for muilti-platform games. Until the xcrap box 360 dies, the only games to take advantage of the Blu-ray's 50GB will be PS3 exclusives.
Devs are still learning the system, or PS3's architecture, to develop good games, but that's different than whether or not they use the 50GBs of the available disc space.
[QUOTE="njean777"]Well i know i have been wondering what is the point of Blu-ray? Now i own a ps3 and i have some blu-ray movies which look really good, but i want to know what is the point of putting games on blu-ray? I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4, but no one else seems to be taking this advantage. Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point? All movies are 1080p but games come in at random numbers Why is this?
RahKayne
I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4
More developers have and are using BD's room, however Konami is the most forward about this. I'm sure all of the new games coming out will use it (Killzone, White Knight, etc.) and there are some now that we just don't know that do use more than 10gb. I would expect later games to use the full 50 gb. What you must understand is that it takes time for developers to exploit new technology. Sure PS3 had all of this stuff from the get go, but it would not be considerate to expect immediately (or even after a while) for the maximum capacity of a console to be used. This is one reason why many people say PS3 is future proof (well for the HD format). I'd rather have the technology available for it's full life, than never to have it at all.
Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point?
Dunno if it's a problem. However please elaborate about the games not runnin gon full 720p? (Which ones?)
Movies are just videos. Games are real time interactive programs that output video. It's up to the game developer to be able to program the game to output at a certain resolution. Like I said before I'd rather have it than not have it at all. In the near future you'll be glad PS3 can do all of this. In a nutshell, thin kabout the future and not the now.
well for the games i mean gta4 is full 720 on the xbox, but only 640 or 630 cant remember on the ps3, and i know no one cares about this but haze is only 576. What is with this why is the xbox version of gta4 on dvd HD but the one on blu ray isnt?
[QUOTE="GARRYTH"]Sorry to tell you-But Blu ray are not scratch resistant!plus the scratch resistant and a huge plus in my book.
plus the space is there wether they use it or not it is still available.
plus all laguages on one disk = easier to manafacture the disk instead of having to deal with differant contries.
plus i noticed the slow speed on the disk drive (but more information off the disk than dvd's) = less heat and straint on the machine.
sizzlingdviper
Yes they are. They can be scratched, but it's hard.
[QUOTE="jimm895"]The thing is developers are not taking advantage of the HD format in games. The main reason being is they really don't fully understand how to develope on the format. It's going to take longer than before for developers to really start using what they have in front of them.YourDaddy88
Wrong - the main reason devs aren't using the full 50GB on all games is because of inferior systems like the 360, which are limited to 9GB DVDs, which then becomes the devs' limit for muilti-platform games. Until the xcrap box 360 dies, the only games to take advantage of the Blu-ray's 50GB will be PS3 exclusives.
Devs are still learning the system, or PS3's architecture, to develop good games, but that's different than whether or not they use the 50GBs of the available disc space.
Correct. There are a lot of variables that go into putting something on a disc. To answer your question about the resolution between the two GTA IV, it has to do again with copying code over. I'm very sure money has some involvement. I bet Microsoft "hinted them" to start dev. first for 360.
you what pissed me off about bluray??? when you buy the movies like hitman (which comes as a double disc) or planet earth (which comes as 5 discs i think), theyre are no fewer discs then if you bought it on dvd, i dont want box sets, i want 1 disc! obviously planet earth may be too big for 1 but you know what i mean
you what pissed me off about bluray??? when you buy the movies like hitman (which comes as a double disc) or planet earth (which comes as 5 discs i think), theyre are no fewer discs then if you bought it on dvd, i dont want box sets, i want 1 disc! obviously planet earth may be too big for 1 but you know what i mean
grand17
Well, HD requires more space.
Blu ray was designed to last a long time. However will pay the price in the beginning but over a longer period it will pay off. You have the choice to buy blu ray or not. I just bought a PS3. I wont buy blu ray movies till I have the TV for it and prices drop a little.
you what pissed me off about bluray??? when you buy the movies like hitman (which comes as a double disc) or planet earth (which comes as 5 discs i think), theyre are no fewer discs then if you bought it on dvd, i dont want box sets, i want 1 disc! obviously planet earth may be too big for 1 but you know what i mean
grand17
I completely disagree with that thought.
Say for example 1 hour of video takes 5GB (I am making these numbers up) that would mean on a single layer BD you can get 5 hours of video and on a dual layer disc you can get 10. What if the entire Planet Earth series was 30 hours? You could compress the video and make it all fit, but then you are sacrificing quality and quality is what this new format is about.
Then you take in the uncompressed audio and your space fills up quickly and to solve that problem you get multiple discs. And that is MUCH better.
If they can dedicate an entire feature to 1 disc and use another disc for supplemental material to get me better quality, I am all for that.
Warning ! Microsoft rant coming :
Tell that to Microcrap, they wanted to beat Sony for this generation by releasing an unfinished product and not thinking of a new format for games, using the old DVD - later regretting not to use HD DVD from the start. The consequence is that game developers had to follow them and their big player base, thus not able to have a big enough format to really push the game to a new generation.
To increase profit, they use payoffs to buy exclusivity and forbid developers to say if their games will go one day on the other platform (examples : Lost planet, Eternal sonata). Then comes chaos, as for example a Naruto game is being exclusive to X360 then some time later a different game is being exclusive to PS3 (and Naruto ultimate ninja storm will use more than 9Gig space, I assure you) : the gamer is then lost in lies and uncertainty as to which game or console to buy.
The increasing userbase of PS3 should allow developers to convince thier board of directors they can refuse Microcrap's dirty money (and Japanese being USA's direct competitor for world economy) and fully develop a game for the PS3.
Actually I like a lot of cutscenes in my games (you could guess that I love Final Fantasy. :P). And I would prefer to have them in HD. When I played Enchanted Arms I was very disappointed in the cgi videos. They were of good HD quality, but there were about, what, two? And it came out on DVD on another console, too.
Another example is Ultimate Alliance. The videos are okay, but low-res. Of course I would have prefered HD videos. If it had only been on PS3, then they probably would have been.
Of course this doesn't have an impact on gameplay, but in my opinion it's nice to have the vids in HD if you're gaming in HD.
Didn't have The Darkness more streaming videos for the in-game-TVs because of Blu-Ray? I like that kind of thing because of the atmosphere it delivers. Don't tell me you haven't watched the documentary about the foundation of Liberty City yet! :)
[QUOTE="jimm895"]The thing is developers are not taking advantage of the HD format in games. The main reason being is they really don't fully understand how to develope on the format. It's going to take longer than before for developers to really start using what they have in front of them.YourDaddy88
Wrong - the main reason devs aren't using the full 50GB on all games is because of inferior systems like the 360, which are limited to 9GB DVDs, which then becomes the devs' limit for muilti-platform games. Until the xcrap box 360 dies, the only games to take advantage of the Blu-ray's 50GB will be PS3 exclusives.
Devs are still learning the system, or PS3's architecture, to develop good games, but that's different than whether or not they use the 50GBs of the available disc space.
true true...360 is holding down ps3 to go to its max ....gta iv, burnout, skate, and all other multiplats could hav been much biggerlike 3 hours take up 25gig blu ray...because the quality of the video is much better....you what pissed me off about bluray??? when you buy the movies like hitman (which comes as a double disc) or planet earth (which comes as 5 discs i think), theyre are no fewer discs then if you bought it on dvd, i dont want box sets, i want 1 disc! obviously planet earth may be too big for 1 but you know what i mean
grand17
I actually agree with the notion that the 360 is holding the PS3 back in terms of games. If more games were PS3 exclusives we would see more games that fill up blu-ray discs. However as long as the 360 remains alive then multiplatform games (ones that appear on 360 and PS3) are going to be severely limited in terms of how much game content is put in and it's leaving PS3 owners left out.
Not exactly fair in my eyes.
Wow there are some wild guesses in here. This isn't a xbox 360 holding down PS3 thing. In fact, it has nothing to do with either. The fact is that all games developers compress game data on the media. Whether it be for the Wii, PS3, or 360. Fact, unless your dealing with large amoungs of CG, the average game will EASILY fit on a DVD-9. This is why in-game engine video was developed in the late 90s. It takes way too much room to have video. FFVII would have fit on 1/4 of one cd if there wasn't so much cg.
The point is that, there is no advantage to blu-ray unless the develop wants cg. The average PC game has texture resolutions far higher than any current gen console, yet almost all games fit on one dvd-9. What is the limiting factor? video memory. The PS3 and 360 both have 512 total ram with 256 of that being for the GPU. Thats a fraction of what is needed to have native 1920X1080 textures. For PCs, which use the same source textures, anyone who has tried playing Doom 3, Quake 4, Crysis, or any number of games with uncompressed high end textures knows that the games for the most part REQUIRE 768MB of GPU ram, in addition to generally system requirement of 512MB-1GB. FSX, considered one of the most graphically comprehensive games( considering it has textures to literally cover 90% of the world) and is known to bring state of the art PCs to their knees.....fits on 2 dvds.
PCs are important to understand because the PS3 and 360 were both engineered from PC parts, with the exception of Sonys Cell chip (which does kick major ass), but it is being wasted because developers don't know how to use the damn thing yet...the same way they still aren't really taking advantage of multi-core PCs yet. Its not a PS3 weakness....its just ahead of its time. A single layer Blu-ray disc holds 25 GB. This is a chunk. But truth is the PS3 as a game platform simply isn't being taken advantage of, and it has nothing to do with the 360. Saying its so won't make it true. The 360 and PS3 have GPUs that are virtually identical in performance..which is the most important part of the equation. They are both from same generation PC GPUs from ATI and NVIDIA based on technology that is more than two years old. And they each have a horribly low amount of ram. Both companies should be take their crap back and release something useful.
I guess I am not sure what "no developer has used blu-ray means". We are getting games with data that are larger than what a dvd can hold. We are getting HD games.....
"Average PC game" has resolutions "FAR higher" than current gen consoles..... While you make some good points is it possible this was just a tad of an exageration?
Wow there are some wild guesses in here. This isn't a xbox 360 holding down PS3 thing. In fact, it has nothing to do with either. The fact is that all games developers compress game data on the media. Whether it be for the Wii, PS3, or 360. Fact, unless your dealing with large amoungs of CG, the average game will EASILY fit on a DVD-9. This is why in-game engine video was developed in the late 90s. It takes way too much room to have video. FFVII would have fit on 1/4 of one cd if there wasn't so much cg.
The point is that, there is no advantage to blu-ray unless the develop wants cg. The average PC game has texture resolutions far higher than any current gen console, yet almost all games fit on one dvd-9. What is the limiting factor? video memory. The PS3 and 360 both have 512 total ram with 256 of that being for the GPU. Thats a fraction of what is needed to have native 1920X1080 textures. For PCs, which use the same source textures, anyone who has tried playing Doom 3, Quake 4, Crysis, or any number of games with uncompressed high end textures knows that the games for the most part REQUIRE 768MB of GPU ram, in addition to generally system requirement of 512MB-1GB. FSX, considered one of the most graphically comprehensive games( considering it has textures to literally cover 90% of the world) and is known to bring state of the art PCs to their knees.....fits on 2 dvds.
PCs are important to understand because the PS3 and 360 were both engineered from PC parts, with the exception of Sonys Cell chip (which does kick major ass), but it is being wasted because developers don't know how to use the damn thing yet...the same way they still aren't really taking advantage of multi-core PCs yet. Its not a PS3 weakness....its just ahead of its time. A single layer Blu-ray disc holds 25 GB. This is a chunk. But truth is the PS3 as a game platform simply isn't being taken advantage of, and it has nothing to do with the 360. Saying its so won't make it true. The 360 and PS3 have GPUs that are virtually identical in performance..which is the most important part of the equation. They are both from same generation PC GPUs from ATI and NVIDIA based on technology that is more than two years old. And they each have a horribly low amount of ram. Both companies should be take their crap back and release something useful.
stele29
Wow a smart person. Excellent post.
How did Blu Ray help Uncharted in any other way than Linear PCM 7.1 audio? The game length is comparable to Gears Of War and both are graphically stellar and both are system exclusives.
Metal Gear 4 looks very good, but not better than anything on the 360 and the only reason it is filling a dual layer BD is again, audio, which most people aren't even equipped to take advantage of.
you what pissed me off about bluray??? when you buy the movies like hitman (which comes as a double disc) or planet earth (which comes as 5 discs i think), theyre are no fewer discs then if you bought it on dvd, i dont want box sets, i want 1 disc! obviously planet earth may be too big for 1 but you know what i mean
grand17
Not so fast. Like many have said, it takes more space to do HD over SD. To add to that, it's also up to the studio to use either a 25GB or 50GB disc. Planet Earth uses 25GB discs for a total of 4 discs, but they could've done it in 2 with 50GB discs. Anyway, there are many movies where the film and extras are on 1 blu-ray disc, whereas they are usually in 2 DVD discs. One example is Pearl Harbor, which uses 2 DVDs but only 1 blu-ray for the feature film (not sure about extras).
[QUOTE="stele29"]Wow there are some wild guesses in here. This isn't a xbox 360 holding down PS3 thing. In fact, it has nothing to do with either. The fact is that all games developers compress game data on the media. Whether it be for the Wii, PS3, or 360. Fact, unless your dealing with large amoungs of CG, the average game will EASILY fit on a DVD-9. This is why in-game engine video was developed in the late 90s. It takes way too much room to have video. FFVII would have fit on 1/4 of one cd if there wasn't so much cg.
The point is that, there is no advantage to blu-ray unless the develop wants cg. The average PC game has texture resolutions far higher than any current gen console, yet almost all games fit on one dvd-9. What is the limiting factor? video memory. The PS3 and 360 both have 512 total ram with 256 of that being for the GPU. Thats a fraction of what is needed to have native 1920X1080 textures. For PCs, which use the same source textures, anyone who has tried playing Doom 3, Quake 4, Crysis, or any number of games with uncompressed high end textures knows that the games for the most part REQUIRE 768MB of GPU ram, in addition to generally system requirement of 512MB-1GB. FSX, considered one of the most graphically comprehensive games( considering it has textures to literally cover 90% of the world) and is known to bring state of the art PCs to their knees.....fits on 2 dvds.
PCs are important to understand because the PS3 and 360 were both engineered from PC parts, with the exception of Sonys Cell chip (which does kick major ass), but it is being wasted because developers don't know how to use the damn thing yet...the same way they still aren't really taking advantage of multi-core PCs yet. Its not a PS3 weakness....its just ahead of its time. A single layer Blu-ray disc holds 25 GB. This is a chunk. But truth is the PS3 as a game platform simply isn't being taken advantage of, and it has nothing to do with the 360. Saying its so won't make it true. The 360 and PS3 have GPUs that are virtually identical in performance..which is the most important part of the equation. They are both from same generation PC GPUs from ATI and NVIDIA based on technology that is more than two years old. And they each have a horribly low amount of ram. Both companies should be take their crap back and release something useful.
Large_Soda
Wow a smart person. Excellent post.
How did Blu Ray help Uncharted in any other way than Linear PCM 7.1 audio? The game length is comparable to Gears Of War and both are graphically stellar and both are system exclusives.
Metal Gear 4 looks very good, but not better than anything on the 360 and the only reason it is filling a dual layer BD is again, audio, which most people aren't even equipped to take advantage of.
While both of you make good points (Stele29 - excellent article), you're still missing the main point.
The point is not the RAM limiting factor, the point is devs aren't using the full 50GB of space that they have. RAM has nothing to do with it. Why? Because while RAM may limit that space for textures or similar processing data, they can still use that space for audio (some do care) or CG to enhance the storyline, etc.
Most games fit on a 9GB DVD. No sh*t. It's the devs' spec that they must fit on a 9GB space, so what's the surprise? The limiting factor of the 360 is just that. Devs will not make muiltiple discs for one system and 1 disc for another. This would increase production costs and reduce their profit margin. What they do instead is establish a base line that works for all and run with it. If their spec was 50GB then guess what? Most games would fit on a 50GB disc.
No matter how you spin it - the 360 IS limiting games right now, by putting limits on what devs can and cannot do beyond RAM. Don't confuse disc space with graphics and textures - you can use that space for much more. Non-HDD 360? Another MS fumble that makes a dev's day harder at the office.
isn't gta 4 on blu ray? yes. and even cod4. its says it right there on the box.flinknasty
I think all PS3 games use blu-ray discs. Not 100% sure though.
[QUOTE="stele29"]Wow there are some wild guesses in here. This isn't a xbox 360 holding down PS3 thing. In fact, it has nothing to do with either. The fact is that all games developers compress game data on the media. Whether it be for the Wii, PS3, or 360. Fact, unless your dealing with large amoungs of CG, the average game will EASILY fit on a DVD-9. This is why in-game engine video was developed in the late 90s. It takes way too much room to have video. FFVII would have fit on 1/4 of one cd if there wasn't so much cg.
The point is that, there is no advantage to blu-ray unless the develop wants cg. The average PC game has texture resolutions far higher than any current gen console, yet almost all games fit on one dvd-9. What is the limiting factor? video memory. The PS3 and 360 both have 512 total ram with 256 of that being for the GPU. Thats a fraction of what is needed to have native 1920X1080 textures. For PCs, which use the same source textures, anyone who has tried playing Doom 3, Quake 4, Crysis, or any number of games with uncompressed high end textures knows that the games for the most part REQUIRE 768MB of GPU ram, in addition to generally system requirement of 512MB-1GB. FSX, considered one of the most graphically comprehensive games( considering it has textures to literally cover 90% of the world) and is known to bring state of the art PCs to their knees.....fits on 2 dvds.
PCs are important to understand because the PS3 and 360 were both engineered from PC parts, with the exception of Sonys Cell chip (which does kick major ass), but it is being wasted because developers don't know how to use the damn thing yet...the same way they still aren't really taking advantage of multi-core PCs yet. Its not a PS3 weakness....its just ahead of its time. A single layer Blu-ray disc holds 25 GB. This is a chunk. But truth is the PS3 as a game platform simply isn't being taken advantage of, and it has nothing to do with the 360. Saying its so won't make it true. The 360 and PS3 have GPUs that are virtually identical in performance..which is the most important part of the equation. They are both from same generation PC GPUs from ATI and NVIDIA based on technology that is more than two years old. And they each have a horribly low amount of ram. Both companies should be take their crap back and release something useful.
Large_Soda
Wow a smart person. Excellent post.
How did Blu Ray help Uncharted in any other way than Linear PCM 7.1 audio? The game length is comparable to Gears Of War and both are graphically stellar and both are system exclusives.
Metal Gear 4 looks very good, but not better than anything on the 360 and the only reason it is filling a dual layer BD is again, audio, which most people aren't even equipped to take advantage of.
Wow, a "smart" person indeed. But you fail to grasp the full picture. PC game does the compression, therefore requires huge install time (some of which takes more than half an hour. at 10 minutes are spent on unpacking). It also uses libraries pre-installed by windows itself, so it can save spaces. (Instead programmers writing the code, they can just call an API written in windows to achieve the same thing).
CG is quite important in certain games. Would FF7 make the same impact if it had none of those CGs? If they do a remake of FF7, would millions upon millions of fans expect anything less than full blown "advent children" quality of CG animation?
Audio, while not everyone is capable of enjoying them, for those who do, (like me) and have 3K worth of equipment to enjoy it, why would we expect anything less from it? Many poeple believes HD is just about pictures, I say worng, it's aobut a full package. Picture and sound should both be considered.
Gaming content wise, even without any CG, games will become bigger and bigger. Given the life span of PS3, which is about 7 - 10 years, we are going to see games much bigger than 9GB dvd even without CG. Let's use PC as an example again, 7 years ago, in 2001, rarely a game exceeds the space of CD. Now most PC games are around 4-5 GB with heavy compression.
Another example is gears of war. It uses streaming technology to look that good. Each game level takes about 1GB for streaming technology, thus the entire gears of war game is around 8-9 levels. Surprise? If that game can be on a higher capacity disk, would you not want the game to have say 20 - 30 levels?
What I don't understand is that how can poeple not want the best if they can afford.
Wow, a "smart" person indeed. But you fail to grasp the full picture. PC game does the compression, therefore requires huge install time (some of which takes more than half an hour. at 10 minutes are spent on unpacking). It also uses libraries pre-installed by windows itself, so it can save spaces. (Instead programmers writing the code, they can just call an API written in windows to achieve the same thing).
CG is quite important in certain games. Would FF7 make the same impact if it had none of those CGs? If they do a remake of FF7, would millions upon millions of fans expect anything less than full blown "advent children" quality of CG animation?
Audio, while not everyone is capable of enjoying them, for those who do, (like me) and have 3K worth of equipment to enjoy it, why would we expect anything less from it? Many poeple believes HD is just about pictures, I say worng, it's aobut a full package. Picture and sound should both be considered.
Gaming content wise, even without any CG, games will become bigger and bigger. Given the life span of PS3, which is about 7 - 10 years, we are going to see games much bigger than 9GB dvd even without CG. Let's use PC as an example again, 7 years ago, in 2001, rarely a game exceeds the space of CD. Now most PC games are around 4-5 GB with heavy compression.
Another example is gears of war. It uses streaming technology to look that good. Each game level takes about 1GB for streaming technology, thus the entire gears of war game is around 8-9 levels. Surprise? If that game can be on a higher capacity disk, would you not want the game to have say 20 - 30 levels?
What I don't understand is that how can poeple not want the best if they can afford.
henry4th
Aha - someone who see the light. You sir, are a good citizen.
Warning ! Microsoft rant coming :
Tell that to Microcrap, they wanted to beat Sony for this generation by releasing an unfinished product and not thinking of a new format for games, using the old DVD - later regretting not to use HD DVD from the start. The consequence is that game developers had to follow them and their big player base, thus not able to have a big enough format to really push the game to a new generation.
To increase profit, they use payoffs to buy exclusivity and forbid developers to say if their games will go one day on the other platform (examples : Lost planet, Eternal sonata). Then comes chaos, as for example a Naruto game is being exclusive to X360 then some time later a different game is being exclusive to PS3 (and Naruto ultimate ninja storm will use more than 9Gig space, I assure you) : the gamer is then lost in lies and uncertainty as to which game or console to buy.
The increasing userbase of PS3 should allow developers to convince thier board of directors they can refuse Microcrap's dirty money (and Japanese being USA's direct competitor for world economy) and fully develop a game for the PS3.
TheTenth10
why does somebody always have to come in a perfectly normal discussion w/ stupid fanboy talk?
[QUOTE="SPD_WeBmAsTaH"]LOL. What the hell are you yapping about? GTAIV on PS3 has full 1080p and it looks absolutely amazing on my tv.donwon06
sorry to burst your bubble, but it's native resolution is 630p. it's just getting upscaled to 1080p.
I don't even know why people make a big deal about GTA IV's resolution. The graphics in that game suck anyway, and a higher res will only make it look worse. The appeal is the gameplay, not the graphics.
[QUOTE="donwon06"]sorry to burst your bubble, but it's native resolution is 630p. it's just getting upscaled to 1080p.[QUOTE="SPD_WeBmAsTaH"]LOL. What the hell are you yapping about? GTAIV on PS3 has full 1080p and it looks absolutely amazing on my tv.YourDaddy88
I don't even know why people make a big deal about GTA IV's resolution. The graphics in that game suck anyway, and a higher res will only make it look worse. The appeal is the gameplay, not the graphics.
i don't care about it. obviously it matters to other people because they whine about it, and fanboys bicker at each other about it. GTA is about the gameplay and i think the graphics look nice on my ps3 and hdtv.
[QUOTE="SPD_WeBmAsTaH"]LOL. What the hell are you yapping about? GTAIV on PS3 has full 1080p and it looks absolutely amazing on my tv.donwon06
sorry to burst your bubble, but it's native resolution is 630p. it's just getting upscaled to 1080p.
while this is true, if you read IGN's 11 page review, it explicitly said, Ps3 version looks better, run better. Besides, for such a crappy graphics known as GTA4, why would anyone bother to compare them?
HOw about Gran Turismo that runs 1080p native? That's high def gaming we are talking about.
For the truth and none of this bs your getting about "the devs dont understand the format" read on....
The Ps3 has 256 mb video ram which limits its resolutions. Meaning if it had 512 mb video ram it would be able to handle games at higher resolutions much more easily. One example which is a personal experience is when i had Quake 4 on PC. I had a 256 mb card(7900gs) and i was able to run the game perfectly at 1280 x 1024, BUT if i put the resolution up to 1600 x 1200 my steady 60 fps went extremely low to 20-40fps.
HD is just another term used for a higher resolution. So 1080p = 1920 x 1080, 720p = 1280 x 720. So developers are lowering the games resolutions and upscaling them to 1280x720p in order to keep a consistent frame rate. I also made a thread about 3-4 months ago asking "When will HD gaming come to an end after devs run out of power to up the resolutions with a playable framerate" and all i got were a bunch of kids saying PC gaming and console gaming is different when in fact they are completely identical and at one point your going to end up with stuff like 5xxp upscaled to 720p as the norm. As graphic engines demand more the resolutions will lower or the games engine will lower. One will happen but i think its obvious to say they chose the lowering of resolutions, which personally i don't mind.
Also to the person above me Gran Turismo isnt even full hd thats upscaled as well.
For the truth and none of this bs your getting about "the devs dont understand the format" read on....
The Ps3 has 256 mb video ram which limits its resolutions. Meaning if it had 512 mb video ram it would be able to handle games at higher resolutions much more easily. One example which is a personal experience is when i had Quake 4 on PC. I had a 256 mb card(7900gs) and i was able to run the game perfectly at 1280 x 1024, BUT if i put the resolution up to 1600 x 1200 my steady 60 fps went extremely low to 20-40fps.
HD is just another term used for a higher resolution. So 1080p = 1920 x 1080, 720p = 1280 x 720. So developers are lowering the games resolutions and upscaling them to 1280x720p in order to keep a consistent frame rate. I also made a thread about 3-4 months ago asking "When will HD gaming come to an end after devs run out of power to up the resolutions with a playable framerate" and all i got were a bunch of kids saying PC gaming and console gaming is different when in fact they are completely identical and at one point your going to end up with stuff like 5xxp upscaled to 720p as the norm. As graphic engines demand more the resolutions will lower or the games engine will lower. One will happen but i think its obvious to say they chose the lowering of resolutions, which personally i don't mind.
Also to the person above me Gran Turismo isnt even full hd thats upscaled as well.
bigblunt537
They are not. What a PC needs is always more demanding than what a console needs. Thats why developing for the 360 is easy. It uses a PC structure that allows for easy acces to its hardware in a fashion that resembles PC. PC always needs more resources to output a game in the same quality as a console game, but since consoles are always behind PCs, whenever a PC game is also on the console, the PC is better graphically thanks to the higher specs
Well i know i have been wondering what is the point of Blu-ray? Now i own a ps3 and i have some blu-ray movies which look really good, but i want to know what is the point of putting games on blu-ray? I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4, but no one else seems to be taking this advantage. Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point? All movies are 1080p but games come in at random numbers Why is this?
njean777
do you know how much $$$ it costs to make a 50bg game vs a 4.7gb game?
[QUOTE="njean777"]Well i know i have been wondering what is the point of Blu-ray? Now i own a ps3 and i have some blu-ray movies which look really good, but i want to know what is the point of putting games on blu-ray? I know there is more room on a blu-ray disc but not one developer has tooken this to its advantage i mean ex. MGS4, but no one else seems to be taking this advantage. Another problem i am seeing is the point of Blu-ray is HD but if games these days on the ps3 cant even run full 720 i mean whats the point? All movies are 1080p but games come in at random numbers Why is this?
LeeSan420
do you know how much $$$ it costs to make a 50bg game vs a 4.7gb game?
not much. Just avoid using compression and voila.
They are not. What a PC needs is always more demanding than what a console needs. Thats why developing for the 360 is easy. It uses a PC structure that allows for easy acces to its hardware in a fashion that resembles PC. PC always needs more resources to output a game in the same quality as a console game, but since consoles are always behind PCs, whenever a PC game is also on the console, the PC is better graphically thanks to the higher specskenshinhimura16
That may be true but they still use their hardware in the same way a PC game would use its hardware and that's what I'm trying to show here. The higher the resolution the more demanding producing the textures and graphics will be regardless of PC or consoles. So my main point is that after a while this is going to be the norm as games become even more greater graphically.
[QUOTE="kenshinhimura16"]
They are not. What a PC needs is always more demanding than what a console needs. Thats why developing for the 360 is easy. It uses a PC structure that allows for easy acces to its hardware in a fashion that resembles PC. PC always needs more resources to output a game in the same quality as a console game, but since consoles are always behind PCs, whenever a PC game is also on the console, the PC is better graphically thanks to the higher specsbigblunt537
That may be true but they still use their hardware in the same way a PC game would use its hardware and that's what I'm trying to show here. The higher the resolution the more demanding producing the textures and graphics will be regardless of PC or consoles. So my main point is that after a while this is going to be the norm as games become even more greater graphically.
And just to add something, which actually has one of the largest roles in all this, and i'm not being partial here, is that the 360 is getting more support right now because when stripped down to the basics its nothing more than a pc in a small case. Microsoft purposely designed it to be compatible with directx because they knew it would be a small jump for developers who normally work on pc games to also work sideways over to 360. If you compare the 360 as being generally equivilent to an x86 machine, the PS3 is kinda like a Sparc or Alpha in comparison. As in, they are all microprocessors but the kernels handle things very differently and thus engineering software cross platform is likewise expensive. So what you see are developers wanting to maximize their investments...which means more money to 360/PC, and then shifting it to PS3 where useful. The good old days of having companies develop for only one platform (except for first party titles) is over. Development costs are skyrocketing and major publishers like EA and Activision run the show....and trust me, they only care about money. Even square-enix, which was notoriously Sony-centric is developing for 360 (no Final fantasy though of course. Exclusivity doesn't even mean anything these days. In fact, its temporary at best. Unless a game is made by Sony or MGS, anything can happen.
What can we do about it? Stop acting like fanboys and embrace the differences. We all want to justify our purchases, and I think once we get past the petty differences, its all about having fun. I love my PS3. Aren't many good games yet, but I still love it. And I think the 360 is a pretty solid system too. Microsoft really messed up in the first year but they came around for their fans. Sony did the same thing when PS2's were dying like crazy early on. And if the blu-ray problems become wide spread, I expect Sony will ball up and help us out. So whether its DVD-9, or blu-ray, or that extremely crappy UMD format that the PSP has (i wanna play my mini-dvds dammit!), content is king. So as I play FF4 (my favorite game) PS1 rerelease on my PS3, the only thing I care about is....wow, I love this game!
Happy gaming!
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment