should of released without a blue ray
This topic is locked from further discussion.
a blue ray player there stand alone they can be purchased i dont need one with my gaming Nofacekilla11
then get a ps2 and stop complaining
[QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]i believe sony should of made two versions one with and one without a blue ray player. the blue ray player jetted the price. and i feal ripped off with it. i have no use for the blue ray i bought my ps3 for gaming not moviesemeritus
Great idea...
But what are you going to use to load ALL the games that are on Blu-Ray Discs?
see...the thing is...if Sony doesnt put a blu ray player in the console, then they will probably decide to put the games on DVD9 discs. I dont know its just a thought.....
Ive said it once and ill say it a million times, there is NO need for blu ray discs for games (not games + tons of HD cut scenes....just games) this generation. NONE. Dont think so? Lets see how many discs GTA IV comes out in for the xbox. And how many discs did Oblivion use up?? Hmmmm.....And dont say blu dragon...because you can fit the game itself on one disc, but they needed extra discs to fit the enormous amounts of cut scenes littered all over the game. American forbidden>
a blue ray player there stand alone they can be purchased i dont need one with my gaming Nofacekilla11Playing too many movies on your gaming console tends to reduce the life of the lasers. We saw that happen with the PS2 hope it doesn't happen with the PS3.
[QUOTE="emeritus"][QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]i believe sony should of made two versions one with and one without a blue ray player. the blue ray player jetted the price. and i feal ripped off with it. i have no use for the blue ray i bought my ps3 for gaming not moviesmenduco76
Great idea...
But what are you going to use to load ALL the games that are on Blu-Ray Discs?
see...the thing is...if Sony doesnt put a blu ray player in the console, then they will probably decide to put the games on DVD9 discs. I dont know its just a thought.....
Ive said it once and ill say it a million times, there is NO need for blu ray discs for games (not games + tons of HD cut scenes....just games) this generation. NONE. Dont think so? Lets see how many discs GTA IV comes out in for the xbox. And how many discs did Oblivion use up?? Hmmmm.....And dont say blu dragon...because you can fit the game itself on one disc, but they needed extra discs to fit the enormous amounts of cut scenes littered all over the game. American forbidden>
Kojima just said he need BluRay 50 for MGS, and your telling me you don't need BluRay for gaming. You can also use my MGS on CD collection. MGS on DVD will equal 6 DVD9s and 11 DVD5s.
Here's your Metal Gear Solid for PS3 on CD just for you. Your "Alienware" PC?
Wow...we're so impressed.. Try putting one together yourself - you may learn something
Your "Alienware" PC?
Wow...we're so impressed.. Try putting one together yourself - you may learn something
i bought a alien ware because i liked the design and power it offered. its not hard to buy parts and piece together your own. but i choose a different route. i wasnt bragging or anything i just feal my pc is stronger. i wasnt saying it to impress anyone come on.
exactly i woudlnt buy a ps3 to play movies. thats why it aggrivates me that they included one when there were other ways of doing it without that expencive new technology that hasnt been prooven reliable as of yetNofacekilla11Nobody cares about what you want, Sony stands to make money off BluRay royalties and thats why they're pushing BluRay you think just casuse you wanna play MGS on 1000 CDs and copy all there games on your massive 500 gb harddrive they're gonna care.
[QUOTE="Deyee"][QUOTE="pimperjones"]What are you gonna do when games get bigger, in a few years games will start reaching 15-20 gig range. You expect game manufacturers to make two different copies of each game one on single BluRay and a second version on 2-3 DVDs. Thats not practicle. No ones gonna do that. makingmusic476
Oh, you mean how EA, Rockstar, Bethesda and other developers/publishers have already done with Blu-Ray and regular DVD games? Oblivion, Madden(other sports games), and GTA IV upcoming.
Yes, Sony was thinking ahead, but at the same time they were being a smidge too zealous with the Blu-Ray tech.
As a gamer, I honestly don't care about having to get up a couple times to change discs for Blue Dragon. It didn't bother anyone else back in the day with Final Fantasy VII now did it?
Also, I highly doubt that in the next few years that MOST games will be in the 15-20 gig range, maybe a few, but not the majority.
The devs of mass effect were originally thought it that it would impossible for them to fit the game on one DVD. Well, with heavy compression and very efficient code, they managed to BARELY cram the game on one DVD9. Blue Dragon is on 3 DVDs. Blu-ray is neccessary. Deal with it. Blue Ray isn't neccessary. It's great for some games like RPG's but I highly doubt most games will need the extra space. Like you said... they could fit Mass Effect on one DVD. Blue Ray is great but by no means neccessary.
exactlty thats all i am saying. i already know that blue ray can hold the most data on one disc i have a blue ray player in my computer. and now one with the ps3 the point i was making they didnt need to have it just to create games. i was saying it because it would of cut costs without one and brought more buyers. blue ray doesnt make better games. the hardware does. blue ray is just storage thats it. they could of did the same thing without it/.
and what the hell do i care if they released one without it now. i already have one i was just discussing how they could of done it without it.
NofaceKilla... you are ignorant. You dont see the use of having a blue ray player because it hasnt proved itself yet? well without explaining to you how it actually has proven itself, why would you want to pigeon hole yourself? In your mind blue ray has the "possibility" to become successful, well wouldnt you want one in your PS3 just in case it did..?? And you said earlyer you would much rather have a 500gb hard drive for 125$ you said you couldt fit plenty of 50 gb games on it.... STUPID.... 10 games?? plenty?? and your paying 125 bucks for that... or for 200 you get blue ray which "has the chance" to become successful (already is). Im glade you are not creating our games other wise we would all be buying **** that would be no good next week.dubbleduecerokay one i remember about ten years ago i decided to get this cool new movie player it was called a sony lazor disc player and it was about to make the movies you see at home better and amazing,. they offered these huge discs that looked like vinyls and hmmm not even two years later it was gone thats why. in three months from now blue ray could be gone and there be silverx the next gen in data storage. technology is ever growing and instead of focusing on something that hasnt prooven itself. and the comment about 10 games on a 500 gb storage. how many games right now are 50 gigs ?
exactlty thats all i am saying. i already know that blue ray can hold the most data on one disc i have a blue ray player in my computer. and now one with the ps3 the point i was making they didnt need to have it just to create games. i was saying it because it would of cut costs without one and brought more buyers. blue ray doesnt make better games. the hardware does. blue ray is just storage thats it. they could of did the same thing without it/.
and what the hell do i care if they released one without it now. i already have one i was just discussing how they could of done it without it.
Nofacekilla11
On one hand Xbox fanboys say BR isn't needed for games on the other hand people like Hideo Kojima says the 25GB BR disk isn't enough.... Hmm, who to believe.... This is a tough one...
[QUOTE="dubbleduecer"]NofaceKilla... you are ignorant. You dont see the use of having a blue ray player because it hasnt proved itself yet? well without explaining to you how it actually has proven itself, why would you want to pigeon hole yourself? In your mind blue ray has the "possibility" to become successful, well wouldnt you want one in your PS3 just in case it did..?? And you said earlyer you would much rather have a 500gb hard drive for 125$ you said you couldt fit plenty of 50 gb games on it.... STUPID.... 10 games?? plenty?? and your paying 125 bucks for that... or for 200 you get blue ray which "has the chance" to become successful (already is). Im glade you are not creating our games other wise we would all be buying **** that would be no good next week.Nofacekilla11okay one i remember about ten years ago i decided to get this cool new movie player it was called a sony lazor disc player and it was about to make the movies you see at home better and amazing,. they offered these huge discs that looked like vinyls and hmmm not even two years later it was gone thats why. in three months from now blue ray could be gone and there be silverx the next gen in data storage. technology is ever growing and instead of focusing on something that hasnt prooven itself. and the comment about 10 games on a 500 gb storage. how many games right now are 50 gigs ? Booohoo you bought Laser Disk so did half of China, things happen live with it. Did you forget to mention Sony's CD which we all use today, and how about Sony's audio cassettes which was around for well over 2 decades. How about Sony's Beta format which although failed in home use is still the most used format for professional broadcasting to date.
[QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]exactlty thats all i am saying. i already know that blue ray can hold the most data on one disc i have a blue ray player in my computer. and now one with the ps3 the point i was making they didnt need to have it just to create games. i was saying it because it would of cut costs without one and brought more buyers. blue ray doesnt make better games. the hardware does. blue ray is just storage thats it. they could of did the same thing without it/.
and what the hell do i care if they released one without it now. i already have one i was just discussing how they could of done it without it.
jdt532
On one hand Xbox fanboys say BR isn't needed for games on the other hand people like Hideo Kojima says the 25GB BR disk isn't enough.... Hmm, who to believe.... This is a tough one...
the only reason you need all that space is for cut scenes so instead of alot of great gaming your gonna get a mini movie in your game awesome. just the reason i play games to sit and watch movies
[QUOTE="jdt532"][QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]exactlty thats all i am saying. i already know that blue ray can hold the most data on one disc i have a blue ray player in my computer. and now one with the ps3 the point i was making they didnt need to have it just to create games. i was saying it because it would of cut costs without one and brought more buyers. blue ray doesnt make better games. the hardware does. blue ray is just storage thats it. they could of did the same thing without it/.
and what the hell do i care if they released one without it now. i already have one i was just discussing how they could of done it without it.
Nofacekilla11
On one hand Xbox fanboys say BR isn't needed for games on the other hand people like Hideo Kojima says the 25GB BR disk isn't enough.... Hmm, who to believe.... This is a tough one...
the only reason you need all that space is for cut scenes so instead of alot of great gaming your gonna get a mini movie in your game awesome. just the reason i play games to sit and watch movies You don't like cut scenes and HD uncompressed music tough luck but some of us like cinematic games, maybe you should go back and play Pong no cut scenes there.
[QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"][QUOTE="dubbleduecer"]NofaceKilla... you are ignorant. You dont see the use of having a blue ray player because it hasnt proved itself yet? well without explaining to you how it actually has proven itself, why would you want to pigeon hole yourself? In your mind blue ray has the "possibility" to become successful, well wouldnt you want one in your PS3 just in case it did..?? And you said earlyer you would much rather have a 500gb hard drive for 125$ you said you couldt fit plenty of 50 gb games on it.... STUPID.... 10 games?? plenty?? and your paying 125 bucks for that... or for 200 you get blue ray which "has the chance" to become successful (already is). Im glade you are not creating our games other wise we would all be buying **** that would be no good next week.pimperjonesokay one i remember about ten years ago i decided to get this cool new movie player it was called a sony lazor disc player and it was about to make the movies you see at home better and amazing,. they offered these huge discs that looked like vinyls and hmmm not even two years later it was gone thats why. in three months from now blue ray could be gone and there be silverx the next gen in data storage. technology is ever growing and instead of focusing on something that hasnt prooven itself. and the comment about 10 games on a 500 gb storage. how many games right now are 50 gigs ? Booohoo you bought Laser Disk so did half of China, things happen live with it. Did you forget to mention Sony's CD which we all use today, and how about Sony's audio cassettes which was around for well over 2 decades. How about Sony's Beta format which although failed in home use is still the most used format for professional broadcasting to date. dude shut up i aam not crying i have the system i bought a xbox too and its noisy as hell when it plays games. i am discussing it not asking for a refund . i think there could of been other ways to offer it. i guarentee that sony is loosing more sales then gaining because of cost. not many parents are gonna drop 6 bills on there kids toy for people with jobs its fine.
[QUOTE="jdt532"][QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]exactlty thats all i am saying. i already know that blue ray can hold the most data on one disc i have a blue ray player in my computer. and now one with the ps3 the point i was making they didnt need to have it just to create games. i was saying it because it would of cut costs without one and brought more buyers. blue ray doesnt make better games. the hardware does. blue ray is just storage thats it. they could of did the same thing without it/.
and what the hell do i care if they released one without it now. i already have one i was just discussing how they could of done it without it.
Nofacekilla11
On one hand Xbox fanboys say BR isn't needed for games on the other hand people like Hideo Kojima says the 25GB BR disk isn't enough.... Hmm, who to believe.... This is a tough one...
the only reason you need all that space is for cut scenes so instead of alot of great gaming your gonna get a mini movie in your game awesome. just the reason i play games to sit and watch movies
Just one problem with that argument, MGS games have never used pre rendered CGI movies that take up allot of space all the movies are made using the in game graphics engine...
[QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"][QUOTE="jdt532"][QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]exactlty thats all i am saying. i already know that blue ray can hold the most data on one disc i have a blue ray player in my computer. and now one with the ps3 the point i was making they didnt need to have it just to create games. i was saying it because it would of cut costs without one and brought more buyers. blue ray doesnt make better games. the hardware does. blue ray is just storage thats it. they could of did the same thing without it/.
and what the hell do i care if they released one without it now. i already have one i was just discussing how they could of done it without it.
pimperjones
On one hand Xbox fanboys say BR isn't needed for games on the other hand people like Hideo Kojima says the 25GB BR disk isn't enough.... Hmm, who to believe.... This is a tough one...
the only reason you need all that space is for cut scenes so instead of alot of great gaming your gonna get a mini movie in your game awesome. just the reason i play games to sit and watch movies You don't like cut scenes and HD uncompressed music tough luck but some of us like cinematic games, maybe you should go back and play Pong no cut scenes there. and some people like blue ray for movies thats great i didnt one time say that i want to change peoples opinions on games or the blue ray player. i said it could of been sold without one. will it probably not. does that mean i cant discuss it and get people in the post talking about it and expressing there thoughts. then you got a few people that want to make it a big issue and try calling me names and dissing me on my thoughts and thats cool i could go and play third grade games as well. the fact is i would of rathered a cheaper version over the expencive version that offers me 50 gigs of a game i hated since it came out the first time
i believe sony should of made two versions one with and one without a blue ray player. the blue ray player jetted the price. and i feal ripped off with it. i have no use for the blue ray i bought my ps3 for gaming not moviesNofacekilla11Even though I agree with you, Its a done deal and nothing is going to change it.
[QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]i believe sony should of made two versions one with and one without a blue ray player. the blue ray player jetted the price. and i feal ripped off with it. i have no use for the blue ray i bought my ps3 for gaming not movieswizdomEven though I agree with you, Its a done deal and nothing is going to change it. yeah i know but it does stir up cconversation even though some people getting all butt hurt about it
Your "Alienware" PC?
Wow...we're so impressed.. Try putting one together yourself - you may learn something
Lol harsh...., Yeah like some here have stated the PS3 and next gen gaming does need Blu-ray simply because of texture maps/compression! We all know that compressed texture loose a percentage of the detailed quality they would've possed in an ogiinal scene. By having simply a larger disc medium textures coul dbe left in their original state making for better visuals and FASTER LOADTIMES. After all this is the sole reason why both last gen and more recent PC games come on DVD's. The benefits trully outweigh the cost.
Also take into consideration that many newer games (in particular UE3) can support "2048x2048" (or more) texture maps and beyound! This "avg. bump" over the typical 1024x256/512 adds a great ammount of detail with only say a 4-16mb increase in resources (ram/vram). Now with that said this 4-16mb texture usage gets multiplied by the ammount of textures on a level per level throught the game making for a much larger file size on Disc. So basically the HW of either a PC, 360, or PS3 is there for such advanced textured gaming but the medium to access that (uncompressed) data is only on the PS3 (or what ever Blu-ray games may come to PC).
Theres a trick in which you can uncompress level textures for faster load times in Doom3 PC edition and it adds like 1.4-2 gigs in the overall folder (after deleting the orig. which is like 300mbs) so imagine what this when say Quake wars comes out on multi DVD PC, DVD9 360, and Blu-ray PS3! Im positive that either the loadtimes if not the texture quality will be rather close between the PC & PS3 (& thats considering if the porters actually do a good job this time)
But yeah I read most of this in an article where some dev used like 7 terabytes of uncompressed digital "footage" 4 one of those Shrek like movies. They stated that working with less compression results in better quality, faster access, and less computational strain on the CPU/GPU's cause your dealing with raw format.
Your "Alienware" PC?
Wow...we're so impressed.. Try putting one together yourself - you may learn something
Lol harsh...., Yeah like some here have stated the PS3 and next gen gaming does need Blu-ray simply because of texture maps/compression! We all know that compressed texture loose a percentage of the detailed quality they would've possed in an ogiinal scene. By having simply a larger disc medium textures coul dbe left in their original state making for better visuals and FASTER LOADTIMES. After all this is the sole reason why both last gen and more recent PC games come on DVD's. The benefits trully outweigh the cost.
Also take into consideration that many newer games (in particular UE3) can support "2048x2048" (or more) texture maps and beyound! This "avg. bump" over the typical 1024x256/512 adds a great ammount of detail with only say a 4-16mb increase in resources (ram/vram). Now with that said this 4-16mb texture usage gets multiplied by the ammount of textures on a level per level throught the game making for a much larger file forbidden> impressive details
[QUOTE="wizdom"][QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]i believe sony should of made two versions one with and one without a blue ray player. the blue ray player jetted the price. and i feal ripped off with it. i have no use for the blue ray i bought my ps3 for gaming not moviesNofacekilla11Even though I agree with you, Its a done deal and nothing is going to change it. yeah i know but it does stir up cconversation even though some people getting all butt hurt about it
We're only getting frustrated because you're being short sighted and refuse to hear our arguments. Just cause most game fit on a 8.5GB DVD-9 TODAY doesn't mean games wont get bigger. It's a fact that when consoles get more powerful games get bigger in size due to the fact that levels are bigger and textures are also bigger and all of those bigger textures that are in the bigger levels will take up allot more space. You sound allot like Scott Nudds a man that insisted that a PC would never need 1GB of RAM but he was obviously proved wrong. Don't be short sighted like Scot Nudds.... learn from his mistakes... Here's the Scott Nudds blog from ten years ago it's quit funny.
http://www.digg.com/hardware/A_Gigabyte_of_RAM_You_must_be_crazy
[QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"][QUOTE="wizdom"][QUOTE="Nofacekilla11"]i believe sony should of made two versions one with and one without a blue ray player. the blue ray player jetted the price. and i feal ripped off with it. i have no use for the blue ray i bought my ps3 for gaming not moviesjdt532Even though I agree with you, Its a done deal and nothing is going to change it. yeah i know but it does stir up cconversation even though some people getting all butt hurt about it
We're only getting frustrated because you're being short sighted and refuse to hear our arguments. Just cause most game fit on a 8.5GB DVD-9 TODAY doesn't mean games wont get bigger. It's a fact that when consoles get more powerful games get bigger in size due to the fact that levels are bigger and textures are also bigger and all of those bigger textures that are in the bigger levels will take up allot more space. You sound allot like Scott Nudds a man that insisted that a PC would never need 1GB of RAM but he was obviously proved wrong. Don't be short sighted like Scot Nudds.... learn from his mistakes... Here's the Scott Nudds blog from ten years ago it's quit funny.
http://www.digg.com/hardware/A_Gigabyte_of_RAM_You_must_be_crazy
PC games have already begun exceeding the space of a DVD-9. Dark messiah is already over 8.5 gigs when put onto the HDD
I think having Blu ray was smart. Mass Effect almost ran out of room on the 360
Does "Mass Effect" fit on one disc?
Yep, but just barely. This is a monstrous game. In fact, there was a time – not too long ago – when we pretty much scoffed at the idea of fitting onto one disc. But, there’s an art to optimizing the data that goes on a disc – plus we have a few programmers that seem to pull off magic tricks right when we need them.
See so as time goes on game designers will want the extra space so having blu ray was smart. Even if you think it was dumb.
http://blogs.ign.com/BioWare_Games/2007/02/23/47642/
Unless you possess the power to Alter reality then your dislike or like of the Blu-ray really has no meaning.
It's here. Deal with it. Quit moaning.
[QUOTE="pimperjones"]What are you gonna do when games get bigger, in a few years games will start reaching 15-20 gig range. You expect game manufacturers to make two different copies of each game one on single BluRay and a second version on 2-3 DVDs. Thats not practicle. No ones gonna do that. Deyee
Oh, you mean how EA, Rockstar, Bethesda and other developers/publishers have already done with Blu-Ray and regular DVD games? Oblivion, Madden(other sports games), and GTA IV upcoming.
Yes, Sony was thinking ahead, but at the same time they were being a smidge too zealous with the Blu-Ray tech.
As a gamer, I honestly don't care about having to get up a couple times to change discs for Blue Dragon. It didn't bother anyone else back in the day with Final Fantasy VII now did it?
Also, I highly doubt that in the next few years that MOST games will be in the 15-20 gig range, maybe a few, but not the majority.
Mind your gob...as they say in england...LAIR is 35 gig.......
Lol harsh...., Yeah like some here have stated the PS3 and next gen gaming does need Blu-ray simply because of texture maps/compression! We all know that compressed texture loose a percentage of the detailed quality they would've possed in an ogiinal scene. By having simply a larger disc medium textures coul dbe left in their original state making for better visuals and FASTER LOADTIMES. After all this is the sole reason why both last gen and more recent PC games come on DVD's. The benefits trully outweigh the cost.
Also take into consideration that many newer games (in particular UE3) can support "2048x2048" (or more) texture maps and beyound! This "avg. bump" over the typical 1024x256/512 adds a great ammount of detail with only say a 4-16mb increase in resources (ram/vram). Now with that said this 4-16mb texture usage gets multiplied by the ammount of textures on a level per level throught the game making for a much larger file size on Disc. So basically the HW of either a PC, 360, or PS3 is there for such advanced textured gaming but the medium to access that (uncompressed) data is only on the PS3 (or what ever Blu-ray games may come to PC).
Theres a trick in which you can uncompress level textures for faster load times in Doom3 PC edition and it adds like 1.4-2 gigs in the overall folder (after deleting the orig. which is like 300mbs) so imagine what this when say Quake wars comes out on multi DVD PC, DVD9 360, and Blu-ray PS3! Im positive that either the loadtimes if not the texture quality will be rather close between the PC & PS3 (& thats considering if the porters actually do a good job this time)
But yeah I read most of this in an article where some dev used like 7 terabytes of uncompressed digital "footage" 4 one of those Shrek like movies. They stated that working with less compression results in better quality, faster access, and less computational strain on the CPU/GPU's cause your dealing with raw format.
Myugenjin
A lot of good but point but I got a few minor corrections:
1) "1.4-2 gigs in the overall folder (after deleting the orig. which is like 300mbs)"
It's MB, mbp means "mega bits per second". :)
2) Keeping files uncompressed actually prolongs loading times on the PS3 because of Blu-Ray's 9MBps reading speed and uncompressed data takes up too much space in the RAM leaving less space for things like 1080p frame buffers.
Also the CELL is really good at decompressing data and can do it on the fly with minimal hit in performance.
So compressed data decompressed on the fly gives better graphics and shorter loading times on the PS3 than uncompressed data would.
On PCs it's a different because the CPUs usually are too weak to decompress on the fly while handling a game and PCs got more RAM to store the uncompressed data in.
What Blu-Ray does allow for is to compress the data at so high bit-rates that it doesn't lose quality than would have been possible on DVD9, so instead of uncompressed we should rather say lossless compression.
Enough with the nitpicking, I just waned to add to your comment about the GPUs being able to handle really high res textures but it matters very little if the screen resolution is so low that the details can't be seen most of the time (why the image quality loss from encoding textures at too low bit-rates, due to disc capacity restrictions, isn't all that noticeable when the game is played in 720p).
This is why I hope more developers will render their games natively in 1080p.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment