Blu Ray is not useful for gaming this gen

I'm really tired of all this "The 360 uses outdated hardware because it doesnt have Blu Ray" or "This game is only possible on Blu Ray"

Lets look at some facts:

1) Blu Ray is too slow at 2x to stream data off the disc hence the installs

2) A lot of 1st party and exclusive 3rd party games require installs that are up to 5 gb in size for many games

-Hot Shots Golf

-MGS4

Multiplat:

-DMC4

-SC4

-GTA4

etc etc

3) If you've played MGS4 you know how many load screens there are, there are load screen for MENUS. Also:

-About 20 mins worth of installs 4.5 gb of space used up

-Installs in between every chapter even after you've gone through them once

4) MGS4 was confirmed to be about 33gb from someone who used a pc Blu Ray drive:

http://i32.tinypic.com/2b1574.jpg

5) Remember FF13"only possible on Blu Ray"?

In reality 2x Blu Ray is gimped. Sorry but thats the truth. If it was at 4x it would be an advantage. But at 2x there is a trade off with Blu Ray, installations and hard drive space or getting up and changing a disc every 12 hours. I'd rather change discs.

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

FragTycoon

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

More storage space is always useful but it doesn't mean it can't be worked around.

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

mephisto_11

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

you guys have one game on your own system Lost odyssey

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

mephisto_11

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

mgs4 :)

lol just messin

I agree actually. Blu-Ray wasn't needed this generation But Sony shoved it in their to give them an advantage in the HD format war.

More storage space is always useful but it doesn't mean it can't be worked around.

Blue-Sky

Pretty much it.

Blu Ray is definitely useful, but certainly not necessary.

It's useful, but it's not necessary. Not only do the games cost more, but Blu-Ray movies are expensive.Shad0ki11

cost more man? games on each system cost $65 dollars.. as for making the game costing to much, we aren't giving them development money right? and yeah the movies are expensive..the price will drop.

Hey

Blueray is one of the advantages that PS3 has over 360

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

mephisto_11

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

MGS4

Back in the day of the the floppy disc the CD wasn't needed and that turned out to be wrong. The DVD wasn't needed over the CD when it xame out and look how that turned out. So saying Blu-Ray isn't needed could be proven to be untrue in the end.jimm895

Of course, but I seriously doubt it'll be THIS GENERATION that proves it. I mean most games can still fit on a single DVD right now!

1) is false

Games like Uncharted show that it is possible to make games with no-in-game loading screens on the PS3 due to streaming assets from both the hard disc and the Blu Ray drive WITHOUT having an install process.

The Blu Ray has two bonuses over DVD-9:

1) the obvious, it's higher capacity

2) it has a FIXED read speed that is higher than the AVERAGE speed of the DVD-9. Because the DVD-9's read speed is variable, depending on where the data is placed, if the disc is packed full of data that needs to be accessed evenly, the drive obviously isn't going to be reading the outer rim of the disc (the fastest read speed) all of the time. If it's an even spread, the DVD-9 is going to variate between fastest and slowest and fall behind the consistent average speed of the Blu Ray drive, which is more than adequate. It's much faster than the slowest read speed of the 360's DVD-9 drive and significantly slower than the fastest read speed.

If you have a packed disc and need to cram a lot of data into each disc, another limitation arises in DVD-9. Essential data that is integral to the game must be placed on EACH and EVERY disc or perhaps just 2 or 3 of them. For example, character models and specific texture/level data. If you have a persistent level map, say, the one in Final Fantasy VII, you need to make the entire world map available on all the discs you are able to free roam. Dialogue is the same, as is any other kind of essential data.

That means that the sub-8 gigabytes available on the DVD-9 is further compromised, spreading it across more and more discs and forcing each disc to be more crammed, forcing the developers to hassle with the logical technique of putting the most desired and most frequently accessed data on the outer rim. Development then necessitates that they place data evenly, giving rise to a non-ideal situation in which Blu Ray's read speed would be superior to the DVD's average.

So, let's say, for sports games and other junky non-story-driven games, DVD-9 is going to be a plus since you're not going to need to cram. But on RPGs and other stuff where you pack a lot of material onto the disc, the Blu Ray is both going to be able to hold something like at least 5-6 times more data per disc on a dual-layer in addition to having a faster average read speed.

That, and, I'm not sure what the hell Naughty Dog did on Uncharted, but assuming anyone can replicate that, game over, gentlemen. PS3 wins this debate.

That said, a lot of developers are really sloppy with loading/installs on the PS3. At least that's what I have to assume, since there is no technical limitation that I can see on PS3.

[QUOTE="jimm895"]Back in the day of the the floppy disc the CD wasn't needed and that turned out to be wrong. The DVD wasn't needed over the CD when it xame out and look how that turned out. So saying Blu-Ray isn't needed could be proven to be untrue in the end.ThePlothole

Of course, but I seriously doubt it'll be THIS GENERATION that proves it. I mean most games can still fit on a single DVD right now!

Eh... "just wait"? :P

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

SiKh22

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

you guys have one game on your own system Lost odyssey

[QUOTE="SiKh22"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

Deathtransit

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

you guys have one game on your own system Lost odyssey

How is that ownage? The game RUNS on DVD9, without a 5 gb install and long load times. I only have to swap a disc every 12 hours

[QUOTE="Deathtransit"][QUOTE="SiKh22"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

mephisto_11

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

you guys have one game on your own system Lost odyssey

How is that ownage? The game RUNS on DVD9, without a 5 gb install and long load times. I only have to swap a disc every 12 hours

lost odyssey would not need to be four discs if it was on blu ray. i love it how the person that asked that question completely ignored this fact. 360 users can look forward to a 2-3 disc ffXIII.desyple

Because changing the disc after a 10 hours is a total buzz kill :|

I bet you throw your games out the window every time you have to take a bathroom break, or eat and sleep....

lost odyssey would not need to be four discs if it was on blu ray. i love it how the person that asked that question completely ignored this fact. 360 users can look forward to a 2-3 disc ffXIII.desyple

Honestly, disc swapping never seemed like a big deal in the past. At least not when it was only 3-4 discs.

[QUOTE="desyple"]lost odyssey would not need to be four discs if it was on blu ray. i love it how the person that asked that question completely ignored this fact. 360 users can look forward to a 2-3 disc ffXIII.Blue-Sky

Because changing the disc after a 10 hours is a total buzz kill :|

I bet you throw your games out the window every time you have to take a bathroom break, or eat and sleep....

maybe in some people's mind mutliple disks and disk swapping seem old since its been here since forever, and blu ray is something different

But i mean blu ray is different it will be the future

like game cartridges to CD disks

I don't really blame blu ray, but I blame the PS3 for being unable to read disc speeds without the help of installs.

Blu ray and "teh cell" are 2 of the biggest loads of BS ive heard this gen.Gh0st_Of_0nyx

why? they don't work?

oh nm.. I get it, ya don't like the PS3... check ;)

man gamers have amensia. we all have probably played a game once upon a time that used atleast 2+ discs. now people claim ownage on fanboys because of blu ray. i dont know if everyone on here has seen WALL-E but you know in that movie how lazy the people became. is that what were heading for people. come on.

blu ray is not a necessity this gen. come on not even computers have fully used blu ray for gaming (never will) so consoles wont have to necessarily either. i think consoles could just be like a pc where you have swapable internal hdds and you just install games on the hdd vs having to use blu ray.

I'm really tired of all this "The 360 uses outdated hardware because it doesnt have Blu Ray" or "This game is only possible on Blu Ray"

Lets look at some facts:

1) Blu Ray is too slow at 2x to stream data off the disc hence the installs

2) A lot of 1st party and exclusive 3rd party games require installs that are up to 5 gb in size for many games

-Hot Shots Golf

-MGS4

Multiplat:

-DMC4

-SC4

-GTA4

etc etc

3) If you've played MGS4 you know how many load screens there are, there are load screen for MENUS. Also:

-About 20 mins worth of installs 4.5 gb of space used up

-Installs in between every chapter even after you've gone through them once

4) MGS4 was confirmed to be about 33gb from someone who used a pc Blu Ray drive:

http://i32.tinypic.com/2b1574.jpg

5) Remember FF13"only possible on Blu Ray"?

In reality 2x Blu Ray is gimped. Sorry but thats the truth. If it was at 4x it would be an advantage. But at 2x there is a trade off with Blu Ray, installations and hard drive space or getting up and changing a disc every 12 hours. I'd rather change discs.

mephisto_11

1) is false

Games like Uncharted show that it is possible to make games with no-in-game loading screens on the PS3 due to streaming assets from both the hard disc and the Blu Ray drive WITHOUT having an install process.

The Blu Ray has two bonuses over DVD-9:

1) the obvious, it's higher capacity

2) it has a FIXED read speed that is higher than the AVERAGE speed of the DVD-9. Because the DVD-9's read speed is variable, depending on where the data is placed, if the disc is packed full of data that needs to be accessed evenly, the drive obviously isn't going to be reading the outer rim of the disc (the fastest read speed) all of the time. If it's an even spread, the DVD-9 is going to variate between fastest and slowest and fall behind the consistent average speed of the Blu Ray drive, which is more than adequate. It's much faster than the slowest read speed of the 360's DVD-9 drive and significantly slower than the fastest read speed.

If you have a packed disc and need to cram a lot of data into each disc, another limitation arises in DVD-9. Essential data that is integral to the game must be placed on EACH and EVERY disc or perhaps just 2 or 3 of them. For example, character models and specific texture/level data. If you have a persistent level map, say, the one in Final Fantasy VII, you need to make the entire world map available on all the discs you are able to free roam. Dialogue is the same, as is any other kind of essential data.

That means that the sub-8 gigabytes available on the DVD-9 is further compromised, spreading it across more and more discs and forcing each disc to be more crammed, forcing the developers to hassle with the logical technique of putting the most desired and most frequently accessed data on the outer rim. Development then necessitates that they place data evenly, giving rise to a non-ideal situation in which Blu Ray's read speed would be superior to the DVD's average.

So, let's say, for sports games and other junky non-story-driven games, DVD-9 is going to be a plus since you're not going to need to cram. But on RPGs and other stuff where you pack a lot of material onto the disc, the Blu Ray is both going to be able to hold something like at least 5-6 times more data per disc on a dual-layer in addition to having a faster average read speed.

That, and, I'm not sure what the hell Naughty Dog did on Uncharted, but assuming anyone can replicate that, game over, gentlemen. PS3 wins this debate.

That said, a lot of developers are really sloppy with loading/installs on the PS3. At least that's what I have to assume, since there is no technical limitation that I can see on PS3.

BobHipJames

man gamers have amensia. we all have probably played a game once upon a time that used atleast 2+ discs. now people claim ownage on fanboys because of blu ray. i dont know if everyone on here has seen WALL-E but you know in that movie how lazy the people became. is that what were heading for people. come on.

blu ray is not a necessity this gen. come on not even computers have fully used blu ray for gaming (never will) so consoles wont have to necessarily either. i think consoles could just be like a pc where you have swapable internal hdds and you just install games on the hdd vs having to use blu ray.

xbox360isgr8t

the thing about blu-ray is that its the size of a HDD yet its many many times cheeper.

Blu-ray is the next format for distributed hard-copy digital information. If you dont like that FACT! because it happens to be part of the PS3, get over it.

Blu-ray is not NEEDED in order to play video games, hell, the continued sales of PS2 and Wii prove you don't need a PS3/360 for gaming at all. But a progression of technology (especially for a console that plans to be around for 10 years) is quite important and wanted for a electronic fans like myself.

changing disc forces a game to be semi linear thats what people don't understand all sandbox games would be screwedRagashahs

Grand Theft Auto still manages to fit just fine on a single DVD.

Right now it's really games with a lot of long cutscenes that seem to be pushing beyond the limits of the format. And really this isn't something you would expect in a so-called sandbox game.

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

"games will never use that much space"

I love how history repeats itself.

FragTycoon

Multiple cartridge games didn't work back in the day and compression technology wasn't where it was today. Its a completely different story today. Show me one game that couldn't be done on DVD9. AND DONT SAY MGS4

MGS4

Heavenly Sword

1) is false

Games like Uncharted show that it is possible to make games with no-in-game loading screens on the PS3 due to streaming assets from both the hard disc and the Blu Ray drive WITHOUT having an install process.

The Blu Ray has two bonuses over DVD-9:

1) the obvious, it's higher capacity

2) it has a FIXED read speed that is higher than the AVERAGE speed of the DVD-9. Because the DVD-9's read speed is variable, depending on where the data is placed, if the disc is packed full of data that needs to be accessed evenly, the drive obviously isn't going to be reading the outer rim of the disc (the fastest read speed) all of the time. If it's an even spread, the DVD-9 is going to variate between fastest and slowest and fall behind the consistent average speed of the Blu Ray drive, which is more than adequate. It's much faster than the slowest read speed of the 360's DVD-9 drive and significantly slower than the fastest read speed.

If you have a packed disc and need to cram a lot of data into each disc, another limitation arises in DVD-9. Essential data that is integral to the game must be placed on EACH and EVERY disc or perhaps just 2 or 3 of them. For example, character models and specific texture/level data. If you have a persistent level map, say, the one in Final Fantasy VII, you need to make the entire world map available on all the discs you are able to free roam. Dialogue is the same, as is any other kind of essential data.

That means that the sub-8 gigabytes available on the DVD-9 is further compromised, spreading it across more and more discs and forcing each disc to be more crammed, forcing the developers to hassle with the logical technique of putting the most desired and most frequently accessed data on the outer rim. Development then necessitates that they place data evenly, giving rise to a non-ideal situation in which Blu Ray's read speed would be superior to the DVD's average.

So, let's say, for sports games and other junky non-story-driven games, DVD-9 is going to be a plus since you're not going to need to cram. But on RPGs and other stuff where you pack a lot of material onto the disc, the Blu Ray is both going to be able to hold something like at least 5-6 times more data per disc on a dual-layer in addition to having a faster average read speed.

That, and, I'm not sure what the hell Naughty Dog did on Uncharted, but assuming anyone can replicate that, game over, gentlemen. PS3 wins this debate.

That said, a lot of developers are really sloppy with loading/installs on the PS3. At least that's what I have to assume, since there is no technical limitation that I can see on PS3.

BobHipJames

Yo lemmings, you all ignoring this post is nothing more than damage control. This obviously is the only guy posting in this thread that has a clue what he's posting about, and it's being ignored by lemmings since it doesn't fit their fanboy vision.

u do realize that the 2x speed was for the first generation bluray players right?stereointegrity

That includes the Playstation 3.

Your last point about FF is incredibly stupid. any game can be made for any problem, even if it does have FF13 as its name (:o)

BUT that may mean comprimises for one or both platforms. Thats the only annoying thing about this going multiplat.

Blu ray is useful for gaming this gen, it means larger games, but at the moment at the trade off that you will have to do an install to make it run well, which is perfectly fine when new hard drives are cheap anyways.

Next gen though I would expect a better blu ray drive to be fitted to the ps4, what MS will do I dont know. I doubt they will make all their games downloadable, the internet cant take that yet.

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

1) is false

Games like Uncharted show that it is possible to make games with no-in-game loading screens on the PS3 due to streaming assets from both the hard disc and the Blu Ray drive WITHOUT having an install process.

The Blu Ray has two bonuses over DVD-9:

1) the obvious, it's higher capacity

2) it has a FIXED read speed that is higher than the AVERAGE speed of the DVD-9. Because the DVD-9's read speed is variable, depending on where the data is placed, if the disc is packed full of data that needs to be accessed evenly, the drive obviously isn't going to be reading the outer rim of the disc (the fastest read speed) all of the time. If it's an even spread, the DVD-9 is going to variate between fastest and slowest and fall behind the consistent average speed of the Blu Ray drive, which is more than adequate. It's much faster than the slowest read speed of the 360's DVD-9 drive and significantly slower than the fastest read speed.

If you have a packed disc and need to cram a lot of data into each disc, another limitation arises in DVD-9. Essential data that is integral to the game must be placed on EACH and EVERY disc or perhaps just 2 or 3 of them. For example, character models and specific texture/level data. If you have a persistent level map, say, the one in Final Fantasy VII, you need to make the entire world map available on all the discs you are able to free roam. Dialogue is the same, as is any other kind of essential data.

That means that the sub-8 gigabytes available on the DVD-9 is further compromised, spreading it across more and more discs and forcing each disc to be more crammed, forcing the developers to hassle with the logical technique of putting the most desired and most frequently accessed data on the outer rim. Development then necessitates that they place data evenly, giving rise to a non-ideal situation in which Blu Ray's read speed would be superior to the DVD's average.

So, let's say, for sports games and other junky non-story-driven games, DVD-9 is going to be a plus since you're not going to need to cram. But on RPGs and other stuff where you pack a lot of material onto the disc, the Blu Ray is both going to be able to hold something like at least 5-6 times more data per disc on a dual-layer in addition to having a faster average read speed.

That, and, I'm not sure what the hell Naughty Dog did on Uncharted, but assuming anyone can replicate that, game over, gentlemen. PS3 wins this debate.

That said, a lot of developers are really sloppy with loading/installs on the PS3. At least that's what I have to assume, since there is no technical limitation that I can see on PS3.

NielsNL

Yo lemmings, you all ignoring this post is nothing more than damage control. This obviously is the only guy posting in this thread that has a clue what he's posting about, and it's being ignored by lemmings since it doesn't fit their fanboy vision.

exactly.

also naughty dog just copied the data again and again on the disk, so that the ps3 could read certain bits from multiple places to sped up loading times.

[QUOTE="stereointegrity"]u do realize that the 2x speed was for the first generation bluray players right?ThePlothole

That includes the Playstation 3.

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

1) is false

Games like Uncharted show that it is possible to make games with no-in-game loading screens on the PS3 due to streaming assets from both the hard disc and the Blu Ray drive WITHOUT having an install process.

The Blu Ray has two bonuses over DVD-9:

1) the obvious, it's higher capacity

2) it has a FIXED read speed that is higher than the AVERAGE speed of the DVD-9. Because the DVD-9's read speed is variable, depending on where the data is placed, if the disc is packed full of data that needs to be accessed evenly, the drive obviously isn't going to be reading the outer rim of the disc (the fastest read speed) all of the time. If it's an even spread, the DVD-9 is going to variate between fastest and slowest and fall behind the consistent average speed of the Blu Ray drive, which is more than adequate. It's much faster than the slowest read speed of the 360's DVD-9 drive and significantly slower than the fastest read speed.

If you have a packed disc and need to cram a lot of data into each disc, another limitation arises in DVD-9. Essential data that is integral to the game must be placed on EACH and EVERY disc or perhaps just 2 or 3 of them. For example, character models and specific texture/level data. If you have a persistent level map, say, the one in Final Fantasy VII, you need to make the entire world map available on all the discs you are able to free roam. Dialogue is the same, as is any other kind of essential data.

That means that the sub-8 gigabytes available on the DVD-9 is further compromised, spreading it across more and more discs and forcing each disc to be more crammed, forcing the developers to hassle with the logical technique of putting the most desired and most frequently accessed data on the outer rim. Development then necessitates that they place data evenly, giving rise to a non-ideal situation in which Blu Ray's read speed would be superior to the DVD's average.

So, let's say, for sports games and other junky non-story-driven games, DVD-9 is going to be a plus since you're not going to need to cram. But on RPGs and other stuff where you pack a lot of material onto the disc, the Blu Ray is both going to be able to hold something like at least 5-6 times more data per disc on a dual-layer in addition to having a faster average read speed.

That, and, I'm not sure what the hell Naughty Dog did on Uncharted, but assuming anyone can replicate that, game over, gentlemen. PS3 wins this debate.

That said, a lot of developers are really sloppy with loading/installs on the PS3. At least that's what I have to assume, since there is no technical limitation that I can see on PS3.

NielsNL

Yo lemmings, you all ignoring this post is nothing more than damage control. This obviously is the only guy posting in this thread that has a clue what he's posting about, and it's being ignored by lemmings since it doesn't fit their fanboy vision.

Well i'm no Lemming but i'm pretty sure he is wrong about BR read speeds. I think that it has already been proven that at 4x BR is faster than a DVD-9 on average...but the PS3 runs at 2x and IS slower than the DVD.

Also, if you need 50GB to make a great game then how come Crysis fits on a DVD-9? And when installed without language packs takes under 3GB of hard drive space? Developers need to spend more money on licensing compression technology.

Sony fans hate the fact that they can't show why BR is needed and yet they all had to stump up the cash for it being in the PS3 (and now have to suffer cut down console versions as a result). It was a trojan horse, it won the format war for the BR association, it lost you your backwards compatibility and many functions from the PS3 and it barely, if at all, helps make games better.

Its good that its there:

1) lazy devs won't bother saving space on a DVD, speeding up production time (lord knows PS3 titles are hard enough to make )

2) More content, much much more content. Uncharted just let rip on content because it simply could, result: a brilliant game with zero restrictions