Blu-Ray doesn't make games longer, look at HS and Uncharted.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

Just what I thought, you avoid the quesation, not even to come close to answering it.

Yeah, the games you listed are short. What does that have to do with blu-ray?

Truth_Hurts_U

Just what I thought, avoiding the proof. I have yet to see this stunning game, with mind blowing graphics and length on a blu Ray disc.

Next gen maybe. But at this rate... My $60 is just paying for future next gen (longer) blu ray titles. I want them now.... not 5 or more years later.

Again, what does the game's length have to do with blu-ray. You still have yet to answer the question. You "proof" says nothing about blu-ray.

It depends. Considering many games, if demanding enough, require the Bluray disk to contain redundant information in order to statistically boost average read speeds. Then tack on the fact that games on the PS3 are less compressed then on the XBox 360. In reality, it all depends, since theoretically a game could be shorter on the PS3 due to these two factors.

If a game is released, by an unbiased company, that essentially has less gameplay elements (whether it be levels or game modes - w/e), and says the content was cut due to the smaller size of the DVD9 disk - only then will you have a real argument. Theoretically, one could say, some game may be shorter

rimnet00

That would be a good point if there weren't still lots of room left on a blu-ray disc after all of that content. Not one PS3 game has even come close to filling a blu-ray disc. Until they do so, they can add in all they want.

[QUOTE="rimnet00"]

It depends. Considering many games, if demanding enough, require the Bluray disk to contain redundant information in order to statistically boost average read speeds. Then tack on the fact that games on the PS3 are less compressed then on the XBox 360. In reality, it all depends, since theoretically a game could be shorter on the PS3 due to these two factors.

If a game is released, by an unbiased company, that essentially has less gameplay elements (whether it be levels or game modes - w/e), and says the content was cut due to the smaller size of the DVD9 disk - only then will you have a real argument. Theoretically, one could say, some game may be shorter

The_Crucible

That would be a good point if there weren't still lots of room left on a blu-ray disc after all of that content. Not one PS3 game has even come close to filling a blu-ray disc. Until they do so, they can add in all they want.

Source?

Blu-Ray can mean longer games, but it depends on the dev. If the dev makes the game short, it doesn't matter. They can use that extra space for having uncompressed video/audio unlike on 360 where they have to compress the crap out of it. In the future, 360's DVDs will be compressed so much that it will take forever to decompress.AIH_PSP

What? :lol: not at all.

All compression does is affect quality not speed. The higher the quality the larger the size of the file.

Again, what does the game's length have to do with blu-ray. You still have yet to answer the question. You "proof" says nothing about blu-ray.The_Crucible

You really have no idea how blu ray works on ps3 do you? So you want me to school you...? Ok.

1. It uses uncompressed data.

2. It seek time sucks and load time.

A. Which leads to it being padded with replicated data or just filler data.

Blu Ray is too weak this gen to have anything of great length with out having massive load times or file sizes.

Like I said I gave you proof. Take your goggles off and read.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

Again, what does the game's length have to do with blu-ray. You still have yet to answer the question. You "proof" says nothing about blu-ray.Truth_Hurts_U

You really have no idea how blu ray works on ps3 do you? So you want me to school you...? Ok.

1. It uses uncompressed data.

2. it seek time sucks and load time.

A. Which leads to it being padded with replicated data or just filler data.

Blu Ray is took weak this gen to have anything of great length with out having massive load times or file sizes.

Like I said I gave you proof. Take you goggles off and read.

A 9GB game on the 360 is 18GB in the PS3? If it's a megabyte less, your whole argument falls apart.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

Again, what does the game's length have to do with blu-ray. You still have yet to answer the question. You "proof" says nothing about blu-ray.Truth_Hurts_U

You really have no idea how blu ray works on ps3 do you? So you want me to school you...? Ok.

1. It uses uncompressed data.

2. It seek time sucks and load time.

A. Which leads to it being padded with replicated data or just filler data.

Blu Ray is too weak this gen to have anything of great length with out having massive load times or file sizes.

Like I said I gave you proof. Take your goggles off and read.

1. I own a PS3. So to act like you are telling me anything is hilarious.

2. Yeah, it uses uncompressed data. uncompressed is higher quality than compressed.

3.Seek andm load times suck, huh? I hear that all of the time. Tell me, which game has bad load times? Oblivion? Oh, wait, that was the 360. Uuuuuuh, I can't think of one.

4. They can use all of the filler data they want. Blu-ray has a lot of wiggle room. Show me where ANY game has maxed out the blu-ray disc and I'll shut up. Chances are, you won't find ****.

5. Without proof of blu-ray discs being filled, you have no room to say that blu-ray is limiting game length. DVD's, on the other hand, are so maxed out that devs are having to decide what stays and what goes. Maybe you should focus on that, the bigger capacity issue. But you won't, you are a fanboy.

Once again, you have completely failed on prooving that blu-ray is limiting the length of games. Not one PS3 game has taken up all of the space on a blu-ray disc, that says it all.

1. I own a PS3. So to act like you are telling me anything is hilarious.

You have no idea how blu ray on PS3 works.

2. Yeah, it uses uncompressed data. uncompressed is higher quality than compressed.

Then why are multiplat games still better looking on DVD? Because you fell for the old myth.

3.Seek andm load times suck, huh? I hear that all of the time. Tell me, which game has bad load times? Oblivion? Oh, wait, that was the 360. Uuuuuuh, I can't think of one.

I already told you what game(s) have bad load times. And game that installs a file to the hard drive has bad load times. That why the PS3 has the crutch (HDD standard).

4. They can use all of the filler data they want. Blu-ray has a lot of wiggle room. Show me where ANY game has maxed out the blu-ray disc and I'll shut up. Chances are, you won't find ****.

MGS4 is said to be using 50GB Blu Ray disc. Lets see how long that game turns out to be.

When you have games that already take up almost an entire single layer BR disc.... That look and play no better then a DVD disc game...There is something wrong.

5. Without proof of blu-ray discs being filled, you have no room to say that blu-ray is limiting game length. DVD's, on the other hand, are so maxed out that devs are having to decide what stays and what goes. Maybe you should focus on that, the bigger capacity issue. But you won't, you are a fanboy.

Read above.

Once again, you have completely failed on prooving that blu-ray is limiting the length of games. Not one PS3 game has taken up all of the space on a blu-ray disc, that says it all.

No were did I say Blu Ray is limiting games. Thats what happens when a fanboy twisted your words. I said it makes games short and fat. Learn to read please.

The_Crucible

Try playing a big sized game compressed and compare it to the same game while its uncompressed.

Most of the time you don't see much of a difference except some games lag when compressed like GTA.

A 9GB game on the 360 is 18GB in the PS3? If it's a megabyte less, your whole argument falls apart.
Xolver

All I have to say is what?

So if a game isn't double the size on a Blu Ray disc then a DVD disc... I fail? WTF?

Doesn't change the fact that the game is larger by GB's.

Truth_Hurts_U, I must say, you sound like really huge fanboy. I'll stay out of your argument though.

well right now it seems like the only thing being done with the extra space is putting about 9 different languages on it. That's just a waste, IMO.BuryMe

It's not a waste if the devs didn't think of making the game longer/full of more content anyway. If it's either that or the regular game, what would you prefer?

[QUOTE="Xolver"]A 9GB game on the 360 is 18GB in the PS3? If it's a megabyte less, your whole argument falls apart.
Truth_Hurts_U

All I have to say is what?

So if a game isn't double the size on a Blu Ray disc then a DVD disc... I fail? WTF?

Doesn't change the fact that the game is larger by GB's.

Exactly. So if the game is, say, 11GB instead of 9GB (and that's probably an exaggeration), how the HELL does that work against BR? They've still got much space to work with.

Truth_Hurts_U, I must say, you sound like really huge fanboy. I'll stay out of your argument though.

Xolver

Um, no... I'm realistic. I'm not blinded by the dust coated finish of my PS3.

Exactly. So if the game is, say, 11GB instead of 9GB (and that's probably an exaggeration), how the HELL does that work against BR? They've still got much space to work with.

Xolver

Like I said BR makes games small and fat.

In the furture (next gen) it will change. Right now this statement holds true.

No. No, no, no, no. That doesn't make any sense at all.

What you fanboyish people don't realize is that potential and actual outcome is totally different. PS3 has the potential for a much longer game (and I'm sure that will, to some degree, be apparant in the JRPGs), but when developers choose to aim at different goals, how can you expect the game to be 100 hours long? How do you NOT realize that the size of the BR is distributed differently for a game, with the goal not being length? It's common sense, and the only reason for not understanding that would be "I own a 360" or "I like whining".

Xolver

You might ave noticed there are other threads in this forum where people (such as myself) are complaining about the longevity of the games. I am pretty sure longevity is not what Sony had in mind when they thought about installing a Blue Ray disc on the ps3.

When people talk about the Ps3 (with no bashing purposes) they always talk about potential, they use sentences like "wait and see, PSe will own in late 2008" etc.

I am not saying this will not happen (that does not mean that's gonna happen for sure either), I just wonder, can't I wait without a PS3 collecting dust in my sitting room?

[QUOTE="Xolver"]

Exactly. So if the game is, say, 11GB instead of 9GB (and that's probably an exaggeration), how the HELL does that work against BR? They've still got much space to work with.

Truth_Hurts_U

Like I said BR makes games small and fat.

In the furture (next gen)it will change. Right now this statement hold true.

So it works against BR because it's larger on BR, even though it doesn't affect the content of the game (or even better it with the audio)? Yeah, you're making much sense here, budd.

Truth_Hurts_U, I must say, you sound like really huge fanboy. I'll stay out of your argument though.

Xolver

I don't think he's a fanboy but a true fan ofgaming, yes. He does own both the PS3 and 360. As far as his argument goes, he's making valid points which you Sony fanboys can't comprehend.

So it works against BR because it's larger on BR, even though it doesn't affect the content of the game (or even better it with the audio)? Yeah, you're making much sense here, budd. Xolver

So audio makes a game longer and makes the value greater? Talk about not making sense... This takes the cake.

I'm not playing the game to hear 7.1 audio..... I'm playing it to have fun. Audio only isn't fun.

[QUOTE="Xolver"]

No. No, no, no, no. That doesn't make any sense at all.

What you fanboyish people don't realize is that potential and actual outcome is totally different. PS3 has the potential for a much longer game (and I'm sure that will, to some degree, be apparant in the JRPGs), but when developers choose to aim at different goals, how can you expect the game to be 100 hours long? How do you NOT realize that the size of the BR is distributed differently for a game, with the goal not being length? It's common sense, and the only reason for not understanding that would be "I own a 360" or "I like whining".

siafni

You might ave noticed there are other threads in this forum where people (such as myself) are complaining about the longevity of the games. I am pretty sure longevity is not what Sony had in mind when they thought about installing a Blue Ray disc on the ps3.

When people talk about the Ps3 (with no bashing purposes) they always talk about potential, they use sentences like "wait and see, PSe will own in late 2008" etc.

I am not saying this will not happen (that does not mean that's gonna happen for sure either), I just wonder, can't I wait without a PS3 collecting dust in my sitting room?

Well, I might sound hypocritical and biased, but here's my take on it.

People have all the rights in the world to claim BR adds content and length (though I've never heard length expressively being spoken, but nvm), and you can't prove them wrong no matter what you do.

People have got to have not much sense by saying "BR makes games small", because frankly, 1. They'll never be able to prove it. 2. It already proves them wrong in the audio department and more subtly in others.

As for your PS3, I can't say much but "try play shorter games with more value and online", because I'm not here to defend bad games, I'm here to defend BR in this thread.

[QUOTE="Xolver"]So it works against BR because it's larger on BR, even though it doesn't affect the content of the game (or even better it with the audio)? Yeah, you're making much sense here, budd. Truth_Hurts_U

So audio makes a game longer and makes the value greater? Talk about not making sense... This takes the cake.

I'm not playing the game to hear 7.1 audio..... I'm playing it to have fun. Audio only isn't fun.

What? You don't seem to be comprehending me.

Fine, let me give you an example which is waaaay exaggerated in *your* favor.

A game is made, it should be 9GB, but the devs reckon it's way too slow, so they puff it with 14GB of recycled data, and the game is now 23GB.

Why does that work against BR? Seriously, why? They even have more space to work with and better audio.

Now we go back to reality and assume the recycled data is not X1.5 times the size of the game. So devs still have a lot of space to work with.

You know what's wrong in your argument? When you say BR games are fat and I say it doesn't work against them, you say it still doesn't improve their quality. When I say it's still equal (or better with the audio) quality, you say audio isn't much and they're fat. Basically, you return to the same faulty argument which didn't even work against BR in the first place. Your argument's flaws would look sooo much clearer if you didn't decide to delete the whole quote tree before waiting for 5 quotes.

[QUOTE="mclovin401"]

your so right about the length of the games. take a game like GTA, sure the stories are the same for 360 and ps3, but you could fit a city 5 times bigger on the blu-ray (ps3) version.

myke2010

QFT!!

It's so funny to read cows parroting Sony.

That still dosen't change the fact that nothing on the PS3 couldn't be done on the 360 at this point. "Potential" means nothing if it's not utilized.Erkidu

Audio. Multiple languages. I know, you can't feel the audio change and you speak English so you don't care for the other languages, save it. Still, avoid making untrue claims all the time.

That's the case with everyone that claims similar claims: Nothing can be done on the PS3 that can't be done on the 360. What about XXXXX? Oh, I don't mind XXXXX, so I'll change my argument now.

Get it right the first time, dammit.

well right now it seems like the only thing being done with the extra space is putting about 9 different languages on it. That's just a waste, IMO.BuryMe

:lol:

it is also about having more animations, sound, etc.

have fun with your 640p halo3 and its 4 hour sp.

you lemms r bunch of 5 year old tards, just go away, plzz.

lemmings think if u put 1mb of file in a blu ray disc it will magically turn into 2mb or something?

its the possibility + opportunity.

[QUOTE="Xolver"]

Alright, what was the price of the original PS3?

-

What's the price you suggest?

=

What's the price of BR?

c_smithii

What was the price of the PlayStation?

What was the price of the PlayStation 2?

Should have = the Price of PlayStation 3

Multiple language coding and uncompressed audio were the only BD-Rom advantages I wanted when I bought my ps3.:roll:

Sometimes I get the feeling I am one of the only ps3 owners, with a capable 7.1 PCM reciever, that can face the harsh reality that as of now Blu-ray is bringing very little to the table.

Multiple language coding and uncompressed audio were the only BD-Rom advantages I wanted when I bought my ps3.:roll:

Sometimes I get the feeling I am one of the only ps3 owners, with a capable 7.1 PCM reciever, that can face the harsh reality that as of now Blu-ray is bringing very little to the table.

dru26

Your receiver decode any lossless audio aswell?

No. No, no, no, no. That doesn't make any sense at all.

What you fanboyish people don't realize is that potential and actual outcome is totally different. PS3 has the potential for a much longer game (and I'm sure that will, to some degree, be apparant in the JRPGs), but when developers choose to aim at different goals, how can you expect the game to be 100 hours long? How do you NOT realize that the size of the BR is distributed differently for a game, with the goal not being length? It's common sense, and the only reason for not understanding that would be "I own a 360" or "I like whining".

Xolver

LMAO well said.

[QUOTE="c_smithii"][QUOTE="Xolver"]

Alright, what was the price of the original PS3?

-

What's the price you suggest?

=

What's the price of BR?

pielover666

What was the price of the PlayStation?

What was the price of the PlayStation 2?

Should have = the Price of PlayStation 3

The original PlayStation, and PS2 were both $299, common sense would lead you to also make the PS3 also $299.

[QUOTE="dru26"]

Multiple language coding and uncompressed audio were the only BD-Rom advantages I wanted when I bought my ps3.:roll:

Sometimes I get the feeling I am one of the only ps3 owners, with a capable 7.1 PCM reciever, that can face the harsh reality that as of now Blu-ray is bringing very little to the table.

Chutebox

Your receiver decode any lossless audio aswell?

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="dru26"]

Multiple language coding and uncompressed audio were the only BD-Rom advantages I wanted when I bought my ps3.:roll:

Sometimes I get the feeling I am one of the only ps3 owners, with a capable 7.1 PCM reciever, that can face the harsh reality that as of now Blu-ray is bringing very little to the table.

dru26

Your receiver decode any lossless audio aswell?

Yea, I love blu ray. Your receiver doesn't decode lossless, but mine doesn't either. Gonna upgrade as soon as wife lets me though. But the sound from blu ray is fantastic to say the least.

Blu-Ray CAN make games longer

Blu-ray so far has not made games longer

-D3MO-

I'm not going to read the rest of this thread because all questions were answered the moment this was posted.

[QUOTE="dru26"][QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="dru26"]

Multiple language coding and uncompressed audio were the only BD-Rom advantages I wanted when I bought my ps3.:roll:

Sometimes I get the feeling I am one of the only ps3 owners, with a capable 7.1 PCM reciever, that can face the harsh reality that as of now Blu-ray is bringing very little to the table.

Chutebox

Your receiver decode any lossless audio aswell?

Yea, I love blu ray. Your receiver doesn't decode lossless, but mine doesn't either. Gonna upgrade as soon as wife lets me though. But the sound from blu ray is fantastic to say the least.