BluRay is NOT needed (long read)

  • 90 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for joeyg1097
joeyg1097

93

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 joeyg1097
Member since 2002 • 93 Posts

Apparently, it's argued that you can't have epic, long, and detailed games without huge disc storage. I argue that it's only needed for hyper-realistic looking games that have either tons of textures, audio, or movies. As a case against the necessities of these aspects, let me take you back to 1992 with the Ultima series, specifically Utima VII: The Black Gate.

For those of you not familiar with this series, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima
Specifically on Ultima VII: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_VII

Warning: This is going to be long since there are so many features to describe in this epic game.

Created by Richard Garriott, it featured 10's of thousands of items and NPCs. It had 100's of kilometres of explorable terrain, requiring the use of horse & cart, ship, and a magic carpet to get anywhere quickly as well as teleportation through rune stones and moon gates. Almost any item could be picked up, moved, or interacted with, whether it was a torch that you could leave lit or unlit on the ground or in your hand, window shutters that could be opened or closed, or roulette tables that you could gamble on. Ultima VII was a completely freeform RPG where you could go and do whatever you wanted to (steal, murder, fight or run from the city guards if you were observed, bake bread).

It had day/night and weather cycles that actually affected NPC behaviour. Each NPC had a daily schedule, thus you would see them walking along the streets after work to get to the tavern for dinner, after which they could go home to sleep. If it were raining, the NPCs would head indoors. You could have 8 party members out of 10 (or around thereof) at any point in time and they would not only fight by your side with melee or ranged automatically based on the preset strategy that you assign them, they would also react to your actions, such as complaining, leaving the party, or even outright attacking you when they see you steal or murder. All NPCs also had morale effects, fighting to the death, fleeing at the first signs of trouble, or states in between. Every NPC and party member could be interacted with, having written dialogue for each that differed depending on whether your PC was male or female (a pretty rare feature at the time).

Combat was real-time and required much strategy to overcome your foes. You had to be careful with missile weapons which, though deadly and weakening foes from afar, could inflict friendly fire unless you had your ranged flank the enemies. Battles typically involved your 8 person party versus 1-12 enemies at any given time ranging from roaming bandits to huge dragons that could quickly wipe out a badly equipped or inexperienced party. Chaos could ensue where your party gets separated in dark corridors either from chasing fleeing enemies or running away themselves, dropping items in the process. Related to this, torches dual wielded with weapons would suddenly go out during battles, adding to the confusion in dark spaces. Ultima VII even had KO's before death for all NPCs and monsters, unless you were hit really hard. This was good, because party death would mean literally bringing the member's corpse (which was heavy) to someone who could resurrect him. To be successful in combat, one had to balance one's party between melee front fighters and ranged as well as tailor your strategies depending on the environment (eg. open field with much manueverability vs. indoor battles in constricted corridors).

There were no set character roles, relying on stats to determine what you were good at, thus one could focus on melee stats to increase your damage and amount carryable (based on strength - each item/weapon/armour/corpse had a weight allotment) at the detriment of mana for casting spells or ranged combat. One could determine the stats of each party member to your liking, although each had particular starting statistics that would make it more favourable to have them specialize in certain areas.

It had dynamic music that depended on combat status. Whether it be victoriously chasing after fleeing enemies or having party members cut down left and right, the music changed to fit the overall progress of a real-time battle. Outside of combat, the music changed from city to city (about 12 full-fledged cities), in the wilderness, underground, or based even on the building you were in (eg. tavern).

Ultima VII had about 64 unique spells that all had different effects. One had to purchase the spells off of mages throughout the world and collect reagents used for each spell from either shops or in different areas of the wilderness. Ranging from conjuring food, altering the weather, enchanting ranged ammo, telekinesis, speak with the undead, cause everyone to dance, different projectiles/area of effect spells with status effects or direct damage, or spells to kill everyone in sight, stop time, and literally end all life (all of the 1000's or so NPCs and monsters except for 3 people I think) in the world (a fun game breaker).

 

Ultima VII: The Black Gate could take someone anywhere between 30-100 hours to beat depending on how many sidequests and how much exploration you did. This is an epic game of huge proportions that has so much character and attention to detail. I'd argue that it's size, scope, and story completely dwarf Oblivion. It begins with a simple murder investigation that you conduct to become a political intrigue involving the spread of a seemingly helpful religious cult to a tale of stopping a world destroyer from entering Britannia. If you read the Wikipedia entry, you would also see the anti-EA references scattered within its plot. Full of intrigue and those elements that make RPGs one of the greatest genres, Ultima VII sets a standard to which any RPG can be measured.

 

All of this only takes up 30 or so megabytes of disc space. It ran on a 386 processor, recommended 486.

 

Sure, the animations are frame-based (ie. an animation consisted of non-continuous frames of pictures) and the music is midi but the graphics are pleasing to the eye, the character portraits are detailed enough, the music is great for all of its tin-yness, and the gameplay is deep. For what it lacks in graphics, audio, and CGI, it more than makes up for it in those parts that make games arguably better entertainment than TV, movies, books, and stand-alone music: engaging stories with complex characters, grand musical scores, and worlds in which one can interact with.

You don't need huge storage space to make great games. Some will argue that BluRay allows for BOTH good gameplay and great graphics and atmosphere. I agree that atmosphere is important for games but that does not necessitate realistic graphics. Metroid Prime 1 is a great example of this with its subtle effects on Samus' visor from steam, water, and even her face reflected in the visor from explosions. If you fired Samus' arm canon for a long period of time, shimmering heat waves would emit from the canon for awhile. Effects like these don't require huge disc space. Combining gameplay and realistic graphics would be great except that developing such a game would take a very long time and plenty of resources. Since developers are limited in their resources, they can only spend so much time on a project.

I would rather they came up with astounding and innovative epic games with "last gen" graphics than games that take 5-7 years to develop a graphics engine that needs the space of BluRay. Give us an Ultima VII with an epic story, highly immersive world, and characters with personality.

Give us a game whose main selling point isn't in the screenshots.

Avatar image for deadmeat59
deadmeat59

8981

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#2 deadmeat59
Member since 2003 • 8981 Posts
yes it is needed vangaurd on pc is 20 gbs . so at least HD dvd is needed. but u know whats not needed? these posts thats what .
Avatar image for winner-ps3
winner-ps3

2364

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 winner-ps3
Member since 2007 • 2364 Posts

im not reading this mess,

Just so yo know once a game gets written in native HD the size of the game increases times 3

why the hell are HD movies on bluray? obviously HD images need more space

note MGS3 subsistance was on 2 dvds(a ps2 game), one was for the game and the other was online play

we go from cartiges-cds-dvds and for some stupid reason we cant upgrade again thats riduculous!

MS is so dumb for making a new machine but using old technology (dvds)

GEARS OF WAR IS A 6 HOUR LONG CAMPAIGN! (note i heard R6V is really short too)

Avatar image for DeathKnight112
DeathKnight112

518

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 DeathKnight112
Member since 2005 • 518 Posts

im not reading this mess,

Just so yo know once a game gets written in native HD the size of the game increases times 3

why the hell are HD movies on bluray? obviously HD images need more space

note MGS3 subsistance was on 2 dvds(a ps2 game), one was for the game and the other was online play

we go from cartiges-cds-dvds and for some stupid reason we cant upgrade again thats riduculous!

MS is so dumb for making a new machine but using old technology (dvds)

GEARS OF WAR IS A 6 HOUR LONG CAMPAIGN! (note i heard R6V is really short too)

winner-ps3

Gears is longer than 6 hours..

Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts
Unfortunately it's all about the eye candy these days.  The Ultima series were great for what they were, and it is a shame that players have limited influence in the world they are presented with.
Avatar image for deactivated-608cb95043897
deactivated-608cb95043897

1111

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 deactivated-608cb95043897
Member since 2006 • 1111 Posts

The problem I see with your opinion is that your comparing it to the past.. Blue ray is Sony's bet on the Future of games, not what they need now but in the next 3-5 years... Remember Bill Gates saying "No one will need more than 637 kb of memory for a personal computer." see how hard it can be to predict the future...

Some of the new games will need it for more comp AI opp. I think they also talked about music not needing to be compressed and using more in game music ect .. You get my point

Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

Avatar image for mismajor99
mismajor99

5676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#8 mismajor99
Member since 2003 • 5676 Posts

Ultima was one of my first games on the PC, a truly amazing game. Great post by the way.

 V Came with a nice map too :)

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_V

 

Avatar image for organic_machine
organic_machine

10143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 organic_machine
Member since 2004 • 10143 Posts
I think blu-ray is not needed now, but when we make games that are insanely damanding with deep pysics and ultra-advandec AI, and an almost perfect lighting system; i think thats when we will need it.
Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

hailltoyou

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Avatar image for Goku004
Goku004

754

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 Goku004
Member since 2006 • 754 Posts

[QUOTE="winner-ps3"]

im not reading this mess,

Just so yo know once a game gets written in native HD the size of the game increases times 3

why the hell are HD movies on bluray? obviously HD images need more space

note MGS3 subsistance was on 2 dvds(a ps2 game), one was for the game and the other was online play

we go from cartiges-cds-dvds and for some stupid reason we cant upgrade again thats riduculous!

MS is so dumb for making a new machine but using old technology (dvds)

GEARS OF WAR IS A 6 HOUR LONG CAMPAIGN! (note i heard R6V is really short too)

DeathKnight112

Gears is longer than 6 hours..

lol, its 8hours....and don't tell me to play it on hard...that doesn't account for the length of the game.

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

hailltoyou

 

Apparently, from the topic creators view...9GB is bigger...

Avatar image for deactivated-608cb95043897
deactivated-608cb95043897

1111

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-608cb95043897
Member since 2006 • 1111 Posts
[QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

RahnAetas

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Yes, but if you then want to burn a nice long CD-HD-Blu of your fav song to play in the car wouldn't you like to have 25Gb then?

Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts
[QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

DanBrim1

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Yes, but if you then want to burn a nice long CD-HD-Blu of your fav song to play in the car wouldn't you like to have 25Gb then?

That would imply I would have 25 gigs of decent music.  Which I don't.  Not even close.  I would need what?  5000 songs?

Avatar image for organic_machine
organic_machine

10143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#14 organic_machine
Member since 2004 • 10143 Posts
[QUOTE="DanBrim1"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

RahnAetas

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Yes, but if you then want to burn a nice long CD-HD-Blu of your fav song to play in the car wouldn't you like to have 25Gb then?

That would imply I would have 25 gigs of decent music.  Which I don't.  Not even close.  I would need what?  5000 songs?

well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen

Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts

well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen organic_machine

I tend to go for quality over quantity.  Just my opinion, but the quality of games haven't improved too much in the past few years.  Graphics have gotten better, people are throwing in more voice acting, but the quality of the games?  No, just hasn't really increased that much.

My plate is already filled with eye candy, I don't need another 16 gigs of eye candy.  I'll happily take 1 gig of some game quality in exchange.

Avatar image for 101gamespot
101gamespot

125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 101gamespot
Member since 2006 • 125 Posts
Nobody Cares what u Think
Avatar image for organic_machine
organic_machine

10143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#17 organic_machine
Member since 2004 • 10143 Posts

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen RahnAetas

I tend to go for quality over quantity.  Just my opinion, but the quality of games haven't improved too much in the past few years.  Graphics have gotten better, people are throwing in more voice acting, but the quality of the games?  No, just hasn't really increased that much.

My plate is already filled with eye candy, I don't need another 16 gigs of eye candy.  I'll happily take 1 gig of some game quality in exchange.

thats very true and that is my problem with the PS3. Technically, it is a much better designed system than the 360. It is much better built and it is actually relyable (something microsoft has never ever been able to do right). But it has pretty much no games out now that use the potential that it has! none! it is depressing. Thats why I just stick with pc.

Avatar image for deactivated-608cb95043897
deactivated-608cb95043897

1111

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 deactivated-608cb95043897
Member since 2006 • 1111 Posts
[QUOTE="DanBrim1"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

RahnAetas

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Yes, but if you then want to burn a nice long CD-HD-Blu of your fav song to play in the car wouldn't you like to have 25Gb then?

That would imply I would have 25 gigs of decent music.  Which I don't.  Not even close.  I would need what?  5000 songs?

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="DanBrim1"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

organic_machine

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Yes, but if you then want to burn a nice long CD-HD-Blu of your fav song to play in the car wouldn't you like to have 25Gb then?

That would imply I would have 25 gigs of decent music.  Which I don't.  Not even close.  I would need what?  5000 songs?

well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen

[QUOTE="DanBrim1"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

What is better 9 GB or 25 GB , you tell me ?

RahnAetas

Depends on what each is filled with.  I don't buy music CDs since I'm not going to pay 20 dollars for 19 bad songs and 1 decent one.  Better to pay the 1 dollar and download it.

Yes, but if you then want to burn a nice long CD-HD-Blu of your fav song to play in the car wouldn't you like to have 25Gb then?

That would imply I would have 25 gigs of decent music.  Which I don't.  Not even close.  I would need what?  5000 songs?

No you are right you might not need it ,,But what about other people? Just look at the HD size on the Ipod..People tend to like more space to store stuff..

Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts
[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen organic_machine

I tend to go for quality over quantity.  Just my opinion, but the quality of games haven't improved too much in the past few years.  Graphics have gotten better, people are throwing in more voice acting, but the quality of the games?  No, just hasn't really increased that much.

My plate is already filled with eye candy, I don't need another 16 gigs of eye candy.  I'll happily take 1 gig of some game quality in exchange.

thats very true and that is my problem with the PS3. Technically, it is a much better designed system than the 360. It is much better built and it is actually relyable (something microsoft has never ever been able to do right). But it has pretty much no games out now that use the potential that it has! none! it is depressing. Thats why I just stick with pc.

jeeez people , do you know that good games are in development from 2 to 3 years ( and thats for medium companies , I'm not talking about smaller developers). PS3 hardware was finalized some where in 2006 , devkit's where shipped 3 times till developers got final devkit versions. MGS 4 should release at this years  end , all MGS games took about 2 years to develop. First trailer was shown at 2006 E3 running on PS2 hardware ( that trailer meant something like "we are making next MGS" )  , next trailer was shown at TGS 2006 that trailer was running on PS3 devkit  ( not final devkit ). So in general I better wait and get something thats looks and plays awesome then get some thing incomplete. Good games take time to make thats a known fact in games history :P

Avatar image for Blackbond
Blackbond

24516

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 Blackbond
Member since 2005 • 24516 Posts

PC says DVD9 + HDD = Blu-Ray not needed  so why should the PS3 which also has a standard HDD need Blu-Ray for gaming. Blu-Ray is a luxary not a need.

Avatar image for Skie7
Skie7

1031

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#22 Skie7
Member since 2005 • 1031 Posts

I'd be surprised if anything on the PS3 ever requires more than 2 DVDs.  I'd even bet that most games that are released on the PS3 will only require 1 DVD.  BluRay is on the PS3 only to put BluRay players in more homes.  Sony is trying to gain an edge in the HD DVD war.

It would surprise me if either HD-DVD or BluRay become widely accepted by the masses.  IMO, they'll be more like the laser disc.  Something only the technophiles own until the next big media format is released.

Avatar image for carl2tan
carl2tan

1385

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#23 carl2tan
Member since 2003 • 1385 Posts

BD makes the prerendered cutscenes look better, thats all.  BD will not be needed until next gen.  Even then, we could make 2disc DVD games.  (many PSone games were multi disc)

Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#24 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
lol I like how you descrbed ultima but the problem was that it's graphics were not top of the line... Much less was there audio? Was there music? Where there any long cinematics? The game was large and you can do anything to it...but.... how do you know blu-ray is useless??? If you made a game as large as ultima with everything and on top of that hours after hourse of awesome cinematics and tons of music and sound effects for every object and on top of that... weapons and armor... skills and how they interact as you level them up.... How about swimming and physics behind the water or shaders or how about all those clouds in the sky? What about the weather effects and what if tornados brushed by and changed the enviroment. What if there were over millions of spells you can make like in oblivion and they had ton of special effects. What if the graphics were suppose to be on the same level as Kill Zone 2? You think that it won't be needed. But if they tried and maake an Ultima Game that lived up to all of those it would take more than 50 Gbs... no doubt about it... so just shut your trap and accept blu-ray cause it's because of consumerism and the need to advance technologically was the main reason why it was made....
Avatar image for organic_machine
organic_machine

10143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#25 organic_machine
Member since 2004 • 10143 Posts
[QUOTE="organic_machine"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen hailltoyou

I tend to go for quality over quantity.  Just my opinion, but the quality of games haven't improved too much in the past few years.  Graphics have gotten better, people are throwing in more voice acting, but the quality of the games?  No, just hasn't really increased that much.

My plate is already filled with eye candy, I don't need another 16 gigs of eye candy.  I'll happily take 1 gig of some game quality in exchange.

thats very true and that is my problem with the PS3. Technically, it is a much better designed system than the 360. It is much better built and it is actually relyable (something microsoft has never ever been able to do right). But it has pretty much no games out now that use the potential that it has! none! it is depressing. Thats why I just stick with pc.

jeeez people , do you know that good games are in development from 2 to 3 years ( and thats for medium companies , I'm not talking about smaller developers). PS3 hardware was finalized some where in 2006 , devkit's where shipped 3 times till developers got final devkit versions. MGS 4 should release at this years  end , all MGS games took about 2 years to develop. First trailer was shown at 2006 E3 running on PS2 hardware ( that trailer meant something like "we are making next MGS" )  , next trailer was shown at TGS 2006 that trailer was running on PS3 devkit  ( not final devkit ). So in general I better wait and get something thats looks and plays awesome then get some thing incomplete. Good games take time to make thats a known fact in games history :P

goo lord, I hope you're right. I hope games like MGS completely use the PS3s potential. That would be amazing.

Avatar image for Hot_Potato
Hot_Potato

3422

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#26 Hot_Potato
Member since 2004 • 3422 Posts
Insomniac, Konami, and every other PS3 dev>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>TC
Avatar image for hotsauceyguy
hotsauceyguy

71

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#27 hotsauceyguy
Member since 2007 • 71 Posts

I'd be surprised if anything on the PS3 ever requires more than 2 DVDs.  I'd even bet that most games that are released on the PS3 will only require 1 DVD.  BluRay is on the PS3 only to put BluRay players in more homes.  Sony is trying to gain an edge in the HD DVD war.

It would surprise me if either HD-DVD or BluRay become widely accepted by the masses.  IMO, they'll be more like the laser disc.  Something only the technophiles own until the next big media format is released.

Skie7

Of course Sony is trying to gain an edge. So what. Blu-ray still allows developers a much larger canvas to make games better than a DVD.

JUst as video games upgraded from cartriges and cds to DVDs and got much better in the process. Video games will progress from DVDs to Blu-ray and become much better. The only difference is that the Xbox 360 will not be joining the PS3 in this trip.

Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#28 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
Also imagine this... how would you like going through the PS2 era with Cds instead of using Dvd's? What would you  think if  you need 8 Cds for a single game? That doesn't make sense does it now? You have to think for a second games ran off of 750 Mbs. And then they jumped up to 4 Gbs... Or if they were dual layered Dvds 8 Gbs. but in exchange for that cost you get next gen graphics sound and cinematics. Now let's say you need that much more this generation... well what do you think blu-ray worthless? If you apply the same exact situation do you still think blu-ray is that worthless???
Avatar image for CAlNlAC
CAlNlAC

689

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 CAlNlAC
Member since 2006 • 689 Posts
Is it needed at this point? No, not really. But it certainly helps.
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#30 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
well you think having 8gbs worthless on a Dvd? well think again it held 10 times more than a Cd practicallly and it still lacked room. So eventually you start to think blu-ray disks may not hold enough memory..... Later on in the generation. So don't say it's worthless cause it won't be.
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#31 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
Lol what did people think when the Dvd disk came out people said it's not really that needed we just have to stick with tapes and Cds. But in all actuality it was a necessity. So maybe it won't be needed right now but about 2-3 years from now it'll come in handy and that's where Sony rules quality over a long period of time.
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#32 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
lol
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#33 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
This thread was kinda stupid...
Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts

PC says DVD9 + HDD = Blu-Ray not needed  so why should the PS3 which also has a standard HDD need Blu-Ray for gaming. Blu-Ray is a luxary not a need.

Blackbond

Thats typical logic of PC user. Some PS2 games are on 2 DVD's all ready, God of War II is like 8+ GB. PS3 dosen' t have standard HDD in has laptop HDD those cost alot of money compared with 3,5 HDD' s. 60 GB thats not alot of space , new PC  games takes 12 GB on HDD when you install them and Blu-Ray is 25 GB , wy the hell you need to install game then ? for faster loading times and ect. ? (I can wait extra 10-15 seconds of loading time I'm a patient person :P ), some PS3 games use that already. 

Wy keep something old , when there is something new and 3 times better then the old ?

Avatar image for Bri294
Bri294

211

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#35 Bri294
Member since 2005 • 211 Posts
I think that for the developers that actually can somewhat tap the potential of the ps3 right now(mostly 1st party devs) the blu ray disks are needed.  Even Hideo Kojima needed more than 25 gigs of space for MGS4.  I heard that he requested a 50 gig disk from sony.  If that is true then yes blu ray is needed.  I know for a fact I dont want to download any 20-50 gig games.  They would take days to download.
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#36 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
That's what I thought too...lol.
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#37 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
The person who made this thread should of opened his/her eyes by now.
Avatar image for Lazy_Boy88
Lazy_Boy88

7418

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Lazy_Boy88
Member since 2003 • 7418 Posts

Yeah let's just stick with CDs. It worked for giant massive games 10 years ago why not now? Blu-ray is not absolutely needed, but 360 games are going to be limited by DVD9. PC installs are already getting over 10GB and they're already having to work extremely hard to pack 360 games onto one disc... and this generation has just started. Think about 2 years from now when PC games are 20GB average and 360 games are either stripped down or on 2+ discs just for a shooter.

Blu-ray diodes are going to cost $8 by June.... the advantages to the developers and extra content for us far outweight any initial cost this year alone not to mention the next 5.

Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts
Still quite silly.  Not many developers need that much space to begin with.  Those who do tend to go overboard with size intensive stuff.
Avatar image for Yahiko182
Yahiko182

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#40 Yahiko182
Member since 2004 • 599 Posts
If that's the case your putting down alot of games Rahn like oblivion it went overboard and so will MGS 4 and Halo 3 that's what makes em better.
Avatar image for wiljas
wiljas

1132

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#41 wiljas
Member since 2003 • 1132 Posts
[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="organic_machine"]well songs arent getting any more high def and they arent becoming more technelogically demanding. games are. blu ray may not be needed yet. but it will be. certainly by next gen organic_machine

I tend to go for quality over quantity.  Just my opinion, but the quality of games haven't improved too much in the past few years.  Graphics have gotten better, people are throwing in more voice acting, but the quality of the games?  No, just hasn't really increased that much.

My plate is already filled with eye candy, I don't need another 16 gigs of eye candy.  I'll happily take 1 gig of some game quality in exchange.

thats very true and that is my problem with the PS3. Technically, it is a much better designed system than the 360. It is much better built and it is actually relyable (something microsoft has never ever been able to do right). But it has pretty much no games out now that use the potential that it has! none! it is depressing. Thats why I just stick with pc.

Honestly this is just a lame excuse for complaining about Blu-ray. More space is a good thing. Yes alot of games are eye candy these days, but it is not just consoles. PC's have some crap games out there that are so poorly programmed that you need a super high end PC that cost you $3000 so that they don't jump around and freeze up. Blu-ray is a good thing not because it gives you more texture space or better audio. But it allows the Game makers space so that they can worry less about compression and game length and lets them work on the story line and gameplay. If they chose not to that is our loss and not the fault of a disk or processor or anything with the hardware.

Yea. So the PS3 does not have hundreds of great next gen titles out. But there is only a hand full of Xbox360 games that you could truly call next gen. and the Xbox360 has been out for a year. But because of the PS3 you will see more and more great next gen games comming out on both consoles.

So no the Blu-ray is not bad for games at all. it is there to help push limits of games as we know them. DVD for games is bad because it is holding us back. It is the old person saying they don't that new fangled contraption because I don't know how to use it.

Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts

Still quite silly.  Not many developers need that much space to begin with.  Those who do tend to go overboard with size intensive stuff.RahnAetas

Yes those developers make downloadable games on XBL and PSN. If you want have tones of voice over in true surround sound and hi-def cut-scenes, extra content like : making of the game video clips and other stuff you need something to put all of that in and Blu-Ray comes in this gen.

Avatar image for Blackbond
Blackbond

24516

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 Blackbond
Member since 2005 • 24516 Posts

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

PC says DVD9 + HDD = Blu-Ray not needed so why should the PS3 which also has a standard HDD need Blu-Ray for gaming. Blu-Ray is a luxary not a need.

hailltoyou

Thats typical logic of PC user. Some PS2 games are on 2 DVD's all ready, God of War II is like 8+ GB. PS3 dosen' t have standard HDD in has laptop HDD those cost alot of money compared with 3,5 HDD' s. 60 GB thats not alot of space , new PC games takes 12 GB on HDD when you install them and Blu-Ray is 25 GB , wy the hell you need to install game then ? for faster loading times and ect. ? (I can wait extra 10-15 seconds of loading time I'm a patient person :P ), some PS3 games use that already.

Wy keep something old , when there is something new and 3 times better then the old ?

Typical lofic of a console user. Incorrect, wrong, and misinformed. And who says you have to install the whole game on the PS3 HDD. They could have easily made the HDD larger and cut out Blu-Ray all together and had games use partial installations if at all needed.  

Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts

When you don't care about quality, there is no upper limit the quantity.

The argument works in the other direction as well.  I can easily say that 25 gigs is not enough space for next gen.  Hell I can say 100 gigs is not enough.  500 gigs is not enough, so on, so forth.

The storage medium has been increasing in size for the past decade and the quality of games has not increased with them.  The quality of games has not caught up the to size available.  It was different in the 8-16 bit era because there was a constraint on the size, as such quality actually went up as people learned how to do more with less.  Only so much could go into the graphics, the rest went into gameplay.  Since the roof was lifted off size and storage quality increased, gameplay has advanced very little (argueably have gone backwards in some cases). 

 The budget is being thrown into graphics and eye candy.  More and more money is thrown into voice actors, cinematics, and less and less on gameplay.  The budget for eye candy dwarfs what is put into developing gameplay.  The budget for size AND money.  You don't need a lot of space to contain a wealth of gameplay, and there's a lot of old games out there and even current games that attest to that.   The same is even true of graphics, you don't need 25 gigs of space to contain pretty graphics.  There's a lot of old and current games that attest to that as well.

I don't buy into Blu-Ray = better games, because better games are still coming out for the Wii and the 360 which is using plain-ol DVD.  When there is a clear constraint caused by the DVD storage format, then yes, let's move on to something else, but right now, we aren't there yet.

Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts
[QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

PC says DVD9 + HDD = Blu-Ray not needed so why should the PS3 which also has a standard HDD need Blu-Ray for gaming. Blu-Ray is a luxary not a need.

Blackbond

Thats typical logic of PC user. Some PS2 games are on 2 DVD's all ready, God of War II is like 8+ GB. PS3 dosen' t have standard HDD in has laptop HDD those cost alot of money compared with 3,5 HDD' s. 60 GB thats not alot of space , new PC games takes 12 GB on HDD when you install them and Blu-Ray is 25 GB , wy the hell you need to install game then ? for faster loading times and ect. ? (I can wait extra 10-15 seconds of loading time I'm a patient person :P ), some PS3 games use that already.

Wy keep something old , when there is something new and 3 times better then the old ?

Typical lofic of a console user. Incorrect, wrong, and misinformed. And who says you have to install the whole game on the PS3 HDD. They could have easily made the HDD larger and cut out Blu-Ray all together and had games use partial installations if at all needed.  

Yes I'm a console user so what ? And you are the one that is mislead and misinformed. There are all ready partial install's in some PS3 games and wy do you cut out new technology that can bring so much.

Avatar image for Blackbond
Blackbond

24516

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 Blackbond
Member since 2005 • 24516 Posts
[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

PC says DVD9 + HDD = Blu-Ray not needed so why should the PS3 which also has a standard HDD need Blu-Ray for gaming. Blu-Ray is a luxary not a need.

hailltoyou

Thats typical logic of PC user. Some PS2 games are on 2 DVD's all ready, God of War II is like 8+ GB. PS3 dosen' t have standard HDD in has laptop HDD those cost alot of money compared with 3,5 HDD' s. 60 GB thats not alot of space , new PC games takes 12 GB on HDD when you install them and Blu-Ray is 25 GB , wy the hell you need to install game then ? for faster loading times and ect. ? (I can wait extra 10-15 seconds of loading time I'm a patient person :P ), some PS3 games use that already.

Wy keep something old , when there is something new and 3 times better then the old ?

Typical lofic of a console user. Incorrect, wrong, and misinformed. And who says you have to install the whole game on the PS3 HDD. They could have easily made the HDD larger and cut out Blu-Ray all together and had games use partial installations if at all needed.

Yes I'm a console user so what ? And you are the one that is mislead and misinformed. There are all ready partial install's in some PS3 games and wy do you cut out new technology that can bring so much.

How am I mislead and misinformed? I simply replied t what you wrote and there is no PC game that takes 12GB to install and the PS3 HDD aren't laptop HDD's hence why they can be interchanged with any normal PC HDD. I'm misinformed and mislead yeah right. Your information and facts are way off. You admitted it in your first sentence. Those partial installs are for load times only anyways. Nobody is talking about cutting out new technology I'm just explaining its not a "NEED" its a luxary.

Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts

When you don't care about quality, there is no upper limit the quantity.

The argument works in the other direction as well.  I can easily say that 25 gigs is not enough space for next gen.  Hell I can say 100 gigs is not enough.  500 gigs is not enough, so on, so forth.

The storage medium has been increasing in size for the past decade and the quality of games has not increased with them.  The quality of games has not caught up the to size available.  It was different in the 8-16 bit era because there was a constraint on the size, as such quality actually went up as people learned how to do more with less.  Only so much could go into the graphics, the rest went into gameplay.  Since the roof was lifted off size and storage quality increased, gameplay has advanced very little (argueably have gone backwards in some cases). 

 The budget is being thrown into graphics and eye candy.  More and more money is thrown into voice actors, cinematics, and less and less on gameplay.  The budget for eye candy dwarfs what is put into developing gameplay.  The budget for size AND money.  You don't need a lot of space to contain a wealth of gameplay, and there's a lot of old games out there and even current games that attest to that.   The same is even true of graphics, you don't need 25 gigs of space to contain pretty graphics.  There's a lot of old and current games that attest to that as well.

I don't buy into Blu-Ray = better games, because better games are still coming out for the Wii and the 360 which is using plain-ol DVD.  When there is a clear constraint caused by the DVD storage format, then yes, let's move on to something else, but right now, we aren't there yet.

RahnAetas

Yes I know and that lack of good gameplay is hurting us older gamers 10+ years of gaming. But some developers managed to get that balance between graphics and gameplay, some dev' s where lost in graphics  and forgot about game play and all the way around.

Dev'  should look at there past and remember wy they started making games in the first place.

But admit that would be cool to see original X-com in full 3D running on Unreal engine 3 :P

Avatar image for TyrantDragon55
TyrantDragon55

6851

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#48 TyrantDragon55
Member since 2004 • 6851 Posts

http://gamesfirst.com/?id=1132

Just thought everyone would find this interesting, I'm surprised I'm the first to post it in this thread.

Avatar image for RahnAetas
RahnAetas

1834

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 RahnAetas
Member since 2003 • 1834 Posts

http://gamesfirst.com/?id=1132

Just thought everyone would find this interesting, I'm surprised I'm the first to post it in this thread.

TyrantDragon55

There you go folks, something that supports my "quality has not caught up with quantity" idea.

Avatar image for hailltoyou
hailltoyou

1493

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 hailltoyou
Member since 2005 • 1493 Posts
[QUOTE="hailltoyou"][QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="hailltoyou"]

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

PC says DVD9 + HDD = Blu-Ray not needed so why should the PS3 which also has a standard HDD need Blu-Ray for gaming. Blu-Ray is a luxary not a need.

Blackbond

Thats typical logic of PC user. Some PS2 games are on 2 DVD's all ready, God of War II is like 8+ GB. PS3 dosen' t have standard HDD in has laptop HDD those cost alot of money compared with 3,5 HDD' s. 60 GB thats not alot of space , new PC games takes 12 GB on HDD when you install them and Blu-Ray is 25 GB , wy the hell you need to install game then ? for faster loading times and ect. ? (I can wait extra 10-15 seconds of loading time I'm a patient person :P ), some PS3 games use that already.

Wy keep something old , when there is something new and 3 times better then the old ?

Typical lofic of a console user. Incorrect, wrong, and misinformed. And who says you have to install the whole game on the PS3 HDD. They could have easily made the HDD larger and cut out Blu-Ray all together and had games use partial installations if at all needed.

Yes I'm a console user so what ? And you are the one that is mislead and misinformed. There are all ready partial install's in some PS3 games and wy do you cut out new technology that can bring so much.

How am I mislead and misinformed? I simply replied t what you wrote and there is no PC game that takes 12GB to install and the PS3 HDD aren't laptop HDD's hence why they can be interchanged with any normal PC HDD. I'm misinformed and mislead yeah right. Your information and facts are way off. You admitted it in your first sentence. Those partial installs are for load times only anyways. Nobody is talking about cutting out new technology I'm just explaining its not a "NEED" its a luxary.

First : Battle stations : Midway took about 10 GB  as I remember but I might be wrong. Second : PS3 uses 2.5  HDD ( laptop) , normal PC  is  3.5 HDD.