Do PS3 exclusives really require blu-ray or was it marketing BS all along?

[QUOTE="mejiseike"]All you need to know.... 1 game FINAL FANTASY 13 PS3 it was 1 disk, HD resolution, HD sound 360 it was 3 disks, Lower resolution, not as HQ sound point is Blu ray discs are better, end of discussion and another fact is that Blu Ray is almost finished.... HVDs (Holographic Versatile Disc) are coming out soonish_Matt_

I'm pretty certain Holographic discs are not going to be the norm for another decade,

A lot of bragging by cows about blu-ray for years now. They claim the 360 games are gimped because they are stuck with only DVD. Well, my question is, if blu-ray is needed to run PS3 exclusives, then how will they ever be ported to their portable?

If PS3 games can be run by a portable then this is definitive proof that blu-ray is just a format that's good for playing HD movies and does nothing for gaming.

alexfla

Because the data gets compressed? no uncompressed audio but some 128bit/s Mp3s and stuff like that. Sure BluRay isn't needed for PS3 games, sure they could have just compressed the data more, but when it comes to movies BluRay makes a lot of sense and I happely payed some extra money to watch BluRays ^^

Blu Ray has more space then DVD so thats one pro for having it. Also its good for sony because it allows them to get there format into many homes with the PS3.

Then only downside is that Blu-Ray is quite slow.

VensInferno

my 8x blu-ray drvie>24x dvd drive

PS3 is only 2x blu-ray drive, thats why loading times are bad on alot of games compared to 360 versions

BLuray was never necessary for games. It is a plus though... since I can't think of one PS3 game that's multi-disc.

Plus the movies... every movie I buy is on Bluray. I just can't go back to DVD.

[QUOTE="Deathtransit"]I bet DVDs originally didn't read as fast as they do now. BR players on PS3 are slow, but I'm sure the tech will improve if it hasn't already, and those limitations will be gone. Even so, you can't deny for audio and pre rendered cutscenes it's still a good thing to have. Over compression like 360's Rage and FF13 is a bad thing.AnnoyedDragon

Blu-ray has long term benefits, what is in question is if it was needed 'now'.

Quite frankly its only use is lower compression content (not even blu-ray can do uncompressed) and not needing to swap disks on consoles. I think development costs are a far greater limitation on content creation than storage right now, and Rage is the only game doing what it is right now. Hardware limitations is the next issue, there is no point in being able to store higher quality textures; if you don't have the Vram to use them.

I just don't like it how these games with big storage usage are being used to justify Blu-ray. From what we have seen, a lot of it is duplicated data, thanks to PS3's early adoption. The technology was far too immature to be using in games right now, PS3's disk drive is archaic compared to the Blu-ray drives out right now. It will still do HD films fine at 2x speed, but a lot of the storage usage in games is compensation for its limitations.

If Microsoft wasn't such a money grubbing ***, they could easily demolish PS3's Blu-ray advantages. All they would have to do is allow the use of 3rd party HDD like PS3, and made HDD requirements for 360 games. This would mean that content could be compressed onto the disk for installation to the HDD, which would perform superior to PS3's x2 Blu-ray. They could announce this today and laugh at PS3's Blu-ray, but of course they won't.

I just don't see Blu-ray as being valuable this generation, outside of nit picking of course. People can nit pick all day as to Blu-ray's perks on PS3, perks that could be easily demolished if Microsoft were to allow what I just said.

Really? Because I dont see any games on my 360 that look as good as GOW3 or Uncharted 2

TheSterls

Blu-ray is a storage medium, it played no role in the visual quality of those games.

Thats actually not true as BR allows for the storage of higher quality textures on a system that has limited ram through streaming methods.

[QUOTE="finalstar2007"]

lmao at TC.. really? this is 2011 you should have known by now how valuable blu-ray is.. lolz.. ok a simple example.. FFXIII is on 1 disk on PS3.. how many n 360 can you guess? ;).. or look at dead space 2 ;).. then come back and your answer will magically show up :o

AnnoyedDragon

If you are honestly going to make a big deal about your games not needing to swap disks, you have to agree that PC being able to run full games without a disk; pretty much shows the PS3 up in this area.

I'm not talking about digital distribution by the way, people can easily patch the CD check out. Sure developers don't like it, but it really doesn't affect them.

The PC doesnt show anyone up in this area, as it forces you to install the entire game on the HDD .

imho bluray makes games better so its needed in gaming this gen and unto the future. i feel that if your system doesnt use bluray for gaming, you are obselete

imho bluray makes games better so its needed in gaming this gen and unto the future. i feel that if your system doesnt use bluray for gaming, you are obselete

_SWAG_

Thats actually not true as BR allows for the storage of higher quality textures on a system that has limited ram through streaming methods.

TheSterls

Vram is a far greater limitation than storage today, when it comes to textures. Streaming doesn't change that, particularly with PS3's slow Blu-ray drive.

The PC doesnt show anyone up in this area, as it forces you to install the entire game on the HDD .

TheSterls

Installations are a good thing, they remove all the limitations of the optical disc format.

I find it ridiculous for a PS3 gamer to mock a 360 gamer for having to swap disks, but then pretend being able to run without a disk isn't a big deal.

Thats actually not true as BR allows for the storage of higher quality textures on a system that has limited ram through streaming methods.

TheSterls

To save VRAM bandwidth, RSX doesn't have theluxury of native 3DC+texture compression format support. RSX's Aisotropic Filtering is inferior to modern PC GPUs.

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]What Ps3 games have you seen on a portable?alexfla

[QUOTE="pelvist"]

PC games dont come on Blu-Ray disc either, and I dont think youll ever find a 50 GB download on Steam. Its more marketing BS from Sony.

You do know that DVD drives were available for PC's in the late 90's, yet most PC games were still on CD up until a few years ago.

And you don't find 50GB steam downloads because it would take forever to download, would take up too much HD space, and the games are also delivered on DVD therefore steam download size is the same. On PS3(with the exception of a few games that have sizeable installs) you can have a 50GB game with no install so HD space is not an issue. Also GOW3 is 35GB with NO CGI so that whole "CGI takes up all the space" arguement is history.

Maybe you should ask John Carmack what he thinks about Bluray?

Anyways, another anti-bluray campaign shot down in flames. There'll probably be another one tomorrow:P

imho bluray makes games better so its needed in gaming this gen and unto the future. i feel that if your system doesnt use bluray for gaming, you are obselete

_SWAG_

1 percent of annual 300 million PC unit sales is about 30 million i.e. the uptake is faster than PS3. ronvalencia

PC games dont come on Blu-Ray disc either, and I dont think youll ever find a 50 GB download on Steam. Its more marketing BS from Sony.

pelvist

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]1 percent of annual 300 million PC unit sales is about 30 million i.e. the uptake is faster than PS3. DerekLoffin

From 2009, http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/316537/blu-ray_drives_pcs_fuggetaboutit

A new study by market researcher iSuppli shows that only 3.6 percent of PCs this year will ship with Blu-ray high-definition optical drives, a figure will rise to just 16.3 percent by 2013.

[QUOTE="pelvist"]

PC games dont come on Blu-Ray disc either, and I dont think youll ever find a 50 GB download on Steam. Its more marketing BS from Sony.

sdu_1111

Thats lovely but, you can fit 15 GB on a dual layered DVD. BTW the topic title is "Do PS3 exclusives really require blu-ray or was it marketing BS all along?" So my comparative response wasnt misplaced. If PC exclusives look better graphically (which they do) and have as much if not more content than PS3 exclusives AND fit on a single DVD then that pretty much says it all really. Its easy to pack loads of unnecessary junk onto a Blu-Ray disc and say hey its better because theres more files!!! But taking PC exclusives and even some multiplats into account, its pretty obvious that they dont really REQUIRE it.