Honestly, I don't think Blu-ray has done that much for gaming.

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

Of course it didn't, it's just a storage, a larger DVD...

Ultimately,its only advantage in gaming is the convinience of not having to change discs while playing on the PS3,but as you noted,that advantage is offset by slower read times,and mandatory installation requirments...

AM-Gamer

Yet they have figured ways to make the load times as fast as dvd's and to do them without mandatory installs. Simply write the data twice on the BR. Not to mention next gen the speeds will be much faster and both the next PS and xbox will probably use BR. If it did nothing for gaming why will it be the new standard?

Maybe it'll be a standard next gen,but this gen,it did basically nothing when it comes to video games,aside from somewhat better sound quality,and removing an inconvenience of switching discs...

As one user pointed out above,in theory,Blu Ray could hold high-res visual assets,but aged PS3 hardware is the bottleneck,stopping the idea from working.

OP is correct,this gen,Blu-Ray was more or less useless in gaming,and I'd even argue it ended up hurting Sony,due to overly expensive BD drives in original PS3s...

It's one of the things that really screwed the PS3 this gen.

Blu Ray is the standard for HD. If you want the best HD, you get Blu Ray. It also has more storage so devs can put more into their games, not just in content but also graphic details and whatnot. DVD became obsolete the moment Blu Ray came out. DVD is for last gen, just like playing games on multiple discs.

Blu Ray is the future, all future systems will use it.

Blu Ray is the standard for HD. If you want the best HD, you get Blu Ray. It also has more storage so devs can put more into their games, not just in content but also graphic details and whatnot. DVD became obsolete the moment Blu Ray came out. DVD is for last gen, just like playing games on multiple discs.

Blu Ray is the future, all future systems will use it.

ShadowMoses900

Internal console hardware and game coding determines if the game will run in 720p(HD) or not...

Blu-Ray is just storage,it won't give you "best" HD,whatever that means :lol:

As explained above,in theory,you could put higher quality visual assets on Blu-Ray,but aged PS3 hardware is the bottleneck,and would cause issues...

Aside from no disc swaping and lossless audio,Blu-Ray has no clear-cut advantages atm.

Everything possible on the PS3 is possible on 360,with some slight adjustments if necessary...

It hasn't done much for gaming because PS3 GPU is not fast enough to really take advantage. Graphics wise it has done almost nothing, although the PS3 does have some "console graphics kings" it's not necessarily BECAUSE of blu-ray. But it's nice to have lossless audio and multiple audio tracks on the disc. There have been lots of "perks" on the PS3 versions of games, but as far as the core game goes blu-ray does nothing for the graphics. I'm thinking next gen games will more typically make use of the format because presumably all consoles will have around 50GB+ discs. So games will not have to be designed for the lowest common denominator 9GB discs.2Chalupas

OMG :o

Actually, blu-ray could've done much more for gaming than we were showed throughout this gen. It only looks like the true advantages of blu-ray was the ability to utilize uncompressed audio, and save from the swapping, but if the ps3 didn't have so many bottlenecks, blu-ray would've impressed way more than it have lead us to believe thus far. The mandatory installs and slower load times doesn't come from the blu-ray format at all, but more so the slow blu-ray drive that sony had to include in the ps3 build. At the time the ps3 was debuting, anything that had the word "blu-ray" in it was very costly, even drives. Now at the time (I believe) there were BR drives that was much faster than what sony had ultimately decided to go with, but that would've drove cost even more so than it already was (in which is 1 of the most acknowledged reasons why the ps3 was a failure compared to it's predecessors).

I really believe that if sony decides to go with the bluray format next gen, it'll show us what was intended for us to see this gen, since cost are WAY down now for drives, and dev are very use to working with and on the format. We definitely know that NO NEXT GEN CONSOLE can go with a dvd format drive, and survive at all.

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"][QUOTE="ispeakfact"]It's actually done quite a bit when you look at games like MGS4, God of War 3, the Uncharteds, etc. It gives devs a lot more breathing room. Plus, you can get mulitple games on disc just like the ps3 version of Dead Space 2.ispeakfact

I wonder why some games are required to be installed on HDD if the PS3 blu ray is so Godly.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]It's only good for uncompressed sound and higher quality graphical assets.Wiimotefan

It doesn't even do that. If it did that it would be a pretty decent advantage.

Technically it could support much higher resolution textures and more variation in textures throughout a game, but the PS3 hardware bottlenecks that idea.

I suppose it could also hold data for high(er) poly models, but again the PS3 (and most gaming hardware and engines) puts a bottleneck on that as well.

The only visual benefit that Blu Ray brings is in the form of video.

while most of that is true you guys are forgetting a couple of very important things like the game design itself. Games like FF which uses tons of voice acting, tries to go for an semi open-world at he same time it uses CGI... For a game like this storage is everyting. Another example of this is the Yakuza series which has as much pre-rendered cut-scenes and dialogue as the FF series or even more and it goes for open-world too. And what about White Knight Chronicles and Gran Turismo 5? Those 2 games take full advantage of the blu-ray too! But is not just that, there is this too:

"The latter element in particular is outstanding: Joel and Ellie have a multitude of canned motion captures stored on the Blu-ray disc, with the game constantly evaluating surrounding geometry in order to produce the most appropriate context-driven animation. It's the best solution for the most realistic effect - procedurally generated motion is the natural evolution, as we've seen from first-gen efforts like FIFA's Impact Engine, but Naughty Dog's solution produces the more convincing effect."

and that takes tons of space. That's why Uncharted 2 even though it's short it takes an immense amount of space. There can't be a better in-game animation than a real-life animation, right? Haven't you guys noted that Uncharted's one of the very few games where the world still feels alive even while in-game? You can see the different expressions on Nate's face when he is on a fire-fight and stuff.

If the PS3 would have been as huge as the PS2 was last gen we would be seeing devs taking advantage of the storage but since the Xbox became popular the multiplat developement deteriorates any idea the devs would have for it. After all, they have to make each version of the game to be as similar as possible and this is why I pray that if FFvs really does exist that it should stay PS3 exclusive. I bet that if FFXIII would have stayed exclusive it would turned out as a completely different game. The problem was that half the game was made with blu-ray in mind and then by including the Xbox version is obvious they made a ton of last minute changes because otherwise, why left all the side-quests for the post game? And what about this?

Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Blu-ray provides many more advatages than just having the entire game on one disc.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]It's only good for uncompressed sound and higher quality graphical assets.Wiimotefan

It doesn't even do that. If it did that it would be a pretty decent advantage.

Technically it could support much higher resolution textures and more variation in textures throughout a game, but the PS3 hardware bottlenecks that idea.

I suppose it could also hold data for high(er) poly models, but again the PS3 (and most gaming hardware and engines) puts a bottleneck on that as well.

The only visual benefit that Blu Ray brings is in the form of video.

Here is a simple example.. having FFXIII on 1 disk and play it on the PS3 easier than having 3 DVD's like the xbox did.

i'd say it did pretty well what it was designed to do

finalstar2007

Here's an even simpler example.. mandatory installs. :|

I only owned a PS3 for about a year and a few months, but I was unaware at the time.. that a number of games require you to install data onto the HDD. That Install (especially for games like MGS4) took a hell of a lot more time than swapping out a disc. :|

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"]It's only good for uncompressed sound and higher quality graphical assets.mitu123

It doesn't even do that. If it did that it would be a pretty decent advantage.

Technically it could support much higher resolution textures and more variation in textures throughout a game, but the PS3 hardware bottlenecks that idea.

I suppose it could also hold data for high(er) poly models, but again the PS3 (and most gaming hardware and engines) puts a bottleneck on that as well.

The only visual benefit that Blu Ray brings is in the form of video.

Ahh, I see. Yeah PCs don't have those bottlenecks. But even then you don't need BR to get that quality on a PC when multiple dvds, or downloads do the trick just fine.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"]It's only good for uncompressed sound and higher quality graphical assets.Gue1

It doesn't even do that. If it did that it would be a pretty decent advantage.

Technically it could support much higher resolution textures and more variation in textures throughout a game, but the PS3 hardware bottlenecks that idea.

I suppose it could also hold data for high(er) poly models, but again the PS3 (and most gaming hardware and engines) puts a bottleneck on that as well.

The only visual benefit that Blu Ray brings is in the form of video.

while most of that is true you guys are forgetting a couple of very important things like the game design itself. Games like FF which uses tons of voice acting, tries to go for an semi open-world at he same time it uses CGI... For a game like this storage is everyting. Another example of this is the Yakuza series which has as much pre-rendered cut-scenes and dialogue as the FF series or even more and it goes for open-world too. And what about White Knight Chronicles and Gran Turismo 5? Those 2 games take full advantage of the blu-ray too! But is not just that, there is this too:

"The latter element in particular is outstanding: Joel and Ellie have a multitude of canned motion captures stored on the Blu-ray disc, with the game constantly evaluating surrounding geometry in order to produce the most appropriate context-driven animation. It's the best solution for the most realistic effect - procedurally generated motion is the natural evolution, as we've seen from first-gen efforts like FIFA's Impact Engine, but Naughty Dog's solution produces the more convincing effect."

and that takes tons of space. That's why Uncharted 2 even though it's short it takes an immense amount of space. There can't be a better in-game animation than a real-life animation, right? Haven't you guys noted that Uncharted's one of the very few games where the world still feels alive even while in-game? You can see the different expressions on Nate's face when he is on a fire-fight and stuff.

If the PS3 would have been as huge as the PS2 was last gen we would be seeing devs taking advantage of the storage but since the Xbox became popular the multiplat developement deteriorates any idea the devs would have for it. After all, they have to make each version of the game to be as similar as possible and this is why I pray that if FFvs really does exist that it should stay PS3 exclusive. I bet that if FFXIII would have stayed exclusive it would turned out as a completely different game. The problem was that half the game was made with blu-ray in mind and then by including the Xbox version is obvious they made a ton of last minute changes because otherwise, why left all the side-quests for the post game? And what about this?

Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Blu-ray provides many more advatages than just having the entire game on one disc.

Yes, HDD > blu ray...

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"]It's only good for uncompressed sound and higher quality graphical assets.Gue1

It doesn't even do that. If it did that it would be a pretty decent advantage.

Technically it could support much higher resolution textures and more variation in textures throughout a game, but the PS3 hardware bottlenecks that idea.

I suppose it could also hold data for high(er) poly models, but again the PS3 (and most gaming hardware and engines) puts a bottleneck on that as well.

The only visual benefit that Blu Ray brings is in the form of video.

while most of that is true you guys are forgetting a couple of very important things like the game design itself. Games like FF which uses tons of voice acting, tries to go for an semi open-world at he same time it uses CGI... For a game like this storage is everyting. Another example of this is the Yakuza series which has as much pre-rendered cut-scenes and dialogue as the FF series or even more and it goes for open-world too. And what about White Knight Chronicles and Gran Turismo 5? Those 2 games take full advantage of the blu-ray too! But is not just that, there is this too:

"The latter element in particular is outstanding: Joel and Ellie have a multitude of canned motion captures stored on the Blu-ray disc, with the game constantly evaluating surrounding geometry in order to produce the most appropriate context-driven animation. It's the best solution for the most realistic effect - procedurally generated motion is the natural evolution, as we've seen from first-gen efforts like FIFA's Impact Engine, but Naughty Dog's solution produces the more convincing effect."

and that takes tons of space. That's why Uncharted 2 even though it's short it takes an immense amount of space. There can't be a better in-game animation than a real-life animation, right? Haven't you guys noted that Uncharted's one of the very few games where the world still feels alive even while in-game? You can see the different expressions on Nate's face when he is on a fire-fight and stuff.

If the PS3 would have been as huge as the PS2 was last gen we would be seeing devs taking advantage of the storage but since the Xbox became popular the multiplat developement deteriorates any idea the devs would have for it. After all, they have to make each version of the game to be as similar as possible and this is why I pray that if FFvs really does exist that it should stay PS3 exclusive. I bet that if FFXIII would have stayed exclusive it would turned out as a completely different game. The problem was that half the game was made with blu-ray in mind and then by including the Xbox version is obvious they made a ton of last minute changes because otherwise, why left all the side-quests for the post game? And what about this?

Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Blu-ray provides many more advatages than just having the entire game on one disc.

Of course Blu Ray has advantages but it's still not a piece of glittery magic PS3 fans make it out to be. If it was, we'd probably see more PS3 exclusives with worlds more content than 360 games but we don't and the average 360 exclusive is just as content rich as the average PS3 exclusive. As it is, developers rarely take advantage of the Blu Ray disc beyond higher quality FMV and lossless audio. Even when we compare games on the PC, where developers have virtually unlimited space to work with, games are still, on average, about 10 - 15 GB.

And I hardly see a game like GT5 as an example of a game that took full advantage of Blu Ray when it was released in a form that even Forza 3 topped in terms of content, let alone Forza 4. Yeah I know Forza 4 only had half of the total amount of cars GT5 had but it also didn't have 800+ cars that were merely uprezzed PS2/PSP cars and all of its cars had fully modeled interiors and whatnot.

Speculating that [INSERT GAME HERE] would have been better if it was PS3 only is nonsense because of what I already pointed out earlier. if developers that don't have any other platform to develop for and only the size constraints of the Blu Ray disc to worry about don't end up making bigger, more content rich games, why on Earth should we automatically assume a third party would do so? In the case of FFXIII, did you actually read the list of content that was cut out? Most of that content was filler that probably would've ended up cut anyway.

Funny how times have changed in 6 years. :P

DD just goes to show you how the gaming industry can sometimes be unpredictable.

One thing that hampered Blu was the PS3 was the only machine really pushing it for gaming.

DVD for instance, Sony introduced for gaming, but Xbox followed suit. It was easier for 3rd parties to justify supporting games of that size. This gen, companies have to tailor their software around the PS360's limitations, which also includes DVD. Most of the time you are buying a PS3 game, you are merely getting a 3rd party multiplat game designed for DVD and Blu was an afterthought, and rightfully so as supporting Blu isn't to those companies benefit. PC gaming did delve into DVD software, but it never pushed it like it did CD since most games you install anyways. Consoles rely more heavily on their disc formats.

Next gen, if 2/3rds of the companies support Blu, we will see more interesting support for the format. More games pushing lossless audio, multiple language tracks, levels designed to take advantage of the format, things of that nature. I should point out there are some great exclusive games that did take advantage of Blu ray (for instance sound), but clearly they are exceptions this generation. As far as movies go, I can't stand to watch a Brand new big Budget new movie steaming or DVD, it has to be Blu. It has to take advantage of my 7.1 and my HD Plasma.

Formats can't do too much as they are just storage mediums, but they can make a difference. For instance, what did DVD do for gaming last gen? When we can answer that individually, and then look to see 2/3rds of the consoles supported DVD, we can see that technology is only one part of the equation. The other is support.

We can go buy a bad ass 2160p UHD TV, but what's the point if companies don't support it with software? This is always the dilemma. :(

SolidTy

I like blue ray's better than DVD... it sucks about the installation part.. but somehow i don't think that's the blue ray's fault.

It extended the life of the ever-so-dying optical disks. That's about it.

I like blue ray's better than DVD... it sucks about the installation part.. but somehow i don't think that's the blue ray's fault.

Joedgabe

The blu ray in the PS3 is just to slow.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

One thing that hampered Blu was the PS3 was the only machine really pushing it for gaming.

DVD for instance, Sony introduced for gaming, but Xbox followed suit. It was easier for 3rd parties to justify supporting games of that size. This gen, companies have to tailor their software around the PS360's limitations, which also includes DVD. Most of the time you are buying a PS3 game, you are merely getting a 3rd party multiplat game designed for DVD and Blu was an afterthought, and rightfully so as supporting Blu isn't to those companies benefit. PC gaming did delve into DVD software, but it never pushed it like it did CD since most games you install anyways. Consoles rely more heavily on their disc formats.

Next gen, if 2/3rds of the companies support Blu, we will see more interesting support for the format. More games pushing lossless audio, multiple language tracks, levels designed to take advantage of the format, things of that nature. I should point out there are some great exclusive games that did take advantage of Blu ray (for instance sound), but clearly they are exceptions this generation. As far as movies go, I can't stand to watch a Brand new big Budget new movie steaming or DVD, it has to be Blu. It has to take advantage of my 7.1 and my HD Plasma.

Formats can't do too much as they are just storage mediums, but they can make a difference. For instance, what did DVD do for gaming last gen? When we can answer that individually, and then look to see 2/3rds of the consoles supported DVD, we can see that technology is only one part of the equation. The other is support.

We can go buy a bad ass 2160p UHD TV, but what's the point if companies don't support it with software? This is always the dilemma. :(

Naylord

*Thumbs Up*:P

Of course it didn't, it's just a storage, a larger DVD...

Ultimately,its only advantage in gaming is the convinience of not having to change discs while playing on the PS3,but as you noted,that advantage is offset by slower read times,and mandatory installation requirments...

Rocker6

Why would it do anything for gaming? All it is is a dvd with more storage space on it >_>

wis3boi

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

Of course it didn't, it's just a storage, a larger DVD...

Ultimately,its only advantage in gaming is the convinience of not having to change discs while playing on the PS3,but as you noted,that advantage is offset by slower read times,and mandatory installation requirments...

Mozelleple112

Why would it do anything for gaming? All it is is a dvd with more storage space on it >_>

wis3boi

One thing that hampered Blu was the PS3 was the only machine really pushing it for gaming.

DVD for instance, Sony introduced for gaming, but Xbox followed suit. It was easier for 3rd parties to justify supporting games of that size. This gen, companies have to tailor their software around the PS360's limitations, which also includes DVD. Most of the time you are buying a PS3 game, you are merely getting a 3rd party multiplat game designed for DVD and Blu was an afterthought, and rightfully so as supporting Blu isn't to those companies benefit. PC gaming did delve into DVD software, but it never pushed it like it did CD since most games you install anyways. Consoles rely more heavily on their disc formats.

Next gen, if 2/3rds of the companies support Blu, we will see more interesting support for the format. More games pushing lossless audio, multiple language tracks, levels designed to take advantage of the format, things of that nature. I should point out there are some great exclusive games that did take advantage of Blu ray (for instance sound), but clearly they are exceptions this generation. As far as movies go, I can't stand to watch a Brand new big Budget new movie steaming or DVD, it has to be Blu. It has to take advantage of my 7.1 and my HD Plasma.

Formats can't do too much as they are just storage mediums, but they can make a difference. For instance, what did DVD do for gaming last gen? When we can answer that individually, and then look to see 2/3rds of the consoles supported DVD, we can see that technology is only one part of the equation. The other is support.

We can go buy a bad ass 2160p UHD TV, but what's the point if companies don't support it with software? This is always the dilemma. :(

SolidTy

Why would it do anything for gaming? All it is is a dvd with more storage space on it >_>

wis3boi

People must be pretty dumb to not realise the importance and impact of Blu-ray.
All in all, its beneficial and pushing the gaming industry and technology further.

Like how Cartridges have moved to Compact Discs to DVD's.
I expect Blu-rays storage amount to be the STANDARD for Next Gen Machines. And the Wii:U apparently is Blu-ray size too.

The Space is EVERYTHING a Developer needs and can shove on. And gaming ethusaist can see it and hear through a top HDTV and SOUND SYSTEM.

People must be pretty dumb to not realise the importance and impact of Blu-ray.
All in all, its beneficial and pushing the gaming industry and technology further.

Like how Cartridges have moved to Compact Discs to DVD's.
I expect Blu-rays storage amount to be the STANDARD for Next Gen Machines. And the Wii:U apparently is Blu-ray size too.

The Space is EVERYTHING a Developer needs and can shove on. And gaming ethusaist can see it and hear through a top HDTV and SOUND SYSTEM.

g0ddyX

Sorry but size isn't every thing which you obviously don't understand.

microsoft already talked about blue ray when ps3 released. they said blue ray doesn't really do anything special and something better is out there. lolk2theswiss

There is something better and it is called "HVD" which is an acronym for "Holographic Versatile Disk"

While DVDs are limited to 9gb of storage, and Blu-rays still only 50gb, the HVD can store as much as 6 TB, correct.. 6000GB of data!

That's more than today's HDDs.

Of course, the main selling point of the disk is the resolution it can play, while DVD uses SD resolution of 720x480p, and Blu-ray the 'Full' HD resolution of 1920x1080p (near cinema 2K or 35mm prints) The HVD is capable of supporting oup to 4096x2160p, or 4KHD resolution, 4 times that of Blu-Ray 1080p. It might even be able to go beyond "Ultra HD" resolution aka 8KHD for a full 35 megapixel image on screen. Will also be vastly superior to even the largest IMAX 15/70mm prints!

Cost per disk is $120-180 and an HVD player would cost around $15,000 to manufacture.. <-- Old number but still, won't be in the PS4.. perhaps PS5 though

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

One thing that hampered Blu was the PS3 was the only machine really pushing it for gaming.

DVD for instance, Sony introduced for gaming, but Xbox followed suit. It was easier for 3rd parties to justify supporting games of that size. This gen, companies have to tailor their software around the PS360's limitations, which also includes DVD. Most of the time you are buying a PS3 game, you are merely getting a 3rd party multiplat game designed for DVD and Blu was an afterthought, and rightfully so as supporting Blu isn't to those companies benefit. PC gaming did delve into DVD software, but it never pushed it like it did CD since most games you install anyways. Consoles rely more heavily on their disc formats.

Next gen, if 2/3rds of the companies support Blu, we will see more interesting support for the format. More games pushing lossless audio, multiple language tracks, levels designed to take advantage of the format, things of that nature. I should point out there are some great exclusive games that did take advantage of Blu ray (for instance sound), but clearly they are exceptions this generation. As far as movies go, I can't stand to watch a Brand new big Budget new movie steaming or DVD, it has to be Blu. It has to take advantage of my 7.1 and my HD Plasma.

Formats can't do too much as they are just storage mediums, but they can make a difference. For instance, what did DVD do for gaming last gen? When we can answer that individually, and then look to see 2/3rds of the consoles supported DVD, we can see that technology is only one part of the equation. The other is support.

We can go buy a bad ass 2160p UHD TV, but what's the point if companies don't support it with software? This is always the dilemma. :(

Mozelleple112

;) *SolidTy Approves of Mozelleple112 * :P

:cool:

[QUOTE="finalstar2007"]

Here is a simple example.. having FFXIII on 1 disk and play it on the PS3 easier than having 3 DVD's like the xbox did.

i'd say it did pretty well what it was designed to do

heretrix

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

Of course it didn't, it's just a storage, a larger DVD...

Ultimately,its only advantage in gaming is the convinience of not having to change discs while playing on the PS3,but as you noted,that advantage is offset by slower read times,and mandatory installation requirments...

Mozelleple112

Why would it do anything for gaming? All it is is a dvd with more storage space on it >_>

wis3boi

I've already acknowledged the point about lossless audio in my later posts,read through this thread,please...

Still,fact remains,when it comes to gaming,Blu-Ray hasn't done much.What do you have,somewhat better audio in some games,and no switching discs?

That's it...

Anything possible on the PS3 is possible on the 360,only perhaps with some small adjustments...

I also acknowledged the theoretical possibilty of putting higher quality visual assets on the BR,however,aged PS3 hardware is the bottleneck,stopping the idea.

Here,from my earilier post:

Aside from no disc swaping and lossless audio,Blu-Ray has no clear-cut advantages atm.Rocker6