If blu-ray doesn't work for games now, how will it later?

I was just thinking. Most down the blu-ray due to the read speed it has. And how that hurts in games because data needs to be pulled quickly and often.

Here's my question. If blu-ray's speed can't be dealt with this gen, how will it work for next gen?

Wha? *puts in copy of uncharted* *notices how fast the game runs with little load times*

What are you talking about?

I was just thinking. Most down the blu-ray due to the read speed it has. And how that hurts in games because data needs to be pulled quickly and often.

Here's my question. If blu-ray's speed can't be dealt with this gen, how will it work for next gen?

The_Crucible

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

ZIMdoom

Playing devil's advocate here: Many counter games like Uncharted and Heavenly Sword with pointing to their gameplay length. While Uncharted looks and plays great, its only about 12 hour game. Is it possible, with the BR read speeds, to fit all of the data needed for an Uncharted-type game of 20 hour length?

I was just thinking. Most down the blu-ray due to the read speed it has. And how that hurts in games because data needs to be pulled quickly and often.

Here's my question. If blu-ray's speed can't be dealt with this gen, how will it work for next gen?

The_Crucible

faster drive speeds will be out by the next consoles are on the scene. BluRay itself was brand new when the PS3 was due for release so the only affordable drives available were SLOW. MS on the hand had access to DVD drives & the technology had been out for around 8 years- so they could get off the shelf 12x drives at a low cost. Sony could only get brand new 2x drives for BluRay- which is as good as 10x DVD so its slower than the X360. had 4x BluRay had been available we wouldnt be having this topic AND the PS3 probly may not have had a HDD since 4x BluRay would be MORE than fast enough for loading.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

The_Crucible

Playing devil's advocate here: Many counter games like Uncharted and Heavenly Sword with pointing to their gameplay length. While Uncharted looks and plays great, its only about 12 hour game. Is it possible, with the BR read speeds, to fit all of the data needed for an Uncharted-type game of 20 hour length?

also folklore is 20 hours long. 12 hours it not that short for the type of game. look at cod 4 4 hour single player.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

The_Crucible

Playing devil's advocate here: Many counter games like Uncharted and Heavenly Sword with pointing to their gameplay length. While Uncharted looks and plays great, its only about 12 hour game. Is it possible, with the BR read speeds, to fit all of the data needed for an Uncharted-type game of 20 hour length?

it is but why does a developer want to spend nearly twice as long on a 20hour game when a 12hour game will sell just aswell?

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

The_Crucible

Playing devil's advocate here: Many counter games like Uncharted and Heavenly Sword with pointing to their gameplay length. While Uncharted looks and plays great, its only about 12 hour game. Is it possible, with the BR read speeds, to fit all of the data needed for an Uncharted-type game of 20 hour length?

Granted, I'm not a programmer, but I don't buy that arguement. I don't see why, when a 10 hour game like Uncharted can do it, then why would making Uncharted 12 or 15 hours long be any different? Wouldn't they just keep doing what works...or why they did for the first 10 hours or so? It's like saying the longer the movie the harder it is for the projector to feed the reel. I don't buy that. If it works, then it works and will always work. I fail to see whay making the game longer would change the way the game reads.

Now I know people are going to say it is harder for the laser to find all the data. But again, that makes no sense to me because Uncharted proved there are ways around this. You can hide the loading during cur scenes. You can cache data on the fly into the HDD which also a way to "hide" the loading. You can do what Oblivion did and replicate data on the disk making it easier to find.

And we are already hearing stories of games being many gigs of data like MGS 4 or Resistance 2. So far, from what we've seen, there aren't long load times or lengthy installs needed for those games. At least, not that we know of.

While Sony says and does many stupid things from a PR perspective. I have yet to know of them putting something into their console that would cause problems the way people act like BR would. I doubt they would have put a too slow drive into their console if it would cause problems.

I will also remind people that last gen people all praised the Xbox HDD saying it would eliminate loading and how the PS2 would be hurt when people realized how massively long the PS2 load times were. Well, the PS2 came out with games like Rachet and Clank and Jak and Daxter, which had ZERO load times (because they were hidden) and didn't need the HDD...while the Xbox still had loading even with their HDD. Granted that was more an exception than the rule...but I think it makes a valid point. Developers should use the hardware the way it was designed and things will work way better than people think they should. Because nobdoy last gen thought it was possible for the PS2 to stream a game without loading because you needed HDD and a much faster drive to do that. But the PS2 had neither and did it anyway.

Blu-ray works now and will be even better in future... It has to be afterall Blu-ray seems to be the next big thing in HD era...

As others pointed out its not Blu-ray the problem but how good devs are to expolit the console's capabilities... I do believe Blu-ray has advantages with its massive storage and in time Devs will benefit from that...

expect installsAlways-Honest

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

expect installsAlways-Honest

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]expect installsThe_Crucible

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

ut3, dmc4, lost planet... it's just the beginning, and i don't mind either

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]expect installsThe_Crucible

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

it is but why does a developer want to spend nearly twice as long on a 20hour game when a 12hour game will sell just aswell?

CwlHeddwyn

I think this is a good point. Having played Heavenly Sword, which is about 5-6 hours, and Uncharted and now Call of Duty...these games feel like they are over way too soon. But I felt great when they were done. I felt the story ended at the proper point and the game felt complete while leaving me wanting more.

To me, that is EXACTLY what a game should do. I know we have a perception of "value" when we drop all that money for a game, and will complain if the game isn't super long. But I want quality first and foremost. I feel like HS and Uncharted were very high quality and accomplished what they set out to do. On the other hand, games that go on too long can feel artificially dragged out and that takes away from the game. I don't want 20 twists and false endings. I don't want secret bosses 3 or 4 times just to make a game longer. I just want an enjoyable game with an involving story. One of the reasons I went from loving Twilight Princess to being annoyed buy it was it felt artificially too long with the added dungeons. I thought the game should have ended much sooner than it did.

When a game is dragged out just for the sake of making it longer, that is how you end up with dull repitition, and you start getting annoyed at everything, and the game goes from fun to being a pain to play. It becomes a chore, and I don't like that.

Interesting enough, thinking back, some of the games that really blew me away and I felt were "perfect" games, were "shorter" games that scored 8 or 8.5. Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Mark of Kri, Beyond Good and Evil, Silent Hill 2, Uncharted and Heavenly Sword. Technically they aren't "perfect", but in terms of the experience they offer and the gameplay and story they were perfect examples of what gaming should be. At least in my opinion.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]expect installsheretrix

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

expect installsAlways-Honest

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]expect installsAlways-Honest

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

ut3, dmc4, lost planet... it's just the beginning, and i don't mind either

UT3? Turd. DMC4 (as I already said)? Turd. Lost Planet? :lol:

2X Blu-Ray has read speeds comparable to a 16X DVD if its a constant read speed. Unfortunately, the Blu-Ray drives out now don't achieve a straight peak speed at a constant rate. People just focus on the numbers and not on the data transfer rates associated with them.

When Blu-Ray hits 4X constant read speeds, it will be completely fine, and I have no doubts that the drives will get faster given time.

Oh, the Club has an install. Takes about 5 minutes ro so and is about 1GB. Wow, we better watch out!

Like CD Drives and DVD Drives before hand Blu-Ray drives will become faster over time. A Blu-Ray drive 5 years from now will be much faster then whatever is in the PS3 right now.Blackbond

2X in PS3, and the theoretical maximum for Blu-Ray is thought to be 12X, which will be more than enough.

i dont under

[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]expect installsSony-ismy-Homey

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

spoken like a true gamer.... your an example to all of us

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

ZIMdoom

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]expect installsThe_Crucible

Why? because Capcom has?

Yeah it was real tough. I rented DMC4, installed it, played it, hated it, uninstalled it, done.

Show me a game worth a crap with an install and i might care.

ut3, dmc4, lost planet... it's just the beginning, and i don't mind either

UT3? Turd. DMC4 (as I already said)? Turd. Lost Planet? :lol:

what does turd mean?.. you think it's a bad game?

UT3 is a great multi player game and Lost planet was a good game on 360.. what's your point here.. are you angry in general?

there will be more games with an install because blu ray is slower to read than dvd... simple.

spoken like a true gamer.... your an example to all of us

doobie1975

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

I've been playing a lot of PS3 lately (borrowed one)...and BR works. It's not like I put in the game or movie and it doesn't work. And both Uncharted and Heavenly sword were amazing games that had no loading as far as I could tell. The problems you are talking about now, such as having to install, is because developers are refusing to learn the proper way to use the PS3 hardware. They want to program every game like its on PC, requiring nothing more than massive ram numbers. Since they can't do that they fall back to the install, which is their next best work-around.

I think instead of worrying about BR, people should be worrying about this trend of developers not making games for consoles anymore, so much as they make games how they want and then try to shoehorn it onto the console. Even if it results in a crap port, or a terrible Wii game, they don't care because they can't be bothered to use the hardware properly. I think that is a much more disturbing trend than having to instal BR games which is just annoying.

HuusAsking

Okay. what about a game like Burnout Paradise? A large, sandbox map that never needs loading throughout, until you start a race or whatever. How is that able to run as smooth on the PS3 as the 360? When i drive 150-200mph (it seems) I can go from one end of the city to the other without issue.

what does turd mean?.. you think it's a bad game?

UT3 is a great multi player game and Lost planet was a good game on 360.. what's your point here.. are you angry in general?

there will be more games with an install because blu ray is slower to read than dvd... simple.

Always-Honest

Turd: crap, poop, etc.

UT3 was a mediocre online game. It was a HUGE disappointment to many.

Lost Planet, "teh good on 360." Great. Sucked on PS3 for no reason. Turd.

Yes, these are my opinions. But I don't think they vary too much from the main stream on these games.

"there will be more games with an install because blu ray is slower to read than dvd". Yes, from crappy devs. Tell me how all of the other PS3 games without 5GB install work just fine.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

You can do that in games like Heavenly Sword and Uncharted because the transition points are known and you can cache your data loading around them. But what about games where the data access can be more random (for example, neither of the two mentioned games are multiplayer)? Oblivion had to load stuff on the hard drive because it had mechanisms that allowed for "jumping" (going immediately between arbitrary points A and B). Game loading also involves "jumping". Ideally, the hard drive is supposed to allow for near-to-zero game loading time even from a "jump".The_Crucible

Okay. what about a game like Burnout Paradise? A large, sandbox map that never needs loading throughout, until you start a race or whatever. How is that able to run as smooth on the PS3 as the 360? When i drive 150-200mph (it seems) I can go from one end of the city to the other without issue.

The "jump" in both cases is when you transition from free-roam to and from objective-based (in Scarface, it's when you trigger a mission--in BP, it's when you trigger a race or the like).

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

what does turd mean?.. you think it's a bad game?

UT3 is a great multi player game and Lost planet was a good game on 360.. what's your point here.. are you angry in general?

there will be more games with an install because blu ray is slower to read than dvd... simple.

The_Crucible

Turd: crap, poop, etc.

UT3 was a mediocre online game. It was a HUGE disappointment to many.

Lost Planet, "teh good on 360." Great. Sucked on PS3 for no reason. Turd.

Yes, these are my opinions. But I don't think they vary too much from the main stream on these games.

"there will be more games with an install because blu ray is slower to read than dvd". Yes, from crappy devs. Tell me how all of the other PS3 games without 5GB install work just fine.

well.. someone is an angry youngster...

come back when you can talk like a rational person.

I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.SpruceCaboose

the facts are what we see and experience....

I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.SpruceCaboose

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.Always-Honest

the facts are what we see and experience....

A 2X BD disc has transfer rates of about 60MBps. (52MBps is needed to transfer the HD video for the BD specs). A 16X DVD has transfer rates of around 22000 KBps.

The facts are what they are, not what anecdotal evidence suggests.

From Blu-Ray's spec sheets.

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.SpruceCaboose

the facts are what we see and experience....

A 2X BD disc has transfer rates of about 60MBps. (52MBps is needed to transfer the HD video for the BD specs). A 16X DVD has transfer rates of around 22000 KBps.

The facts are what they are, not what anecdotal evidence suggests.

well, hope it will show someday. you can stare yourself blind on numbers and stats, but you can also see what happens in reality..

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.Always-Honest

the facts are what we see and experience....

A 2X BD disc has transfer rates of about 60MBps. (52MBps is needed to transfer the HD video for the BD specs). A 16X DVD has transfer rates of around 22000 KBps.

The facts are what they are, not what anecdotal evidence suggests.

well, hope it will show someday. you can stare yourself blind on numbers and stats, but you can also see what happens in reality..

That both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray look stunning, and that Xbox 360 games and PS3 games look dang near identical?

Or what exactly are you telling me that I should be looking for?

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.SpruceCaboose

the facts are what we see and experience....

A 2X BD disc has transfer rates of about 60MBps. (52MBps is needed to transfer the HD video for the BD specs). A 16X DVD has transfer rates of around 22000 KBps.

The facts are what they are, not what anecdotal evidence suggests.

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.SpruceCaboose

the facts are what we see and experience....

A 2X BD disc has transfer rates of about 60MBps. (52MBps is needed to transfer the HD video for the BD specs). A 16X DVD has transfer rates of around 22000 KBps.

The facts are what they are, not what anecdotal evidence suggests.

well, hope it will show someday. you can stare yourself blind on numbers and stats, but you can also see what happens in reality..

That both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray look stunning, and that Xbox 360 games and PS3 games look dang near identical?

Or what exactly are you telling me that I should be looking for?

looks have nothing to do with this... loading times have.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]I see everyone is ignoring the fact that a 2X BD Drive has comparable data transfer rates to a 12-16X DVD drive.HuusAsking

the facts are what we see and experience....

A 2X BD disc has transfer rates of about 60MBps. (52MBps is needed to transfer the HD video for the BD specs). A 16X DVD has transfer rates of around 22000 KBps.

The facts are what they are, not what anecdotal evidence suggests.

I see my mistake. I was dropping a 0 from the DVD read rates in my head. I apologize. It would be about 8X assuming constant data rates.

looks have nothing to do with this... loading times have.

Always-Honest

I have not experienced load times on the PS3 games that were comparatively worse than similar titles on the Wii or the 360. The only recent system that had terrible load times in my eyes was the PSP, and that is why I no longer own one.

Wha? *puts in copy of uncharted* *notices how fast the game runs with little load times*

What are you talking about?

Bread_or_Decide

now dont get me wrong here i dont agree with the TC either and his logic....but uncharted uses the HDD liberally as a cache...there is massives amounts of data allways being put on the hdd at all times common files and files minutes before they are needed.

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

looks have nothing to do with this... loading times have.

SpruceCaboose

I have not experienced load times on the PS3 games that were comparatively worse than similar titles on the Wii or the 360. The only recent system that had terrible load times in my eyes was the PSP, and that is why I no longer own one.

not by much, but they are longer in most games (though uncharted and burnout are great...)

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

looks have nothing to do with this... loading times have.

Always-Honest

I have not experienced load times on the PS3 games that were comparatively worse than similar titles on the Wii or the 360. The only recent system that had terrible load times in my eyes was the PSP, and that is why I no longer own one.

not by much, but they are longer in most games (though uncharted and burnout are great...)

I guess I am more forgiving. I went through early disc based system. A half-minute or so load is nothing in comparison to what I had been groomed for through the early PSOne and Saturn days!

I was just thinking. Most down the blu-ray due to the read speed it has. And how that hurts in games because data needs to be pulled quickly and often.

Here's my question. If blu-ray's speed can't be dealt with this gen, how will it work for next gen?

The_Crucible

Who says it will be used next-gen? Sony won its war, onto other formats.

[QUOTE="Always-Honest"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Always-Honest"]

looks have nothing to do with this... loading times have.

SpruceCaboose

I have not experienced load times on the PS3 games that were comparatively worse than similar titles on the Wii or the 360. The only recent system that had terrible load times in my eyes was the PSP, and that is why I no longer own one.

not by much, but they are longer in most games (though uncharted and burnout are great...)

I guess I am more forgiving. I went through early disc based system. A half-minute or so load is nothing in comparison to what I had been groomed for through the early PSOne and Saturn days!

ha, no .. true..