Why is Blu-Ray needed when PS3 HDD is standard?

My thoughts on this subject are well illustrated on the following image:

My thoughts on this subject are well illustrated on the following image:

 

SER69

:lol:  ouch

I know its been said many times. That Blu-Ray isn't needed because the most graphically intense game in on PC and that uses DVD9. The counter claim to this is that PC doesn't need a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drive because it installs game data on to the HDD.

Now a lot of people gave flack to MS for not having the HDD standard unlike the PS3 which has a HDD standard in every console. Since the PS3 has an HDD in every console like the PC why should it need a Blu-Ray player when PC doesn't need one as well? I mean you can't use the exuse that PC doesn't need Blu-Ray because it has HDD standard when all PS3's have HDD standard as well. To me the Blu-Ray is just a luxary it isn't a neccestiy for gaming or developers for PS3 if they have the HDD standard on all consoles.

Without the Blu-Ray player the PS3 would have benifited from a lower price and an earlier launch. I mean games aren't big enough on console that they need to be installed now but the 60GB HDD would have proved to be an advantage later on even without Blu-Ray. Even without Blu-Ray PS3 would still have the advantage of standard HDD thus the capability of the "so called" bigger unrestricted games so many brag about.

Blackbond

Does no one in this thread know how to do basic math?

Here, this is easy, what is 60/25?   Or better yet, 20/25 (since even though it is now history, it still defines the limits)?  Now try 60/50, or 20/50...  PS3's HDD is tiny by PC standards (heck even the 360 elite's HDD is tiny by PC standards).  Where as installation on a PC with a huge HDD is a very viable option for all games, doing that for console just isn't a real option at this size.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I know its been said many times. That Blu-Ray isn't needed because the most graphically intense game in on PC and that uses DVD9. The counter claim to this is that PC doesn't need a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drive because it installs game data on to the HDD.

Now a lot of people gave flack to MS for not having the HDD standard unlike the PS3 which has a HDD standard in every console. Since the PS3 has an HDD in every console like the PC why should it need a Blu-Ray player when PC doesn't need one as well? I mean you can't use the exuse that PC doesn't need Blu-Ray because it has HDD standard when all PS3's have HDD standard as well. To me the Blu-Ray is just a luxary it isn't a neccestiy for gaming or developers for PS3 if they have the HDD standard on all consoles.

Without the Blu-Ray player the PS3 would have benifited from a lower price and an earlier launch. I mean games aren't big enough on console that they need to be installed now but the 60GB HDD would have proved to be an advantage later on even without Blu-Ray. Even without Blu-Ray PS3 would still have the advantage of standard HDD thus the capability of the "so called" bigger unrestricted games so many brag about.

DerekLoffin

Does no one in this thread know how to do basic math?

Here, this is easy, what is 60/25? Or better yet, 20/25 (since even though it is now history, it still defines the limits)? Now try 60/50, or 20/50... PS3's HDD is tiny by PC standards (heck even the 360 elite's HDD is tiny by PC standards). Where as installation on a PC with a huge HDD is a very viable option for all games, doing that for console just isn't a real option at this size.

Do you not read the OP? Like I said its not a need it becomes a "Luxary" My PC only has 60GB and it does fine with gaming and all sorts of stuff. You act like you will have to install games on the system for every game. There hasn't been many games to even exceed DVD9 yet unless its FMV heavy like Blue Dragon. 

I see a big problem for DVD as the storage for consolegames. All guys that have a X360 know about the DVD Drive, it's loud (~4Sone) and produces heat (games like Oblivion take it to the limits). One solution would be a HD-DVD or a BR drive both have around 1x@36Mbit/s Data rate, the DVD has a Data rate of 1x@11 Mbit/s. The drive would not need to spin that fast, making it loudless and cooler. The other solution would be to outsource the Data on a Harddisk.

aren't a lot of big PC games on multiple disks? one disk is installed and another is played. that wouldn't be very good for a console, the game case would carry around a useless second disk for the rest of the period of ownership, not cool. my opinion.

The chipsets in PS3 chew through data at such a rate that in order to build variety and detail and quality into the games, we need more than nine gigabytes.demoralizer

[QUOTE="DerekLoffin"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

I know its been said many times. That Blu-Ray isn't needed because the most graphically intense game in on PC and that uses DVD9. The counter claim to this is that PC doesn't need a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drive because it installs game data on to the HDD.

Now a lot of people gave flack to MS for not having the HDD standard unlike the PS3 which has a HDD standard in every console. Since the PS3 has an HDD in every console like the PC why should it need a Blu-Ray player when PC doesn't need one as well? I mean you can't use the exuse that PC doesn't need Blu-Ray because it has HDD standard when all PS3's have HDD standard as well. To me the Blu-Ray is just a luxary it isn't a neccestiy for gaming or developers for PS3 if they have the HDD standard on all consoles.

Without the Blu-Ray player the PS3 would have benifited from a lower price and an earlier launch. I mean games aren't big enough on console that they need to be installed now but the 60GB HDD would have proved to be an advantage later on even without Blu-Ray. Even without Blu-Ray PS3 would still have the advantage of standard HDD thus the capability of the "so called" bigger unrestricted games so many brag about.

Blackbond

Does no one in this thread know how to do basic math?

Here, this is easy, what is 60/25? Or better yet, 20/25 (since even though it is now history, it still defines the limits)? Now try 60/50, or 20/50... PS3's HDD is tiny by PC standards (heck even the 360 elite's HDD is tiny by PC standards). Where as installation on a PC with a huge HDD is a very viable option for all games, doing that for console just isn't a real option at this size.

Do you not read the OP? Like I said its not a need it becomes a "Luxary" My PC only has 60GB and it does fine with gaming and all sorts of stuff. You act like you will have to install games on the system for every game. There hasn't been many games to even exceed DVD9 yet unless its FMV heavy like Blue Dragon.

Yes I do, and if you're talking history (remember, PS3 is only 4 months old), then yeah, but we're talking for the next 5 years. Even conservative projections of average game size put it over 7 GB, and we already are fielding games well over 10 GB. Again I ask, does no one in this thread have basic math skills?

 I should be nicer though, let's ignore BR size, now what is 20/9?  Even with DVD9, the HDD isn't enough.