Support NeoGAF

[human5892]

>>Net/Net pros and cons with DVD drives in every box:
>>PROS:
>>No loss in game quality whatsoever

Higher access speeds and capacity sort of seem like factors that could increase a game's quality, but that's just me...

>>Extremely high quality standard grade DVD playback (tried and true format, with all bugs ironed out, Dolby digital support, DTS, progressive scan, etc. etc.)

BR/HD-DVD drives will support DVD playback with all of these bells and whistles.

>>Cheaper box

Depends -- I'm almost positive Sony will be selling theirs for the same price as Microsoft does. It's going to cost Sony more than it does MS, yeah, but as a consumer, what do I care?

>>Cheaper games (or cheaper game development, meaning devs can spend the time/money wasted on supporting a more expensive format on something that counts, like quality of the game)

Possibly, but again, you don't HAVE to use Blu-Ray if you don't have the money.

 

[ypo]

What does whether the PS3'll be accepted as a movie player has to do with anything? So what if no one wants or wants to switch to a BR movie player? That doesn't change the fact that a BR disc gives shit load more storage than a DVD disc. Which means developers can put a lot more content/higher quality content in games. Some of you make it seem that movie playback is the only reason for the PS3 going BR.

 

[Lord Error]

Shog, weren't you the one saying that PSP is too overpowered for it's own good, and stuff like that? We all know how that one turned out now, and I doubt anyone in the right mind would have liked if PSP would have been any less powerful than it is.

 

[Azih]

That developer guy is clearly out of his mind if he thinks a LOTR movie on a Blu Ray or HDDVD would look the same as DVD, just with no swapping.

He never said that. He said that the difference wouldn't be noted by Joe Consumer. And he's right.

 

[Nerevar]

That developer guy is clearly out of his mind if he thinks a LOTR movie on a Blu Ray or HDDVD would look the same as DVD, just with no swapping. Last I checked, 1080p is slightly different than 480p.

A) blu-Ray does not output 1080p. It's either 1080i or 720p.

b) You're missing the point. he's saying moving to the Blu-Ray does not increase the quality of the movie. this is not debateable. You can fit all 4 discs of the LOTR special edition on one disc for HD-DVD or blu-ray, but the content itself does not change. You would have to re-encode it to have it output at 720p / 1080i. There is nothing preventing this from being put on a regular DVD if the DVD player supports the output of 720p / 1080i and also has support to decode information of that high quality (and from what I've seen, the WM9 codec looks nice). Therefore, besides higher capacity, blu-ray or HD-DVD offer no advantages over standard DVD.

Higher Capacity and higher transfer speeds are two clear, gaming related advantages. And yes I got tired of swapping disks back then at 16bit Amiga times - it's the main reason why I can't bring myself to buy a limited edition of LOTR movies.

well, I can understand your point, but that still puts you in the minority. I don't know anyone who hasn't bought the limited edition LOTR movies because of disc-swapping. I know people who haven't bought them because they were too long, but that's a different issue entirely.

 

[manngc]

I had an interesting thought on the way MS could proceed with the next generation of storage. What if the Xbox 2 had a significantly larger HDD included? This way, games would be installed on the HDD just like on a PC (you can leave the movies on the Discs to save space on the HDD). This would optimize load times (HDDs are still faster than 16xDVD right?) and optimize space on the DVD (no need to double data up or optimize the layout for loading). Best of both worlds without going into experimental territory like HD-DVD or Blue-Ray.

Then again most of the rumors say the Xbox2 will not have an HDD...too bad. Thoughts?

 

[Borys]

Downplaying PS3 right now won't help you anti-Sony guys.
And just like the guy above said: PSP being ultra-high tech with an UMD (new media! new format!) drive beating DS is O.K. by your standards but PS3 beating Xenon ain't?

Give me a break. You need to take off those green-colored glassess. Seriously.

 

[Azih]

I had an interesting thought on the way MS could proceed with the next generation of storage. What if the Xbox 2 had a significantly larger HDD included? This way, games would be installed on the HDD just like on a PC (you can leave the movies on the Discs to save space on the HDD). This would optimize load times (HDDs are still faster than 16xDVD right?) and optimize space on the DVD (no need to double data up or optimize the layout for loading). Best of both worlds without going into experimental territory like HD-DVD or Blue-Ray.

Then again most of the rumors say the Xbox2 will not have an HDD...too bad. Thoughts?

Having to install games kills the insert and play console factor and won't happen period.

 

[sonycowboy]

Are you dense? DVD did not require higher res from the displays!!! It just optimised the experience from everyone's SD TV sets! That's a big fucking difference between then and now!



Are you shitting me? Obcourse it's important! It's THE most important factor! Otherwise, who'd give a shit about HD content for movies?!?

Right now, I can put a highly detailed 720p (1280x720) WMV9 movie on my SXGA computer screen and enjoy it's full res glory, or via S-Vid out of my vid card, display it on my 480i SD TV set and hardly tell the difference from a normal 480i MPEG2 DVD version. Do you think anyone in their right mind would choose the second option?!? It's all about the fucking display!

For a person without a HDTV, outside fo the computing realm, BR does not mean SHIT! PS3 with BR to a SDTV owning person won't mean diddly squat, because you can't tell the fucking difference, no matter how well versed the person is in tech!



WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT WHEN THEY CAN'T SEE THE FUCKING BENEFIT ON THEIR SHITTY SD TVS?!?!?!?! X_X

You seem to be a very,very angry man.

 

[Nerevar]

Downplaying PS3 right now won't help you anti-Sony guys.
And just like the guy above said: PSP being ultra-high tech with an UMD (new media! new format!) drive beating DS is O.K. by your standards but PS3 beating Xenon ain't?

Give me a break. You need to take off those green-colored glassess. Seriously.

I love GAF logic. Arguing that HD-DVD is unnecessary for next gen automatically equals you being an anti-Sony xbox fanboy. I would like more intelligent discussion and less idiotic responses like this so I don't have to scroll through 5 pages of crap in the first place.

 

[Azih]

Downplaying PS3 right now won't help you anti-Sony guys.
And just like the guy above said: PSP being ultra-high tech with an UMD (new media! new format!) drive beating DS is O.K. by your standards but PS3 beating Xenon ain't?

Give me a break. You need to take off those green-colored glassess. Seriously.

Hey I'm only in the thread because I think attempting to push DVD out this soon is harmful and DVD should be left as the standard format for a few more years.

 

[GhaleonEB]

:lol

Yeah, 1080p video and higher quality multi-channel sound do not increase the end result

.

Drive Read speed increases with both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD over what DVD can do.

Another thing is that no-one will mandate you develop PlayStation 3 games on Blu-Ray ROM discs unless you want to: some games at launch will ship on DVD's I am sure, just like it happened for PlayStation 2 (several of the launch games shipped on CD-ROM's).

One word: Minidisc. Superior format, waaaaaay ahead of it's time. Released when everyone is perfectly happy with CD's, which are the standard format. Unless the average person, who I should note do not have bleeding edge multi-thousand dollar TV's, sees a truly compelling reason to adopt Blu-Ray, it will be slow at best to take off. Having lots of them in PS3's is a nice sell to movie studios and publishers, but much less so when those same systems also play regular DVD's, like the players sitting in the majority of homes in the country. Why fracture a market that is still rapidly growing?

 

[Shogmaster]

Higher access speeds and capacity sort of seem like factors that could increase a game's quality, but that's just me...

That would make sense if any those new high end PC games that require minimum of 512MB of system RAM and 128MB of frame buffer for the video card actually exceeded capacity of a single DVD EVAR! Think about that for a second and let it sink in.

I dont think even the most optimistic Sony worshipper nor XBot here would expect the PS3 and Xenon to exceed 512MB of RAM, thus operating under the relatively safe assumption that neither the PS3 or Xenon will have anything over 512MB, why in the hell do you think capacity of a the optical media will ever impact either of those two system's game content?!?

The media to RAM ratio for the next gen is plenty good with the regular DVD. HD-DVD and BR for gaming is a total waste unless BR and HD-DVD drives are exponentially faster in data transfer speed, and there was way more than 512MB of RAM to fill up. It's safe to assume that the DVD drive for the Xenon will be close to or at 16X, and at that speed, any speed advantage BR and HD-DVD has over 16X DVD won't be significant enough fro less than 512MB of system RAM IMO.

 

[Shogmaster]

You seem to be a very,very angry man.

I am angry that some people just can't understand simple concepts and keep bothering us with the same shit, everyday. GOD does that ever piss me off! :lol

 

[jedimike]

Do you guys actually think you'll be swapping DVD's? One of the devs just said the biggest game he was ever involved with was 4GB. Are games going to just suddenly double in size because we're moving to a new platform?

Which means developers can put a lot more content/higher quality content in games. Some of you make it seem that movie playback is the only reason for the PS3 going BR.

Content is still limited. The highest res textures used on consoles are still not as big as what devs use for PC games. I mean 720 pixels is Max... anything higher res than that is a total waste.

If Klee is correct, and I think he is, Xbox will still have a higher end model available with a HD-DVD drive simply for movie playback. Movie playback is the driving factor for moving to a high-def standard... not drive storage.

Higher access speeds and capacity sort of seem like factors that could increase a game's quality, but that's just me...

I was under the impression that a 16X DVD-ROM was faster than BR.

 

[sonycowboy]

Hey I'm only in the thread because I think attempting to push DVD out this soon is harmful and DVD should be left as the standard format for a few more years.

There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that DVD will continue to be the standard for quite a few years. However, as a consumer, that happens to have access to an HDTV of at least 720p, 1080i, or eventually 1080p, why wouldn't you want the new format. You can still watch your DVD's and get new ones in the better format. I see a crap load of posts saying to get the Xbox version of a game because it's 480p, 720p, has better load times, better audio, etc.

But that same argument isn't valid for movies?
And it won't be valid for games when the PS3 has the potential (and no doubt that potential will be realized quite quickly if Xbox 2 only has DVD size storage) to have better quality audio and video due to lower compression rates?

Also, there are millions of consumers who already have some leve of HDTV. Try telling them that it's useless to buy a new format that will still play their existing DVD library, but will also take advantage of their investment.

 

[kaching]

Looks like the topic has hit upon a sensitive spot: storage media. The posts are really starting to fly back and forth now.

 

[GhaleonEB]

There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that DVD will continue to be the standard for quite a few years. However, as a consumer, that happens to have access to an HDTV of at least 720p, 1080i, or eventually 1080p, why wouldn't you want the new format. You can still watch your DVD's and get new ones in the better format. I see a crap load of posts saying to get the Xbox version of a game because it's 480p, 720p, has better load times, better audio, etc.

But that same argument isn't valid for movies?
And it won't be valid for games when the PS3 has the potential (and no doubt that potential will be realized quite quickly if Xbox 2 only has DVD size storage) to have better quality audio and video due to lower compression rates?

Also, there are millions of consumers who already have some leve of HDTV. Try telling them that it's useless to buy a new format that will still play their existing DVD library, but will also take advantage of their investment.

Two questions: What proportion of the market are those with HDTV's, and when are they expected to reach critical mass? (No sarcasm, I interested to know the trends.) If HDTV formats are really going to be a huge portion of the market in the next three years, then I see your point. If they are going to grow to 20% of the market in the next several years, that takes the edge off the impetus for a new media format.

 

[Azih]

There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that DVD will continue to be the standard for quite a few years.

Yes that's true but it would be much much better if the market wasn't muddled by the introduction of new formats. ESPECIALLY when they're competing with each other. Just realeasing a next gen DVD format would be enough to confuse customers when it comes to buying content or players let alone COMPETING formats.

I'm telling you people WILL buy BR movies and expect them to work on their vanilla DVD players and get frustrated when they don't. They WILL Buy HD movies and expect them to run on their PS3s. And none of it should be happening AT ALL.

Right now things are neat, simple, clear... standardised. Leave it alone for pete's sake.

Also, there are millions of consumers who already have some leve of HDTV. Try telling them that it's useless to buy a new format that will still play their existing DVD library, but will also take advantage of their investment.

ALL of the rest of your post is catering to the bleeding edge. The audio-video-techno philes. Catering to this niche IS NOT WORTH confusing the mainstream (especially when the mainstream won't even notice the DIFFERENCE). And it doesn't take much at all to confuse the mainstream believe you me.

 

[open_mouth_]

There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that DVD will continue to be the standard for quite a few years. However, as a consumer, that happens to have access to an HDTV of at least 720p, 1080i, or eventually 1080p, why wouldn't you want the new format. You can still watch your DVD's and get new ones in the better format. I see a crap load of posts saying to get the Xbox version of a game because it's 480p, 720p, has better load times, better audio, etc.

But that same argument isn't valid for movies?
And it won't be valid for games when the PS3 has the potential (and no doubt that potential will be realized quite quickly if Xbox 2 only has DVD size storage) to have better quality audio and video due to lower compression rates?

Also, there are millions of consumers who already have some leve of HDTV. Try telling them that it's useless to buy a new format that will still play their existing DVD library, but will also take advantage of their investment.

Plus, Blue-Ray systems will be backwards compatible so it's not like peoples' current DVD's will just stop working. That's the beauty of it... a future piece of hardware that many people might not make use of at first, but one that will likely be used very often in years to come. It's a nice bonus for PS3's to have, for sure, but not an entirely necessary one, imo. And to Jedi, yes game sizes do increase from generation to generation pretty steadily (but that might be because storage mediums have gone up and developers use up space inefficiently).

 

[manngc]

Azih,
Is having to install a game really so different from what games like DOA3 and Ninja Gaiden already do? These games have large initial loads because they are filling up the HDD cache for future use. And the good thing is that if you keep playing the same game (after powering the system down) the loading will not reoccur since it's already on the HDD. What I proposed was something similar to this. A large initial load that is masked once it has been done once. And the HDD will be large enough for several games at once... It still will have the pick up and play feel, just not for the initial load...

Mann

 

[Nerevar]

But that same argument isn't valid for movies?

Of course the argument is the same for movies. But since neither MS nor Sony receive royalties from movie studios, I don't think they care.

And it won't be valid for games when the PS3 has the potential (and no doubt that potential will be realized quite quickly if Xbox 2 only has DVD size storage) to have better quality audio and video due to lower compression rates?

As has been stated before, I doubt increased storace capacity will lead to higher quality audio. You're going to see developers limited more by the amount of data they can load into RAM than anything else. Xbox had better sound this gen simply because it supported DD5.1. I expect that to be standard on all consoles in the future, thus sound will probably be standard. I don't expect anyone will buy a game because the FMVs look a little better either. The biggest advantage Sony might have is cell. If it really is much more powerful than what is in the Xbox 2, then it really doesn't matter what format either one has.

Also, there are millions of consumers who already have some leve of HDTV. Try telling them that it's useless to buy a new format that will still play their existing DVD library, but will also take advantage of their investment.

Considering HDTVs cost thousands of dollars, if you're into gaming and own an HDTV I would be seriously surprised if you didn't own multiple consoles next gen. Seriously, most HDTV owners aren't college kids scraping by and only able to afford one console. But that's just my opinion.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

So, in conclusion.

All of the Xbots have managed to convince themselves that no HDD, no HD media are insignificant and that the PS3 CPU is too powerful and it won't make any difference in the games?

:lol :lol

HDD is nice, but not having it built-in to the system isn't going to change much (except convenience for the consumer...see XBOX) and the inclusion of HD-disc format as standard is also nice, but is the benefit (potential) worth the cost to the manufacturers at the cost of shipping at a higher price, losing or downgrading the amount and kind of (more important) components worth it? PS3's potential CPU capability, IMO, like XBOX2, etc is overblown in a huge, massive, unfucking-believable way...when system balance is what your trying to achieve in a $199-299 console that's gonna last for four to six years of peak development. Yeah, it's important to have enough space to store shit on....yes, it's important to have enough capability to make games run on...in the end, no one's gonna be able to say that who 'wins' next generation did it by tech capability...as usual. These sorts of arguments and such are going to prove to be relatively meaningless when all that really matters is who is gonna get what games.

I mean, yeah, it's obvious, but that's kinda the point of my post right now.

 

[Shogmaster]

There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that DVD will continue to be the standard for quite a few years. However, as a consumer, that happens to have access to an HDTV of at least 720p, 1080i, or eventually 1080p, why wouldn't you want the new format. You can still watch your DVD's and get new ones in the better format. I see a crap load of posts saying to get the Xbox version of a game because it's 480p, 720p, has better load times, better audio, etc.

But what you fail to grasp is that by having multiple versions of Xenon for optical media will never impact the gaming espect negatively. All they are planning to do is to offer a version of Xenon with DVD and another higher cost version with HD-DVD. The brilliance of this is that it will never fracture the gaming market, yet provide those who want the HD movie playback the option to buy the more expensive version of Xenon!

But that same argument isn't valid for movies?

Then just get the HD-DVD version of Xenon for yourself and stop beating this stupid dead horse!

And it won't be valid for games when the PS3 has the potential (and no doubt that potential will be realized quite quickly if Xbox 2 only has DVD size storage) to have better quality audio and video due to lower compression rates?

Stop avoiding reality! None of the PC games that require much higher RAM for the games ever needed anything bigger than a single DVD! What do you think is so goddamned special about the next gen console gaming that would require so much more storage for the media than the high end PC games with much higher minimum RAM requirement? You are lost in a fucking dream land. Wake the hell up.

Also, there are millions of consumers who already have some leve of HDTV. Try telling them that it's useless to buy a new format that will still play their existing DVD library, but will also take advantage of their investment.

They can buy the more expensive version of Xenon with HD-DVD in it! Problem fucking solved, now shut the hell up already!

 

[Azih]

Azih,
Is having to install a game really so different from what games like DOA3 and Ninja Gaiden already do?

As long as it's hidden from the consumers and it's not a very long initial load (which is true for the Tecmo games) then yeah there's a huge difference between what DoA3 and NG do and what PC games do.

EDIT: but with multiple discs and making a PC style 'play disc' and a few 'install discs' you have to do it PC style installation and that's no good.

nother EDIT: Also yeah I woulda liked a HD in the Xenon myself for the fast loading purposes :sigh: Maybe their flash memory solution will keep some of the HD advantages. We'll see.

 

[Lord Error]

One word: Minidisc. Superior format, waaaaaay ahead of it's time. Released when everyone is perfectly happy with CD's, which are the standard format.

Minidisc players couldn't play CDs and had sound quality inferior to a CD. Bad example.

Do you guys actually think you'll be swapping DVD's? One of the devs just said the biggest game he was ever involved with was 4GB. Are games going to just suddenly double in size because we're moving to a new platform?

There are several games right now that are around, or bigger than 7GB. I don't know what he was working on, but I could probably count a dozen or so games of that size between PS2 and XBox. Sizes can only go up with next gen games.

A) blu-Ray does not output 1080p. It's either 1080i or 720p.

I'm not sure about that, but still, a pretty big difference.

You would have to re-encode it to have it output at 720p / 1080i. There is nothing preventing this from being put on a regular DVD if the DVD player supports the output of 720p / 1080i

How many DVD players will support this, and what's the point even, when the hi-def formats will play that at higher quality and offer higher capacity and higher transfer speed.

He never said that. He said that the difference wouldn't be noted by Joe Consumer. And he's right.

Where does he mention Joe Consumer? This is his quote:

Movies already do this. Lord of the Rings is a great example. If the Lord of the Rings DVD's came out on HD-DVD's (or Blue Ray), the quality wouldn't necessarily change at all... it would just mean that instead of swapping disks half way between the movie, you'd have it all on one disk.

 

[sonycowboy]

But what you fail to grasp is that by having multiple versions of Xenon for optical media will never impact the gaming espect negatively. All they are planning to do is to offer a version of Xenon with DVD and another higher cost version with HD-DVD. The brilliance of this is that it will never fracture the gaming market, yet provide those who want the HD movie playback the option to buy the more expensive version of Xenon!

Then just get the HD-DVD version of Xenon for yourself and stop beating this stupid dead horse!

They can buy the more expensive version of Xenon with HD-DVD in it! Problem fucking solved, now shut the hell up already!

Fine. Your answer seems to be: Pay more for the same functionality the PS3 will offer.

Brilliant!!!

 

[Azih]

Where does he mention Joe Consumer? This is his quote:

Ah my bad I was focuing on this quote myself

You have to understand that the rare breed that visits forums like the one we're using, are just that - rare. more than 70% of the PS2 and Xbox users out there are still not sure what the difference is between DVD's and VHS, accept that one's a shiny disk, and the other is a bulky tape.

Average consumers think that PS2 games look just as good as Xbox games. Average consumers think EA games are great, because they have Tiger woods on the cover, or the 'real' Lord of the rings guys on the front of the box'.

And he's right in his other quote as well. He added the 'necessarily' qualifier and that's all that's needed. Sure you might have a better version, but it's just as likely you'd just put the two DVD LOTR into one BR and release it, no diff in quality, just no need for disc swapping. In there he's arguing that disc swapping isn't a very big deal and that's an argument that I'm frankly very uninterested in from either side.

 

[Nerevar]

I'm not sure about that, but still, a pretty big difference.

There's a huge difference in the amount of data requird for 1080i and 1080p (roughly two times the data, of course, because it's twice the scanlines). I know for a fact that neither blu-Ray nor HD-DVD outputs 1080p as part of it's standard. They might have the bandwidth for it though, so you might see some high-end stuff that upconverts Blu-Ray content to 1080p and outputs it over HDMI to sets that support it (most 1080p sets currently or set to go on the market don't accept a 1080p input, either).

How many DVD players will support this, and what's the point even, when the hi-def formats will play that at higher quality and offer higher capacity and higher transfer speed.

There's obviously an advantage for watching movies. But when we're talking about games, MS can make the xbox2 capable of decoding whatever codecs it wants. Thus, if it can support WMV9 or Mpeg4 or whatever at 720p / 1080i, developers can put that on a DVD. There's nothing stopping that. And as was stated before, I don't think higher transfer speeds will be too much of a difference next gen. A well-encoded HD FMV on DVD is going to look almost as good (maybe indistuingishably so) from an MPEG2 HD FMV on a blu-ray disc, and require a lower transfer speed and less disc space to boot. It will just require more CPU power, but since it's a console, we're not exactly worried about it playing while we surf the web in the background, now are we?

 

[psycho_snake]

Why is it a bad think if Xbox 2 HD is optional. Isnt it better that they have it that way?

 

[Azih]

Why is it a bad think if Xbox 2 HD is optional. Isnt it better that they have it that way?

If something isn't standard then games won't use it. They'll be developed for the lowest common spec list so that everyone can play them, which would the version of the Xenon without a HD. That sucks.

 

[kaching]

Stop avoiding reality! None of the PC games that require much higher RAM for the games ever needed anything bigger than a single DVD! What do you think is so goddamned special about the next gen console gaming that would require so much more storage for the media than the high end PC games with much higher minimum RAM requirement? You are lost in a fucking dream land. Wake the hell up.

So next gen console gaming is never going to advance things beyond PC gaming of today, over the course of at least 5-6 yrs of shelf life? Fantastic, what a sell.

They can buy the more expensive version of Xenon with HD-DVD in it! Problem fucking solved, now shut the hell up already!

If having the HD-DVD drive in the XB2 isn't going to be of benefit for both video playback *and* gaming then I'd just be inclined to get a stand-alone HD-DVD player

 

[Shogmaster]

Shog, weren't you the one saying that PSP is too overpowered for it's own good, and stuff like that? We all know how that one turned out now, and I doubt anyone in the right mind would have liked if PSP would have been any less powerful than it is.

First of all, didn't Sony have to A) Reduce the initial shipment in Japa, B) Artificially raise the US price by forcing a gay bundle, and C) Delay the launch in Europe? All of these things seem like a symptom of low yield of parts, and thus negative effect of aiming too high, while low tech POS like DS is selling neck and neck with PSP.

Let me repeat that: The joke of a machine that is the DS has so far, sold better than the PSP because Sony couldn't bring out the PSP in time, and can't make them in enough quantities. I think the DS just might end up borrowing enough time for Ninny to counter the PSP properly at this rate.

So to answer your Q, yes, I still think Sony aimed too high, and they are paying for that right now.

Second, BR/HD-DVD is capacity question that will never impact gaming experience. NEVER. Not even for the sorriest movie disguised as a turn based RPG that Square might churn out in 1080p for the next gen, since games like that are meant to be played for days, not couple of hours. Switching discs matters very little for games.

 

[human5892]

That would make sense if any those new high end PC games that require minimum of 512MB of system RAM and 128MB of frame buffer for the video card actually exceeded capacity of a single DVD EVAR! Think about that for a second and let it sink in.

I dont think even the most optimistic Sony worshipper nor XBot here would expect the PS3 and Xenon to exceed 512MB of RAM, thus operating under the relatively safe assumption that neither the PS3 or Xenon will have anything over 512MB, why in the hell do you think capacity of a the optical media will ever impact either of those two system's game content?!?

The media to RAM ratio for the next gen is plenty good with the regular DVD. HD-DVD and BR for gaming is a total waste unless BR and HD-DVD drives are exponentially faster in data transfer speed, and there was way more than 512MB of RAM to fill up. It's safe to assume that the DVD drive for the Xenon will be close to or at 16X, and at that speed, any speed advantage BR and HD-DVD has over 16X DVD won't be significant enough fro less than 512MB of system RAM IMO.

And we'll never need more than 64k, and who could possibly fill more than a CD's worth of data, etc.

Look, make any arguement against Blu-Ray that you want, but don't try to tell me that more space, in and of itself, could ever be a bad thing.

I was under the impression that a 16X DVD-ROM was faster than BR.

Isn't it something like 16x DVD is faster than BR now, but BR will eventually (as in, within the PS3's timeframe) be faster? I dunno, now you've got me unsure. I could be wrong.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

If something isn't standard then games won't use it. They'll be developed for the lowest common spec list so that everyone can play them, which would the version of the Xenon without a HD. That sucks.

Not if the standard save unit is already relatively huge. From there, users can simply pick more/bigger units, and games, like they already do now, will specify the needed amount for storage for specific uses. So, really, the fragmentation bit doesn't work here so well if the console manufacturers set this up well from the beginning. MS isn't just going to forget about the stuff they made available in a console next gen.

 

[Lord Error]

A well-encoded HD FMV on DVD is going to look almost as good (maybe indistuingishably so) from an MPEG2 HD FMV on a blu-ray disc, and require a lower transfer speed and less disc space to boot.

BR supports codec better than MPEG2 btw (WM9, H264, etc.), so the less space argument is invalid. You can just store more stuff on hi-def media (video and other data), no matter what.

And as was stated before, I don't think higher transfer speeds will be too much of a difference next gen.

I'm wondering how have you come to this conclusion, as in my opinion, that is one thing that will be needed a lot with future consoles, unless you want to have games that load longer than they already do, or have to limit the quality of graphics due to slower-than-ideal streaming data

 

[Nerevar]

And we'll never need more than 64k, and who could possibly fill more than a CD's worth of data, etc.

Wow, talk about totally missing the point of his post.

 

[Shogmaster]

Fine. Your answer seems to be: Pay more for the same functionality the PS3 will offer.

Brilliant!!!

Hello, McFly, THINK! Remember the large capacity Flash storage rumpored for Xenon? That's got to be payed for somehow. And that WILL impact gameplay.

In the end, it will all even out.

 

[Azih]

Not if the standard save unit is already relatively huge.

Yeah I can agree with that. Though KOTOR style games are lousy with save file memory and I liked having to never worry about save game maintenance due to the XBOX HD. But there would have to be a large reserved scratch file that can't be used for save games so that after an initial load games can load fast. Fast loading times are one of the things I hope the Xenon maintains.

 

[Lord Error]

First of all, didn't Sony have to A) Reduce the initial shipment in Japa, B) Artificially raise the US price by forcing a gay bundle, and C) Delay the launch in Europe? All of these things seem like a symptom of low yield of parts, and thus negative effect of aiming too high, while low tech POS like DS is selling neck and neck with PSP.

And why should you, or anyone else, give two craps about any of this? Would you seriously want PSP to want be any less than it is?

I'm sorry if I'm forcing your answer on this, but I just can't wrap my mind around such backwards thinking you seem to be displaying here.

 

[sonycowboy]

Hello, McFly, THINK! Remember the large capacity Flash storage rumpored for Xenon? That's got to be payed for somehow. And that WILL impact gameplay.

In the end, it will all even out.

???

 

[Shogmaster]

So next gen console gaming is never going to advance things beyond PC gaming of today, over the course of at least 5-6 yrs of shelf life? Fantastic, what a sell.

I know it might be a hard concept to wrap your simple noggin around, but capacity is seperate from power in this example. We are talking about media to RAM ratio, not today's PC gaming to tomorrow's console gaming power ratio. NOTHING TO DO WITH EACHOTHER.

If having the HD-DVD drive in the XB2 isn't going to be of benefit for both video playback *and* gaming then I'd just be inclined to get a stand-alone HD-DVD player

Now you're using your head. Good for you.

 

[Nerevar]

BR supports codec better than MPEG2 btw (WM9, H264, etc.), so the less space argument is invalid. You can just store more stuff on hi-def media (video and other data), no matter what.

I agree .. but once agian, the debate revolves around quality versus capacity. My point is that they're not going to have to sacrifice quality to fit it on a smaller capacity. Worst case scenario is that they have to ship it on multiple discs - and if that prevents you from buying the game than I doubt MS cares. It's not tha big of a deal to most consumers.

I'm wondering how have you come to this conclusion, as in my opinion, that is one thing that will be needed a lot with future consoles, unless you want to have games that load longer than they already do, or have to limit the quality of graphics due to slower-than-ideal streaming data

Is Shogmaster on your ignore list? Chirst, it's like you people don't even try to read anymore. A few things:
1) BRD does not have singificantly faster read times than a 16X DVD
2) It doesn't matter how fast you can stream in data if you're filled to capacity on the RAM. As shogmaster has pointed out, if you have 512 of RAM you're going to be constrained by how much data you can fit in RAM in the first place. Streaming data from the optical media won't make a difference.

That is how I reached this conclusion. If you would like to present a well researched technical counter arugment to my points, I'd be more than happy to read it.

 

[Shogmaster]

???

You were trying to equate two very different systems part for part, and I just showed you why that's stupid.

 

[Azih]

So next gen console gaming is never going to advance things beyond PC gaming of today, over the course of at least 5-6 yrs of shelf life? Fantastic, what a sell.

Well the point made was that a)optical storage media isn't going to be the wall that games run into, total system memory will be this gen. b) disc swapping isn't that big of a deal especially since any game that'll go over DVD limit will be 20-40 hours anyway. c) There's a limit to the amount of FMV you can put in a game mang.

Edit: and yeah why am I summarising points that others (namely Shog and nerverar have already made? and made better)

 

[ypo]

"Content is still limited. The highest res textures used on consoles are still not as big as what devs use for PC games. I mean 720 pixels is Max... anything higher res than that is a total waste."

You make it sound that higher res textures are the only thing that'll increase storage space, but it's not. Really, it's not. Like some have pointed out, we already have games approaching the DVD storage limit this gen, with crappy res (relative to next gen games) textures at that, and you think we don't need more space next gen? Riiight!

 

[Shogmaster]

And we'll never need more than 64k, and who could possibly fill more than a CD's worth of data, etc.

How are those examples have any fucking relevance to the question at hand? Don't be a tard!

Look, make any arguement against Blu-Ray that you want, but don't try to tell me that more space, in and of itself, could ever be a bad thing.

How about higher cost of the console and the games? That's pretty bad in my book.

 

[Shogmaster]

"Content is still limited. The highest res textures used on consoles are still not as big as what devs use for PC games. I mean 720 pixels is Max... anything higher res than that is a total waste."

You make it sound that higher res textures are the only thing that'll increase storage space, but it's not. Really, it's not. Like some have pointed out, we already have games approaching the DVD storage limit this gen, with crappy res (relative to next gen games) textures at that, and you think we don't need more space next gen? Riiight!

Would it kill the experience to stop playing for a minute in the middle of a 10 hour game to switch a disc? What, you don't have a fucking bladder? You want to finish the game without lifting your ass off the couch even once?

HOW'S THIS EVEN A GAMING ISSUE PEOPLE?!? :lol

 

[Lord Error]

Sure you might have a better version, but it's just as likely you'd just put the two DVD LOTR into one BR and release it, no diff in quality, just no need for disc swapping.

Don't tell me you seriously believe any such big releases on BR and HDDVD will be released in 480p, just by copying two DVDs onto the new media?

Is Shogmaster on your ignore list? Chirst, it's like you people don't even try to read anymore. A few things:

No, Shogmaster is not on my ignore list, I read his posts, but I still don't understand how a faster loading speed and faster streaming speed is something of lesser importance in machines that may only have 256MB (or 512MB, even that is not that much) Or do you seriously think that engines that stream graphics will just not be necessary on next gen consoles?

How fast a BRD drive may end up in PS3 (or if it may end up at all) is up to speculation, obviously.

How about higher cost of the console and the games? That's pretty bad in my book.

You mean the same way PS2 was going to cost $700 as it was using a DVD drive?

 

[Argyle]

2) It doesn't matter how fast you can stream in data if you're filled to capacity on the RAM. As shogmaster has pointed out, if you have 512 of RAM you're going to be constrained by how much data you can fit in RAM in the first place. Streaming data from the optical media won't make a difference.

Huh? When games stream data in, obviously data that is no longer needed is unloaded to make room for the data that's about to be needed...