PlayStation®3 General Discussion

[revolver20]

Most of the claims for blu-ray and games filling up discs is because its uncompressed, whereas most games on 360 are compressed the difference is tiny and only people with really expensive kit will notice it.

[PFC_Hudson]

---

richzx6r wrote:

and as I used to wait some 8-10 minutes to load a game, and didn't mind that; 15 seconds I can handle.

---

 

Message Edited by PFC_Hudson on 26-02-2009 12:13 PM

[JudgeFredd]

Regarding this thing about slower Blu-ray I have read countless times that a 2x Blu-ray can read as much data as a 10x DVD. I'm not too sure about the Xbox 360 but I think its drive is 12x so the PS3 isn't really all that disadvantaged in that area.

I'm glad the PS3 drive spins so slowly because it cuts down on noise.

As for games being limited to DVD 9 many developers say that this is enough for the current generation, and since they seem to be moving more and more to downloadable 'extra' content they're probably more than happy with this. Slap half a game on a disc and sell the other half by pretending it's extra content, nudge nudge, wink wink. Why would they want to fill 25/50GB when they could make more money selling what won't fit on a DVD 9 as extra content.

[FixBeat]

some good replies, thanks people.

i wasn't aware that games are taking longer to load on ps3?  GTA4 that definately is not the case!  the cut scenes in GTA4 especially take longer than the PS3 to load.  i guess it's alot to do with how it's programmed too though.

about DVD being enough for the current generation.  and compressed vs uncompressed.  well if it's compressed on the DVD, that for one will make loading time longer, as it has to load it then uncompress it.

compression was invented to solve a PROBLEM, that there's not enough space on current media for what the developers want to produce.  that problem is now solved permantently with extra capacity discs (blu-ray), so why use compression software which WILL make a difference to the end quality when you don't need to on blu-ray?

so if you are right and when they go onto PS3 they're uncompressed, that simply means that put a ps3 game next to a 360 game on 2 48" HD tvs and the ps3 should look better to the trained eye everytime.  is this the case?

---------------------

sorry about my uber geekiness lol. 

[Shaggy2000]

Compression technology these days is so advanced that games on the 360 frequently take up less space than a similiar game on the original Xbox. Infact the technology is always advancing, it wouldnt surprise me if the next Halo game actually takes up less space on a DVD than Halo 3.

At the end of the day games developers could use up an entire DVD or even an entire Blu Ray, but this takes time and more imprtantly money, why make a game a third longer if its not going to increase sales, plus the most people dont actually finish the game they buy, I know I have loads of games that I have played two thrids through and just left it for "the next big thing".

[tooms109]

---

richzx6r wrote:

---

kingchaz wrote:

---

luckymouse wrote:

---

Nismo_360 schreef:
I kinda agree with ya buddy. Apart for the bit where ya said Blu-Rays load faster.

---

Blu-Ray is faster, under certain specifiq conditions [/nitpick]

---

so why does street fighter4 take 15 secounds longer on ps3 to load than on 360 reading from dics?

---

The discs spin slower in a bluray drive, but each rotation collects more information, so there's not much in it - if SF4 takes longer to load; that's just bad programming, and as I used to wait some 8-10 minutes to load a game, and didn't mind that; 15 seconds I can handle.

---

I agree that sometimes it is bad programming....

But the blu-ray drive is slow ,thats why on a lot of games we have to have forced installs.

Something i really dislike.......I know it keeps load times low but i'd sooner just put the disc in and play.

Not to mention save HDD space.

A good example is Devil May Cry........You have to install the ps3 version,yet the advantage of installing is next to zero in terms of load times (compared to the 360 version...Which plays off disc) .

[whereismax123]

---

Shaggy2000 wrote:
Compression technology these days is so advanced that games on the 360 frequently take up less space than a similiar game on the original Xbox. Infact the technology is always advancing, it wouldnt surprise me if the next Halo game actually takes up less space on a DVD than Halo 3.

At the end of the day games developers could use up an entire DVD or even an entire Blu Ray, but this takes time and more imprtantly money, why make a game a third longer if its not going to increase sales, plus the most people dont actually finish the game they buy, I know I have loads of games that I have played two thrids through and just left it for "the next big thing".

---

thats right . and that was the orignal point of why microsoft choose to remian with dvd , as they belive the new compression methods still dont put the dvd out its time yet . when i look i usenet i can see games like halo 3 not taking up much more space than halo 2 . metal gear came in at about 30 gigs from usenet . alot of the exclusives have huge amounts of space from audio not needing to be compressed nearly as much 

[Shaggy2000]

---

whereismax123 wrote:

---

Shaggy2000 wrote:
Compression technology these days is so advanced that games on the 360 frequently take up less space than a similiar game on the original Xbox. Infact the technology is always advancing, it wouldnt surprise me if the next Halo game actually takes up less space on a DVD than Halo 3.

At the end of the day games developers could use up an entire DVD or even an entire Blu Ray, but this takes time and more imprtantly money, why make a game a third longer if its not going to increase sales, plus the most people dont actually finish the game they buy, I know I have loads of games that I have played two thrids through and just left it for "the next big thing".

---

thats right . and that was the orignal point of why microsoft choose to remian with dvd , as they belive the new compression methods still dont put the dvd out its time yet . when i look i usenet i can see games like halo 3 not taking up much more space than halo 2 . metal gear came in at about 30 gigs from usenet . alot of the exclusives have huge amounts of space from audio not needing to be compressed nearly as much 

---

Thats kind of the point, MGS4 does use up virtually an entire Blu Ray disc, but thats because the audio isnt compressed and no doubt alot of the textures etc. wont be compressed. I'm sure that if this information was compressed using modern compression algorithms it would fit onto a DVD disc, and if it was compressed I wonder how many people would truthfully be able to hear (or see) the difference.

[conan23uk]

i read that even ut3 couldn't fit on a dvd,   but it does. wasnt rfom supposed to use all most of the space on a bluray? but that looked rubbish and wasnt a particularly a big game.

[Scythegpd]

---

tooms109 wrote:

---

richzx6r wrote:

---

kingchaz wrote:

---

luckymouse wrote:

---

Nismo_360 schreef:
I kinda agree with ya buddy. Apart for the bit where ya said Blu-Rays load faster.

---

Blu-Ray is faster, under certain specifiq conditions [/nitpick]

---

so why does street fighter4 take 15 secounds longer on ps3 to load than on 360 reading from dics?

---

The discs spin slower in a bluray drive, but each rotation collects more information, so there's not much in it - if SF4 takes longer to load; that's just bad programming, and as I used to wait some 8-10 minutes to load a game, and didn't mind that; 15 seconds I can handle.

---

I agree that sometimes it is bad programming....

But the blu-ray drive is slow ,thats why on a lot of games we have to have forced installs.

Something i really dislike.......I know it keeps load times low but i'd sooner just put the disc in and play.

Not to mention save HDD space.

A good example is Devil May Cry........You have to install the ps3 version,yet the advantage of installing is next to zero in terms of load times (compared to the 360 version...Which plays off disc) .

---

Bold - Which is a good example of poor programming. Uncharted looks better, is longer and contains more in it that Devil May Cry yet had no install and very little loading time. So is Devil May Cry's install due to blu-ray ... or programming? And if it's blu-ray then explain Uncharted.

Killzone2 doesn't have an install either ...