Looks like xbox 360 may be showing it's limitations

[Demon]

Nope but what they could say is 'Games cost tens of millions to make these days and we can't afford to develop 2 versions side by side, so we aimed for the middle ground' WHich is what seems to be happening.

Blu-Ray will have benefits to gamers over the next 5-10 years (The life of the PS3) Resistance already uses more than a DVD because it gives 7.1 Uncompressed sounds (or so i am told) and that is just a first gen title. Ratchet will no doubt be the same. If it is just being hinted at after 18 months DVD9 isn't big enough, i am willing to be it wont be big enough in 3 years time. Though MS will probably have stopped all support for the 360 by then and have there new console out.
Sony done a similar thing with DVD. 'But a CD is big eough, we don't mind changing discs etc' A La Dreamcast but thing is people get a lot more for a bit more cost. I Enjoy using the Blu-Ray functionality of my PS3 tbh and for me, Blu-Ray being included on the PS3 has 0 downsides.

The downside of BR on the PS3 as of today is very slow datarates from these first gen BR drives.. on the vast majority of games, this impacts on loading times.. and developers have to put time and effort into reducing these.. Installing to HDD is shortsighted and not sustainable, holding multiple copies of files at different disk positions severaly limits the BR capacity, and even when faster transfer rates are available due to 2nd gen BR Drives, developers have to code to the lowest common demoninator according to you guys, so I don't see it as the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I agree that DVD9'c capacity can be exceeded, but that is just stating the obvious, so well done for that 'insight'.. but considering when the 360 came out, there was no choice from a financial and availability perspective..

As we know, there are no 'rules' that state MS (or Sony) have to stick with their current solutions, MS could allow HD-DVD game loading, and included one in the 360 when prices are right (or even BR, it doesn't matter to them), Sony can put 2nd gen BR drives in the PS3, both could incorporate massive HDD's or allow partial install to external USB HDD's.. since they are on the cutting edge of technology, changes are just something people will have to deal with..

 

[V4NT0M]

You dont need 50GB of space to make a good game... You can make an excellent game in 1MB... What was that project called where they made an entire game with texture filtering lighting effects etc in 16kb?

 

[JUMPURS]

The downside of BR on the PS3 as of today is very slow datarates from these first gen BR drives.. on the vast majority of games, this impacts on loading times.. and developers have to put time and effort into reducing these.. Installing to HDD is shortsighted and not sustainable, holding multiple copies of files at different disk positions severaly limits the BR capacity, and even when faster transfer rates are available due to 2nd gen BR Drives, developers have to code to the lowest common demoninator according to you guys, so I don't see it as the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I agree that DVD9'c capacity can be exceeded, but that is just stating the obvious, so well done for that 'insight'.. but considering when the 360 came out, there was no choice from a financial and availability perspective..

As we know, there are no 'rules' that state MS (or Sony) have to stick with their current solutions, MS could allow HD-DVD game loading, and included one in the 360 when prices are right (or even BR, it doesn't matter to them), Sony can put 2nd gen BR drives in the PS3, both could incorporate massive HDD's or allow partial install to external USB HDD's.. since they are on the cutting edge of technology, changes are just something people will have to deal with..

At the moment the loading times are not as bad as people make out, if someone wants to sit and time a 13 second load time Vs at 5 second load time, they really need to get out more. HDD installs are not an issue because every PS3 has an HDD, and if it is true they have done away with the 20GB so there is plenty of Space, and with GoW proving that data can be streamed very effectivly from Disc, then load times are becoming a non issue. GTA IV wont have any load times, and RC: FTOD is going to use the same tech as GoW did. So Load times are going to become moot.

I never professed to be insightful about the DVD9 situation, but many people argue that this 'next gen' came to soon by MS, which tbh is hard to argue against. The xbox still had another couple of years life in it, the PS2 has just had its 2 best games of the consoles life in the past couple of months. And TBH they both easily beat anything this 'next gen' has to offer. MS could have waited and went with an HD-DVD drive. The tech was there and wasn't an issue. The only reason MS didn't was because they wanted the 360 out the door as quick as possible.

If MS start releasing games on HD-DVD i think they will just kill the xbox brand right there and then tbh. Multi disc games wont help MS, but wont do nearly as much damage as releasing games on HD-DVD. The press who are mostly Pro MS, will turn so quick it will make their head spin. The press is already starting to lose slight bits of their 360 fanboyness already.

 

[JUMPURS]

You dont need 50GB of space to make a good game... You can make an excellent game in 1MB... What was that project called where they made an entire game with texture filtering lighting effects etc in 16kb?

yeap i remember what you are talking about, but it wasn't a 'good game' it was hardly going to engage you for 13 hours single player really.

50GB might be overkill but it might make life easier for devs to have an 11 - 12GB game, and extra couple of gig can go a long way.

I am not saying Sony's sole reason for Blu-Ray in the PS3 is for gaming, but personally i would rather have the extra storage, slower, a lot quieter drive than the faster, smaller capacity Noisey DVD drives.
if i need to wait 10 seconds more for it to load, but means i dont need to listen to the drone, i would be happy. I would even turn down the speed on the 360 drive to increase load times if MS gave me the option, that is how little i care about load times.

 

[Demon]

At the moment the loading times are not as bad as people make out, if someone wants to sit and time a 13 second load time Vs at 5 second load time, they really need to get out more. HDD installs are not an issue because every PS3 has an HDD, and if it is true they have done away with the 20GB so there is plenty of Space, and with GoW proving that data can be streamed very effectivly from Disc, then load times are becoming a non issue. GTA IV wont have any load times, and RC: FTOD is going to use the same tech as GoW did. So Load times are going to become moot.

I never professed to be insightful about the DVD9 situation, but many people argue that this 'next gen' came to soon by MS, which tbh is hard to argue against. The xbox still had another couple of years life in it, the PS2 has just had its 2 best games of the consoles life in the past couple of months. And TBH they both easily beat anything this 'next gen' has to offer. MS could have waited and went with an HD-DVD drive. The tech was there and wasn't an issue. The only reason MS didn't was because they wanted the 360 out the door as quick as possible.

If MS start releasing games on HD-DVD i think they will just kill the xbox brand right there and then tbh. Multi disc games wont help MS, but wont do nearly as much damage as releasing games on HD-DVD. The press who are mostly Pro MS, will turn so quick it will make their head spin. The press is already starting to lose slight bits of their 360 fanboyness already.

Load times are bad.. I find Motorstorm unnacceptable when choosing vehicles, for a 'next' gen console this is poor.. infact any game running from the BR has appalling load times... if there are an extra 10 second here and there, if that happens 60 times while playing, that's 10 minutes wasted..

Installing to HDD is not sustainable, if you have to install large chunks of your supposedly 'massive' tens of Gb' games, how many will fit on a 60Gb HDD? not many.. then what do you do? the vast majority of owners will not be capable or want to change their HDD for another one..??

As for the 360 coming out too early, well, with technology changing so quickly this is always going to be the case.. clearly the PS3 came out too early as well, they should have waited until A. They had BR drives that actually performed acceptably, and B. Some games where available.

 

[JUMPURS]

Load times are bad.. I find Motorstorm unnacceptable when choosing vehicles, for a 'next' gen console this is poor.. infact any game running from the BR has appalling load times... if there are an extra 10 second here and there, if that happens 60 times while playing, that's 10 minutes wasted..

Installing to HDD is not sustainable, if you have to install large chunks of your supposedly 'massive' tens of Gb' games, how many will fit on a 60Gb HDD? not many.. then what do you do? the vast majority of owners will not be capable or want to change their HDD for another one..??

As for the 360 coming out too early, well, with technology changing so quickly this is always going to be the case.. clearly the PS3 came out too early as well, they should have waited until A. They had BR drives that actually performed acceptably, and B. Some games where available.

The only game i can say i have found loading times an issue is Motorstorm, and that is just the dev's fault. Look at oblivion, it loads quicker than the 360.

if a game is only taking about one or 2 gig, if you want it, then there is plenty of space to go around. even then you can delete the data and add the cache back on again. I know i only play maybe 4 main games at a time, the rest. like seems to be a trend on OcUK, the new games are a fad that quickly fad away.

The 360 did come out too early, i think most people will agree the last gen could have went on for another year or 2. Lack of games for the PS3 isn't the machines fault, iirc the 360 had a similar drought when it first came out with the next must buys after launch being Oblivion and GRAW which where about 4 months after launch.

 

[NathanE]

HOWEVER the PS3 has 1 major flaw.. Sony have limited its FPS to sync in sets of 10. So if a game runs on the verge of 30FPS as most do currently.. should that a game start to struggle it will not drop 1 ~3 frames.. it drops down to 20 FPS instead..

Where as the 360 will simply drop frames 1 at a time..

No it won't. That's not how V-sync works at all. V-sync drops the frame rate by a multiple of the monitor's refresh rate. Dropping it "1 frame at a time" will still cause tearing...

 

[Demon]

The only game i can say i have found loading times an issue is Motorstorm, and that is just the dev's fault. Look at oblivion, it loads quicker than the 360.

if a game is only taking about one or 2 gig, if you want it, then there is plenty of space to go around. even then you can delete the data and add the cache back on again. I know i only play maybe 4 main games at a time, the rest. like seems to be a trend on OcUK, the new games are a fad that quickly fad away.

The 360 did come out too early, i think most people will agree the last gen could have went on for another year or 2. Lack of games for the PS3 isn't the machines fault, iirc the 360 had a similar drought when it first came out with the next must buys after launch being Oblivion and GRAW which where about 4 months after launch.

Oblivion uses the mutiple copies of files placed at different places on the disk, some of the files are duplicated over 20 times, surely this massively reduces the storage capability..
And that's the only game that does load quicker.. and then it took devs a lot of time and effort to get this 'right'.. time taken away from game development? maybe..

I don't see the argument that the 360 came out 'too early'.. in what way? I can't see how waiting nearly 18 months would have improved anything?
Developers moan far more about the next gen consoles not being quite powerful enough then they do about the odd isolated case of having to put effort into dealing with DVD9's size..
If anything, for what they've achieved, it came out about the right time, the PS3 is late to the party, offered everything, and is failing to deliver fully on many counts..

 

[Dutch Guy]

Oblivion uses the mutiple copies of files placed at different places on the disk, some of the files are duplicated over 20 times, surely this massively reduces the storage capability..
And that's the only game that does load quicker.. and then it took devs a lot of time and effort to get this 'right'.. time taken away from game development? maybe..

Who cares if files are duplicated, if it speeds up loading times I am all for it.

And I don't think it takes a lot of time to duplicate files.

 

[JUMPURS]

No it won't. That's not how V-sync works at all. V-sync drops the frame rate by a multiple of the monitor's refresh rate. Dropping it "1 frame at a time" will still cause tearing...

Much like many xbox games suffer from, and tbh i haven't seen any on the PS3 so he may be right.

Oblivion uses the mutiple copies of files placed at different places on the disk, some of the files are duplicated over 20 times, surely this massively reduces the storage capability..
And that's the only game that does load quicker.. and then it took devs a lot of time and effort to get this 'right'.. time taken away from game development? maybe..

I don't see the argument that the 360 came out 'too early'.. in what way? I can't see how waiting nearly 18 months would have improved anything?
Developers moan far more about the next gen consoles not being quite powerful enough then they do about the odd isolated case of having to put effort into dealing with DVD9's size..
If anything, for what they've achieved, it came out about the right time, the PS3 is late to the party, offered everything, and is failing to deliver fully on many counts..

It doesn't affect me if they put the whole game on the disc 3 times, they have the space to do it. Load times are not something that have ever bothered me, we are talking seconds in every case. As for taking time away from developers, Don't developers have to spend time trying to find ways to compress data etc like they did for Mass effect i think it was?

The 360 did, the xbox and PS2 could have lasted another 12 months easily, that way MS could actually have included HDMI and HD-DVD instead of new consoles and silly add ons. After 18 months, and in fact it has been going on for a while, developers are talking about the 360 being hampered by DVD9, then it does show that they could have waited.

 

[sc(+)pe]

MS could have waited to include those things, although the inclusion of a hidef format player as standard would have meant we wait longer, it costs more and basically the games are (9 times out of 10) still the same.
What MS needed this round was a larger slice of Market share (to claw back some of those lost $billions) and I guess they thought this could be achieved best by being first to the market with their next console.

For what the 360 offers me (reliability issues asside), I think it came to the market at the correct time.

 

[KNiVES]

At the end of the day, the 360 games are simply more fun. No amount of technical Sony geekery will raise a convincing argument. It's all in the games, and Sony came way too late to the scene.

 

[Azrael1]

Hmm owning both consoles, yeah the 360 is still in the lead.

Hopefully in a years time a killer game will come out for the PS3.

 

[Johnnytoxic]

So what if they use data duplication to speed things up, when they do this it is quicker than the 360. Oh and they would still have 20-30gigs spare even after duplication.

Bluray is nothing but an advantage.

 

[t@xman]

Who cares if files are duplicated, if it speeds up loading times I am all for it.

And I don't think it takes a lot of time to duplicate files.

I agree with you, but it does somewhat negate the arguement regarding BD disc capacity when data is duplicated in this way!

 

[Dutch Guy]

I agree with you, but it does somewhat negate the arguement regarding BD disc capacity when data is duplicated in this way!

As far as I am concerned they should give the user the option of copying all the data to the harddrive if that speeds up the loading.

 

[Sniper123]

So what if they use data duplication to speed things up, when they do this it is quicker than the 360. Oh and they would still have 20-30gigs spare even after duplication.

Bluray is nothing but an advantage.

Thats what I was thinking

 

[regulus]

http://origin.gamesradar.com/gb/ps3...sectionId=1006&releaseId=20060308105930968037

Xbox 360's lack of a guaranteed hard-drive, with some gamers having opted for the stripped-down Core version, and its use of DVD discs, will create limitations in Grand Theft Auto IV's development, Rockstar has acknowledged.

During an interview with Official PlayStation Magazine, Rockstar's creative vice president Dan Houser was posed this question: "On PS3 you've got a guarantee that every machine is going to have a hard-drive and, with Blu-ray, you've got plenty of storage, whereas on Xbox 360 there's no guarantee of a hard-drive and you're working with the DVD format. Does that create limitations?" To which he simply answered, "Yep."

"To be honest with you," Houser continued, "we haven't solved all those riddles yet." Although the difficulties aren't limited to working with Microsoft's console, as he explains that "both [platforms] have enormous challenges" and that "there are problems on both ... both have their own particular pleasures and pains". If anyone can make the most of what's available, though, it has to be Rockstar.

I made the same post regarding complaints about DVD9 space from Bioware with Mass Effect. To say I was flamed is an understatement. The fact of the matter is, games is only going to demand more storage space as the platform matures. Funcom already said that there's no way Conan: Hyborian Adventures will fit on a DVD9 disc, and that they have to make alternative provisions, and now Rockstar is saying the same thing.