Jump to content



Photo

Likelyhood of the next xbox inculding a blu-ray drive?

blu-ray format war microsft xbox next gen

  • Please log in to reply
255 replies to this topic

#241 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 26 January 2013 - 20:38

PS3 exclusives are huge.
Uncharted 3 - 47Gb
GT5 Spec II - 26Gb
Killzone 3 - 46Gb
MGS4 - 28Gb

All multiplatform games are gimped because of 360s small Dual Layer DVDs, they are no bigger than 8Gb for single disc games.


Those are not actually real sizes of the games though, remember the PS3 can't really use more than a DVD size of games anyway due to the limited memory, it simply doesn't have the memory t fit high res texturess, models, animations, AI, Maps+++ in the memory.

textures are what takes the largest toll here as they are the ones that are biggest, can be least compressed and give the biggest quality loss. a lot of PS3 exclusives have for some reason taken to storing non pre compressed textures on the disk to inflate the disk size. this of course have a few drawbacks. BD is already slow to load, you just slowed it another 10 times. in addition you will end up with LOWER quality, as the PS3 will need to compress the texture as it puts it into memory, instead of the artist pre-compressing it and being able to check the quality before choosing another compression quality and setting to avoid artifacts.

So I wouldn't look at the disk size of current games particularly, the only exceptions are car games(even there the PS3 inflated the size a lot for no return when you compare to Forza, which had more quality on merely two DVD's) which loads smaller "levels" at a time, and long RPG's that allows disk switching anyway, though the reason for the size of these are usually JRPG's with a lot of very big pre-rendered FMV's, which usually are so mediocre in quality the console could render it better itself for a fraction of the space cost and with much smoother sequence change between action and FMV.


So no, the 360 didn't really gimp anything, it often had bigger and better texture quality than the PS3 games, since it could actually use them.

Either way we're talking next gen, and we'll most definitely see a high capacity storage medium on both consoles for high res textures and model data for display on 1080 screens


#242 ~Johnny

~Johnny

    Earthling

  • Joined: 10-August 08
  • Location: London, England, Earth, Milky Way

Posted 26 January 2013 - 21:12

...


To correct some misconceptions in your post:

1 - Uncompressed textures are not there to inflate disc sizes. They're there because they have the advantage of not having to be decompressed before being passed to the GPU, which costs precious CPU time. It helps performance.
2 - Saying that PS3 games can't use more than a ~9GB of data is ridiculous. Any development house worth their salt can write a half decent streaming engine that will allow the PS3 to chew through as much data it you can fit on the disc.
3 - Let's not forget the massive audio and video content banks in most games. Textures aren't the only things taking up space, and again uncompressed audio can help with performance.
4 - You'll be hard pressed to find any 360 exclusive which can match the texture quality and visual fidelity of top end PS3 titles.

#243 McKay

McKay

    Neowinian Stallion

  • Joined: 29-August 10
  • Location: 308 Negra Arroyo Lane
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: LG G3

Posted 26 January 2013 - 21:14

PS3 exclusives are huge.
Uncharted 3 - 47Gb
GT5 Spec II - 26Gb
Killzone 3 - 46Gb
MGS4 - 28Gb

All multiplatform games are gimped because of 360s small Dual Layer DVDs, they are no bigger than 8Gb for single disc games.


If that was true then why do most Multiplatform games not even approach the 8GB limit? The PS3 isnt that much different in power from the Xbox, the only advantage a Blu-Ray disk gives is more of the game. But with the PS3 you're gimped by the Drives slow loading speed.

#244 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 26 January 2013 - 21:28

To correct some misconceptions in your post:

1 - Uncompressed textures are not there to inflate disc sizes. They're there because they have the advantage of not having to be decompressed before being passed to the GPU, which costs precious CPU time. It helps performance.
2 - Saying that PS3 games can't use more than a ~9GB of data is ridiculous. Any development house worth their salt can write a half decent streaming engine that will allow the PS3 to chew through as much data it you can fit on the disc.
3 - Let's not forget the massive audio and video content banks in most games. Textures aren't the only things taking up space, and again uncompressed audio can help with performance.
4 - You'll be hard pressed to find any 360 exclusive which can match the texture quality and visual fidelity of top end PS3 titles.


1: One problem with that. GPU's today and for the last, oh... 8-10 years or so, have supported and used compressed textures in memory, either they compress them as they get put in memory, or you pre compress them before loading in memory, so the artist has control of the quality of the textures. for the 360 this is I believe done using the direct x compressed texture format. I have myself made DX comrpessed textures for game models I've done.

And seriously... uncompressed textures in the 256 MB memory on the PS3... yeah.. that'll be enough to fit the textures of one character in a triple A game :)

2: sure they can use streaming textures. that's how they can get whatever textures they have in there in in there in the first place. It also results in LOD popping. I also specifically said there are games who make use of more. however the PS3 has very limited texture space available in memory. especially if you suggest they're going to put high res textures in there uncompressed. :) imagine the texture popping. it's make the hated ME popping a minor LOD glitch.

3. Audio outside of musics is generally mono sounds in games, and uncompressed or compressed ir in fact irrelevant here. while uncompressed will use less CPU. compressed audio today is so efficient to decompress, especially the formats used in video games which are created more for efficiency than size that it's rather irrelevant, especially compared to the fact that uncompressed will also take 10 times as long to read from the disk, AND use CPU to actually read from the disk. Essentially there'll be no noticeable difference, well outside of slower loading.

4. Really, Halo 3 at release, Halo Reach at release and Halo 4 now. Also the GoW games at release. one of them is highly colorful and the other is very brown ish for artistic purposes though.

#245 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 5
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 27 January 2013 - 00:06

I remember one of the early PS3 games made a big deal about including uncompressed audio on disk (and how only blu-ray could make that happen), so storing uncompressed textures as a made up benefit of blu-ray I can easily imagine.

#246 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:57

I'm not sure a blu-ray is even needed. I like the way things are right now just fine.

#247 OP compl3x

compl3x

    Feels good, dunnit?

  • Joined: 06-December 09
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S4

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:37

This comes with the added benefit of:
1. Ever device is already equipped with a method to read it.
2. The device that reads the media is cheaper (I can buy a multicard reader for $4.99, a Blu-Ray player is >= 10x that cost)
3. The media can be updated over time, meaning an error in your menu/subtitles can be fixed (instead of with a Blu-Ray disc you would have to repurchase the video to correct the issue).
4. Zero noise (in a cinematic/immersive environment this is priceless)
5. Faster loading times (for movies and games, allowing you to experience your purchase sooner)

And more that has all been mentioned in the article. Cost is the only thing holding media such as SD/Flash back. And there are many reasons to deal with that cost.


What do you mean every device is already equipped?

Your're comparing consumer prices and manufacturing costs. They are not the same thing.

I've watched 100+ Blu-Rays and I've never came across a buggy menu.

Noise is negligible. I have 3 blu-ray players (2 PS#s, 1 Home Threatre) and you wouldn't even know they are on.

Loading times for movies? Again negligible. Once I hit play it is mere seconds to see the movie. However, copyright warnings slow everything down.

You say cost is the only thing as if it is some trivial point. But I think there are plenty of other reasons to turn down the idea of media on SD.



You want to ditch a perfectly good format (Blu-Ray), move to a much more expensive media, which have no particular benefits and have us all incur the pricing increase. Madness.

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

I have about 30 blu-rays, about 60 PS3 games, and about 35 360 games, I can't imagine having 100+ small SD cards around. Seems like they would be easily lost and broken. I'm anxious about losing or breaking my dozen or so DS/3DS/Vita cards.




Frankly, the second quote you posted just shows how highly irrelevant that site is concerning video games. The site is about the costs of distributing some low-volume independent films. Video games are going to be manufactured in batches of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. And you know what, even if they completely screw up a batch of blu-rays, It would still be cheaper to throw them out and press another batch, than to use SD cards. Hell, they can screw up 20 batches in a row and it'll still be cheaper than using SD cards.


Thank you. This is the point I was about to make. The person in that article is talking about smaller volumes. He doesn't like BR because of DRM so he is looking for alternatives.


I'm not sure a blu-ray is even needed. I like the way things are right now just fine.



You won't when your games come spanned across 4 discs and you have to keep swapping them. 1995 here we come!

#248 Emn1ty

Emn1ty

    Web Programmer

  • Joined: 09-April 06
  • Location: Irvine, CA
  • OS: Windows 8.1, OSX Mavericks
  • Phone: Driod Razr

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:11

What do you mean every device is already equipped?

What has SD card slots?
- Cameras
- Computers
- Media Centers
What has USB Drives?
- TV's
- Consoles
- Computers
- Media Centers
- etc.

That's what I mean by "already equipped". Why should we even use a player when your television is perfectly capable to play video itself?

Regardless, The only reason the 360 will even have a Blu-Ray player has absolutely nothing to do with games, but HD movies. If Microsoft has another way to deliver HD movies to the console (or just decides to go forgo Blu-Ray movies and stick with streamingin this or the next console) then I see little reason at all for them to include Blu-Ray drives. You can whine and moan about 4k (which won't be in the next generation) and having boat loads of audio/video (which many games today use in-game cutscenes to cut down on video) but rarely do games hit higher than a standard dual layer DVD on release and when they do then I'm sure we can deal with multiple discs. I don't think Blu-Ray will solve any problems for games, in fact it solves only one problem. Capacity.

In regards to your comment on "negligeable" load times for movies. Using a player we bought but a year ago, it still takes upwards of 30s for the player to load the disc. That's BEFORE any copyright warnings pop up. My PS3 takes a similar if not more time to load up games that aren't installed to the drive, and installing them takes longer than most PC game installs.

The primary positive point of Blu-Ray's is marred by many steps backwards in terms of performance. Both the discs and the players are slower than DVD's, not to mention more expensive. You can hail them as the end-all-be-all of disc media but from my experience the only positive they've brought to the format is capacity, and perhaps durability.

You won't when your games come spanned across 4 discs and you have to keep swapping them. 1995 here we come!

To be fair, when it comes to installing games to the console you eliminate that problem. At least its faster to install a DVD than a Blu-Ray iirc

#249 Dashel

Dashel

    Disgustipator

  • Joined: 03-December 01
  • Location: USA

Posted 27 January 2013 - 19:51

why ? if you already have a BD player why would you need another one, and because it's the focus doesn't mean it has to do it all. besides I'd wager a lot more people watch HD movies and series over streaming services now than BD. and if you're bringing up countries that don't have the bandwidth for it, these are the same places where DVD still reigns far above BD.


I bought a PS3 last time because of BD and I'll do it again if that feature is still missing as I have invested in the format. I'm a PC gamer so the console is there primarily for media. While streaming is ok for casual viewing, I prefer a more premium experince. Its really as simple as that.

#250 George P

George P

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 04-February 07
  • Location: Greece
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit
  • Phone: HTC Windows Phone 8X

Posted 29 January 2013 - 20:52

I think it will have bd but I also think MS will make a stronger push for GoD this time around for those who have the connections to use it. I also think that at some point in the future we'll get away from optical media and probably back to a flash card type system. Optical will end up running into a size limit while games keep getting bigger in size. After that there is also the massive difference in performance between the two. When we start trying to play games with even bigger sizes opticals slower read speeds will end up being a problem I think. Who wants even longer and longer load times as games get bigger and bigger?

#251 shakey

shakey

    It's soooooo Educational

  • Joined: 31-March 04
  • Location: Austin, Tx

Posted 29 January 2013 - 21:58

I think it will have bd but I also think MS will make a stronger push for GoD this time around for those who have the connections to use it. I also think that at some point in the future we'll get away from optical media and probably back to a flash card type system. Optical will end up running into a size limit while games keep getting bigger in size. After that there is also the massive difference in performance between the two. When we start trying to play games with even bigger sizes opticals slower read speeds will end up being a problem I think. Who wants even longer and longer load times as games get bigger and bigger?


I agree that in the future, near future, that it will turn into that, if not something similar. But as of next gen, it isn't going to happen. Until Movie Production companies start it, we most likely wont see it become mainstream anytime soon. While games are rising, movies have always seemed to be the medium to test new technology on the public.

#252 LaP

LaP

    Forget about it

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 10-July 06
  • Location: Quebec City, Canada
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro Update 1

Posted 29 January 2013 - 22:01

This thread is still going :|

For Microsoft it's either :

1) Include a blu-ray reader.
2) Give next gen victory to sony.

I think MS will choose option 1.

#253 George P

George P

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 04-February 07
  • Location: Greece
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit
  • Phone: HTC Windows Phone 8X

Posted 29 January 2013 - 22:49

I agree that in the future, near future, that it will turn into that, if not something similar. But as of next gen, it isn't going to happen. Until Movie Production companies start it, we most likely wont see it become mainstream anytime soon. While games are rising, movies have always seemed to be the medium to test new technology on the public.


That's true, I dunno when movie studios will look for something new though. Maybe with 4k coming and if people get new tvs with it in good number then maybe they'll start to look. But even with 4k I think the current BD discs will still be enough.

#254 shakey

shakey

    It's soooooo Educational

  • Joined: 31-March 04
  • Location: Austin, Tx

Posted 29 January 2013 - 22:54

That's true, I dunno when movie studios will look for something new though. Maybe with 4k coming and if people get new tvs with it in good number then maybe they'll start to look. But even with 4k I think the current BD discs will still be enough.


Same here. It will be hard to get the public to grasp smaller tech such as flash drives. Disc are , IMHO, a good size. Easy to see, easy to find, easy to not lose. But flash drives... I don't know how many I've lost over the years. They are small and indestinquishable from a lot of other objects. I would hate to have just a pile of flash drives for movies, having to look at each small one to figure out what is in it. I'm sure some marketing guy could get around that, but it's just 1 issue I have with flashdrives being pushed. There are other issues such as locking a flash drive's content and cost and other things I don't really feel like trying to think about. :p
And while GoD might be coming, there are issues with that. My biggest grip is about sound. I have a great theater sound system, and streamed/downloaded games normally have downgraded sound to save space. Physical media at least can offer amazing sound.

#255 OP compl3x

compl3x

    Feels good, dunnit?

  • Joined: 06-December 09
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S4

Posted 30 January 2013 - 01:16

That's true, I dunno when movie studios will look for something new though. Maybe with 4k coming and if people get new tvs with it in good number then maybe they'll start to look. But even with 4k I think the current BD discs will still be enough.


They're expanding the BD specs for 4K blu-ray.

-------

I know people think BD is "dead", but they're wrong. Streaming games or going all digital is viable yet. BD will be around and stay around for ages.