Recommended Posts

All this arguing and it looks like external support won't even be there at launch of the Xbox One http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=667437

  • Like 1

All this arguing and it looks like external support won't even be there at launch of the Xbox One http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=667437

Not too fussed considering there won't even be enough games at launch to physically fill up the HDD. Just hopefully they push it out to the end or the start of next year.

Not too fussed considering there won't even be enough games at launch to physically fill up the HDD. Just hopefully they push it out to the end or the start of next year.

 

Not sure i'd be able to fill 500GB that quickly either. So long as it's not years down the line. Which i doubt it would be.

Yeh I agree - I buy a console and i expect it to come with the space it needs.  500gb is more than enough!

 

You should have seen the uproar from the Sony boys on here when it was announced the XB1 wouldn;t have a user swappable internal drive. "raaaaaaaaaaaaar 500GB is tiny, i'll fill it in a day blah blah" Was cringe worthy attempts at bashing for the sake of bashing.

 

I said i wouldn't make a decision on my next console buy until i'd seen both in the wild and seen some real performance figures but i must say in the last few weeks i've been won over by the XB1. I'll still wait till they're both out though before making that final call.

Not too fussed considering there won't even be enough games at launch to physically fill up the HDD. Just hopefully they push it out to the end or the start of , year.

On top of that its a nonissue of you buy digitally. If you fill up your drive you can still delete and redownload games, and play while they download.

Just another poor attempt at bashing a console over a nonissue by AB. The whole hard drive thing wasn't a big deal 8 years ago and its not a big deal today.

Sorry, I can't quote....

 

This message is for Hawkman....

 

Hard drives are easier than ever to install.  SATA couldn't be easier. After finding a place to install the hard drive physically in the system.  Make sure you know what version of SATA you are installing, find that port on motherboard, plug in SATA cable for that port.  Find SATA port in back of hard drive, plug cable into that, then insert SATA power cable into back of hard drive.  Stick OS disk in Optical drive, boot and then install/partition/format.  Do OS updates and install anti-virus/security and the programs you want to use.  Done and enjoy....

 

In the case of Sony, you don't have to worry about anything above, find old hard drive and take it out, insert new hard drive in the same place, add cables in for data and power, close case and go.

 

Do you guys remember Master and Slave on IDE, that could be confusing if you didn't set the dip switches on the hard drives, you could for example format the wrong drive.  Now all of that stuff is the past.

 

None of this is as easy as finding an empty USB 3.0 port on the back and plugging it in and then going.  Done.

 

One cable for both data and power for USB 3.0 is all you need.

I know they are easier than ever to install, but I also service the computers for many of these "core" gamers, a lot of them are just gamers and not techie at all. As in they wouldn't think of even opening the side door of their case.

I think I have found my answer and it's terrible... :(

https://twitter.com/antic604/status/372360213661114369

 

Basically, it goes like this on the PS4 according to that tweet.

 

1) If you use the Bluray disk to play your games, you cannot install on the hard drive at all.  Period.  You can ONLY play on the disk.

 

2) You can only install to your hard drive if you do digital downloads for the game.

 

What this means is that you have no choice if you buy the optical drive version, you are forced to play it off the disk and then if you do

digital downloads that is great but if you replace your hard drive in the PS4, you then have to redownload all that.

 

yeah dude not great at all.

 

The PS4 really sounds disappointing.  

 

1) Installing an external hard drive is superior in this case.  You don't lose your games, you add to them. 

2) The Xbox One has a compressed format that is downloaded in a compress form and installed in a compressed form on the hard drive, this means it's faster to download and it takes up a lot less space on your hard drive.

   

Installing to the hard drive allows there to be less load times and faster game play than running off of a bluray disk and also allows much quieter operation and allows the developer to easily make changes to the game on the hard drive.

 

 

are we mixing up "installing a game on the harddrive" vs "being able to play without the disc" ?

 

how does any of this changes anything when compared to the pS3?

What this means is that you have no choice if you buy the optical drive version, you are forced to play it off the disk and then if you do

digital downloads that is great but if you replace your hard drive in the PS4, you then have to redownload all that.

 

 

If it works the same as the PS3 you can backup your whole drive to any external USB device, and then restore it on your new HD. No need to redownload anything.

On top of that its a nonissue of you buy digitally. If you fill up your drive you can still delete and redownload games, and play while they download.

Just another poor attempt at bashing a console over a nonissue by AB. The whole hard drive thing wasn't a big deal 8 years ago and its not a big deal today.

 

Sensitive much? Microsoft's decision not to have external support at launch has absolutely nothing to do with me, and is wholely relevant to the discussion in here.

If it works the same as the PS3 you can backup your whole drive to any external USB device, and then restore it on your new HD. No need to redownload anything.

I think you missed the OP.

I think you missed the OP.

 

Backing up your hard drive isn't the same as installing games to it. The PS3 supports external drives for media and/or backing up, but not installing games. The backup utility has existed since launch, or near launch anyway.

 

It simply clones your internal drive.

Backing up your hard drive isn't the same as installing games to it. The PS3 supports external drives for media and/or backing up, but not installing games. The backup utility has existed since launch, or near launch anyway.

 

It simply clones your internal drive.

 

 

No, I didn't  :huh: backing up your internal drive on an external device has nothing to do with games support on external hard drives.

My bad, totally forgot about that tool. I've never had to do anything like that on mine.

I know that the external HDD support for the Xbox One will be released soon after launch, but I would like to see the same be done for the Xbox 360. As right now, external drives are repartitioned with up to a maximum partition of 32GB for all things Xbox. Removing that limit would be great! They won't sell many HDD accessories for the Xbox 360 anymore with the Xbox One coming and supporting this setup.

My bad, totally forgot about that tool. I've never had to do anything like that on mine.

 

Me neither. I was considering doing that just these days to replace the HD with a bigger one since I'm collecting quite a few titles from the PSN+ and it'll eventually fill up but I'm feeling a bit lazy tbh  :D

On top of that its a nonissue of you buy digitally. If you fill up your drive you can still delete and redownload games, and play while they download.

Just another poor attempt at bashing a console over a nonissue by AB. The whole hard drive thing wasn't a big deal 8 years ago and its not a big deal today.

Which is also why many consider this thread to be useless, seeing as people can already change out the drive as it stands. An external drive seems to be an answer to a problem people won't have with the PS4.

Listen to music, watch movies and TV shows etc.

Stream stream steam...from services or your computer.

 

 

Because the PS4's internal drive can be upgraded, so its really not a big deal?

 

Yes, it can be upgraded, once I hit the max, I can switch it up, but that means I would also have to re-download all the things that I already had. That's an inconvenience. Especially if my games are all digital.

All this arguing and it looks like external support won't even be there at launch of the Xbox One http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=667437

 

what does not being available at launch have to do with what people are arguing about? should people in regions that the consoles are not available in at launch be excluded from xbox one and ps4 discussions?

what does not being available at launch have to do with what people are arguing about? should people in regions that the consoles are not available in at launch be excluded from xbox one and ps4 discussions?

Remember the rules,

- XB1 must support every feature that PS4 will have.

- PS4 doesn't need to support every feature that XB1 will have.

 

Keep those in mind and these threads will be easier to discuss.

One thing I don't understand is why don't Sony and Microsoft provide both options on both consoles, as there are obvious advantages in each of those features.

 

Designing the console so the HD can be easily replaced is certainly not that hard, and I would assume than allowing game installs on external storage isn't either.

 

Well, then I am confused because that isn't what Yoshida said.

 

Yoshida said that the PS4 won't have game support on external drives, which the PS3 also doesn't have.

You don't need game support to backup your internal drive contents (including games) to an external usb device though, because you won't be playing the games from said external device.

 

Then again they might announce later that they would remove the backup feature (not likely as it wouldn't make any sense, but still possible) but that would be a completely different issue from this one.

 

Yes, it can be upgraded, once I hit the max, I can switch it up, but that means I would also have to re-download all the things that I already had. That's an inconvenience. Especially if my games are all digital.

 

Yes, it's an inconvenience, but not because you have to re-download all your games but because you have to back them up on another drive.

Or re-download them, of course, but backing up is obviously faster not just because of the connection speed but because you won't have to track down every single item you had previously installed.

 

Backing up and restoring on the new drive would be a one time thing, but still time consuming.

Which is also why many consider this thread to be useless, seeing as people can already change out the drive as it stands. An external drive seems to be an answer to a problem people won't have with the PS4.

 

 

You read my post, so you know the scenarios where I see myself wanting to use an external for everything. 

 

Its too bad the X1 isn't getting the support at launch, but as long as it doesn't take too long, the 500gb drive will be enough for a while for me. 

 

But anyway, this topic has been done to death, arguing against extra features seems ridiculous, but some people in this thread love doing it.

The PS4 has a 2.5 laptop hard drive inside and how do you get away from breaking the warranty if you have to open the box and replace the hard drive.

Although it's not a hard thing to do, how many people outside of the hard core of the hard core gamers are going to know how to do this?

 

Also, it's not nearly as easy as plugging in a cable that can only go in one way on the Xbox One.

 

I think not having an external drive on the PS4 is dumb.   Sorry, I am going to say it.  I think it's really dumb and it proves to me that this system isn't as well

thought out as it should have been.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Pretty nice tool, thanks
    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!