TDQuiksilver Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Blu-ray Warhawk requires 800 MB of HDD spacePosted on August 26th, 2007 at 23:32 EDT Warhawk is approaching quite fast, due to release at 12:01 EST on PSN this coming Tuesday. Gamers will also have the option of picking up a hard copy, or rather a Blu-ray version of the title from their local retail outlet. Besides the fantastic extras including several behind the scenes features and a complementary bluetooth headset, several planned on picking up the Blu-ray alternative to save some precious HDD space. Unfortunately, we've got bad news for those folks. It has recently been confirmed by a member of our forums who managed to get his hands on a copy of Warhawk early, Jags71, that Warhawk requires approximately 800 MB of space regardless of the version. He says the Blu-ray "will place a 789 MB cache file onto your hard drive similar to the file Resistance places on your drive to reduce loading times. You CANNOT boot your copy from this cache file. You will need to place the disc into the PS3 to play the game." Make sure to check out our review of Warhawk when it becomes available. Source: Playstation Universe Cache, cache, cache... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted August 28, 2007 Veteran Share Posted August 28, 2007 It's such a conundrum, isn't it? Sony, for whatever reason you want to list, gives developers the space most feel they will need as games continue to grow in quality, yet the new media comes so early in the life of the format that the drives are still in their infancy and too slow to keep load times to an acceptable level. I wonder where the balance is. It would kind of suck, IMO, to buy a game on a physical disc only to have it require the same amount of HDD space as the downloadable version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted August 28, 2007 Subscriber² Share Posted August 28, 2007 It's such a conundrum, isn't it? Sony, for whatever reason you want to list, gives developers the space most feel they will need as games continue to grow in quality, yet the new media comes so early in the life of the format that the drives are still in their infancy and too slow to keep load times to an acceptable level. I wonder where the balance is. It would kind of suck, IMO, to buy a game on a physical disc only to have it require the same amount of HDD space as the downloadable version. Warhawk IMO is a PSN title at heart. It's multiplayer only and as we can see not that big in size from the get go (yeah extra maps/content may be added later increasing its base size). I mean geez the folklore/hs DEMOS were greater in size I think! The only reason the Blu-Ray version exists is to attract people to the bundled headset. Yeah ok it's nice to have a hard copy, manual ect... but really the headset is the only reason to go for a hard copy. I myself will be buying the PSN copy as it's only ?20. I'll get a headset seperately later! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntbnnt Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Yea, I'll be downloading this bugger. Demos take more space and are half teh game, so I really don't get the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trong Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 It's doesn't sound too bad if you have a 60 or 80 GB HDD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 360 owners are going to be in here soon going, "oh blu ray can't even hold it all" blah blah, we have 60gb harddrives or if your like me 160gb. I got the space to dish out a gig here a gig there for reduced loading times, we aren't salvaging space here, its not a big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironman273 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 360 owners are going to be in here soon going, "oh blu ray can't even hold it all" blah blah, we have 60gb harddrives or if your like me 160gb. I got the space to dish out a gig here a gig there for reduced loading times, we aren't salvaging space here, its not a big deal. I wasn't even going to say anything until I saw the flaw in your argument. You're taking two seperate arguments, BR Drive and HDD space, and bundling them into one. It's not whether you care you're using the HDD or not, it's the fact that the space of the BR drive gets touted as such a huge plus of the PS3. This article is basically saying that the large HDD is necessary because of the shortcomings of the BR drive. Basically you're causing an argument by coming up with such a lame and biased excuse. :no: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted August 28, 2007 Subscriber² Share Posted August 28, 2007 (edited) I wasn't even going to say anything until I saw the flaw in your argument. You're taking two seperate arguments, BR Drive and HDD space, and bundling them into one. It's not whether you care you're using the HDD or not, it's the fact that the space of the BR drive gets touted as such a huge plus of the PS3. This article is basically saying that the large HDD is necessary because of the shortcomings of the BR drive.Basically you're causing an argument by coming up with such a lame and biased excuse. :no: The topic of whether or not BR benefits PS3 shouldn't even have come up with Warhawk. As I've already said Warhawk is a PSN title repackaged onto Blu-Ray solely for the headset addon. It's a 800mb game with multiplayer only - Not really any reason to release it on Blu-Ray at all other than for the bundle. Having half the online community play from disc and half from hard drive would not work well... or at least not fairly. Could also be a pain for developers as addons/patches for the BR version may have had to of been patched differently if the whole game ran from disc. This way everything is the same and everything is equal. It's really just down to the end user to buy w/e version they want. As for the article claiming "save precious space" I think they are going a little over the top. < 1GB. Demos in the store are more than that just now. 60GB PS3s will be the highest % owned. As well as the fact that we can upgrade our drives easily. I personally don't think anyone was buying the BR version to save space :rolleyes: Edited August 28, 2007 by Audioboxer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cormier6083 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 I can't afford anything, but IMO, I would definately get the Hard Copy. Jabra headset ftw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdsams Veteran Posted August 28, 2007 Veteran Share Posted August 28, 2007 its just ironic that sony says blue ray is so much better than dvd but in reality, there have there highs and lows...the slow read speed is a killer for blu ray...for right now atleast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironman273 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 The topic of whether or not BR benefits PS3 shouldn't even have come up with Warhawk.As I've already said Warhawk is a PSN title repackaged onto Blu-Ray solely for the headset addon. It's a 800mb game with multiplayer only - Not really any reason to release it on Blu-Ray at all other than for the bundle. I agree with this statement. It was stupid to even but the bait out there with such a ridiculous "explanation." That being said, If you buy the disc, you should be able to run it from the disc. The fact that you can't does say something about BR's limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin001 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 It's such a conundrum, isn't it? Sony, for whatever reason you want to list, gives developers the space most feel they will need as games continue to grow in quality, yet the new media comes so early in the life of the format that the drives are still in their infancy and too slow to keep load times to an acceptable level. I wonder where the balance is. It would kind of suck, IMO, to buy a game on a physical disc only to have it require the same amount of HDD space as the downloadable version. The blu ray version is mainly for those people who just collect games and want the art work etc or those who just cant waste the bandwidth or have the speed to download the game frm PSN so they thought they wud thru in a headset with it as well so they cud charge the whole ?40 for it! As for it installing stuff on the HDD, its all good even if it was on DVD it still wudnt be able to keep up with the transfer speeds off the HDD....right?? or am i talkin crap? And you cant hav half the users runnin frm HDD and getting get loading and half running frm blu ray! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dior_addict Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 6 minutes! I was going to get the hard copy, until I realized I didn't really need the extra, and I can save money by picking up the headset off an online retailer. Hope to see some of you guys on there tonight. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troist Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 i think its because the blu-ray discs have fairly poor speeds (it only reads at 1x or something low like that which might be faster than DVD's 1x but DVDs now read way faster) whereas the hard drive has great speeds. i'm all for caching on the hard drive if it makes the game better. 800MB isn't exactly that much anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightz Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 6 minutes!I was going to get the hard copy, until I realized I didn't really need the extra, and I can save money by picking up the headset off an online retailer. Hope to see some of you guys on there tonight. :) i'm pretty much in the same boat. i cancelled my pre-order for the retail version and i'm downloading it now. 50% to go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iconboy Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 does anyone know how comfortable the jabra headset is? cause i have a logitech one and after 20 mins of playing resistance the damn thing is cutting into my ear! ouch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightz Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 does anyone know how comfortable the jabra headset is? cause i have a logitech one and after 20 mins of playing resistance the damn thing is cutting into my ear! ouch! it's pretty light and i barely notice it when i wear it. occasionally though, i feel it hurting my ear. but that only happens if i have it on for extended periods of time (over an hour). i believe the thing that wraps around your ear is adjustable/bendable, though i've never tried it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts