ORIGINAL: Majikdra6on

ORIGINAL: KongRudi

Oh, I think I must have missed that section about what kind of attitude I needed to have in the forum-rules. :(
Sorry about that.

Welcome. Back.

I think you' re thinking what I' m thinking.

ORIGINAL: ginjirou

I' m not going to comment on those two games since they' re not out yet. We don' t know how much CGI they' ll use, we don' t know how much space they' ll use (maybe they' ll actually put the games on two discs?) and we don' t yet know if the developers will limit the content because of the lack of space.

Umm... with that logic your whole arguement falls apart because not a single game on Blu Ray is out.

Also it' s cheaper to put a game on 2 DVD disc' s then an a Blu-ray atm.

Umm... with that logic your whole arguement falls apart because not a single game on Blu Ray is out.

Hehe, nice one.
Seriously though, additional space can' t be bad. What if we need more space? That' s why I like the Blu-ray even though it' s not out. If games doesn' t use the extra space, then movies will.
If developers add extra content like making of documentaries (just an example VX, they could do other stuff and some people really enjoy documentaries and interviews) the Blu-ray will be required. The Blu-ray will come in handy if developers make huge games in 1080p and want to add extra content.
I don' t want to comment on the two 360 games because it' s right now impossible to tell how much extra content they have, how big the games are, how much CGI there is, how many discs they' ll be on, how they' ll look, how much voice acting they' ll have and so on.

ORIGINAL: QuezcatoL

Also it' s cheaper to put a game on 2 DVD disc' s then an a Blu-ray atm.

It was also cheaper to put games on two CD' s than on a single DVD.
If you' d like to we could put PS3 games on 20 CD' s, that' d be cheaper than Blu-ray
I' m sure that if the 360 would' ve had an HD-DVD you wouldn' t be complaining about the " useless space" .
360 fanclub sure is a fitting word for this forum.

Ginjirou,there is a diffrence,2 cd' s was hardly enough for prv gen.
Okay some games like Morrowind was on a CD=700mb.

But nvm 2 dvd' s is far more then enough.

I' m sure that if the 360 would' ve had an HD-DVD you wouldn' t be complaining about the " useless space" .
360 fanclub sure is a fitting word for this forum.

And if ps3 didn' t use blu-ray i doubt very much you would have missed it,now would you?

ORIGINAL: ginjirou

It was also cheaper to put two games on two CD' s than on a single DVD.

Yeah but absolutely nothing fits on a single CD anymore when it comes to games. That' s because technology in graphics and such advanced way beyond the CD as a storage medium. Right now, especially when consoles are concerned, graphical technology has not surpassed DVDs enough for them to get replaced. Again, Oblivion looked incredible, it did not need CG cutscenes because the graphics were great. Your arguement saying " what if" is very lacking. The did add extra content to the game like behind the scenes stuff and just slapped it on another DVD in the collectors edition. Why does it need to be on the game disc. After you watch it once you aren' t going to watch it repeatedly and during game sittings.

I' m sure that if the 360 would' ve had an HD-DVD you wouldn' t be complaining about the " useless space" .

If it was going to jack up the price of the console and potentially the games I would. I wasn' t happy about paying $400 for my 360. $600 for the PS3 is way to much imo. Let' s not forget the BR discs cost $34 a pop. I know developers get them at a reduced cost but not by a huge amount. BAsically have of their sales goes to paying for the discs the games were burnt on if they sell them at $60. Sony is forcing them to bite the bullet.

360 fanclub sure is a fitting word for this forum.

Yeah I guess... just because informed people are critisizing some PS3 stuff.

360 fanclub sure is a fitting word for this forum.

I think i might be a member, though i cant find my membership card! Do i get benefits? discounts?

One of the points is Ginj, is that Sony is forcing a medium on gamers that might not even be fit for the future, instead of waiting it out, and seeing whether or not its BluRay or HD DVD that lasts in the long run. Back last gen, the standard for DVD was already set, but having to different formats of Next Gen dvd is purely silly.

But as you say more is never bad.

But....

I hope Sony fails, why?

because im mean!

And if ps3 didn' t use blu-ray i doubt very much you would have missed it,now would you?

If it would' ve limited developers when they make their 1080p games then I would' ve miss it.
I can honestly say that if the 360 would' ve had a HD-DVD drive that developers could' ve used for gamedata then I would' ve been much happier and I would see no reason to buy a PS3 except for a few exclusives.

One of the points is Ginj, is that Sony is forcing a medium on gamers that might not even be fit for the future, instead of waiting it out, and seeing whether or not its BluRay or HD DVD that lasts in the long run. Back last gen, the standard for DVD was already set, but having to different formats of Next Gen dvd is purely silly.

I know it' s pretty hard on us consumers, who want a Sony console, to make us buy a format that might not win. But you have to understand that Sony is a company and there' s lots of profit to make if the Blu-ray is successful. Microsoft would' ve done the same thing if they were developing a new disc format.
But keep in mind that even if the Blu-ray fails the developers will still be able to use the extra space offered and you' ll still be able to watch HD-movies during the PS3s early life.
So even if the Blu-ray fails I see the inclusion of it as a good thing. It' s useful no matter what you say. If you want to watch HD-movies on a cheap HD-player you might as well get Blu-ray and you' ll get a videogame console as a bonus. Even though it will fail, because when it fails you can just buy a HD-DVD player which will be cheaper in the future.

Ginjiru, do you have a TV that supports 1080p. If so you are a lucky person.

I' d like to say after reading this-

I can honestly say that if the 360 would' ve had a HD-DVD drive that developers could' ve used for gamedata then I would' ve been much happier and I would see no reason to buy a PS3 except for a few exclusives.

I really don' t believe that. Most developers are completely happy with DVDs. Sony didn' t put the BluRay drive in for developers, they put it in to save their company. They know the gaming branch of their company is the only thing keeping them afloat. In order to make more money out of it they decided to force a new storage medium on the consumer through it. If they win the console war they have effectively forced a new storage medium on consumers whether they wanted it or not. If they control the new storage medium it helps to save their dying company. If you think they did it for consumers or developers you are way off.

Aslo, HD gaming once you hit 720p doesn' t change much once you get higher. Infact I have no real need for an HDTV or an HD medium. My 360 games look incredible on my SDTV. I' ve seen it on HD and there is a slight difference but not anything that makes me want to go out and sped the money on a new TV. Once you do hit 720p you really only start seeing a big difference on really big TVs. With 1080p you need a gigantic TV before you start seeing a differece.

I play 720p on my 26 inch widescreen tv :)


Btw,my mom is getting me a new HD tv.
With component input this time.

And yes i will keep the old one also.

Ginjiru, do you have a TV that supports 1080p. If so you are a lucky person.

Not yet but I see a next-gen videogame console as a long term investment and once I buy a 1080p TV I' ll be happy the console supports the resolution.

I really don' t believe that. Most developers are completely happy with DVDs. Sony didn' t put the BluRay drive in for developers, they put it in to save their company.

They put it in because thet can make money from it. They don' t care for developers or consumers, they care for money. Of course. But does that make it useless? I don' t think so. I don' t know that but I' ll be very surprised in the future if the additional space isn' t used. I don' t care for what reason Sony put in the Blu-ray player. Honestly, why would I? It' s not like I expect a company to care for me. But if I see potential in a product I' ll like the inclusion of it.

Aslo, HD gaming once you hit 720p doesn' t change much once you get higher. Infact I have no real need for an HDTV or an HD medium. My 360 games look incredible on my SDTV. I' ve seen it on HD and there is a slight difference but not anything that makes me want to go out and sped the money on a new TV. Once you do hit 720p you really only start seeing a big difference on really big TVs. With 1080p you need a gigantic TV before you start seeing a differece.

Most people here says that the difference between SDTV' s and HDTV' s is huge.
And the standard size of TV' s is getting bigger and bigger. And the larger TV' s are getting cheaper and cheaper.
Look, I' m not getting a 1080p TV for years. I don' t even own a HDTV yet. I' m not buying a PS3 for a long time. I' m going Wii, PC and possibly 360. But that doesn' t mean that I can' t see the possibilities that Blu-ray offers.

HDTV' s are falling in price here in Sweden.

You can find a kick ass HD tv for around 6-7 lakan now.

I won' t go anywhere below 32" the next time I buy a TV.
I' m getting a 23" PC monitor soon. Maybe that' ll be useful.

the deal its this, u can fit every fucking game on a DVD 9 but the picture and sound would be horrid if u want to play in the best way there is u will need blu-ray, rigth now Resistance FoM its over 22 Gb and its just a launch title, hell, its not even out yet, so shit i guess BluRay its fucking important now

ORIGINAL: QuezcatoL

I play 720p on my 26 inch widescreen tv :)


Btw,my mom is getting me a new HD tv.
With component input this time.

And yes i will keep the old one also.

thats cool-

ofc it will.

And ginjirou i sit around 0.5-1 m from the screen,i can' t have anything bigger,but my next HDTV will be just a 27 inch widescreen.

ORIGINAL: fernandino

the deal its this, u can fit every fucking game on a DVD 9 but the picture and sound would be horrid if u want to play in the best way there is u will need blu-ray, rigth now Resistance FoM its over 22 Gb and its just a launch title, hell, its not even out yet, so shit i guess BluRay its fucking important now

SOund was damn good in Oblivion, and pretty much every other game out on the 360. Even the sound for Chaos Theory for the original Xbox was incredible, especially in DD5.1. The picture is also damn good. Everything is fine on a DVD.

the Reason Resistance is 22 Gigs is because one, they aren' t compressing, and two, because they just want to show off the Blu Ray for Sony. the game would look just as good if they compressed it and slapped it on a DVD. Resistance doesn' t look any better than CoD3 graphically and I doubt it' s going to be epically long so I' m not seeing how BR is an advantage with this game.

There' s one thing I' ve always wondered about compressing games.
When the console reads the data and eh... uh... uncompresses it, doesn' t that take a little extra power or time? Or does it make loading times longer? There' s got to be some kind of disadvantage when reading compressed data. Right?

Current generation games, especially on PS2, waste disc space with duplicate files to improve access times. Plus, to save processing time, compression algorithms are not very advanced.

For next generation games, compression and procedural techniques can be improved for the much faster processors. And duplicate files are not needed when we have faster drives (12x DVD) and a hard disk drive (or part of 512MB RAM) for caching.

Current Generation
- Duplicate Files
- Minimal Compression
- Minimal or No Procedural Synthesis
- Wasteful FMV

Next Generation
- Minimal or No Duplicate Files
- Advanced Compression
- Advanced Procedural Synthesis
- Real Time Cutscenes






And here is your question to the tech mod at pcvsconsole.

I would only argue that compression must cost somewhere - be it in the time it takes to decompress, or the quality loss (compression always comes at some cost).

by chairmansteve to eb
Apparently, you have not much experience with compression techniques. Some can take more processing but provide better quality, smaller sizes, and greater bandwidth efficiency. Since you lack adequate knowledge of compression, I' ll assume that procedural synthesis is way out of your league.

I hope you realize that Xbox 360 has a very powerful customized CPU, much more capable for tasks like compression and procedural synthesis than the Intel 733MHz CPU in the original Xbox. Likewise, the X360 ATI GPU is far more capable at procedural rendering (and normal map compression) than the X1 NVIDIA GPU.

Uncompressed? Let' s look at one example of why uncompressed is not ideal.

1080p Uncompressed Video at 24 FPS
Storage Per Hour = 537GB
Bandwidth Required = 150MB/sec (1.2Gbps)

Add a little extra for uncompressed audio.

For that uncompressed video, we' d need a disc capacity much larger than DVD, HD-DVD, or Blu-ray. And we' d need the transfer rate of 33x Blu-ray or 108x DVD. With advanced compression, the space and bandwidth problems can both be solved, and multichannel digital audio can be included.

DXTC (DirectX Texture Compression) is designed for 4:1 compression of color (RGBA) maps. 3Dc is also designed for 4:1 compression but for normal maps. Both are lossy formats, but you need to zoom up close in Photoshop to notice the difference (if any). Textures are filtered (to decrease aliasing) in real-time in games anyway, so the images in game will look different (compressed or not) from the image file opened in a photo application.

Compression brings two advantages: space and speed. Not only does a compressed texture take 1/4 the space in RAM and Disk, it also only needs 1/4 the bandwidth. With 4:1 compression, developers can add 4x as much detail to graphics without requiring more memory space or memory bandwidth.

It doesn' t even matter if the DVD has the room for uncompressed textures, because the textures are better off compressed when used in real-time in the games. So they might as well be already compressed (with the same format) on the DVD too. Plus, compressed files will load faster from DVD. A lossless compression via software might be added to require even less DVD space, and it could be unpacked to the native hardware compressed texture formats when stored in RAM.

Original Vs Compressed Textures
http://www.ati.com/developer/images/compresonator_1_image.JPG# (color)
http://www.ati.com/developer/images/compresonator_2_image.JPG# (color)
http://www.ati.com/developer/samples/dx9/NormalCompression.jpg# (normal)