I love when Sony announced PS3 features...

toxikneedle · 23-03-2006, 02:18 PM

Since yesterday's Sony GDC keynote, I have been reading some of the stupidest posts/comments ever from Sony fanboys and such.

The thing that bothers me the most about what I hear is that for some reason people think that because Sony will use 50GB Blue Ray disks, the textures and models are gonna be super high res or something...... Umm since when is bigger disks give you the processing power to render higher res textures. A game with low res textures has nothing to do with how big the DVD/CD disk is. Space is not what gives you high res textures, as any PC dev can tell you. The only advantage, as far as games, that a BD can give you is having super big and high quality videos, like the 5 second EA, or Ubi intros or if a game uses a rendered intro/cinematic that can be much better quality than before.... but thats it, this doesnt effect the actual game.

Anyways just wanted to let that out

Shotty · 23-03-2006, 02:26 PM

Sony lists the dumbest features that MS already does. Like region free games MS has that but it lets the developers choose if they want to use it or not. Sony always talks about the cell and how powerful it is well MS barely talks about the embedded ram for the gpu this is something total new and unique to the 360 that the ps3 doesnt have and MS could rub it in their faces but chooses not to. Even the unified shaders the 360 is the first electronic device to use unified shaders something MS could rub in sony face but they still choose not to. Ken is running out of things to say really quickly what the heck is 4D that doesnt even make sense, whats next he gonna start making up his own words. "The playstatin 3 is giganormously more powerfuller kompaired to the xbox 360." And all his fanboys would start quoting him and come to this site and post some BS of a comment"

slobdell · 23-03-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toxikneedle

Since yesterday's Sony GDC keynote, I have been reading some of the stupidest posts/comments ever from Sony fanboys and such.

The thing that bothers me the most about what I hear is that for some reason people think that because Sony will use 50GB Blue Ray disks, the textures and models are gonna be super high res or something...... Umm since when is bigger disks give you the processing power to render higher res textures. A game with low res textures has nothing to do with how big the DVD/CD disk is. Space is not what gives you high res textures, as any PC dev can tell you. The only advantage, as far as games, that a BD can give you is having super big and high quality videos, like the 5 second EA, or Ubi intros or if a game uses a rendered intro/cinematic that can be much better quality than before.... but thats it, this doesnt effect the actual game.

Anyways just wanted to let that out

actually the benefit of bluray theoretically could mean higher resolutions on textures and models. Hi-Res grafics/textures/models do take up more space, this is why a 720p video is a much larger file compared to a 480p video of the exact same size. check the xbl marketplace if you don't believe that. The idea sony is going for is that they can store much more of the high res objects on the disk and bluray will be able to pull them off the disk fast enough to display them, where as a standard dvd reader like on the 360 may max out on read speed and not be able to display the 1080p content that sony claims will exist at a fast enough rate to display it on the screen smoothly. The Sony fanboys are not claiming that bluray will increase processing power, because it is not an issue of processing power it is an issue how much information can be stored on the disc and if the system is able to pull large amounts of information off the disc fast enough to display it and have it look good. I despise sony, and I'm not even saying I agree with those fanboy retards, but what they are saying does have some validity.

This is also much of the reason why a computer game from 1995 might take 20MBs of space on your hdd and a game from today can take Gigabytes. it is not simply because they have added more lines of code, it has everything to do with resolution and and texture detail.

Æ N I M A 4 6 N 2 · 23-03-2006, 03:51 PM

lol I love "Big words" in conversations on sonys flaws ps3.

"OH, MY DISK SPACE IS BIGGER THEN YOURES X80X 36o. SO THAT MAKE ME GOD EVEN THOUGH I HAVE NO INFO ON WHY ITS BETTER"

"COME ON 36o BRING IT, I GOT BETTER GAMES, AND UHHHHH BETTER OLINE AND STUFF. MY NEW GAME THAT CAME OUT LOOKS LIKE A HYPE VERSION OD GOD OF WAR"

The matter is that well see at E3, We've gone through this conversation many times and nothing has change.

toxikneedle · 23-03-2006, 03:52 PM

Slobdell, you are saying exactly what PS3 fanboys are saying. If you use higher textures the actual map size not only takes up more space but more processing power. For example, in PC, BF2 uses high textures compared to lets say BF1942, therefore you need 2 GBs of Ram to play it because of all the texture caching, at the same time GPUs with higher ram (256 vs. 512) do better in terms of FPS. And that is on a PC where textures are cached for faster access. My point is that storage is not the solution to having high-res textures. I can bet that there isn't 1 game that uses 9gbs of space that dual layer dvd9s currently offer for 360. Again, storage is not the problem nor is it the solution for high-res textures.

I have developed mods/games for PC before and that's why I hate when Sony makes it sound like you will have a better looking game soley based on the fact that a DB is 50gbs big. Now if they wanna talk about the RSX or the Cell being able to process higher-res textures or high count polygon models, that's another thing.

Getting back to what I was saying in the first post, the comments I've been reading are all saying how you can have all these life-life photorealistic textures now for every wall, person, gun, and whatever else..... Yeah you can store em on a BD, but it doesn't mean the GPU can now process these huge mapped textures just cuz you have a 50gb disk inside.

Grindstone · 23-03-2006, 04:24 PM

Also, Toxik, bear in mind that even a 2x speed Blu-Ray drive has a slower reading rate than the 12x speed DVD-9 in the 360. Granted, at this point they have not announced the drive speed of the Blu-ray player in the PS3, but if it is 2x or less, then the PS3 will suffer longer load times. Kind of a potential problem for the Sony camp; more storage with longer load times. A trade-off for the better? I guess we'll see.

And if the 360 does have games that are on 2 disc, I will not be crying. Who cares? If it is a great game, surely you will not mind.

slobdell · 23-03-2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toxikneedle

Slobdell, you are saying exactly what PS3 fanboys are saying. If you use higher textures the actual map size not only takes up more space but more processing power. For example, in PC, BF2 uses high textures compared to lets say BF1942, therefore you need 2 GBs of Ram to play it because of all the texture caching, at the same time GPUs with higher ram (256 vs. 512) do better in terms of FPS. And that is on a PC where textures are cached for faster access. My point is that storage is not the solution to having high-res textures. I can bet that there isn't 1 game that uses 9gbs of space that dual layer dvd9s currently offer for 360. Again, storage is not the problem nor is it the solution for high-res textures.

yea...i know, but i think you missed my point. what i'm saying is that both systems very well may have the processing and memory power to produce all the high quality textures in the world but if the drive cannot pull it from the disc fast enough, none of that matters. Bluray will have the advantage in that aspect and i doubt they will release the bluray with a 2x speed, especially after the delay they are facing.

and in regards to your comment "I can bet that there isn't 1 game that uses 9gbs of space that dual layer dvd9s currently offer for 360", yea no kidding. there has not been a game released for 260 with 2 discs. and no one is debating whether or not its ok for now, the question is 3 or 4 years from now when the system is utilizing 100% of it's power.

and also, in regards to your comment "Again, storage is not the problem nor is it the solution for high-res textures", you are assuming that super high res textures will max out the systems processor and memory before the max out disc capactiy and again, that is just an assumption.

also "higher resolution and more detailed textures" does not equal "photo realistic super high quality textures" or whatever your wording was.

i dont agree with you and i don't agree with fanboys, i'm just saying that no one can know what the hell they are talking about until we see the games push the limits of the system and that will be a few years, in the meantime i am keeping an open mind and suggest everyone else do the same.

toxikneedle · 23-03-2006, 11:39 PM

I can see your point on how Blue Rays can help games in the future which will use around 10GBs or so of space.... but still I am sure that's not why Sony has a BD drive and why Microsoft still uses a DVD9..... But who knows, for now it's all the same, other than the read speed thing but I haven't actually read up anything on that particular issue.

C Dub · 24-03-2006, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toxikneedle

I can see your point on how Blue Rays can help games in the future which will use around 10GBs or so of space.... but still I am sure that's not why Sony has a BD drive and why Microsoft still uses a DVD9..... But who knows, for now it's all the same, other than the read speed thing but I haven't actually read up anything on that particular issue.

Sony uses BD because its their media like UMD. They stand to gain alot of money if BD becomes the standard for HD movies. Microsoft uses DVD-9 because it was safer media for the future plus it was available now to get a early jump on PS3. HD-DVD(Toshiba) and Blu Ray(Sony) still aren't finalized. Thus one of the reasons for PS3 delay(Blu Ray).

Grindstone · 24-03-2006, 03:29 PM

Yep, they are taking the bundle approach: Give them the Blu-ray player via the Playstation 3! That way, we have a guarranteed user base when we release Blu-ray movies which we get royalty fees for.

Not a bad idea, they are forcing consumers to support the next-gen format (well, gamers at least).

Jacksmith28 · 24-03-2006, 04:17 PM

I hate the ps3. I'm sorry I wasted this post. But I need to speak my mind.

Grindstone · 24-03-2006, 04:48 PM

Well that's great, Jack. Now if you would be so kind as to explain why you hate the PS3, the world would be a better place.

Shotty · 24-03-2006, 05:29 PM

Sony fanboys should be pissed at sony for forcing them to adopt blu-ray and pay a higher price for something that the majority of them wont even use. The majority of gamers are casual gamers that have no idea what HD-DVD or blu-ray are. And I hate out best buy and other retailers are sell up-converting dvd players as HD-DVD players. From thurdays flyers it read:
Phlips up-converting HD DVD player $199.99. I was like WTF that a point blank lie. Imagine when HD-DVD players actually come on the market imagine the confusion. "So this is an upconverting HD-DVD player and its $200 and this is a HD-DVD player and it $500 oh I pick up the $200 one since its cheaper. Honestly I want bestbuy to stop lying to its customers.

Sharky · 27-03-2006, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shotty

Honestly I want bestbuy to stop lying to its customers.

That'll be the day that Hell truly freezes over!!!

Jacksmith28 · 27-03-2006, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grindstone

Well that's great, Jack. Now if you would be so kind as to explain why you hate the PS3, the world would be a better place.

Well, the fact that it will be ridicoulsey expensive, the fact that it is japaneese ( no offense to Japeneese people, I just like to support the american economey, even though 360's are made in tiawan), and last, but most important, the controller. Might as well tie a usb cord around a boomerang and plug it in. I could go on forever, but im busy playing my Xbox 360.

no anaesthesia · 26-04-2006, 04:00 AM

i'm just asking... isn't it the textures that take most of the space on the disks
and PLEASE give me a YES/NO answer i'm trying to get some info and wouldn't care to read a post the length of a short story

Jay2984 · 26-04-2006, 05:11 AM

I have no idea what you guys are talking about but you seem like you know your stuff, Im going too take Jack's way out "Sony Sux" LOL

Eilujin · 26-04-2006, 09:46 PM

Im with Jack, Sony Sucks. I don't like them one bit. I tried not to buy my Sony 51" HdTv, but it was in my price range and an offer I couln't refuse. I enjoy playing my Xbox 360 on it. Sony imo, has the worse customer service I have ever seen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slobdel

and in regards to your comment "I can bet that there isn't 1 game that uses 9gbs of space that dual layer dvd9s currently offer for 360", yea no kidding. there has not been a game released for 260 with 2 discs. and no one is debating whether or not its ok for now, the question is 3 or 4 years from now when the system is utilizing 100% of it's power.

I can see 2 things happening 3-4 years from now.
1. HD-DVD players will be cheap (just like dvd players are now), so it would be easy for xbox to put games on those, even though they are denying that now, doesnt mean they wont 3-4 years from now.
2. Hard drives will be ALOT cheaper 3-4 years from now. With the removable hard drive in the 360 it would be easy to eventually get up to over 200GB+ hard drive for cheaper than what the 20GB is now. To my point You could be able to Download the full game right from Live.

Grindstone · 27-04-2006, 10:31 AM

Perhaps, Eilujin, but right now, it takes a friggin' long time to download demos and trailers from XBL, especially if there are a lot of people on doing the same thing.

Granted, 3-4 years from now, maybe some of these kinks will be worked out. But I don't think we'll be downloading games of that magnitude (over 9 gigs) within the near future. I do think that Blu-ray and HD-DVD will have a shorter life span than DVD because of downloading, but they will be utilized while the online infrastructure is being fine tuned.

Besides, having 2 discs for a game is not a problem for me.