Quantcast
View Post
Pemalite said:
Yeah. Not actually that big of a deal that they make it out to be... Just like the Power of the Cell.

There are plenty of ways to side-step the issue of storage speeds, we have been dealing with it for decades after all.
Compression, Mesh/Texture Streaming, Longer Load Times into larger DRAM buffers, Procedural Generation... List goes on.

NAND certainly has it's advantages when leveraged right, especially in asset streaming and load times, but usually game engines are engineered to deal with the lowest common denominator... And that is mechanical storage.
Next gen I would assume that developers will still need to keep in mind for mechanical storage on console (External) and PC.

And for 20 years loading time have been high and in some cases dreadfull - looking at you GTA.

So a faster SSD instead of a slow HDD is a great improvement.

For Sony 1st parties they won't have any need to look at mechanical storage or PC from how what Cerny is pitching so far.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994