makingmusic476 said:
First off, single-layered BD-Roms hold 25GB of data, not 23. Also, only ~7GB of space is available to 360 developers on a DVD9 due to restrictions from MS (i'm not sure what they are). They do not have access to the full 8.5GB. Assuming that the 4th disc is roughly half full, you'd have 3.5 x 7GB = 24.5GB. 24.5GB is less than 25GB. Even if the total data did surpass the 25GB mark, they could just go dual-layer like you said. Kojima already plans to do this with MGS4. As far as the expense of Blu-Ray discs, large runs of single-layered BD-Roms came to about 37 cents per disc, compared to ~10 cents per DVD, so a 4 disc DVD game would actually cost publishers more than a Blu-Ray disc game. I'm sure a dual-layered BD-rom wouldn't cost much more than a single layer, as they are already being mass produced for movies like Pirates of the Caribbean, so the cost difference is negligible. About high end pc games, on the EA store it was recently listed that Crysis would need 16GB of HDD space. However, these specs were quickly taken down and Crytek scame out saying that the specs are not final yet. It could end up being a little bit more or a little bit less, but it's a safe bet that the final number will be roughly 16GB. Also, Medieval II: Total War shipped on two DVD9s way back in Nov. '06. To repeat my initial statement, how many discs will 360 games require in another 2 years? |
"First off, single-layered BD-Roms hold 25GB of data, not 23"
Haha, no they dont, but the funny part is you fell right into my trap directly after, you see, blu ray fanboys always list DVD capacity as some lower number (after formatting and overhead) not the theoretical number. But they always list Blu ray capacity as it's perfect theoretical capacity, as if there is not not one digital bit on that disc that cant be used for content (unlike every other format in the history of man).
I brought this up on a much smarter forum than this, and yes, it was determined through Blu ray movie dumps that Blu ray discs do not have 25GB of usable storage after sector formatting and all that. It's actually <23GB. I dont know the exact number available to a Sony dev on a "25G" blu ray disc, but you can bet it's NOT 25 GB, probably more like 22, or less. Do you honestly think microsoft does special things to discs to remove precious capacity, but somehow Sony has no need of this?Just use common sense.
I'm just tired of the double standard. Either use theoretical capacities for both (8.5 GB in the case of a DL DVD, or 25 GB in the case of Blu ray) Or use a lower "true usable" number for both (like 7GB according to your claim, and 20-22GB on Blu ray) . What you constantly see on the internet is apples and oranges, the theoretical maximum on blu ray, and the lower usable capacity on DVD. This isn't accurate and needs to stop.
The opposite would actually be me saying that a DVD is 9GB, and a Blu ray is ~20GB. This is no different than what you are doing, just reversed. Both cases are apples and oranges.