By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RolStoppable said:
TruckOSaurus said:

I do too. Games not hitting 60 fps and not being 1080p never bothered me one bit but load times sure did (I'm looking at you DMC5).

Don't get your hopes up. Future games will have to load much more data than current games, so the net benefit of the SSD solution will probably hover around 0. Basically similar to how mandatory installs didn't solve the problem of loading times on the PS4 and XB1, but were merely the solution to circumvent the slow Blu-ray drives and keep loading times in check.

It's important to remember that Sony's demonstration a few weeks ago showed loading times for PS4 quality graphics on the PS5, but PS5 quality graphics will obviously be notably more demanding and have longer loading times.

Another important factor is the individual competence of any given development studio. Just because loading times can be kept under control doesn't mean that every game will be that way.

For me there was a net improvement on loading of games, and the suspended activity was also a good improvement, compared to gen 7.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."