By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Zkuq 3 hours ago
Edit Thread
Cerebralbore101 said:
What we have here is a writer that was too lazy to cite his source or read anything. I found the "study" and it has nothing to do with the type of discs that PS5 games are. 
CanadianConservationInstitute said:

https://www.canada.ca/en/conservation-institute/services/conservation-preservation-publications/canadian-conservation-institute-notes/longevity-recordable-cds-dvds.html

The longevity of recordable compact discs (CD-Rs), recordable digital versatile discs (DVD±Rs)Endnote 1 and recordable Blu-rays (BD-Rs) is uncertain, leading to a widespread lack of trust by libraries and archives. Research studies, anecdotal information and manufacturers’ literature suggest that the lifetime of recordable optical discs can range from a couple of years to more than 200 years. This Note explores several of the factors that affect whether a disc will fail within a short period or will continue to perform well for many years.

A BD-R is a recordable Blu-Ray disk. It uses a chemical process to make pits and valleys in a Blu-Ray. 

A BD-Rom is a disc that is pressed at a factory.

They sound similar but are two very different things. Recordable CDs and DVDs are notorious for degrading quickly. Recordable Blu-Rays are just as bad, because they work the same faulty way. This is why people lost their minds when Limited Run simply used a CD-R for many of their disc-based releases instead of pressing the discs. 

TL/DR: Ignorant Game-Rant writer doesn't know the difference between a burner disk and a pressed disk. 

P.S. There has been no study on the long term stability of Blu-Ray disks. CDs are proven to last 70-100 years when stored at 70F and 50% Humidity.

This is exactly why people should be extremely careful when referring to any research results: the chances are that unless you're an expert in the field, you'll get some key detail wrong, which can then change everything. This seems to be exactly what happened here: what might be a good study seems to have been reported incorrectly on these forums.

Personally I would be wary to cite even studies in my own field(s) of expertise, because I know my limits and also how easy it is to get research wrong. It's even easier to get research not in your own field wrong.