Square! We get it you don't enjoy money and you rarely release games to begin with.. sheesh

Damn I can only think of a handful of developers who would need that much.

There is a lot of room between real-time rendering and months to render a cut scene. A couple of hours to target render a scene in a small server farm doesn't stand in the way of development, certainly not if you can render a preview in real time.
And even if you don't bother with polishing up your cutscenes you still get seamless transitions with no loading pauses like in Uncharted and Killzone.

For the purpose of reflecting people's decisions, weapons, co-op partner etc, why not render the characters in a pre-rendered background. Store a geometry and light map together with the video and it shouldn't be to difficult to place a couple of characters in the action.

Cut scenes are an opportunity to show of the artwork and artistic vision in the best possible way. It's a shame that they are usually limited by the game engine.

There was a reason I said FF style CGI, you know the big movie style cutscenes. 

Uncharted 3 - 45~50 GB

Killzone 3 - 41 GB

God of War 3 - 35 GB

Metal Gear Solid 4 - 30 GB

Actually, some devs are already using a full bluray disc.

On Amazon.com, a Transcend 64 GB SDXC card costs $80 before price reduction (to $60). Even if we take that $80, then a variant of Moore's Law basically says that within 3-4 years, they'll cost less than $20. Likely less than that, because prices are still high from being new technology (and thus still being a specialty product).

It would be smart to start converting consoles back to card/cart based technology, since that technology improves much more steadily - they're saying that 2 TB is the limit for SDXC (like 32 GB was the limit for SDHC), and that'll be without any new hardware to read it. So if a system has an SDXC-type game storage system, space for a large game would no longer be an ongoing problem - earlier games would be restricted, but later ones would have plenty of space.

Not to mention that cards and carts are so much faster to read than discs. That was why the N64 had such short load times compared with the PS. It would be amazingly great if we could finally return to card/cart-based game storage.

It's also worth noting that a proprietary format based on SDHC and SDXC would also be an option - after all, the compact design of the SD-line of cards is intended for easy portability (and thus for use in small devices), which isn't necessary for consoles. And it's cheaper to effectively have four SDHC cards taped together (not literally, of course) than to have a single SDXC of the same size (an SDHC of 16 GB from Transcend costs $17, which means that four of them together costs $68, rather than $80). It might be four times the size, but it would be cheaper.

So there are real options for such an approach.

Vs $0.10 for a Blu-Ray disc or even less, using a $10+ memory card would mean $70+ games.

How much of a markup does an SD card (or SDHC, or SDXC) get from manufacture to release? And how much of that is associated with things that game cards wouldn't need (such as writeability, which is no longer necessary now that we use internal storage in consoles)?

What's more, Blu-Ray discs currently cost so little because they've been around for about 7 years. In 2008, the cost to manufacture 10,000 Blu Ray discs (50 GB) was $2.05 per disc, not counting factors such as the case, etc. Remember that this involves burning each disc. SDHC/SDXC cards don't require burning, they only require copying of data only the card, which happens at about the same rate as reading data off the card - in other words, much, much quicker. And with fewer moving parts. And that's just manufacture - there's still licensing costs to consider.

Now let's look at the cost for 15 writeable 25GB BluRay discs, for comparison. 15 writeable 25GB BluRay discs from Memorex costs $30. A single writeable 25GB BluRay disc from Verbatim, with jewel case, costs $10. It's $22 for the 50GB one.

So if a single 50 GB BluRay disc costs $22, and a single 64 GB SDXC card costs $80, then we can comfortably assume that the relationship is something like 4:1. So somehow, I doubt that a Blu-Ray disc costs $0.10, while a proprietary SDXC costs $10. It's just not believable.

Thats bullshit, theres triple layer Blu Ray. When Blu Ray was introduced it was only dual layered. Theres nearly 130 Gb the holding space today on multiple layered discs today. By next gen it will have increased.

A triple-layer BluRay disc would only hold 3x the data, not 4x.

And firmware has to be updated to allow drives to read discs with more than two layers, as I understand it.