Panama said: I thought they paid Spike not to air Sony's E3 this year also.

Sony's conference takes place during prime time. Spike are not going to bump their other programs to air it.

Microsoft did not pay them. Geoff Keighley confirmed this.

czecherychestnut said: disolitude said: DucksUnlimited said: Common sense said so...   I mean you have an X86 architecture with 8 Gb GDDR5 ram and 8 core cpu with awesome GPU...running games in 1080p@60 frames per second. And this is all supposed to run of a slow 6x bluray drive, which runs at around 20MB per second data trasfer rate in the real world...not gonna happen unless you like 2 minute loading times between levels.       disolitude said:   Just out of curiosity, how does that imply it couldn't be an option?     It wouldnt be an option because it just isnt if you want a next gen experience. How is Killzone PS4 going to load a 4GB frame buffer in to RAM 20MB at a time running off a bluray? Textures would appear 30 seconds after the level loads and loading time to gameplay time would be 1:1. Now there is an option of installing a game fully on to PS4, but then using the disk as "drm", meaning you have to keep it in the PS4 in order to play a game. This is a strong possibility, especially considering the sony patent below. You do realise that game textures are compressed right? Textures are loaded in compressed and decompressed into the frame buffer by the GPU on the fly, PC's have done this since the 90's on S3 Trio's and DX6. Otherwise games would need 100's of GB of data just for textures. PS3 has games that run at 1080p and it had only a 2x Blu-ray drive. Many games on the PS3 were able to stream data in without load screens with that 2x drive, so I don't see how the PS4 will suddenly be incapable of doing the same with 3x the bandwidth from the blu-ray drive.

Yes texture compression is absolutely the standard method for loading in game textures but it didnt save the PS3 from having manditory installs or the 360 from having horrible texture pop in on a lot of the games when running off a disk. And 360 is only 1/2 slower than 6x bluray in PS4. I actually cant believe youre trying to sell me the idea here that ps3 was perfectly capable loading 1080p gaming and textures off a bluray. Ps3 had like 1/10th the memory bandwidth PS4 will have and if it was indeed playing a 1080p game, those textures and models had to be subpar since we both know it couldnt do 1080p gaming for 99% of games.

These new consoles most likely have a 256bit video memory bus and ps4 has super fast gddr5 memory...thats a lot of pixels and video bandwidth that they will be able to push. And youre telling me that 6x bluray drive is going to be enough to keep up on the fly? Compressed or not...

And this is before we get in to the fact that disk drives also have a much higher latency and seek times than 7200rpm hard drives.

Trying to hide the sun with one finger as usual.

DucksUnlimited said: disolitude said: It wouldnt be an option because it just isnt if you want a next gen experience. How is Killzone PS4 going to load a 4GB frame buffer in to RAM 20MB at a time running off a bluray? Textures would appear 30 seconds after the level loads and loading time to gameplay time would be 1:1. Now there is an option of installing a game fully on to PS4, but then using the disk as "drm", meaning you have to keep it in the PS4 in order to play a game. This is a strong possibility, especially considering the sony patent below. http://www.techdigest.tv/2013/01/sony_to_block_p.html To me this is much worse than Xbox1 drm, because you get absolutelu no benefits of cloud storage and gaming (disk swapping, no playing at friends place without disk...) while you still cant sell your game or trade it with friends without Sony DRM allowing you to do so. If you have to keep the disk in and no install is to take place, how is this whole PS Vita-PS4 game streaming supposed to work? Only when youre at home and your PS4 is on and disk is in the drive? Thats hardly worth it if you ask me... I suppose my next question is where are you getting that 4gb number from? That's pure speculation at this point. That being said, I guess it just varies from person to person. Requiring an internet connection is more of a turnoff to some people than not being able to play on a friend's console, particularly with it being done in the restrictive manner MS has planned. And you're a fine example of the opposite being true as well. Personally, I'm not really affected much by either. And yes, actually. I believe that's how the streaming is supposed to work. i didn't think it sounded all that amazing either, but it's essentially what the Wii U's gamepad does, and I've heard a lot of people talk about what a fantastic feature it is on that console.

4 gb was a number which this forum along with a few others reported that Killzone PS4 was using when being developed. Now im aware that 4 gb wasnt used for video memory alone but there may come a time in 5 years when games do use that much video memory.

The GPU in the PS4 is no joke and current gen games on PC are a testament that you will need a fast hard drive to have an enjoyable experience. Take something like Crysis 2 or 3 on the PC and install it on a 5400rpm hard drive, then launch it on high settings...you will wait up to a minute for loading. Now take that time and double it, and you will approximately get how long it will take for PS4 bluray to load that same level.

In terms of DRM, I think internet activation + disk verification solves our worries. Like if Microsoft or Sony said you can play without disk anywhere where you log in with your ID for 24 hours without internet, but if you want to play longer and still have no internet, you need to pop the disk back in. Id be perfectly ok with that...

thismeintiel said: disolitude said: Common sense said so... I mean you have an X86 architecture with 8 Gb GDDR5 ram and 8 core cpu with awesome GPU...running games in 1080p@60 frames per second. And this is all supposed to run of a slow 6x bluray drive, which runs at around 20MB per second data trasfer rate in the real world...not gonna happen unless you like 2 minute loading times between levels. Lol, why do you keep saying BS like this?  Common sense says, otherwise.  If ND, GG, and others can make games with NO installs using a 2x drive and games that are 25GB-45GB, I'm sure they'll be fine with a 6x drive and games in the same ballpark, maybe slightly larger.  And for the games that do have an install, it will be JUST like the PS3, with a partial install, but the disc is still required.

Game size has nothing to do with it...its video bandwidth and overall processing power that does.

PS3 had a tiny straw for moving data(2x bluray) but it also took tiny gulps of data since gpu wasnt very powerful...and it still needed manditory installs for some games.

Well PS4 can take huge gulps of data compared to PS3 and youre saying a little bigger straw is good enough.

disolitude said: DucksUnlimited said: I suppose my next question is where are you getting that 4gb number from? That's pure speculation at this point. That being said, I guess it just varies from person to person. Requiring an internet connection is more of a turnoff to some people than not being able to play on a friend's console, particularly with it being done in the restrictive manner MS has planned. And you're a fine example of the opposite being true as well. Personally, I'm not really affected much by either. And yes, actually. I believe that's how the streaming is supposed to work. i didn't think it sounded all that amazing either, but it's essentially what the Wii U's gamepad does, and I've heard a lot of people talk about what a fantastic feature it is on that console. 4 gb was a number which this forum along with a few others reported that Killzone PS4 was using when being developed. Now im aware that 4 gb wasnt used for video memory alone but there may come a time in 5 years when games do use that much video memory. The GPU in the PS4 is no joke and current gen games on PC are a testament that you will need a fast hard drive to have an enjoyable experience. Take something like Crysis 2 or 3 on the PC and install it on a 5400rpm hard drive, then launch it on high settings...you will wait up to a minute for loading. Now take that time and double it, and you will approximately get how long it will take for PS4 bluray to load that same level. In terms of DRM, I think internet activation + disk verification solves our worries. Like if Microsoft or Sony said you can play without disk anywhere where you log in with your ID for 24 hours without internet, but if you want to play longer and still have no internet, you need to pop the disk back in. Id be perfectly ok with that...

That's fine.

I don't see how it's absolutely set in stone that users who didn't want to install a game are absolutely not allowed to wait 2 minutes, but that's not to say you're wrong either. We just don't know, which was my original point.

How would that prevent used games though? if I'm understanding you correctly, you could sell your game to a friend, give them temporary access to your account, and then after 24 hours they just pop the disc in and play permanently, right?

Invest 1 billion into games, open up many studio's in the past gen. They have 20 something ffs... but this is a waste of money? How many more do you want them to have? 15 exclusives also on the X1 in the first year?

MS don't care about games? Lol, You're all blind. This is business people! Not charity.

ironmanDX said: Invest 1 billion into games, open up many studio's in the past gen. They have 20 something ffs... but this is a waste of money? How many more do you want them to have? 15 exclusives also on the X1 in the first year? MS don't care about games? Lol, You're all blind. This is business people! Not charity.

What I find curious about that 1 billion figure is did that 400 million dollar deal with the NFL to have fantasy football count towards that grand total and how much money did they spend on COD exclusivity, and how much for the "rumored" Titanfall exclusivity? I would think those 3 things would have taking a fairly large chunk out of that pie if MS is counting those as part of that grand total.

ironmanDX said: Invest 1 billion into games, open up many studio's in the past gen. They have 20 something ffs... but this is a waste of money? How many more do you want them to have? 15 exclusives also on the X1 in the first year? MS don't care about games? Lol, You're all blind. This is business people! Not charity.

Exactly it's business Microsoft is gonna use whatever resources it can to gain the advantage over Sony, their goal isn't to be the White Knight of gaming it's to flip a profit on the investment they made 10+ years ago.
But as far MS new studios go I can only get excited for Black Tusk, all the other new studios seem to be working on projects like kinect, sports, kids stuff etc(at least according to rumors and studio names).

I hope 3rd parties aren't buying into this tyrant