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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Namco Bandai Says Soulcalibur IV Install Size "Significantly Overblown"

Staude on 02 July 2008
gebx said:
Retrasado said:
SpartanFX said:
gebx said:
leo-j said:
Awsome so its down from 8gb to 4 GB =/

I honestly dont see why the game needs any install at all, its a fighter.

 

Blu Ray drive too slow??

Like you said, its a fighter, so why would it need an install unless the Blu Ray drive has some technical flaw that we don't know about.

lot's of games don't require install and they run and look awesome like uncharted,burnout paradise,etc...

 

so your argument is flawed,,,some of the devs are up to speed and some still are not.

 

Blu ray just like any new technology (DVD in 97-99) has a learning curve.

beat me too it.

OT: At least we now officially know that it doesn't require 9GB to play...

 

 

 

Shouldn't that only be used when users reply within a couple minutes to each other and not 14 hours later??

OT - I never thought of it this way but what if the developers just don't care about the install size? Why is it so bad from a developing point of view to have a large install size? Its only really a pain for the gamers to have to make a sandwich before installing a new game.

 

I would advice to do it while installing instead of prior to it. The other thing would just simply be a waste of time :p



Check out my game about moles ^

Around the Network
makingmusic476 on 02 July 2008
disolitude said:
a12331 said:
disolitude said:
SpartanFX said:
gebx said:
leo-j said:
Awsome so its down from 8gb to 4 GB =/

I honestly dont see why the game needs any install at all, its a fighter.

 

Blu Ray drive too slow??

Like you said, its a fighter, so why would it need an install unless the Blu Ray drive has some technical flaw that we don't know about.

lot's of games don't require install and they run and look awesome like uncharted,burnout paradise,etc...

 

so your argument is flawed,,,some of the devs are up to speed and some still are not.

 

Blu ray just like any new technology (DVD in 97-99)  has a learning curve.

While you may be right that Bluray may be new and you sure are right in saying that the way games are being coded has everything to do with how big the install file is... everyone should know by now that the bluray drive in the ps3 is over 2X slower than the DVD DL drive in the 360 when it comes to reading data. So you're technically both right.

 

Blu-ray:

1× at 36 Mbit/s

2× at 72 Mbit/s *this the one that ps3 uses
4× at 144 Mbit/s
6× at 216 Mbit/s[1]
12× at 432 Mbit/s

Xbox 360 are equipped with a 12x DVD drive, capable of a maximum read rate of 15.85 MB/s

source wikipedia.

show what you can see the ps3 is actually disk drive faster than the 360s by 4.5 times.  

 

 

 

 

lol. I appreciate your effort in researching this but please notice the difference between MB and Mb. One stand for Mega Byte other is Mega Bit. 1 Mega Byte has 8 Mega Bits.

So according to your info there...

xbox dvd drive is 15.85MB x 8 = 126.8 Mbit

PS3 = 72 Mbit

And considering that most Xbox drives these days are 16X not 12X (it was 12X at launch)...taa daa... over 2X faster than PS3.

All 360's have the same drive speed for reading games. The 360's drive reads single layered DVDs at 12x speeds and dual layered DVDs at 8x speeds.

Blu-Ray drives, unlike traditional DVD drives, have a constant read speed. 

The ps3's drive reads at a constant 9MB/s, while the 360's drive reads at a MAXIMUM of 10.57 MB/s. It reads at a minimum of 4.36MB/s.

The only reason the 360's drive could be perceived as superior is because developers can put necessary data on the outer edge of the disc, resulting in much faster read speeds for said data versus the ps3's drive.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42157

And even if the DVD drives in the newer 360s had faster read speeds, developers would be unable to take advantage of it.  If they were to alter their engines to cater to new 360s, people with older 360s would experience excessive loading, etc.  Developers would have to take into account the lowest common denominator.  If anything, the drive would provide an advantage when viewing DVD movies.

 



disolitude on 02 July 2008
makingmusic476 said:
disolitude said:
a12331 said:

Blu-ray:

1× at 36 Mbit/s

2× at 72 Mbit/s *this the one that ps3 uses
4× at 144 Mbit/s
6× at 216 Mbit/s[1]
12× at 432 Mbit/s

Xbox 360 are equipped with a 12x DVD drive, capable of a maximum read rate of 15.85 MB/s

source wikipedia.

show what you can see the ps3 is actually disk drive faster than the 360s by 4.5 times.

 

 

 

 

lol. I appreciate your effort in researching this but please notice the difference between MB and Mb. One stand for Mega Byte other is Mega Bit. 1 Mega Byte has 8 Mega Bits.

So according to your info there...

xbox dvd drive is 15.85MB x 8 = 126.8 Mbit

PS3 = 72 Mbit

And considering that most Xbox drives these days are 16X not 12X (it was 12X at launch)...taa daa... over 2X faster than PS3.

All 360's have the same drive speed for reading games. The 360's drive reads single layered DVDs at 12x speeds and dual layered DVDs at 8x speeds.

Blu-Ray drives, unlike traditional DVD drives, have a constant read speed.

The ps3's drive reads at a constant 9MB/s, while the 360's drive reads at a MAXIMUM of 10.57 MB/s. It reads at a minimum of 4.36MB/s.

The only reason the 360's drive could be perceived as superior is because developers can put necessary data on the outer edge of the disc, resulting in much faster read speeds for said data versus the ps3's drive.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42157

And even if the DVD drives in the newer 360s had faster read speeds, developers would be unable to take advantage of it. If they were to alter their engines to cater to new 360s, people with older 360s would experience excessive loading, etc. Developers would have to take into account the lowest common denominator. If anything, the drive would provide an advantage when viewing DVD movies.

 

 

Interesting numbers. I obviously cant argue myself as I've never measured the data flow between 12X DVD and 2 X bluray. All I can do is provide info where I read the data.

According to this the 12X maximum read speed (outer edge) is 2X faster than bluray 2x. While the minimum read speed (inner edge) on a dvd is a bit less than 2X bluray.

http://www.maxconsole.net/content_img/dvdvsbr.gif.jpg

Here is the article.

http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=6060

 

In any case...I think there are 3 reasons PS3 needs isntalls and xbox doesn't.

1. Memory on 360 is more flexible (512 shared vs 256 - 256)

2. DirectX (or XNA or hatever its called on the 360)...sony has nothing like DirectX in their ps3 that helps devs with game and video programming

3. bluray speed



Dgc1808 on 02 July 2008

Is it really the install Bluray Drive??? Cause i remember reading some test results that show the ps3's 2x drive reads single layer blurays faster than the 360's drive reads dual layer dvd's.



4 ≈ One

makingmusic476 on 02 July 2008
disolitude said:
makingmusic476 said:
disolitude said:
a12331 said:

Blu-ray:

1× at 36 Mbit/s

2× at 72 Mbit/s *this the one that ps3 uses
4× at 144 Mbit/s
6× at 216 Mbit/s[1]
12× at 432 Mbit/s

Xbox 360 are equipped with a 12x DVD drive, capable of a maximum read rate of 15.85 MB/s

source wikipedia.

show what you can see the ps3 is actually disk drive faster than the 360s by 4.5 times.

 

 

 

 

lol. I appreciate your effort in researching this but please notice the difference between MB and Mb. One stand for Mega Byte other is Mega Bit. 1 Mega Byte has 8 Mega Bits.

So according to your info there...

xbox dvd drive is 15.85MB x 8 = 126.8 Mbit

PS3 = 72 Mbit

And considering that most Xbox drives these days are 16X not 12X (it was 12X at launch)...taa daa... over 2X faster than PS3.

All 360's have the same drive speed for reading games. The 360's drive reads single layered DVDs at 12x speeds and dual layered DVDs at 8x speeds.

Blu-Ray drives, unlike traditional DVD drives, have a constant read speed.

The ps3's drive reads at a constant 9MB/s, while the 360's drive reads at a MAXIMUM of 10.57 MB/s. It reads at a minimum of 4.36MB/s.

The only reason the 360's drive could be perceived as superior is because developers can put necessary data on the outer edge of the disc, resulting in much faster read speeds for said data versus the ps3's drive.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42157

And even if the DVD drives in the newer 360s had faster read speeds, developers would be unable to take advantage of it. If they were to alter their engines to cater to new 360s, people with older 360s would experience excessive loading, etc. Developers would have to take into account the lowest common denominator. If anything, the drive would provide an advantage when viewing DVD movies.

 

 

Interesting numbers. I obviously cant argue myself as I've never measured the data flow between 12X DVD and 2 X bluray. All I can do is provide info where I read the data.

According to this the 12X maximum read speed (outer edge) is 2X faster than bluray 2x. While the minimum read speed (inner edge) on a dvd is a bit less than 2X bluray.

http://www.maxconsole.net/content_img/dvdvsbr.gif.jpg

Here is the article.

http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=6060

 

In any case...I think there are 3 reasons PS3 needs isntalls and xbox doesn't.

1. Memory on 360 is more flexible (512 shared vs 256 - 256)

2. DirectX (or XNA or hatever its called on the 360)...sony has nothing like DirectX in their ps3 that helps devs with game and video programming

3. bluray speed

The numbers are straight from Hitachi and Blu-Ray.com. :P

There's more sources and the like in the beyond3d link. :)