http://www.videogamer.com/news/28-08-2008-9181.html

Did you think it would?

"The original game fit on a 360 disk so it wasn't like we were in need of room."

If they have not increased the texture details BluRay will not make a difference that is correct.

The 360 version was there before, the 360 version fits on a DVD, the PS3 version uses the same textures --> BluRay will not be an advantage.

Your quote makes it sound controversial. But reading the linked article it is a rather stupid point to make. As Miller says in the article; they designed the original game to fit on a DVD and so apart from the new content the extra storage isn't used. I mean there is no surprise here. I mean the advantage Blu-Ray brings over DVD is the extra storage, it has no 'magic' effects.

What they could have done of course was use the extra storage space to increase the quality of textures, by using reduced compression for instance. But I assume the original games textures where created with the compression in mind, so just putting them on there uncompressed might not yield a better look. And redoing all the textures to look their best uncompressed is probably to much work.

Kyros said: If they have not increased the texture details BluRay will not make a difference that is correct. The 360 version was there before, the 360 version fits on a DVD, the PS3 version uses the same textures --> BluRay will not be an advantage.

 

Texture detail has nothing to do with size of bluray. Video RAM can hold 256 megs of texture detail on a ps3 and about the same on the 360. Unless you want much more frequent load time on the ps3...

Shock news... content that fits on a DVD fits on a BR disk with no appreciable advantage. End shock news.

Because of that God invented texture streaming. Games like Devil May Cry that have hard load times at some points have become very rare. A game like GTA4 where you can drive everywhere in the world without load times has to read textures to the VRAM all the time. The VRAM is more like a Cache in a system like this that contains everything you see but as little unused textures as possible.

Or in other words there are two things restricting texture details:

1) The bandwidth from disc to VRAM. This has been until now the dominant factor, but apparently developers like for example ID software can now use more textures than fit on a DVD.
2) The amount of texture space on disc. This has not been that important until now, but if developers overcome the first problem this will change. And apparently they come to this point.

why would blu-ray make a difference ??
the original game was on dvd

disolitude said: Kyros said: If they have not increased the texture details BluRay will not make a difference that is correct. The 360 version was there before, the 360 version fits on a DVD, the PS3 version uses the same textures --> BluRay will not be an advantage.   Texture detail has nothing to do with size of bluray. Video RAM can hold 256 megs of texture detail on a ps3 and about the same on the 360. Unless you want much more frequent load time on the ps3...

You fail to understand the concept streaming.One of the better features of BR is that is can access the disk at any moment even with the game running and as its a single track it can load whatever new texture info required.