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

Forums - Sony - BioShock PS3 dev: 'Blu-ray hasn't made much difference'

Rock_on_2008 on 28 August 2008

It will be better on Blu-Ray disc it does not scratch. PS3 version has all the DLC plus survival mode exclusive for PS3 version of Bioshock



Around the Network
Jason77 on 28 August 2008

so what he mean is it could be better on ps3 but they don't wan to upset 360 owner?



jake_the_fake1 on 28 August 2008

I wonder what the developers of Lost Odyssey have to say about this, I'm pretty sure they would have benefited from it.



disolitude on 28 August 2008
Diomedes1976 said:
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.

 

I do understand the concept of streaming. PS3's bluray doesn't have nearly fast enough streaming speeds to show texture detail significantly higher than 360 games. Infact its much slower due to the slower (but constant) read speed of bluray...hence why most textures are loaded on the hard drive with installs.

 



xman on 28 August 2008

Got to say I played this on the 360 and probably in the top ten games I have played in the past five years



PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.

Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game

Xbox live:mywiferocks

Around the Network
sieanr on 28 August 2008
Kyros said:
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...


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.

Fucking bullshit

The bandwidth from disc to VRAM hasn't been an issue since the Dreamcast. All the consoles after that were designed to stream textures.

RAM is a bigger limit on texture detail than those things you mention. This is because a texture has to be in the RAM for it to be rendered. So you can stream all you want but the resolution of the textures you see in a scene is still constrained by how large the ram is.

Texture fillrate is the other big limit. The higher resolution the texture is the more power is required to map that texture to a polygon. Once again you can stream until the cows come home, but it doesn't matter when the GPU isn't powerful enough to actually draw those textures quickly.



Leo-j said: If a dvd for a pc game holds what? Crysis at 3000p or something, why in the world cant a blu-ray disc do the same?

ssj12 said: Player specific decoders are nothing more than specialized GPUs. Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all. 

"Why do they call it the xbox 360? Because when you see it, you'll turn 360 degrees and walk away" 

Jo21 on 28 August 2008
disolitude said:
Diomedes1976 said:
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.

 

I do understand the concept of streaming. PS3's bluray doesn't have nearly fast enough streaming speeds to show texture detail significantly higher than 360 games. Infact its much slower due to the slower (but constant) read speed of bluray...hence why most textures are loaded on the hard drive with installs.

 

thats blu ray x2 vs DVDSx2 x4

the x2 of the blu  ray ins't the same as the x2 of the dvd though.

its slower but not much slower.

hell they can even release dvd games on the ps3 if they get approval of sony if they want.

 



Dgc1808 on 28 August 2008

Ok....



4 ≈ One

jake_the_fake1 on 28 August 2008
Jo21 said:
disolitude said:
Diomedes1976 said:
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.

 

I do understand the concept of streaming. PS3's bluray doesn't have nearly fast enough streaming speeds to show texture detail significantly higher than 360 games. Infact its much slower due to the slower (but constant) read speed of bluray...hence why most textures are loaded on the hard drive with installs.

 

thats blu ray x2 vs DVDSx2 x4

the x2 of the blu  ray ins't the same as the x2 of the dvd though.

its slower but not much slower.

hell they can even release dvd games on the ps3 if they get approval of sony if they want.

 

 

no, at x2 blu-ray is much faster at reading data of the disc than a x2 dvd disc, just remember that the data is more tightly packed on blu-ray than on dvd.

 



mesoteto on 28 August 2008

the only people that seem to think blu = upgrade are those that are clinging to it for every thing...also know as fanboys