Fumanchu said: If the PS3's BD reads data faster than the 360's DVD drive - why do so many games require a mandatory install? I thought it was because of the exact opposite?

 

because installs will always read faster.  The single layer DVD on the 360 reads faster on parts of the disc than the universal read speeds of blu-ray.  Some parts are also slower, but obviously developers can control which parts they place where.  However, the read speeds for the DL DVDs are slower all around than the Blu-ray's universal read speed.

If you just install the data that would have been using on a single layer dvd's fast portion, you solve the problem and actually improve your results.  Some games overused installs, for sure.  Uncharted had no load times and no install, though.

windbane said: scottie said: windbane said: scottie said: Gatorgamer88 said: Even if you hate the PS3 or sony in general, you have to give an ode to the Blu ray. It took awhile but it is a hit, and will become the dominate media source in the coming years. And when microsoft releases the the next Xbox it will have to have Blu Ray capability. Congratulations Sony.....And whoever said that Blu ray is dead is ignorant so think twice next time   Don't tell me what I have to do   It's doing alright, but certainly not 'a hit' The 720 certainly won't use Blu Ray. Microsoft have gone to incedible lengths to try to drive Sony out of the console business, why would they turn around and give them money. Mark my words, the 720 will feature a built in HD-dvd drieve for games, and dvd/downloadable for movies.   Feylick, the 2x BluRay drives used in the PS3 are slower than most dvd drives, and 4x Blu Ray drives are still expensive Hah! I can really see Microsoft using a dead format for their next system. That's the real media center they need! News flash: Blu-ray won the war. Blu-ray reads universally faster than the DL-DVD that the 360 uses. New things are always expensive. Later, they drop in price. Welcome to the economics of technology.   Note how I said they will use HD-dvd for games, not for movies. Lets compare the two formats for the purpose of gaming Capacity - Blu Ray wins 50 gb to 25 Read Speed - A tie Manufacturing Price - HD-Dvd is, and always has been cheaper Licensing Costs - Toshiba owes MS alot for their support of the HD-Dvd, and Toshiba has abondoned the format - Licensing costs for HD-Dvd could be even lower than for the DVD format Not giving money to their rival, Sony - HD-dvd is a clear winner here   HD-Dvd wins 4-1 against BluRay for gaming for the 720     capacity will be much higher by the time the new consoles come out.  HD-DVD, being dead, is not advancing. Ditto for read speeds. Ditto for Manufacturing. Ok, you got me here, I doubt it would cost much to license HD-dvd since it's dead. They gave money to Sony to use a DVD drive.  Oops...

 

Nothing a few R&D dollars from MS couldn't fix - it would probably still be cheaper for MS in the long run than using Blu-Ray

 

This is true, but I think DVD was important to the xbox and 360 (for movies and games) but for the 720 they now have a good alternative to both (downloads and HD-Dvd)

 

Anyway, I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but they certainly could use HD-Dvd if they wanted

NJ5 said: Fumanchu said: If the PS3's BD reads data faster than the 360's DVD drive - why do so many games require a mandatory install? I thought it was because of the exact opposite? It could be because of slower seek times as well. Regarding data loading speed, it seems PS3's Blu-Ray is sometimes faster and sometimes slower than 360's DVD drive, depending on where on the DVD the information is located (for PS3's drive the speed is constant throughout the disc).

So we're getting half the picture then? Even if Blu-ray drives read data faster than the DL-DVD drives the seek times are slower thus rendering the overall performance slower??

It just doesn't make sense that they make the same games have a mandatory install on the PS3 if it reads the data faster/more efficiently.

 

scottie said: windbane said: scottie said: windbane said: scottie said: Gatorgamer88 said: Even if you hate the PS3 or sony in general, you have to give an ode to the Blu ray. It took awhile but it is a hit, and will become the dominate media source in the coming years. And when microsoft releases the the next Xbox it will have to have Blu Ray capability. Congratulations Sony.....And whoever said that Blu ray is dead is ignorant so think twice next time   Don't tell me what I have to do   It's doing alright, but certainly not 'a hit' The 720 certainly won't use Blu Ray. Microsoft have gone to incedible lengths to try to drive Sony out of the console business, why would they turn around and give them money. Mark my words, the 720 will feature a built in HD-dvd drieve for games, and dvd/downloadable for movies.   Feylick, the 2x BluRay drives used in the PS3 are slower than most dvd drives, and 4x Blu Ray drives are still expensive Hah! I can really see Microsoft using a dead format for their next system. That's the real media center they need! News flash: Blu-ray won the war. Blu-ray reads universally faster than the DL-DVD that the 360 uses. New things are always expensive. Later, they drop in price. Welcome to the economics of technology.   Note how I said they will use HD-dvd for games, not for movies. Lets compare the two formats for the purpose of gaming Capacity - Blu Ray wins 50 gb to 25 Read Speed - A tie Manufacturing Price - HD-Dvd is, and always has been cheaper Licensing Costs - Toshiba owes MS alot for their support of the HD-Dvd, and Toshiba has abondoned the format - Licensing costs for HD-Dvd could be even lower than for the DVD format Not giving money to their rival, Sony - HD-dvd is a clear winner here   HD-Dvd wins 4-1 against BluRay for gaming for the 720     capacity will be much higher by the time the new consoles come out. HD-DVD, being dead, is not advancing. Ditto for read speeds. Ditto for Manufacturing. Ok, you got me here, I doubt it would cost much to license HD-dvd since it's dead. They gave money to Sony to use a DVD drive. Oops...   Nothing a few R&D dollars from MS couldn't fix - it would probably still be cheaper for MS in the long run than using Blu-Ray   This is true, but I think DVD was important to the xbox and 360 (for movies and games) but for the 720 they now have a good alternative to both (downloads and HD-Dvd)   Anyway, I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but they certainly could use HD-Dvd if they wanted

 

M$ isn't a hardware company (see RROD).  They aren't going to improve hd-dvd themselves.  Also, the key phrase is "movies and games."  Why completely shut yourself out from blu-ray movies?

There's just no way they go hd-dvd.  That would be a completely Sony move (see PSP).

Fumanchu said: NJ5 said: Fumanchu said: If the PS3's BD reads data faster than the 360's DVD drive - why do so many games require a mandatory install? I thought it was because of the exact opposite? It could be because of slower seek times as well. Regarding data loading speed, it seems PS3's Blu-Ray is sometimes faster and sometimes slower than 360's DVD drive, depending on where on the DVD the information is located (for PS3's drive the speed is constant throughout the disc).   So we're getting half the picture then? Even if Blu-ray drives read data faster than the DL-DVD drives the seek times are slower thus rendering the overall performance slower?? It just doesn't make sense that they make the same games have a mandatory install on the PS3 if it reads the data faster/more efficiently.

 

Oblivion had an install on PS3 and it didn't on 360 because not all 360's have HDs.  The result was that load times were twice as fast on PS3.

But no one likes sitting through an installation if they can avoid it...it must have something to do with the BD read/seek times, otherwise they wouldn't have made it mandatory.

Fumanchu said: NJ5 said: Fumanchu said: If the PS3's BD reads data faster than the 360's DVD drive - why do so many games require a mandatory install? I thought it was because of the exact opposite? It could be because of slower seek times as well. Regarding data loading speed, it seems PS3's Blu-Ray is sometimes faster and sometimes slower than 360's DVD drive, depending on where on the DVD the information is located (for PS3's drive the speed is constant throughout the disc).   So we're getting half the picture then? Even if Blu-ray drives read data faster than the DL-DVD drives the seek times are slower thus rendering the overall performance slower?? It just doesn't make sense that they make the same games have a mandatory install on the PS3 if it reads the data faster/more efficiently.

Yes, there must be something decreasing the performance of the drive, otherwise why would multi-plats like GTA4 require an installation on the PS3 and not 360?

 

NJ5 said: Fumanchu said: NJ5 said: Fumanchu said: If the PS3's BD reads data faster than the 360's DVD drive - why do so many games require a mandatory install? I thought it was because of the exact opposite? It could be because of slower seek times as well. Regarding data loading speed, it seems PS3's Blu-Ray is sometimes faster and sometimes slower than 360's DVD drive, depending on where on the DVD the information is located (for PS3's drive the speed is constant throughout the disc).   So we're getting half the picture then? Even if Blu-ray drives read data faster than the DL-DVD drives the seek times are slower thus rendering the overall performance slower?? It just doesn't make sense that they make the same games have a mandatory install on the PS3 if it reads the data faster/more efficiently.   Yes, there must be something decreasing the performance of the drive, otherwise why would multi-plats like GTA4 require an installation on the PS3 and not 360?

 

Because M$ told them not to do it so as not to leave out all the 360 owners without a hard drive.  There were tons of rumors that Rock Star wanted to implement it on 360.

It all comes down to the developer.  Some, like Naughty Dog, can manage no install and no load times.  Other games aren't as efficient or require more streaming data.

I don't mind installs because I know it will always provide better performance even if it's making up for developer inefficiency sometimes.

@ NJ5

It's a 360 centric game like nearly all multi-platform games currently. The game is optimised for the 360's DVD drive (CD and DVD have been optimised for for ages, Blu-Ray is new technology), bringing that onto the PS3 Blu-Ray drive without major adaptations to the loading routines would cause problems. Read the link earlier within this thread.

BTW, having an equal amount of data on a dual layer DVD, PS3 drive seek times are actually better as well.

windbane said: NJ5 said: Yes, there must be something decreasing the performance of the drive, otherwise why would multi-plats like GTA4 require an installation on the PS3 and not 360?     Because M$ told them not to do it so as not to leave out all the 360 owners without a hard drive. There were tons of rumors that Rock Star wanted to implement it on 360. It all comes down to the developer. Some, like Naughty Dog, can manage no install and no load times. Other games aren't as efficient or require more streaming data. I don't mind installs because I know it will always provide better performance even if it's making up for developer inefficiency sometimes.

The question is not why it does not exist on the 360. The question is why it exists on the PS3 and why is it a mandatory installation as opposed to an optional one.