PS3 games bigger than 360 games?

[CYMBOL]

Hey guys,

I keep reading that the 360 stayed with DVD technology. Of course, the PS3 was thinking out of the box and put their games on Blu-ray.

I was asked by and X-Box owner who feels we (PS3 owners) were "forced" to buy a Blu-ray player and asked me, "Name me one game on PS3 that couldn't be put on a DVD."

I thought RFOM was 17 gigs, but then, I think I read that here with no links.

Does anyone know which games are bigger than DVDs 8.5 gigs - whether out or not? Heavenly Sword? Warhawk? Ratchet? MGS4?

(I heard MGS4 was rumored at almost 25 gigs). Anyone know of any links. Even if my friend didn't ask me, I would be very curious.

I think the 360 was short sighted not to use HD DVD technology for it's games, but I'm curious to know if we have proof of that.

Thanks as always guys,

[ra1024]

The developers stated that a single level of Killzone 2 takes up 2G. Since the levels share assests, each additional level doesn't add a full 2G but you get the picture. I really woulndn't waste time arguing with someone at this point that thinks DVD is adequate for next gen gaming. Everything in the computing world is aobut faster and more storage (ram and disc). If someone honestly thinks that a next gen console shouldn't move up, they just don't get it.

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by ra1024

The developers stated that a single level of Killzone 2 takes up 2G. Since the levels share assests, each additional level doesn't add a full 2G but you get the picture. I really woulndn't waste time arguing with someone at this point that thinks DVD is adequate for next gen gaming. Everything in the computing world is aobut faster and more storage (ram and disc). If someone honestly thinks that a next gen console shouldn't move up, they just don't get it.

At this point I'm just really curious. And it's not so much an argument as me just feeling like I don't know what I'm talking about. How can I say "DVD is not adequate" without some real numbers behind me? I just want to be informed.

Thanks for the response, I appreciate it.

[shido]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

Hey guys,

I keep reading that the 360 stayed with DVD technology. Of course, the PS3 was thinking out of the box and put their games on Blu-ray.

I was asked by and X-Box owner who feels we (PS3 owners) were "forced" to buy a Blu-ray player and asked me, "Name me one game on PS3 that couldn't be put on a DVD."

I thought RFOM was 17 gigs, but then, I think I read that here with no links.

Does anyone know which games are bigger than DVDs 8.5 gigs - whether out or not? Heavenly Sword? Warhawk? Ratchet? MGS4?

(I heard MGS4 was rumored at almost 25 gigs). Anyone know of any links. Even if my friend didn't ask me, I would be very curious.

I think the 360 was short sighted not to use HD DVD technology for it's games, but I'm curious to know if we have proof of that.

Thanks as always guys,

I don't have any links either, but for the most part, you can be assured that all Sony exclusive titles are using more than the 8.5gigs that DVD allows. 3rd party titles so far are usually just ports of the 360 version, so those ones would have identical disc space usage - except for The Darkness and Stranglehold I believe. I'm not totally certain, but I did read somewhere that The Darkness on PS3 had some extra content not found on the 360 version, and I know for certain that the special edition of Stranglehold on PS3 comes with the movie Hard Boiled in HD on the same disc as the game.

No matter what Microsoft or anybody else says though, it's already been proven that DVD isn't big enough for this generation's games. We're seeing it already, with PGR4 having to cut out time of day variations on tracks to fit on one DVD, Rockstar having a hard time fitting GTAIV on one DVD, and a whole bunch of other devs publicly complaining about having only DVD on the 360. And Blue Dragon was released on 3 discs already. People are already pushing the limits of DVD in less than two years on the 360. It's only a matter of time before they realize that they're going to need multiple discs or something else entirely to offset this fact. I suspect that the recent news that Microsoft is allowing "hard drive required" games is one consequence of this. Not only will performance be better when devs can develop their games knowing they'll have access to the hard drive, they could also have you install the game, so swapping discs wouldn't be necessary.

[Existentialist]

Yes, I am curious as well, does anybody know where to find this information?

[CYMBOL]

I am really curious about how large Warhawk and Heavenly Sword are.

[ra1024]

Here's something that will give you some specifics. Project Gothan Racing 4 on the 360 won't have daytime and nightime for each city due to DVD's limitation. I couldn't remember the game when I posted earlier but google helped me remember

http://palgn.com.au/article.php?id=8...ray+vindicated!

[Shu76]

Just goes to show you that M$ rushed out thier console,M$ couldn't use HD DVD at the time cause HD DVD wasn't ready yet,but yet wanted to get their console out before Sony did,now in the long run M$ is paying for it,As they are paying for not having a HDD in every console...their excuse? "We wanted to give consumers an option" Sony "forcing you" to buy blu-ray is nonsense. No one is forcing you to buy a PS3 in the first place.

[ra1024]

Originally Posted by Shu76

Just goes to show you that M$ rushed out thier console,M$ couldn't use HD DVD at the time cause HD DVD wasn't ready yet,but yet wanted to get their console out before Sony did,now in the long run M$ is paying for it,As they are paying for not having a HDD in every console...their excuse? "We wanted to give consumers an option" Sony "forcing you" to buy blu-ray is nonsense. No one is forcing you to buy a PS3 in the first place.

It's quite amusing when you think about that argument. They wanted to give consumers a choice but in reality they forced a DVD drive on consumers. What about consumers who only wanted a CD drive? With a console, you will be forcing some type of drive on people who buy it and you size it according to what you expect to need. With the 360, they're basically saying their games won't ever be much more than what you've seen for years with the PS2/Xbox. You can have more detail and shorter games ( GOW ) or less detail and a longer game (Halo 3). They certainly gave consumers a choice, get good games now (360) or get great games later (PS3)

[Chefsean2006]

Here's a link stating that Resistance Fall Of Man uses upwards of 20+ gigs http://blogs.ign.com/Ted-Insomniac/2006/09/07/32083/
So basically the way this game is designed it could only run on a blu-ray, or multple dvd's (and who wants that). But I'm sure given enough time and energy, any game can run on any system. It's all about what are you willing to leave out.

[helli3yte]

and mgs4 will be waaaaay bigger than 25 gb. theyre using bd50's

[DezNutz]

Resistance: Fall of Man, a launch title, is 16GB.



Check here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance:_Fall_of_Man

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by helli3yte

and mgs4 will be waaaaay bigger than 25 gb. theyre using bd50's

Any links?

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by DezNutz

Resistance: Fall of Man, a launch title, is 16GB.



Check here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance:_Fall_of_Man

Very cool. Thanks,

[MrBogey]

You can always compress down textures but there's a limit. Almost all major 360 games max out storage space. Even though they're using DVD-9s for storage they have a rough limit of around 7GB.

From what I read the added room in the Darkness was used to store whole movies instead of clips for the in-game television.

[cruzzer cruz]

Originally Posted by Shu76

Just goes to show you that M$ rushed out thier console,M$ couldn't use HD DVD at the time cause HD DVD wasn't ready yet,but yet wanted to get their console out before Sony did,now in the long run M$ is paying for it,As they are paying for not having a HDD in every console...their excuse? "We wanted to give consumers an option" Sony "forcing you" to buy blu-ray is nonsense. No one is forcing you to buy a PS3 in the first place.

I've always found that excuse to be completely ridiculous. "Forcing blu-ray" on us? Nobody is forcing us to buy Blu-ray movies. It's the format of the games and they cost exactly the same as 360 games do on DVD. They sold us a Blu-ray drive and a gaming console in one. The only thing I can think of really being forced upon me is the stupidity of these people.

[BIGSAPOTEER]

Originally Posted by cruzzer cruz

I've always found that excuse to be completely ridiculous. "Forcing blu-ray" on us? Nobody is forcing us to buy Blu-ray movies. It's the format of the games and they cost exactly the same as 360 games do on DVD. They sold us a Blu-ray drive and a gaming console in one. The only thing I can think of really being forced upon me is the stupidity of these people.

I agree with you buddy. I'm sick and tired of people saying that Sony is forcing Blu-ray among the other things that the PS3 has on us. They don't have to buy it if they don't want it. But they still bash the PS3 even though they don't have one. When the PS1 first came out with CD technology people complained also saying that it wasn't necessary bla bla bla bal. We all know that it was a wise decesion. Sony is doing the same thing with the integration of Blu-ray. Sony thinks about the future unlike M$ and even Nintendo where they replace their console every 3 years.

[jorg]

heres a link of some titles:
http://btjunkie.org/search?q=ps3&o=62

[Jack Torrance]

Originally Posted by cruzzer cruz

I've always found that excuse to be completely ridiculous. "Forcing blu-ray" on us? Nobody is forcing us to buy Blu-ray movies. It's the format of the games and they cost exactly the same as 360 games do on DVD. They sold us a Blu-ray drive and a gaming console in one. The only thing I can think of really being forced upon me is the stupidity of these people.

I agree 1000%. BD was chosen mainly because of it's huge storage capacity. Nobody is forcing it on you. If you don't want it... don't buy it!

Funny how with the 360, typically you have to buy M$ approved peripherals... you want a larger HD? Gotta buy the M$ one at their price! I think that is more like "forcing" something on to the consumer, where you don't have a choice. With the PS3, you want a larger HD? Go out and buy just about anyone on the market... and the same with headsets, etc.

If anything, the PS3 really does give you more options.

[warhawk21114]

Originally Posted by Jack Torrance

I agree 1000%. BD was chosen mainly because of it's huge storage capacity. Nobody is forcing it on you. If you don't want it... don't buy it!

Funny how with the 360, typically you have to buy M$ approved peripherals... you want a larger HD? Gotta buy the M$ one at their price! I think that is more like "forcing" something on to the consumer, where you don't have a choice. With the PS3, you want a larger HD? Go out and buy just about anyone on the market... and the same with headsets, etc.

If anything, the PS3 really does give you more options.

a'men to that. I wanna larger hd, i go out and buy one at a fraction of the cost per gb that the 360's hd costs. not to mention we complain that lots of stuff gets left out of games due to spacing, now we can get it in beautiful HD and still get what we want. sony knew what they were doing, catering to us in content and truly letting us customize our machines easily with more options and less cost.