The Official PS3 Thread Part II.
08-21-06 | 04:35 PM
#101
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Keizer, OR
Originally Posted by msdmoney
Will they be able to launch this year if the PS3 still isn't in production? I thought consoles went into production mid year to be available full scale for the end of the year, but maybe I am exaggerating the necessary lead time.
I thought there had already been reports that the PS3 was in production.
I thought there had already been reports that the PS3 was in production.
08-21-06 | 07:45 PM
#103
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally Posted by MaxF
That minimalist approach works well for menus on a portable like the PSP, when there's not much screen space. On a console, it just looks a little too sparse. Still, at least it's simple and uncluttered - which is more than you can say for the 360's dashboard.
08-21-06 | 07:53 PM
#104
Banned by request
Originally Posted by kvrdave
I may be wrong, but it feels like they are starting to write off the PSP.
08-22-06 | 12:44 PM
#105
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/22/wi...-ps3-pricetag/
Wow, 22GB. That blows my mind, especially for such an early title. This really makes the BR media worth it for the PS3 if this wouldn't even fit on 2 DL DVDs and things will only get bigger.
Insomniac Games, the guys behind the Ratchet and Clank series, were in the Big Apple showing off the latest build of their upcoming PS3 launch title, Resistance: Fall of Man. Kotaku had a Gawker cameraman on the scene to grab some video, and MTV News' Stephen Totilo managed the impossible. He extracted some positive press about the PS3 (Sony must be furious at Insomniac, this goes against their entire pre-launch strategy).
Has the PS3 buzz finally begun? We've been increasingly anxious that someone at Sony didn't get the memo that their latest and greatest was launching in a few scant months.
- Turns out that Blu-ray drive that every armchair analyst is convinced is a giant wooden equine built to penetrate our consumer-weary walls and then attack with an army of HD movies may actually be useful for gaming afterall. The game currently takes up 22GB! That's seven whole gee-bees more than a single layer HD-DVD disc that the Xbox 360 won't (?) be using for gaming.
- The Dual Shake functionality that was supposedly tacked on at the last minute ... well, it looks like it was still tacked on; nevertheless, it holds some serious promise. Ninety days before this thing has to be on store shelves the developers have still not activated the functionality on the controller, but they have added in some clever gameplay currently triggered with a button press. Shake off a melee attack by shaking the controller, or introduce the end of your rifle to their face with a quick jab of your right hand. Sure, you won't feel the vibration when that blow connects, but it's something.
- But there's also multiplayer. How will Sony's secretive service compare to the superlative Xbox Live? R: FoM will feature: "40-player online matches at launch; 60 levels of player progression while playing online; two-player offline co-op." 60 levels of player progression ... sounds like another popular online game. According to MTV News, Insomniac even promised "better, deeper support than any Xbox Live title."
Has the PS3 buzz finally begun? We've been increasingly anxious that someone at Sony didn't get the memo that their latest and greatest was launching in a few scant months.
08-22-06 | 01:12 PM
#106
Mod Emeritus
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 15,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
22GB for a ratchet and clank game? let me guess they have ingame cut scenes saved as hi def video instead of using the game engine? i don't see how they could take a game that was under 4GB in every previous version and make it 5 times larger. considering the source is a 1st party sony programmer i think someone should pass me the salt.
08-22-06 | 01:22 PM
#107
DVD Talk Hero
It's not for R&C, it's Resistance.
And if they are taking up that much space I think they need to work on their compression.
And if they are taking up that much space I think they need to work on their compression.
08-22-06 | 01:53 PM
#111
Banned
Most games nowadays are around 3-4 GB. Oblivion, as massive as it is, is only 5 GB. 22 GB is definitely a load of bullshit. If this game is truly 22 GB then it must have a load of FMV movies taking up like 18 GB. Will this game be like MGS (ie 80% movie, 20% game)?
There are a few PC games that are 5 GB (like Oblivion that I mentioned above). I am not aware of any games bigger than 5 GB.
Originally Posted by The Bus
What's the biggest PC game ever? I mean Half-Life 2 was only a few GB, right?
08-22-06 | 01:58 PM
#112
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by kgrogers1979
There are a few PC games that are 5 GB (like Oblivion that I mentioned above). I am not aware of any games bigger than 5 GB.
08-22-06 | 02:41 PM
#114
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by PixyJunket
Isn't Myst one of those massive FMV games though?
08-22-06 | 04:06 PM
#115
They mention it's 7gigs more than a SINGLE layer HD-DVD. Of course they neglect to mention that dual layer HD-DVDs are common while DL-BD's have yet to become a viable option for studios and I will assume developers.
08-22-06 | 04:16 PM
#116
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally Posted by Draven
It's not for R&C, it's Resistance.
And if they are taking up that much space I think they need to work on their compression.
And if they are taking up that much space I think they need to work on their compression.
08-22-06 | 04:18 PM
#117
Originally Posted by fumanstan
I wonder with the additional space offered by Blu-ray discs that compression methods used previously will be ignored simply due to the additional space. I worry if this will continue the trend of lengthy load times.
08-22-06 | 05:07 PM
#119
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Originally Posted by spainlinx0
They mention it's 7gigs more than a SINGLE layer HD-DVD. Of course they neglect to mention that dual layer HD-DVDs are common while DL-BD's have yet to become a viable option for studios and I will assume developers.
08-22-06 | 05:14 PM
#120
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally Posted by fumanstan
I wonder with the additional space offered by Blu-ray discs that compression methods used previously will be ignored simply due to the additional space.
08-22-06 | 05:34 PM
#122
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read that all regions will be on the disc for Resistance. So, I assume that's what's taking up all the space and not the game itself. That was in the PSM cover story btw. Either way, like someone mentioned before, if the space is there then why not use it?
08-22-06 | 06:26 PM
#123
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why make people pay a premium price for the console to utilize space that is unneccesary?
They would have been smarter saving a $200 (guessing) whack on the BD drive and using a standard DVD drive. Not only is it a proven technology, but it is cheaper. That means a lower MSRP which means more sales, or a lower production expense which means more profit if the (foolishly) decided to still pursue a $600 tag with this thing.
They would have been smarter saving a $200 (guessing) whack on the BD drive and using a standard DVD drive. Not only is it a proven technology, but it is cheaper. That means a lower MSRP which means more sales, or a lower production expense which means more profit if the (foolishly) decided to still pursue a $600 tag with this thing.
Last edited by Qui Gon Jim; 08-22-06 at 06:29 PM.
08-22-06 | 06:38 PM
#125
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Qui Gon Jim
Why make people pay a premium price for the console to utilize space that is unneccesary?
They would have been smarter saving a $200 (guessing) whack on the BD drive and using a standard DVD drive. Not only is it a proven technology, but it is cheaper. That means a lower MSRP which means more sales, or a lower production expense which means more profit if the (foolishly) decided to still pursue a $600 tag with this thing.
They would have been smarter saving a $200 (guessing) whack on the BD drive and using a standard DVD drive. Not only is it a proven technology, but it is cheaper. That means a lower MSRP which means more sales, or a lower production expense which means more profit if the (foolishly) decided to still pursue a $600 tag with this thing.
I agree with you 100%, but that's a whole other can of worms. I was just talking about what's on the disc since everyone was wondering what the hell was taking up so much space.