• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

DVD size limiting PGR4 (A true test in reading comprehension)

lol @ damage control :lol

"Whilst this wasn't a problem for our dev team, it was a problem fitting all this data onto a single DVD."

You can't be more specific then that.
 
I totally missed the thread, but can I ask?

Was there some crow served? I remember quite a few people claiming no such thing to be true, yet it was.

crow.jpg
 
rs7k said:
I don't know about the PS1 era because I was a PC gamer at the time.

Look, it's up to people who say Blu-Ray is needed to prove why it is. The entire industry disagrees with you, except for Sony and a few developers. The vast majority of titles that will be sold throughout this generation will ship on DVD, so if Blu-Ray is needed, how am I going to play games on the 360? It's really just that simple, it's not developers that dictate whether a media is needed or not, it's market conditions.

Once the PS3 sells more than the Gamecube on a monthly basis, maybe you can start making an argument for Blu-Ray in this generation. Until then, developers will have to force their titles down to DVD size.

Imagine you're a developer and you tell a major publisher (that isn't Sony) your game can't fit on DVD. The publisher listens and thinks about the increase in cost (25GB discs don't fill themselves) and the decrease in return because less people will be able to play your game. Publisher tells developer to find another publisher. That's the scenario that will be played out for the entire generation.

The mass market that both Sony and MS want to sell to don't know the extent of the difference between a game that ships on DVD or Blu-Ray, so any argument that Sony uses that it's better for games will be lost even if it's true.

/thread

Look, you could put CD drives in a PS3 or Xbox 360 and developers would somehow find a way to fit the content on a CD, but that doesn't mean that other storage wouldn't be needed or greatly beneficial. DVDs were being filled up last gen and now we want higher definition and quality content that is somehow not going to take up more space? Of course developers can find a way to keep the content limited to a DVD, just like developers found a way to keep content to fit on a Nintendo 64 cartridge, but that doesn't mean that bigger storage wasn't needed. We're barely into this generation and developers are already complaining about capacity restrictions of the format. Not just PS3 developers but now from one of Microsoft's premiere developers. How is this not so painfully obvious to people?
 
rs7k said:
I don't know about the PS1 era because I was a PC gamer at the time.

Look, it's up to people who say Blu-Ray is needed to prove why it is. The entire industry disagrees with you, except for Sony and a few developers. The vast majority of titles that will be sold throughout this generation will ship on DVD, so if Blu-Ray is needed, how am I going to play games on the 360? It's really just that simple, it's not developers that dictate whether a media is needed or not, it's market conditions.

Once the PS3 sells more than the Gamecube on a monthly basis, maybe you can start making an argument for Blu-Ray in this generation. Until then, developers will have to force their titles down to DVD size.

Imagine you're a developer and you tell a major publisher (that isn't Sony) your game can't fit on DVD. The publisher listens and thinks about the increase in cost (25GB discs don't fill themselves) and the decrease in return because less people will be able to play your game. Publisher tells developer to find another publisher. That's the scenario that will be played out for the entire generation.

The mass market that both Sony and MS want to sell to don't know the extent of the difference between a game that ships on DVD or Blu-Ray, so any argument that Sony uses that it's better for games will be lost even if it's true.

/thread

So to sum up what you have written, developers will develop for the lowest common denominator which is the Xbox 360 and its DVD. But that doest help your argument that blu-ray isn't needed. But since you're ignorant about the PS1 era, or maybe even the PS2, first generation games usually never take advantage of their disk capacity. It was only after that the developers adapted and found was to fill up the space and you can really see the difference. Until you can prove that blu-ray isn't needed, the thread isnt over yet :lol . But neither of us can ya as this console cycle has just started.
 
Marty Chinn said:
Look, you could put CD drives in a PS3 or Xbox 360 and developers would somehow find a way to fit the content on a CD, but that doesn't mean that other storage wouldn't be needed or greatly beneficial. DVDs were being filled up last gen and now we want higher definition and quality content that is somehow not going to take up more space? Of course developers can find a way to keep the content limited to a DVD, just like developers found a way to keep content to fit on a Nintendo 64 cartridge, but that doesn't mean that bigger storage wasn't needed. We're barely into this generation and developers are already complaining about capacity restrictions of the format. Not just PS3 developers but now from one of Microsoft's premiere developers. How is this not so painfully obvious to people?
True, more storage is always a good thing but this is PGR which has always been famed for it's graphical perfectionism i.e. Most developers would find a code solution rather than creating night specific textures. Most just wouldn't have such detailed backgrounds in a racer in the first place.

I think most developers will hit the limitations of the amount of work their staff can produce & the amount of funding they have before they hit the limitations of dvd9. However, developers will have to be frugal with their storage, they won't be able to replicate data for ease of disk access & publisher's logistics will be more complicated as they can't use multi language disks.

Still don't think it'll be a commercially crippling problem for MS though. If they could turn back time & add either HD dvd or waggle, which do you think it would be?
 
Another_visitor said:
If they could turn back time & add either HD dvd or waggle, which do you think it would be?
Waggle, without a doubt because it wouldn't have delayed them.

That said, I think they'd have chosen to do a little more testing on the hardware. :lol
 
Psychotext said:
Waggle, without a doubt because it wouldn't have delayed them.

That said, I think they'd have chosen to do a little more testing on the hardware. :lol
Very true. Waggle or an extra heatsink though? That's a tough one.
 
Why is this thread still going?

A first party developer for MS stated that the need to fit their game on a single DVD9 meant that they had to curtail their vision of the game.

That doesn't automatically render the DVD9 format useless.

It doesn't automatically mean that the Blu Ray format wins by default.

If MS insists on a game shipping on a single DVD9 then the developers understand that they have 7 or so gigabytes availible to them for the game. They then have to find a way round that that limitation or adjust their game accordingly.

Again, why is this thread still going?
 
Marty Chinn said:
Look, you could put CD drives in a PS3 or Xbox 360 and developers would somehow find a way to fit the content on a CD, but that doesn't mean that other storage wouldn't be needed or greatly beneficial. DVDs were being filled up last gen and now we want higher definition and quality content that is somehow not going to take up more space? Of course developers can find a way to keep the content limited to a DVD, just like developers found a way to keep content to fit on a Nintendo 64 cartridge, but that doesn't mean that bigger storage wasn't needed. We're barely into this generation and developers are already complaining about capacity restrictions of the format. Not just PS3 developers but now from one of Microsoft's premiere developers. How is this not so painfully obvious to people?

There's a big difference between needed and greatly beneficial. Let's look at Mass Effect, a game with crazy scope, amazing graphics, filled to the brim with dialogue, described as the best movie experience on a console so far, and it's on a single DVD. I'm not saying Blu-Ray is useless and that it's not needed EVENTUALLY. I'm talking from a business perspective, where developers NEED to fit all their content on DVD more than developers NEED Blu-Ray. I'm talking about some crazy assumptions that some people here have that at some point during the 360's cycles, projects will have to be moved to PS3 because the space on DVD isn't enough.

It's also that I don't think the 360's cycle will be long enough for the problem to become massive. By the time DVD is unworkable, we'll move on to Xbox 720.
 
rs7k said:
There's a big difference between needed and greatly beneficial. Let's look at Mass Effect, a game with crazy scope, amazing graphics, filled to the brim with dialogue, described as the best movie experience on a console so far, and it's on a single DVD. I'm not saying Blu-Ray is useless and that it's not needed EVENTUALLY. I'm talking from a business perspective, where developers NEED to fit all their content on DVD more than developers NEED Blu-Ray. I'm talking about some crazy assumptions that some people here have that at some point during the 360's cycles, projects will have to be moved to PS3 because the space on DVD isn't enough.

It's also that I don't think the 360's cycle will be long enough for the problem to become massive. By the time DVD is unworkable, we'll move on to Xbox 720.

By that theory then DVD isn't needed. Developers can write games to CD and make it work if they wanted to. DVD is greatly beneficial, not needed to next gen gaming. How big was the Warkhawk beta? If I recall, that could fit on a CD.
 
BloodAdo said:
Hate to see the 360 in 2008 :(....Alan Wake 2 DVD's confirmed....Splinter Cell Conviction 4 DVD's :(
What's the big problem with this?


Multi disk/CD/DVD games were always part of gaming, why are they intolerable all of a sudden?
 
Haunted One said:
What's the big problem with this?


Multi disk/CD/DVD games were always part of gaming, why are they intolerable all of a sudden?

Multi-Disc RPGs are fine. Multi-Disc works great in linear games. Multi-Disc does not work in non linear games especially when they have an online component to them.
 
Haunted One said:
What's the big problem with this?


Multi disk/CD/DVD games were always part of gaming, why are they intolerable all of a sudden?

Clearly because PS3 won't have them. Inferiority complex ftw.
 
Marty Chinn said:
Multi-Disc RPGs are fine. Multi-Disc works great in linear games. Multi-Disc does not work in non linear games especially when they have an online component to them.

if it's engineered properly, it can work just fine. it's not like there are a whole lot of massively open-ended do everything-in-any-order games out there. most are incredibly linear.

people act as if humans have never overcome obstacles in the history of man, so it's impossible to start.
 
soco said:
if it's engineered properly, it can work just fine. it's not like there are a whole lot of massively open-ended do everything-in-any-order games out there. most are incredibly linear.

people act as if humans have never overcome obstacles in the history of man, so it's impossible to start.

How do you engineer it around a racing game where you split tracks across discs. Structure the game so you only play certain tracks early on and then certain tracks later on? I suppose that could work but would limit variety and game flow design for each half of the game. Then there's the question of online. When you go to play online, and people want to change tracks or select a race, you wait for everyone to swap discs? Sure there are ways of doing it but the idea is to minimalize disc swapping which you don't do when you have a non linear game or have non linear ways of accessing data.
 
Marty Chinn said:
How do you engineer it around a racing game where you split tracks across discs. Structure the game so you only play certain tracks early on and then certain tracks later on? I suppose that could work but would limit variety and game flow design for each half of the game. Then there's the question of online. When you go to play online, and people want to change tracks or select a race, you wait for everyone to swap discs? Sure there are ways of doing it but the idea is to minimalize disc swapping which you don't do when you have a non linear game or have non linear ways of accessing data.
well, that's why PGR 4 is on one disc.
 
sakuragi said:
So to sum up what you have written, developers will develop for the lowest common denominator which is the Xbox 360 and its DVD. But that doest help your argument that blu-ray isn't needed. But since you're ignorant about the PS1 era, or maybe even the PS2, first generation games usually never take advantage of their disk capacity. It was only after that the developers adapted and found was to fill up the space and you can really see the difference. Until you can prove that blu-ray isn't needed, the thread isnt over yet :lol . But neither of us can ya as this console cycle has just started.


The market will determine whether Bluray is needed or not. Right now, with PS3 sales piddling along, the market perception doesn't look so hot for Bluray as the preeminent game storage medium. What if publishers start dropping titles because the PS3 continues to sell poorly? What will Bluray have accomplished then? Only time will tell, and no amount of fanboy-fueled blabber will decide the outcome any sooner.
 
Marty Chinn said:
By that theory then DVD isn't needed. Developers can write games to CD and make it work if they wanted to. DVD is greatly beneficial, not needed to next gen gaming. How big was the Warkhawk beta? If I recall, that could fit on a CD.

That's pretty dense. I mean, the only reason MS didn't go with anything but DVD is because of the cost of a HD-DVD/BR drive. Why the heck are we bringing CDs into this?

Most of the people commenting in this thread don't have any programming background, so it's useless to determine whether DVD is insufficient or not simply because Blu-Ray is that much bigger. The only thing we can determine its viability by is industry support of the 360, and great things are coming out of that, so what exactly is the problem?
 
rs7k said:
That's pretty dense. I mean, the only reason MS didn't go with anything but DVD is because of the cost of a HD-DVD/BR drive. Why the heck are we bringing CDs into this?

Most of the people commenting in this thread don't have any programming background, so it's useless to determine whether DVD is insufficient or not simply because Blu-Ray is that much bigger. The only thing we can determine its viability by is industry support of the 360, and great things are coming out of that, so what exactly is the problem?

But that's not what you were arguing. You were arguing there's no proof that there is NEED for Blu-Ray. The same could be applied to DVD. You can fit HD content games on a CD if you designed around the format. By your own reasoning from the previous post there is also no need for DVD. Sure most of the people commenting likely don't have a programming background, but I do have one. I also have a game development background so I do have perspective on this. Even if I had neither of them, simple logic would tell you if PS2 and Xbox games were filling DVDs, and developers on both next gen platform are saying that DVD is restricting their content this early in the console's lifespan, then there is a need for a higher capacity medium. You don't need 50 gigs of data, or 20 gigs of data. You simply need more than 7 gigs of data and we're already hitting that limit on some games. Can developers cut corners and content to keep it on a DVD? Sure. That doesn't mean there isn't a need.
 
Marty Chinn said:
But that's not what you were arguing. You were arguing there's no proof that there is NEED for Blu-Ray. The same could be applied to DVD. You can fit HD content games on a CD if you designed around the format. By your own reasoning from the previous post there is also no need for DVD. Sure most of the people commenting likely don't have a programming background, but I do have one. I also have a game development background so I do have perspective on this. Even if I had neither of them, simple logic would tell you if PS2 and Xbox games were filling DVDs, and developers on both next gen platform are saying that DVD is restricting their content this early in the console's lifespan, then there is a need for a higher capacity medium. You don't need 50 gigs of data, or 20 gigs of data. You simply need more than 7 gigs of data and we're already hitting that limit on some games. Can developers cut corners and content to keep it on a DVD? Sure. That doesn't mean there isn't a need.

That's not what he's arguing either because his argument doesn't exist in a vaccuum. It exists in the marketplace as it stands today. Blu-Ray is not NEEDED, as you put it, because there is a preponderance of satisfying game experiences, this gen, available on DVD. You had to fabricate a scenario in which CD was somehow a possible format for an Xbox 360 game to bolster your argument. He only had to look as far as the racks at your local Best Buy to back up his.
 
Marty Chinn said:
But that's not what you were arguing. You were arguing there's no proof that there is NEED for Blu-Ray. The same could be applied to DVD. You can fit HD content games on a CD if you designed around the format. By your own reasoning from the previous post there is also no need for DVD. Sure most of the people commenting likely don't have a programming background, but I do have one. I also have a game development background so I do have perspective on this. Even if I had neither of them, simple logic would tell you if PS2 and Xbox games were filling DVDs, and developers on both next gen platform are saying that DVD is restricting their content this early in the console's lifespan, then there is a need for a higher capacity medium. You don't need 50 gigs of data, or 20 gigs of data. You simply need more than 7 gigs of data and we're already hitting that limit on some games. Can developers cut corners and content to keep it on a DVD? Sure. That doesn't mean there isn't a need.

I totally understand your point. I was mainly arguing the point that the DVD limitation won't have any effect in the marketplace. The consumer doesn't mind paying $60 for Gears of War, and if games of that caliber is what we can expect from DVD, then it's not really a problem.

It's pretty much guaranteed that at some point, working with DVD will be like working with CD now. When that happens is not during this console cycle at all, but the next one, because I'm sure every dev thinking of a project has the DVD limitation in mind. Those that don't will take a risk and go to the PS3 exclusively (see Quantic Dream).

In effect, this gen won't reach its full potential, but I also think that this gen's hardware, had the 360 been equipped with HD-DVD, wouldn't reach the potential of the media. We need a bigger market to satisfy publishers investing in GB-hungry games.

We'll see what happens. I see the advantages of Blu-Ray, I've commented on it a lot before the PS3 launch, but then after the mediocre sales, it's been clear to me for a while we won't see much of its advantages.
 
It's not true, DVD9 gives them more space than they need! From Kotaku:

On July 27, a Bizarre Creations staffer posted on their forums that the upcoming Project Gotham Racing 4 won't have day and night versions of their tracks in the game because "Whilst this wasn't a problem for our dev team, it was a problem fitting all this data onto a single DVD. So we've worked around the problem by providing different lighting models per city."

Seems pretty straight forward, right? But when people sorta went quasi-ape-shit pointing out, rightfully so, that perhaps the medium (DVD) is holding back the game, Bizarre Creations cranked up their spin machine and issued a response under the befuddling headline "Wrong end of stick been grasped?"


In it they seem to blame "fanboys" for the spin on their story, instead of the person in their company who actually said the DVD didn't have enough space.

But the DVD has plenty of space, they say now: "DVD size is absolutely not a factor that we consider when designing our games... and PGR4 is no exception. DVD9 gives us more than we need to create a fabulous experience for you guys."

Notice the word "designing", does that mean that it is a factor when they actually get down to creating them? Because it certainly seems so. BC goes on to write that the issue of no night and day was one caused by developer time and resources, which directly contradicts what was posted in their forums. They had to pick and choose what they wanted to spend development time on and they went with dynamic weather rather than time of day.
 
BloodAdo said:
Hate to see the 360 in 2008 :(....Alan Wake 2 DVD's confirmed....Splinter Cell Conviction 4 DVD's :(

yeah because alan wake and splinter cell will have 10 massive cities. WTF is wrong with some of you people? seriously. :lol
 
Marty Chinn said:
How do you engineer it around a racing game where you split tracks across discs. Structure the game so you only play certain tracks early on and then certain tracks later on? I suppose that could work but would limit variety and game flow design for each half of the game. Then there's the question of online. When you go to play online, and people want to change tracks or select a race, you wait for everyone to swap discs? Sure there are ways of doing it but the idea is to minimalize disc swapping which you don't do when you have a non linear game or have non linear ways of accessing data.

this question is obviously a trap, but here goes. if you want me to design your game for you, you can send me a check :)

first, take a look at Gran Turismo 2 and see how it did it. it was 2 discs.

however, as your example points out, splitting up the tracks in single player isn't such a big deal. it doesn't really limit variety or design flow, though, of the second player. you can't simply pop in one disc and instantly have access to all tracks, perhaps, but if the game has a career mode, you'll be playing that as linearly as most other game. the flow is only interrupted, at the disc change, which is the same as with RE4 GC or an RPG.

the exact answer is going to depend upon the type of a racing game (or the specific game period), but splitting up tracks or cities on multiple discs is definitely an option. you've got the option, in many games, of including online on a separate disc. you've also got the option of compressing some textures more than others on certain discs and removing some models, depending on the single player aspect, which is something that wouldn't be noticed as much in racing games as you're flying around the paths. you've got all the same tracks on both discs, but depending upon the career modes, some items may be clearer on one disc than on another. with a decent engine, it may go unrecognized to many people. in addition, if the tools and api are there, you could allow the users to stream bits of the track from other people in the race, while people are sitting in the lobbies.

there's always going to be some sacrifice no matter which way you go, but the issue is to minimize it.

the easiest way in this case is simply to prevent it through other methods such as completely dynamic lighting instead of baked in lighting, but that causes other sacrifices, obviously.
 
ugh - i hate this DVD/BR thing, but here goes...

BR is DEFINITELY a bonus for games development, right now - it`s not really being used to it`s fullest on the PS3, but the fact that it is there gives developers options that they don`t have on the X360 in terms of storage. I just don`t see how that can be argued.

HOWEVER, there seems to be some people who think that the X360 is utterly doomed because of it`s DVD9 drive and limited space in comparison to the PS3. Now, i`m sure there will be games on the PS3 which are over 20-30-40 gig footprints and i`m sure when these games come we`ll get the "not possible on X360!" spiel or whatever. That may well be true, but the situation is going to be that that space is going to be required for a selection of games , not the majority of games.

I think people are overplaying this as something that all developers are crying out for - at the moment, i don`t think that`s the case - i`m absolutely sure developers love having the option for more capacity rather than not having it at all, but i don`t believe developers are massively constrained by DVD9 at this point in time to the point where they just can`t realise their visions for games within the format.
 
That Kotaku story makes it seem like they have enough space for a lot of shit, but they'd run out of space if they doubled every texture on every track in the game. Which, admittedly, would fill a lot of space very quickly.
 
If such a basic game like PGR cant cope with DVD... what would GT5 do to the 360.

Shoulda gone with HD DVD as standard. It will hurt them in the long run.
 
kammy said:
If such a basic game like PGR cant cope with DVD... what would GT5 do to the 360.

Shoulda gone with HD DVD as standard. It will hurt them in the long run.

HD-DVD would have hurt them even more. Wii would be totally dominating, as in, 90% marketshare. :lol
 
DCharlie said:
ugh - i hate this DVD/BR thing, but here goes...

BR is DEFINITELY a bonus for games development, right now - it`s not really being used to it`s fullest on the PS3, but the fact that it is there gives developers options that they don`t have on the X360 in terms of storage. I just don`t see how that can be argued.

HOWEVER, there seems to be some people who think that the X360 is utterly doomed because of it`s DVD9 drive and limited space in comparison to the PS3. Now, i`m sure there will be games on the PS3 which are over 20-30-40 gig footprints and i`m sure when these games come we`ll get the "not possible on X360!" spiel or whatever. That may well be true, but the situation is going to be that that space is going to be required for a selection of games , not the majority of games.

I think people are overplaying this as something that all developers are crying out for - at the moment, i don`t think that`s the case - i`m absolutely sure developers love having the option for more capacity rather than not having it at all, but i don`t believe developers are massively constrained by DVD9 at this point in time to the point where they just can`t realise their visions for games within the format.
That's the thread right there.
 
Those screens are gorgeous, and there's a significant yet subtle change in lighting most of them. This is a total non-event.
 
pilonv1 said:
Those screens are gorgeous, and there's a significant yet subtle change in lighting most of them. This is a total non-event.
I must admit that I was worried for the game when I first heard the news, but those screens to look fantastic.
 
Top Bottom