No oodle texture is RDO compress to native BCn before it goes on disk, for ANY console or PC.
Oddle is from Rad, its similar to BcPack and is like a JPEG to image before you make it native format (BC1-7) and store it on SSD.
The decompress is just Kraken (ps5) or Zlib (XSX) into memory, not much difference but you can look it up if you wish.
So both consoles are doing same thing, RDO compress to BCn (oodle or BcPack) and then small compress onto disk (ps5 Kraken or XSX zlib)....
The textures in BCn format are not comprerssed much by kraken or zlib, so you have to have a lossy change of the raw file, think Tiff to JPEG for simpicity (but more compelx with Lamda and RDO so more like Mp4 in a way).
I remember when Doom's 20MB was a lot for a game.
So the some PS4/Xbox game is going to be smaller because of not duplicating and because games are going to be compressed on disk. But a developer can add as much data as they want. There's no limit to that. They might try to build bigger games and so they use up more space. They might want to try and be overly detailed and eat up space because it's practical to do it now.Wait...weren't people in other threads saying how game sizes should actually go down because assets no longer need to be duplicated or something like that?
Because if the standard next gen will be 200gb+ the storage on both new consoles will be laughably bad, and probably expensive as hell to expand.
Ps3 games already were up to 50gb in size. Many, many duplicates because of the disc's.What a joke. The fact that gazmes went from 7gb on average during the PS3 era, to 50gb for PS4, was already ridiculous. Now we're talking 200gb? Forget it. I won't even bother with new games.
Like red dead 2 and ffviir?
Right. Well I meant 360 games. They got those games to fit on a dvd9 and most of those third party games looked and performed better on 360. PS3 had blu ray. So devs didn't bother with much compression because they didn't need to. But it's quickly becoming insane. 200gb for a game? That's crazy and so unnecessary.Ps3 games already were up to 50gb in size. Many, many duplicates because of the disc's.
Yeah, I don't claim to know a lot about this stuff, but aren't higher-quality assets going to weigh in heavier than they do now? So even with no duplication, if everything takes more space, then maybe we'd see the same sizes as now for much higher quality, with some cases of games getting bigger? I'm just curious.No assets duplication because of instant random access and no need for Lightmaps due to better GPU capabilities and power says otherwise to me, I think that makes sense to be honest, at the very least it should stay the same or not raise too much.