My favourite topic is back…
So I saw an article this morning about why PS3 games install and while it didn’t provide any information we don’t know it did finish on a point I just have to dispute.
So why do they install? Basically it’s because the game can read data faster from the HDD than the Blu-ray drive… that’s it..
But now the guys over at TalkPlaystation.com finish of by saying…
It is understood that in the future, game installs for the Playstation 3 will be a thing of the past.
I have seen absolutely nothing to even begin to think that this is the case, the two examples of games not using installs are COD4 and Uncharted which have been released already.
Ever since the PS3 community allowed the first games to use an install virtually all games now install.
Why? Because it makes the dev’s job easier and since no one really minds (apart from some websites that won’t let it die) they will just keep doing it.
There is now no end to these ridiculous installs and I fear that they may come to the other consoles now that we have allowed it.
Source: TalkPlaystation.com
Last Updated: July 11, 2008
Gougedeye
July 11, 2008 at 08:40
“and since no one really minds”
Well that’s the point isn’t it? I will happily trade off the intensely minor inconvenience of a once off install to achieve faster load times.
kabraal
July 11, 2008 at 08:45
Is still supposed to be some flame thing again? Cause I liked that polygon article a lot more…
Anyhow if you a console with a hardware, developers will exploit it.
It goes like RAM>HDD>Optical.
Simple really.
kabraal
July 11, 2008 at 09:01
God, that didn’t come out to well…
Crud
July 11, 2008 at 09:44
hahahaha
LazySAGamer
July 11, 2008 at 10:00
lol no you have been more articulate in the past 😉
PaasHaas
July 11, 2008 at 10:20
Its easier and faster and a hdd is standard in the PS3.
The Blu-ray drive being slower would impact it aswell but not that greatly imho.
Other titles function fine without a install but it possibly took a bit more effort from the developers.
If the 360 had a standard hdd it would have installs aswell imo.
SlippyMadFrog
July 11, 2008 at 10:36
“If the 360 had a standard hdd it would have installs aswell imo.”
True, but I think it would have been for space issues instead of speed issues
LazySAGamer
July 11, 2008 at 10:41
The Xbox original had a HDD as standard and didn’t have installs…
Sony has started this and have to take responsibility for it.
PaasHaas
July 11, 2008 at 11:07
But the original xbox was more powerful than the ps2 in every way. Processor and Drive speed, I think so atleast.
They have different drive types and because the they had to get the disc loading right for the PS2 it was already there for the 360.
Thats for multiplat titles atleast.
Game development in general has changed ALLOT since then and installs is one of them imo.
Who knows maybe MS even forced developers to not use installs for the original xbox?
But as you said yourself, its seems like people dont mind the installs (I dont) and unless that changes installs are not going to anywhere and personally I think its better, from a technical standpoint, to not be limited or hindered by a optical discs drive speed.
Its not something sony started its simply where gaming has moving towards and since the same “advances” is not possible on the 360 the PS3 is being “blamed” for it.
kabraal
July 11, 2008 at 11:15
I’m sorry, saying that just because the xbox didn’t have the 360 wouldn’t have had it as well is at best, a wild assumption.
abe
July 11, 2008 at 11:31
But doesnt bluray still read faster than DVD?
PaasHaas
July 11, 2008 at 11:51
Nope, the 360’s drive is faster.
Later on (possibly now already) faster blu-ray drives would be available but the drive in the PS3 is only 2x Blu-ray drive afaik.
Theres other differences aswell such as blu-ray reading at a constant speed and dvd reading faster in the inside and slower on the outside of the disc.
There differences in the seek time aswell.
Jinja
July 11, 2008 at 11:57
“Sony has started this and have to take responsibility for it.”
Dude, you gotta let it go…
I know life as you know is over because of the installs, but you need to build that bridge and get over it.
Jinja’s last blog post..Fat Guy Stuck in Internet
Fox1
July 11, 2008 at 12:13
Blue-Ray has a higher transfer rate than DVD ➡
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc
PaasHaas
July 11, 2008 at 12:35
And I suppose you didnt bother to actually read that yourself I guess?
Didnt think so
kabraal
July 11, 2008 at 12:40
Yup, but I think the seek time of the BD disc is faster. Or is can cover alot more data while moving a certain distance.
But the PS3 has a 2x BD drive = 9MB/s transfer
360 has a 12x DVD drive = 16MB/s transfer
Fox1
July 11, 2008 at 12:51
It says on the left that Blue-Ray reads at 36Mbit/s at 1x. The 360 DVD-Rom only reads at 21.6Mbit/s.
PaasHaas
July 11, 2008 at 13:00
Ok I apologize, you actually did read it but could not comprehend how it applies to the discussion at hand.
Or did I miss something else?
kabraal
July 11, 2008 at 13:43
No, wait what? Afaik the PS3 has a 2x BD drive and the 360 has a 12x DVD drive
2x BD = 72Mbit/s = 9MB/s
12x DVD = 126.6Mbit/s = 16.2MB/s
JimBob
July 11, 2008 at 13:52
Except then we’d be reading millions of articles here about how awesome it is that you can install your games on your hard drive 😆
Milesh Bhana
July 11, 2008 at 19:25
Personally don’t care about installs. But what would be nice is if the install is transparent. Like as soon as you put in a disc and start playing, it streams the game from the DVD ,but installs in the background. Or rather, it caches data and leaves the cache. It’s alot more user friendly.
Milesh Bhana’s last blog post..Cost Price Sale @ BGR Games