Post by: RickPowers on March 03, 2003, 09:26:40 AM
Everyone is wondering if this is the technology we'll see in the next PlayStation, and possibly the next GameCube as well.
So, what's this thing look like? Glad you asked.
http://www.avland.co.uk/sony/bdzs77/index.htm
Talk amongst yourselves ...
Post by: PaLaDiN on March 03, 2003, 09:34:07 AM
What could you possibly do with a 23 GB game?
Post by: GokuSSJ2 on March 03, 2003, 09:49:03 AM
Post by: kennyb27 on March 03, 2003, 09:50:11 AM
QuoteAnswer: Anything you want. This size gives you alot of freedom to compile old games create multi game discs, extremely large games, or just short change the consumer and fill up 2GB. Obviously they need to cut the price tag, even though it wouldn't be as high as $4,000 for a console, because it wouldn't need all the specialties of that player, but it will be pricey.
What could you possibly do with a 23 GB game?
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2003, 09:51:43 AM
Have lots and lots of FMV of course!
Nobody has to use all 23GB but developers would at least now have the freedom to put whatever they want in a game without worrying about disc size. No more mulitple disc games and no more compressed video.
Personally I don't really care about how much space game discs have in the next generation as long as it's not smaller than today's games and all three consoles have the same amount of storage space so that developers can't use the "Gamecube has a smaller disc" excuse.
It says in the article Rick linked to that blank discs are £20 each. Ouch. Those have to come down in price before they get used in videogame consoles. I sure as hell wouldn't want to pay higher prices for games where developers don't even use all of the space paid for.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on March 03, 2003, 09:59:09 AM
Also considering that this new DVD disc has 4times higher bandwith than standard DVDs expect to just see way more info/graphics/textures/physics to be pumped through the system and on the screen.
And im sure Nintendos new console will have it too. Knowing Nintendo they will definetely try to have an even more powerful console than the PS3 and Xbox Next. Which leads to my question.
Do you believe that it even matters to the human eye which next gen system you will have?
The system power now already is closer than ever, and in the next gen I believe that the eye will no longer
be able to see the differences in graphics quality.
I think the next Gen will be the last because the already amazing graphics we have now, and then expecting 500times more polygons
and 20texture layers and all new fancy techniques applied.
So how would you be able to tell the difference between 1billion or 1.2billion polygons?
Post by: kennyb27 on March 03, 2003, 10:10:14 AM
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on March 03, 2003, 10:21:59 AM
I guess PS3 and Xbox Next will be more than gamestations anyway, more like Multimedia devices also for gaming.
I want the next Nintendo to be extremely powerful (ideally the most powerful, it wont matter anyway, but just for the fanboys sake
)and have good online support but other than that just a raw gaming machine.
You guys thoughts about the next gen?
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 03, 2003, 10:34:46 AM
Also I don't think the next generation will be the last, I mean there will be new techniques applied to games like Cel-shading is applied to games today. As we go along the history more and more techniques will be invented that require the next-gen technology.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 03, 2003, 10:37:12 AM
Post by: Tsunekazu on March 03, 2003, 10:54:26 AM
Toshiba and NEC are developing their own blue laser format, but it will be backwards compatiable with red laser discs, so anyone who buys their DVD player will be able to watch both DVD and HD-DVD movies. This would also make more sense for a gaming console. If Nintendo choose to use this format, not only could the games take advantage of the space, but they could also include both a DVD and HD-DVD player.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2003, 11:08:10 AM
This brings up another issue. If these new formats are used in the next generation of consoles how will this relate to backwards compatibility? That's kind of an expected feature now.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on March 03, 2003, 11:10:53 AM
Imagine Blu Ray GODS, with like 12GB
Post by: Infernal Monkey on March 03, 2003, 11:17:27 AM
Imagine what the like of Square will do with 23 GB?
- Final Fantasy 47
Greeted with two hour intro. Take one step foward, random battle, 40 minute video clip, next step, meet new character, watch hour long video. Throw game in bin.
I smell the likes of 3DO games! *Runs for dear life*
Post by: Agent on March 03, 2003, 11:24:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: kennyb27
Hemmorrhoid, I think this is why Nintendo will shine and Microsoft will fall. With all the systems specs so close, it seems very unlikely that the hardware will "matter" anymore. And thats where Nintendo comes in and Microsoft loses. Nintendo has some of the most amazing franchises, i.e. Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, MarioKart, Animal Crossing, we all know that (except those few blind Xbox followers). And this is why I believe Nintendo will stay in the video game market for a while. However, I do not see the next Gen being the last one because, well, it's a business, it's profitable. It will be stretched even past its height as a market.
And this is what we call a blind nintendo follower...
As for backwords compadibility. Well the programming language matching the next consoles also helps...
Post by: Perfect Cell on March 03, 2003, 11:24:06 AM
Post by: Tsunekazu on March 03, 2003, 11:26:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
This brings up another issue. If these new formats are used in the next generation of consoles how will this relate to backwards compatibility? That's kind of an expected feature now.
I wouldn't say backwards compatability is expected. Only 1 recent console has been backwards compatible. I would not say it's expected, perhaps by some, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's an expected feature. Atari had it, Game Boy had it, Playstation had it. That isn't much. Just because two disc systems are released in a row doesn't mean they are expected to be backwards compatible, Saturn and Dreamcast were not.
Post by: Clonester on March 03, 2003, 11:34:43 AM
Would developers have the option of using either a Blu-Ray disk (HD-DVD? not familiar with these formats) or a normal DVD in the Toshiba/NEC? That would be great for developers, so that large games that would normally make a large profit (like a FF) could use the large Blu-Ray whatever disks and other developers who aren't making a large game or cannot afford to use a more expensive disk can use a normal DVD.
Quote:
"It says in the article Rick linked to that blank discs are £20 each." -Ian Sane
Ouch. That's expensive. And don't these disks need to be stored in a special case or something like that? If that really expensive cost doesn't change in the next several years, there will be a slim to none chance that these disks will be used in next-gen consoles. Of course, if demand increases, price will decrease. If this technology is going to be used, console makers had better pray that this storage medium becomes popular.
Post by: Joey on March 03, 2003, 11:47:38 AM
Quote
Imagine what the like of Square will do with 23 GB?
Maybe they could make an FMV moive longer than the Spirits Within.
Post by: sequoia on March 03, 2003, 11:51:35 AM
Post by: theaveng on March 03, 2003, 12:26:25 PM
I see the new Blu-Rays have cases. That sucks, because they'll be big, bulky and take up lots of space. Right now I can store 200 game DVDs (minus case) in a large notebook. I won't be able to do that with the Blu-Rays.
Even with all that space (23 gigabytes), the new Blu-Rays still hold only *2* hours of HDTV!
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 03, 2003, 01:15:15 PM
Post by: RahXephon on March 03, 2003, 01:18:40 PM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 03, 2003, 01:24:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: RahXephon
All the problems we have now with piracy will be gone by then.
....are we talking decades, that is until quantum computing becomes feasible?
Post by: JurassicParkFan on March 03, 2003, 01:37:18 PM
Post by: RahXephon on March 03, 2003, 02:03:16 PM
And off topic go herego here. You can thank me later
Post by: NickNiteQ93 on March 03, 2003, 04:01:17 PM
Post by: ThePerm on March 03, 2003, 07:11:48 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 03, 2003, 07:37:35 PM
And as for the discs being pricy, that will fall, especially when Panasonic begin pumping out hybrids of the new terabyte discs on the market. And with technology in media and the like advancing like it is its sure to fall fast especially since we are still looking at least another year and a half before the consoles hit the market, so anything is possible.
Post by: Slab on March 03, 2003, 07:52:28 PM
here's the link
fluorescent technology
oh...near the bottom of the article...it says that it costs about $0.76 to produce a disc. That's pretty damn cheap.
edited: to make the darn link work...lol
Post by: deminisma on March 03, 2003, 08:01:03 PM
this is GAMECUBE-RELATED ONLY discussion. No GCN2, no PS3.
GAMECUBE ONLY
mwhahahaha -sound familiar, Rick?
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on March 03, 2003, 09:48:17 PM
Quote
Hell I expect nothing less than about 600 million raw from these next consoles. perhaps maybe even edging into the billion mark? That might be a little much, but those kind of graphics would blow me away.
Why not more, first compare the advances. Say PS2 can do 60million raw, the PSX could do like 3000.
Now take that advance and consider realistic possibilites and the new PS3 processor Cell (1terraflop) which is supposebly 1000 times as a Pentium 4 2000. Why not push 1-2billion polys?
And expect the same graphical prowess in GCN 2 or Xbox next. Wonder what system will be the most 'powerful'
Post by: Infernal Monkey on March 03, 2003, 11:07:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: deminisma
wrong forum, buddy.
this is GAMECUBE-RELATED ONLY discussion. No GCN2, no PS3.
GAMECUBE ONLY
mwhahahaha -sound familiar, Rick?
Hey yeah.... *Gets out pitch fork*
Damn you big wigs and your abilities to bend the rules!
*Throws pitch fork and manages to stab own foot with it*
Post by: Termin8Anakin on March 04, 2003, 12:49:52 AM
"What the hell is a terraflop?!"
Is that good?
And if Sony have come up with it, I think Nintendo would be doing something better.
Post by: Tael on March 04, 2003, 02:24:49 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Termin8Anakin
In Marty McFly tone:
"What the hell is a terraflop?!
10^12 floating-point operations per second.
Post by: Scoobert on March 04, 2003, 03:38:10 AM
Knowing Sony though, they'll just use normal DVD's again with maybe some different forms of encryption.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on March 04, 2003, 04:21:46 AM
it was more like 700-1500 right at the beginning, when the PS2 was released it was already down to like 200$
Terraflop is one billion flops, which is damn fast.
The Cell (developed by Sony/IBM) works at 1terraflop, but the rumored GCN processor was supposed to have 2terraflops (but after all, thats just rumors).
Post by: theaveng on March 04, 2003, 04:48:01 AM
QuoteSony has a 50-50 record. They flopped with Beta & Mini-disc. But they suceeded with CDs and DVDs. I'm betting this Blu-Ray technology will be adopted by the DVD Consortium.
Originally posted by: BlkPaladin
Depends on how much Sony really wants to make this a standard. Which I don't see happening. Sony has tried things but kept them prepitory much like Nintendo and their game formats. The last time they tried to set a standard it didn't go well. (Beta Tape)
Post by: RickPowers on March 04, 2003, 05:00:54 AM
)This is posted here because I wanted you guys to talk about something that really matters. This is very interesting stuff, and all three consoles are rumored to be heading in this direction. If you guys want to ride my ass about "breaking my own rules", I'll be happy to shut this one down too. Is that what you want? No? Then quit whining about it.
Back on topic,
I'm fairly certain that the first recordable DVD products came in at a similar price point, and then dropped precipitously. It's entirely possible that we might see this technology (or something VERY close) in a console by 2005. Or it might miss this generation, it's very hard to tell.
It sure as hell is cool looking, though.
Post by: EL Pollo DIablos on March 04, 2003, 05:18:11 AM
Thats how they could use the 23 gb.
El Pollo Diablos
Post by: theaveng on March 04, 2003, 05:23:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
I love how all the rules are attributed directly to me, and that when ever anyone is told not to do something, or is banned, it's always MY fault, whether I did it or not.
Who makes the rules then?
And yes, I think this topic should be closed. Or moved. Just as you deleted the message from the innocent Newbie who asked if he should buy a GameCube. It doesn't make sense to enforce the rules for some people, deleting their messages, and allow other people to break the rules. Everyone should be treated equally.
Post by: RickPowers on March 04, 2003, 07:02:32 AM
Quote
Just as you deleted the message from the innocent Newbie who asked if he should buy a GameCube.
How do YOU know who deleted that message? Everyone on PGC's staff is a moderator, so when something says that it was moved or deleted by "Planet GameCube Moderator", it wasn't necessarily always ME. (For the record, it's a pretty silly thing to come to a GAMECUBE forum and ask if you should buy a GameCube.)
This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. I don't mind being the fall guy, but just keep in mind that it's not always me. The rules were made partly by concensus, and largely by problems that the USERS have created. In fact, every off-limits topic is a direct result from conversations that got way out of hand. If you want someone to blame for the strictness of our rules, you should be looking at yourselves.
That said, for every person that complains that we're too strict, ten others thank us for it. The signal-to-noise ratio is much higher as a result, and I'm not going to apologize for it, since it's having the intended effect.
Post by: PaLaDiN on March 04, 2003, 07:14:32 AM
That link you provided seems to be a burner... but where's the player? Did they skip over that? Or is Blu-Ray burning by definition?
Regardless, the price needs to go DOWN, and FAST.
Post by: RickPowers on March 04, 2003, 07:31:24 AM
Post by: Christberg on March 04, 2003, 07:39:17 AM
Go and compare the price of a DVD recorder and a regular DVD player for your computer and then think about it some more. If you go back 2 years ago, the cost of DVD recorders was ridiculously high, in the several thousand dollar range. In fact, at launch the cost was very similar to this unit for something with similar functionality in a home unit. Last I checked you could buy a home DVD recordable for around 500 bucks.
The drive itself can't really be much more expensive to manufacture than any other drive, honestly. The only thing different is the type of laser used, and a proprietary interface but that doesn't really change the cost either.
I think that it's not only feasible, but very possible.
Once again though, I'm hoping Nintendo goes with a smaller disc form factor to help decrease piracy even more because around 2007 or so recorders for this thing will be affordable enough that piracy could be a real problem for them, kind of like the PS2.
I think it's very likely next generation that Nintendo WILL, in fact, have the most powerful unit, simply because it's not going to include TiVo, web browsing, picture editing, and all the other garbage that will very likely be in competing systems. Essentially they'll be able to make a competitive unit that for the same cost will only have gaming hardware in it, and that in my estimation is a good thing. My computer already does all that stuff much more efficiently. Besides which, does anybody really think they'll need another DVD player by 2005? I sure hope not.
Post by: TAYREL713 on March 04, 2003, 07:46:51 AM
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on March 04, 2003, 08:10:35 AM
Especially today after the new partnership between ATI and Nintendo was announced. Since IBM is doing the PS3 processor and Xbox Next might sport some Intel processor wheres Nintendos processing unit from? NEC?!
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 04, 2003, 08:49:58 AM
But as for the central processor there are plenty of other sources, they could go with NEC, but they could also go with Motorola which made the GBA's processor. Then their is AMD, or they can set out of get new talent like they did with MoSys.
As for the disc they wouldn't go with Blu-Ray for obvious reasons. They may deepen their partnership with Panasonic and maybe score a hybrid of the new disc they came up with. But truely DVD should stay the standard until the developers start to figure out how to fill over one DVD because the excess money it costs for these new formats will be pointless if the developers can't fill them in the time frame they have to get games out to be viable. Because there is only so much code you can do in a set period of time and developement cycles are being pushed into a shorter time frame for the third party developers. Personally I kind of like the idea of putting the disc in a tray with a flash chip in it that could elimate the need for memory cards. (Like SD technology.
)Note: You moved this as I was writting this. I kind of made my heart jump seeing it disappear.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 04, 2003, 10:41:25 AM
Post by: nolimit19 on March 04, 2003, 12:09:09 PM
Post by: rodtod on March 04, 2003, 02:21:18 PM
Think about it, the technological jump from Vinyl records to laser discs is very much like going from cd's to dvd's. Laser discs were basically the same size as vinyl records, but they held a lot more data. Going from laser discs to cd's though meant a decrease in the actual size of the disc. If there's a pattern here, then the next generation of disc media will not only hold more space, but the medium will be smaller in size.
Nintendo would probably never want to use a regular cd-sized type of medium. The GCN's minidiscs are proof enough.
Post by: Tael on March 04, 2003, 04:01:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hemmorrhoid
Terraflop is one billion flops, which is damn fast.
Wrong! 1 billion flops is a gigaflop. Go learn the prefixes for units of measurement again.
Post by: MikeHrusecky on March 04, 2003, 04:21:09 PM
It's apparently working out for them, other than the obvious storage limitation... well granted that turned into a considerable problem fairly quickly.An 8 cm Blu-ray-esque format would mathematically come out to about 9 GB of storage per disc/layer, no? For 2006, I think that'd be enough. Whether that'll last to 2011ish, who knows?
Post by: deminisma on March 04, 2003, 05:29:51 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 04, 2003, 07:45:28 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on March 05, 2003, 06:30:46 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/03/04/blue.dvd.reut/index.html
Post by: theaveng on March 05, 2003, 12:39:05 PM
QuoteComputers released around 1980 used audio cassettes for storing games. My own computer, the Commodore=64 had games available for both disk and tape. The flaw with tapes are (1) Not randomly accessible (2) sloooooow. Data on disc can be read randomly (center/edge/middle... it doesn't matter) and much, much faster.
Originally posted by: TAYREL713
I recall reading an article about the founder of video talking about a video game system based on magnetic tapes (basically VCR tapes). The guy swore it would have been the truth if it could be implemented
QuoteWhen CDs were introduced, players came first. Recordable CDs didn't arrive until ~10 years later. Ditto DVDs: Players in 1995/recorders ~2000. So it's natural to think Blu-Rays would be players first/recorders second... following the same pattern.
Stand-alone players are pointless right now. There's no pre-recorded content yet.
Post by: RickPowers on March 05, 2003, 02:14:41 PM
Quote
When CDs were introduced, players came first. Recordable CDs didn't arrive until ~10 years later. Ditto DVDs: Players in 1995/recorders ~2000. So it's natural to think Blu-Rays would be players first/recorders second... following the same pattern.
That's what we call "anecdotal evidence". You're forgetting about all the formats that had RECORDERS first, like audio cassette, VHS tape, Betamax, etc.
Just as in those cases, you needed the recorder first, because there was no pre-recorded content that would sell players. In this case, the driving force is the need to record HDTV content in it's native format.
For the record, this will also play audio CDs as well as current DVDs. It's also largely using the same technology as was already implemented in DVD recorders, just with a different wavelength laser. In the cases you stated, the recording technology for those formats weren't perfected yet.
Post by: EggyToast on March 05, 2003, 02:50:54 PM
I don't see how it would work for an "on the fly" burnable technology, though. Besides having to prep the disk by spinning it up to the right speed and marking a section for burning, you'd have to burn the disk and then close the data and add it to the TOC on the disk so the system knows where that data is. Doing that on a disk takes up significantly more time than simply saving to either a harddrive or non-volatile flash memory. And at the price point, it's doubtful we'd see anything with recordability in consumer products, let alone a *game console*, anytime soon. Have consoles ever been truly cutting edge for technology? No. They're kinda close to cutting edge for gaming, but PCs still have them beat by a wide margin. Even something like DivX isn't new -- the technology has been around for many years before Nintendo offered to use it.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 05, 2003, 04:10:03 PM
Post by: RickPowers on March 05, 2003, 04:16:45 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 05, 2003, 04:48:39 PM
Post by: RickPowers on March 05, 2003, 05:15:04 PM
A DVD holds 4.7GB on one side, single layer. A DVD can hold approximately SEVEN CDs worth of data.
You can't simply double the data and have your logic hold fast. It's not a multiplication problem, it's an additive problem. Some games that came at the END of the PlayStation's life span were on FOUR discs. That STILL can fit on a SINGLE DVD. By your logic, most games should be one two DVDs NOW, but won't be getting any bigger in another three years. It just doesn't work. Game size doesn't increase exponentially as years go by.
For what it's worth, Devil May Cry is only two DVD discs as a gimmick. The complete game is on each disc, but with different characters. Xenosaga is over one standard DVD because of the sheer amount of FMV used in the game, plus all the game data.
Post by: Tael on March 06, 2003, 12:12:43 AM
Software is a gas. It expands to fill its container.
Post by: [o]CUBE on March 06, 2003, 03:02:56 AM
Post by: pedhead01 on March 06, 2003, 07:00:15 AM
18 more days!!!!!!!
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 06, 2003, 10:14:20 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 06, 2003, 10:18:17 AM
- cube: that may be the longest run on sentence I have ever seen. Could you split that up a little bit?
Post by: [o]CUBE on March 06, 2003, 10:19:23 AM
Post by: theaveng on March 07, 2003, 03:17:10 PM
QuoteIf you look at the sizes of games, you'll notice that each new generation picks up where the last left off:
Originally posted by: RickPowers
Some games that came at the END of the PlayStation's life span were on FOUR discs. That STILL can fit on a SINGLE DVD. By your logic, most games should be one two DVDs NOW, but won't be getting any bigger in another three years. It just doesn't work. Game size doesn't increase exponentially as years go by.
Atari 2600 - 2K to 32K
Original Nintendo - 32K to 512K
Super Nintendo - 512K to 4 megabytes
Nintendo64 - 4 megabytes to 64 megabytes
In each generation, the smallest game was equal to the largest game of the previous generation. If we assume that trend continues, we can make an educated guess that the PS2's smallest game will equal the PS1's largest game... 4 CDs or ~2400 megabytes.
By year 2, PS2 games would hit 4800 megabytes (like FF10). This is year 3 of the PS2, and already the 8500 megabyte DVD has been maxed out by Xenosaga. Would anyone be surprised to see a 17,000 megabyte/dual DVD game in Year 4? Not me. There's a definite demand for Blu-Rays or similar ultra-large discs.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 07, 2003, 03:45:11 PM
Keep in mind that the larger games of the current time are generally laden with FMV. Xenosaga is not actually filled with 8.5 gigabytes of pure gameplay- FMV, I'm sure, takes up a huge portion of that size. BUT, since the quality of console graphics has risen exponentially, there's been less and less need for FMV. In a couple generations, no one will use FMV- it'll be more expensive, take long, and produce results that are little better than in game graphics, if at all. That'll free up a TON of space for actual gameplay, and when the day coems thyat a disc is filled with more than 8 gigabytes of pure gameplay is the day we spend literally years playing the game.
Anyway, I don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but has anyone heard of Panasonic's new venture? They're said to be designing a disc that will hold roughly 10 TERAbytes of information (that's about 10,000 gigabytes, or about 10,000,000,000,000 bytes). They're not even planning on maknig availalbe to consumer for like 10 years, but I thought it was interesting. Supposedly it uses soem type of holographic layering device.
Post by: Tsunekazu on March 07, 2003, 05:24:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Christberg
Go and compare the price of a DVD recorder and a regular DVD player for your computer and then think about it some more. If you go back 2 years ago, the cost of DVD recorders was ridiculously high, in the several thousand dollar range.
Not quite. I've had a DVD-RW/CD-RW since they were first introduced at MacWorld in Feb. 2001. It wasn't cheap, but the computer itself was only 3 grand. Keep in mind, this was not only the first computer to ship with a DVD-RW/CD-RW, but also the first to ship with a GeForce3, so the price of "new hardware" wasn't all in the drive. It's been more than 2 years since it's seen the several thousand dollar range.
Quote
The drive itself can't really be much more expensive to manufacture than any other drive, honestly. The only thing different is the type of laser used, and a proprietary interface but that doesn't really change the cost either.
That's questionable. A big plus for the Toshiba/NEC format is that it can use the same manufacturing process as red-laser discs, so they won't have to use any different plants. Exactly what is required for Blu-Ray, I am not sure, but from my understanding, it needs to be manufactured differently.
Quote
Once again though, I'm hoping Nintendo goes with a smaller disc form factor to help decrease piracy even more because around 2007 or so recorders for this thing will be affordable enough that piracy could be a real problem for them, kind of like the PS2.
The question remains: How well did it really work? For a disc that no one else should be able to make, we have the Freeloader and Action Replay which not only work on Gamecube, but even can be set on the fly for region. To me it sounds like the system has been broken. What would've been a simple way to prevent boot discs? A slot-loading drive with forced-restart when you hit the eject button. There are many simple ways to deter piracy, but considering mass storage is likely for Nintendo's next console, they will have a much greater battle ahead of them than discs.
Quote
Besides which, does anybody really think they'll need another DVD player by 2005? I sure hope not.
It depends on how quickly HD-DVD progresses. We're supposed to see an HD-DVD player and movies by the end of this year, but people are saying that 2005 is more likely. So the early adopters get it, the ones who have the HDTVs to take advantage of it, and then the general public becomes interested by summer 2005. Say consoles launch in fall 2005, including a HD-DVD player might be a huge selling point. It's all "what-ifs" right now, but don't rule anything out. A DVD player helped jump-start PS2 sales in Japan, who knows what may work in a few years.
Post by: theaveng on March 08, 2003, 06:03:54 PM
QuoteYes, I knew someone would say that, but I don't see what relevance it has. Whether a game is 8.5 gigabytes of FMV or 8.5 gigabytes of program, the game still uses and requires all of that storage space. Nothing's changed.
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
"By year 2, PS2 games would hit 4800 megabytes (like FF10). This is year 3 of the PS2, and already the 8500 megabyte DVD has been maxed out by Xenosaga."
Keep in mind that the larger games of the current time are generally laden with FMV.....
As for your prognostication that someday FMVs won't be necessary, I agree. But I don't expect that to happen until the distant future (2010), and so don't consider it relevant to the *current* present situation: DVDs are full... HDTV-quality video requires ~4 times as much storage space as standard video... therefore some new storage media needs to be used. Blu-Ray has the potential to be that new media.
I fully expect we'll see a dual-layer, dual DVD game (17 gigabytes) before the end of the PS2's life. Maybe Final Fantasy 12 or Xenosaga 2. Blu-Rays would be ideal for such games.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 09, 2003, 01:30:13 PM
Post by: RickPowers on March 09, 2003, 02:35:29 PM
Quote
The only relevance in that it's 8.5 gigs of FMV is that in the future FMV won't be necessary, making 8.5 gig games very, very rare. I realize that it'll be a loooooong time before FMV will be completely unneccessary- that's why I said "a couple generations", which I think will be no sooner than 2010. I'll be very surprised if we get two or three more consoles down the line by 2010.
Exactly, as graphics get better, there will be less and less need for pre-rendered video, and more cutscenes will be done in-engine. FMV is incredibly costly in disk space as compared to in-engine instructions.
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 09, 2003, 06:33:41 PM
Post by: Tael on March 09, 2003, 06:50:22 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 09, 2003, 07:08:41 PM
Post by: rodtod on March 09, 2003, 07:11:47 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 09, 2003, 07:16:02 PM
Post by: theaveng on March 10, 2003, 06:15:33 AM
QuoteHa! Sounds like Bill Gates (or whoever said it): "No one will ever need more than 640 kilobytes in a computer."
Originally posted by: BlkPaladin
So my point is vaild that games can't get much bigger than they are already.
I'm going to bookmark this sentence, and then bring it back up in 2005 when the new PS3/X-box2/GameCube2 consoles are released. I bet games on those systems will easily exceed 20 gigabytes.
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 10, 2003, 06:27:26 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 10, 2003, 11:58:25 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 10, 2003, 12:24:40 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 10, 2003, 02:01:39 PM
Post by: Tael on March 10, 2003, 03:30:49 PM
Post by: theaveng on March 10, 2003, 04:41:57 PM
QuoteBecause the size of programs (and games) has always grown:
Originally posted by: mouse_clickertheaveng: What makes you think games will exceed 20 gigs?
Atari 2600 - 2K to 32K maximum size
Original Nintendo - 512K
Super Nintendo - 4000K
Nintendo64 - 64,000K
GameCube - 3,000,000K
-----------------------------------------------
There's no reason to think that 25-year history of constantly growing software will suddenly stop. Even if future technology eliminates the need for FMVs, they'll still need textures. And not normal textures, but HDTV textures which require 4 times as much storage space.
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 11, 2003, 09:01:53 AM
And another thing about texture. They will not get much bigger. HDTV just changes the resulation of the display and the way signal are transmitted to the TV not much else. They may get a little more detailed with the texture but there is only so much a human eye can see.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 11, 2003, 10:32:52 AM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 11, 2003, 11:15:17 AM
As when this technology is finally adapted they will be at the end of how much space opitical laser technology can add to a disk. The rest will be up to compression.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 11, 2003, 04:02:49 PM
Post by: theaveng on March 12, 2003, 06:28:19 AM
And for FMVs, if the game producer wants photo-realistic graphics similar to Shrek, he won't be able to use 2005-released consoles. They won't have that kind of power. The producer will have to use FMVs for ultra-realistic Shrek-quality movies.
Post by: oohhboy on March 13, 2003, 12:47:05 AM
IMO, I believe it is too early for Blue-ray. DVD has only been able to get mass market penatration as of late and with competing discs and formats that will very well surpass Sony's offering, which I believe is only a small step forward in terms of storage space. Blue-ray will not get mass market penatration before the next real leap in portable storage comes about. Eg, Floppies to CD's.
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 13, 2003, 07:37:26 AM
And yes Sony Blu-Ray Disc should make that much of a dent in the current DVD market. It too soon for another format change. Maybe in five years the market may be ready soon if some form of backwards compatibility is employed. (Not to mention the last serious bid Sony had for a standard format was the Beta Tape in the 1980's and everything else they have tried so far hasn't done that well.)
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 14, 2003, 10:05:17 AM
Post by: Cerberus on March 14, 2003, 04:34:43 PM
Post by: theaveng on March 15, 2003, 03:46:45 AM
I design multi-layer boards (upto 12 so far) which allow different circuits to lay on top of one another (separated by ground or power planes to prevent cross-talk). I wonder why they can't do the same with silicon chips?
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 15, 2003, 04:11:48 AM
As for the that law yes it does apply to 3-D chips. You can't just keep piling on layers to make it faster/more powerful because there will come a point where you going form point A to B will not be as fast. The law of dimishing returns applies to almost any dimension.
Post by: oohhboy on March 16, 2003, 02:20:01 AM
Post by: rodtod on March 16, 2003, 08:51:18 AM
Blu-Ray has been around for some time. Had ordinary DVD's never become so popular, Blu-Ray would've surely become the media standard. DVD's still remain, mostly because there hasn't been that big a demand for better-quality movie presentation, and because of the dual-layer format addition. Nevertheless, it's pretty much a given that technology will keep on being upgraded, and that certain products will be surpassed rather quickly. So, it won't be long before Blu-Ray finally replaces DVD's.
The question is, where will Blu-Ray strike first? Will it establish itself in the movie industry, or the gaming?
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 16, 2003, 12:44:11 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 16, 2003, 03:34:09 PM
Quantum computing isn't measured in dimensions, no form of computer really is, for it to be technically usable to humans the results have to be bound to the highest dimension we are familar with (third). And Quantum computing, which uses water (note: at the last time I did research on it) and not silicon still is bound to physical laws. Since the water that is used is bound to them. There may be a better gain to loss ratio but it isn't perfect once we make that jump the computing is hampered by how the phycal chip is model but how the data that is harvested is manipulated. In theory the computing power/speed will always be a constant because its confined to how fast the electrons in the water move. The only way to get faster is to change the physical state of the medium.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 17, 2003, 06:52:47 AM
And in case you forgot: electrons are not the only negative conducting basic particle, there are many more, and many that are smaller. Just to add to a debate about stuff we won't see for several decades to come.
Post by: Clonester on March 17, 2003, 03:24:14 PM
Why? Development costs. Yes, games could fill large storage mediums like the Blu-Ray disks, even without FMV's. Yes, games could reach photo-realistic quality for in-game play. But this would be too costly and take too much time for many game development companies. Right now, there are many small companies fighting to stay in the game making industry. Heck, even companies like Capcom, Sega and Square (now Square-Enix) have been pushing for pennies (although this doesn't seem to have affected their game quality, etc.). The largest of the companies producing games, like Electronic Arts, Nintendo, and Konami have somewhat limited development budgets. Nintendo has been trying harder as of late to lower their development time. Why? To lower cost and to maximize profits. Game makers could fill huge capacity disks with photo realistic graphics, extra goodies, FMV, etc. but this would be limited to the larger companies, and most likely at the cost of quality. It would leave smaller dev. teams behind and possibly out of business.
We can't have everything. Yes we could have a huge world where every npc has their own personality, a really long game that fills a disk with gameplay, or ultra high quality graphics, (etc.) but, due to the time and cost taken, at the cost of a game of high quality or a well polished game. Developers will not be able to afford the "future proposals" of what some people in this topic have been guessing that a large capacity disk would hold, so why use them in your arguements? Yes you could fill a disk with FMV, but many developers could not afford it, and I am personally sick of FMV heavy games including but not limited to (PSX & PS2) Final Fantasy's and other RPG's of this gen and last.
The future as you put it is not healthy for gamers and it will put many developers out of business.
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 17, 2003, 05:42:25 PM
Post by: theaveng on March 18, 2003, 01:22:37 PM
QuoteI'm not aware of any other (-) charged particle. Can you name them for us?
Originally posted by: manunited4eva22
And in case you forgot: electrons are not the only negative conducting basic particle, there are many more, and many that are smaller.
Clonester: Your comment "discs aren't getting filled" is just blatantly false. Resident Evil needed two GC discs just to get everything in. Xenosaga fills every bit of data on a 8.5 gigabyte DVD. Early rumors are that FF12 will too. Developers are growing their games and using all of that space available to them.
MY PREDICTION: Blu-Rays (or similar large format discs) will be adopted for HDTV-quality movies/recording (2006). These ultra-hi-res movies will need about 4 times more storage space than DVD can provide. About 2 yrs later we'll see these discs in PCs, and by 2010 we will see them in game consoles.
For computing, we'll see traditional "1" or "0" (off or on) programming, but the transistor logic will be replaced with single-electron gates. That'll probably hit mainstream around 2020.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 18, 2003, 02:18:39 PM
Post by: theaveng on March 22, 2003, 01:54:36 PM
QuoteYou don't have to be so snide. I asked an honest question... all you had to do was answer it in a *friendly* manner.
Originally posted by: manunited4eva22
linkie Research before you speak.
Instead you acted like an arrogant jackass. Screw OFF.
Post by: oohhboy on March 23, 2003, 12:06:36 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 23, 2003, 07:35:29 AM
Post by: dmbfan755 on April 21, 2003, 09:34:09 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on April 21, 2003, 01:10:09 PM
Post by: Ace on April 23, 2003, 07:55:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Slab
this blu-ray stuff doesn't impress me...I read a while back...like a year ago...that someone was developing some sort of fluorescent light technology with disc that could hold 100-450+ gigs. Now that impresses....
here's the link
fluorescent technology
oh...near the bottom of the article...it says that it costs about $0.76 to produce a disc. That's pretty damn cheap.
edited: to make the darn link work...lol
Slab, I was looking up some articles on the fluorescent technology and I cannot find anything dating after 2000. Do you have more recent links to the technology? What happened to Constilantion 3D?
Post by: Clonester on April 28, 2003, 12:54:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: theavengClonester: Your comment "discs aren't getting filled" is just blatantly false. Resident Evil needed two GC discs just to get everything in. Xenosaga fills every bit of data on a 8.5 gigabyte DVD. Early rumors are that FF12 will too. Developers are growing their games and using all of that space available to them.
[sarcasm] Damn. You must be right. Hundreds of games are filling their disks, making it necessary for multiple DVD's to be used. Especially the small development companies, who can easily afford to develop their games on a blu ray disk or multiple DVD's.[/sarcasm]
Of course, you have been banned, so there is really no point in replying, but I felt like it anyways. What I said was a generalized statement. Yes, some disks (a few) are being filled to the point where multiple disks are necessary, but most aren't. Some companies cannot afford to make games on blu-ray disks or even multiple DVD's without sacrificing something, which almost always leads to an unpolished game.
Look back. The companies that fill the disks/use multiple disks are the larger companies. Companies like Square/Enix, Capcom, Nintendo, Konami, Sega, Rare, EA, etc.
Post by: Tharkun on May 28, 2003, 09:41:57 PM
Imagine a demo-disk on a blue-ray disk or a fluorescent disk. They could have a demo for just about every game in the console's library. Of course this will never happen though because no one will want to put forth the time and effort to make such a massive demo.
Post by: oohhboy on May 29, 2003, 04:36:50 AM
Post by: DRJ on June 28, 2003, 09:57:06 PM
Post by: oohhboy on June 29, 2003, 09:06:17 AM
In star trek the chip is the read/write head(And also a CPU in its own right) and while the remainder of the stick which is transparent holds the data. The sticks themselfs need not to be working at FTL speeds, but having such technology to process data at FTL speeds would improve such a device dramtically assuming you had a bus that could process data fast enough once the data left the FTL fields area of effect.
As I said this is only like the second step towards such technology. Who knows how many more steps we need to take? It would be 5 giant leaps or 10000 steps. Atleast it is in the right dicrection unlike blu-ray which is under-powered, short-changed evolution of DVD, already obsolete technology in terms of what other companies have lined up for the near/medium future.
Post by: DRJ on June 29, 2003, 10:32:26 AM
Post by: HolyPaladin on June 29, 2003, 05:22:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DRJ
A quadrillion bytes would be a million Gigs and the data can be accessed faster than the speed of light.
Wow, it can read data faster than 669,600,000 MPH (speed of light)? Man, and we are only presently accessing data no faster than 294,620 MPH! (Sarcasm.) That's like baking a cake and measuring your ingrediants in seconds, minutes, and hours and your cooking time in pints, quarts, and gallons.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on June 30, 2003, 08:26:37 AM
Post by: Nintendo Gamecube on August 28, 2003, 06:39:30 PM
End of discussion.
Post by: Slab on August 29, 2003, 09:36:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ace
Slab, I was looking up some articles on the fluorescent technology and I cannot find anything dating after 2000. Do you have more recent links to the technology? What happened to Constilantion 3D?
Sorry, I haven't been back here for a while. Constellation 3D is still around. I just did a google search and turned up a bunch of hits.
Constellation 3D
Don't worry. Constellation 3D and the FMD is still around and looks to be the next big data storage format.
Post by: nemo_83 on August 29, 2003, 04:27:24 PM
