What format for games?

Hey. I'm sure if this were a good idea someone would have implemented it allready, so, maybe someone can educate me.

Could some kind of memory stick not be a good formate for games? Good read speeds. Small cheap ports, as opposed to large and expensive disc drives, storage constantly increasing; prices constantly dropping.

Plus supposing there are eight usb 3 ports on the Xbox 720 a game could be on more than one stick if nescessary and as an added bonus I could have CoD9 and whatever single player I'm going through in at once. On PCs numerous ports are standard, so I can't see a problem there, other than in a rare few cases. What's more, programs like Cubase use memory sticks as anti-piracy devices, suggesting stronger security (not that that will stop piracy really) but I'd have thought that would appeal to publisher's sensibilities The games would be smaller and more durable too.

On the other hand, I concede that people use optical discs for movies. Not that this couldn't change too, but people allready have large libraries of these discs. However, would memory sticks not be sufficient to replace the apparently failing blu-ray format, when used in conjuntion with a cheap DVD drive for legacy xbox/PC games and movies?

 

The Bu-Ray format doesn't seem to be failing...

and the max speed on the USB drives an the fact that they would add a significant cost over the traditional disk, seeing as GTA IV was 16GB and thats not a cheap little USB drive there...

 

I haven't bought anything Blu-Ray yet. So yes, I think it is failing.

 

The reason a lot of publishers are preferring optical media are due to its cheap manufacturing cost. This is exactly what makes PS1 such a success that ended nintendo-crap's reign in the gaming world (at that time period)

Perhaps in few years time someone could come up with a memory-chip storage solution that is cheap enough to manufacture as a distribution media for games.

 

much too expensive. the whole point of optical media is that it is supercheap. even for blueray, which is expensive, cost was the primary driving force behind its development. 25-50GB on a disc that costs a few dollars to produce (tops).

that doesn't mean blueray or optical media is the gold standard. optical media is slow, prone to breaking and wear, spins at high rpm, one of the last "moving parts" in a computer. but it is cheap mass storage.

the true ideal solution is actually already has its foot in the door: digital distribution. steam. cheaper distribution than optical, no breaking, nothing to keep track of, autopatching, built in *WORKING* drm for developer security.

perfect.

 

Actually ... *ANY* media format for games are OK

But you, as consumers, have to be willing to bear the price. Publishers couldnt careless on what format they are distributing their item as long as you are willing to bear the cost of the 'format'.

In practical, lets say the usb flash drive version of GTA IV cost 200 bucks. Are you willing to pay for it ? if you are, then publishers wouldnt mind distributing their games via usb flash drive

 

Not a great idea for mass distribution as noted, cost is too high. But makes a WAY better backup solution than discs. Put all your photos etc... on a cheap USB stick and it will last forever. CDs/DVDs will deteriorate over time even if you never touch them.

 

In my opinion, it is Sony having forced Blu-Ray on the PS3 which is the primary reason for Sony having lost the lead in the console market it had with the PS1/PS2.

It is because of the Blu-Ray drive that made the system so expensive at launch. Its high price prevented it from having as large a userbase as the Xbox 360 and Nintendo Wii. Because of its smaller userbase, developers were less apt to develop games for it and which compounded its relatively small userbase.

One of the PS3's selling points is the ability to play Blu-Ray MOVIES, not Blu-Ray GAMES. Most games do not utilize the extra space Blu-Ray offers over DVD and all the extra waste is COMPLETELY wasted.

Many PS3 titles also require hard drive installs, especially multi-platform games shared by the 360. For instance, Fallout 3 and Grand Theft Auto 4 require installations at least 4gb in size whereas the Xbox 360 can run them without a hard drive as my Arcade model does.

My guess is because the Blu-Ray drive in the PS3 is slower than DVD drives or else why would they require hard drive installs? Sometimes, the games do load faster than the Xbox 360 version but many times, the installs are needed to be on parity with the 360 version. Though one disadvantage of the 360 is its infamously loud DVD drive vs the relatively quiet drive in the PS3 where the installs may be helping. Although now with the 360, we have the option to install the games as well and I'm glad its an option vs being mandatory for many PS3 titles. But its also the same for PCs and I wonder why we don't have the option at least of running games straight off the DVD drive like the 360 can?

I feel that all Sony had to do was release PS3 games on DVD, release an SKU at launch just for games for $400 and an SKU that would additionally play Blu-Ray movies for $500-600 (perhaps release an external Blu-Ray drive for the lower end PS3s to upgrade later on like the external HD-DVD drive for the 360) and the PS3 would have been a MUCH bigger success that it is now. The PC and Xbox 360 has shown us that DVDs are still fine for current gaming though this may change in the next-generation but Blu-Ray has helped but also definitely harmed the PS3.

 

blu ray is the future, that was a step in the right direction i think, especially at the price point it is.

optical disk is for now, how it is going to be, cheap and easy to manufacture as said.

 

Sony wasn't selling PS3s because there were no games for it, lol. It's still the priciest console but the library of games is shaping up nicely (finally) and with the Blu-Ray/HD DVD war being over it is really picking up steam. I think 360 will still outsell it simply because of the price point being friendlier to parents and teens. But if someone is looking at upgrading to Blu-Ray and getting a console, PS3 is the right choice now.

 

Still limited by max read/write lifetime.

Right choice if you want the crappy multiplatform ports. :x

 

When I heard back several years ago the PS3 would use Blu-Ray and the 360 still using DVDs, I had thought the latter was doomed from the start. But yet Blu-Ray has not helped the PS3 in being a gaming machine as good as the 360. Blu-Ray is what has caused the PS3 to be the most expensive console on the market, launching at twice the cost of the PS1/PS2. Forcing Blu-Ray on the PS3 may have helped the format win against HD-DVD but at the cost of the PS3's gaming capabilities.

I do believe that DVD will be phased out in the near future for more capacious optical disc formats, but it has not helped the PS3 for games. It has caused it to be out of the price range of many consumers, its storage has gone to waste in almost all PS3 titles and its slow speed has caused many games to require mandatory installs just to load at the same speed as the 360 versions of multi-platform titles.

I would like a list of PS3 titles that have fully used Blu-Ray's storage, the only one I am familiar with is Metal Gear Solid 4 correct? I also know for Dynasty Warriors 6, the FMV video sequences are of slightly lower quality on the 360 version due to compression.

I know that USB drives and other flash storages have limited write cycles but they also have limited read cycles? How long would they last in reading vs optical disks? How about compared to cartridges used in past systems like the NES/SNES/N64/Genesis,etc?

 

How many read/writes are you going to make on a USB stick you use for backing up photos? I doubt anywhere near it's limit. I bet 99% of USB memory stick owners never reach the limit even through regular use.

 

And 99% of CDs never see the end of their useful lifetime either.

 

This maybe a little off topic but I know people who are concerned that a whole generation of photos may be lost due to the failing of optical media that digital photos have been 'backed up' to.

 

I know resistance 1 used about 20 GB i think

 

I like my blueray drive. People who say optical media is dead either A. Have no idea what they're talking about or B. Have no idea what they're talking about. Online distribution is gaining popularity, but there's two problems.

A. Not enough people have crazy 15MB download speeds and therefore don't want to wait 4 or 5 days for one title.

B. People still like pretty packaging. As stupid as it seems, it's true. People like to hold it in their hand. Look at the neat pictures on the cover.

 

and I didn't have a DVD player for years after it came out, that doesn't mean it failed now does it

 

I think the idea of a "cartridge" based game console is a good idea, considering piracy concerns. Sure, optical media is very cheap, but if developers say that they lose hundreds of millions of dollars each year, then wouldn't it be in their best interest to spend the extra few bucks for a USB type or other cartridge? I think so.

If they say it's too expensive, then piracy must not be much of a concern to them. Everyone has an optical drive on their PC, and BR burners are getting very cheap aready. So virtually any PC can use cheap software to pirate a game. Go to a cartridge then the pirate has to have the hardware to pirate the game, which would greatly cut down on casual piracy, which is probably 90% of their concern...

So they either need to put up or shut up!

 

You still ended up buying one so therefore it didn't fail.

 

I believe metal gear solid 4 for the PS3 managed to use all the space available on a blu-ray disk, that is a standard blu-ray disk. I say this as Sony as found a way to have a 500GB or so blu-ray disk that can be read by the PS3, also JVC, Pioneer and Hitachi are said to be working there way towards a 1TB disk expected by around 2012 that should only require a firmware update to work.

 

I think that's a good point. One of the reasons piracy has become so pervasive is because optical media is so easy and cheap to duplicate.

As much as it is a major concern to game studios (so they claim), adopting to different formats isn't really an option though, because the medium in question needs to achieve ubiquity in the markets first for it to be economically viable for mass distribution.

I think flash media has a great potential to be the next step up in low cost mass storage, seeing that the technology is well on its way to gain a major foothold in primary storage solutions and flash drives and memory cards alike come in ever-increasing capacities and lower prices. Hopefully with its inherent advantages over optical media it may achieve the necessary cost effectiveness to benefit both the companies and consumers.

 

what?
I don't have a tv so tvs fail?

 

Yes. I was thinking that as well. Flash media gets cheap enough, then they could make a proprietary cartridge format for consoles, that could include an encoder chip to prevent piracy.

Yes I know there will be workarounds, there always is a way, but if you require additional hardware, then your casual pirate on piratebay and whatnot, wouldn't be so quick to download since it would involve added skill and cost for additional hardware on their end.

Granted, 4.7GB on a standrd DVD at less than $0.50 retail is pretty cheap media. But then again, if piracy is as rampant as they say it is, then spending $5 on a flash based cartridge would be well worth it. They'd probably charge it back to the consumer anyhow. Hell, I can pick up an 8GB flash card for less than $10 retail, which is proably only a few bucks at mfg cost. This is enough media for any PC or console game too.

And it should shut up the devs and publishers too, and eliminate the crappy DRM as it stands today. Hell, even an SD sized media would be fine. Small and easy to carry around, and could have a reader with a few dozen slots. Now I'm just babbling.

Digital distribution will probably negate any of that though.

 

i really don't think it's gonna get so cheap that it even challenge cds n dvds, which are just sheets of plastic.
digital distribution will be the future imo. little distribution cost (no cds, cases, stores, store staff, shipping, ect. only bandwidth) will be the main initiative for developers, and hopfully with more players in the game, the lowered cost will pass on to the consumers.
valve is enjoying a huge chunk of profit with each sale, they price their games similar to retail price despite lower costs. if only someone big enough take a shot at it and challenge them (price wise of course ).

 

I known it's a bit off topic but for storage...
I hate optical media. scratches. lost discs etc etc. I really don't like it. Since dvd's players appeared that I only use an external HDD. no pen drives, way expensive. 2'5" external will do the trick. lot's of storage. small enough to put in my pocket. no scratches only 1 drive with all the info. I have a esata enclosure, I can upgrade the HDD. I currently have a 320gb hdd. price?
320gb for 80$ you can get an usb enclosure for 15$. 95$ it's 0.30$ per Gb. cheaper then dvd's. and it will become even cheaper. dvd's wont get any cheaper.
NAND flash prices will always drop. blue-ray prices will only drop into a certain point like dvd's atm (I bet this point will bit a bit higher then dvd's because of the higher production costs). But in the future new optical technology will be available (holographic storage etc) making the cost per gb drop. But NAND will eventually be cheaper then optical storage. Moore's law. But we will always have optical discs either we love them or hate them.

 

Well, considering you can get a 4 GB USB flash drive for $5, that is approx to a DVD storage, it is still inexpensive. And it gets back to the point of piracy. If piracy is really as rampant as they say, then spending a few more bucks for a much more secure system is the way to go.

Regarding Steam, they don't set the price, it is set by the original dev/publisher. Steam does get a share, but not as much as you'd think.

 

Wrong. I have had plenty of CDRs become unusable. And that's not including scratches etc... that can happen. CDRs have a life span of about 2-5 years.

http://www.dvhardware.net/article9221.html
http://computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,107607,00.html

Yes that's what I was saying. Flash drives are extremely durable and won't fail over time like optical media will. I have even run my flash drives through the wash (by mistake) and they still worked flawlessly, but I wouldn't recommend it. Some manufacturers make very durable drives resistant to extreme cold, waterproof, shock proof etc... and will not fail. Yes there is a read/write limit but you will never reach it from general use. Maybe if you use a flash drive as your OS boot drive you will, but not through regular use.

Not too mention that you can buy flash drives in storage sizes WAY larger than any CD or DVD so it also saves on space and makes it easier to find your stuff not having to flip through pages of media. Just plug it in and it's all there You can also easily make multiple back-ups and have them in different locations for really important data. Much easier than a box of CDs to transport and store. Not too mention all that time burning discs, ugh.

 

yeah i also have a ton of unusable CDs. no memory chip has ever worn out on me so far.

 

i doubt we are going back to times of the nintendo cartridges. digital distribution is the way to go.

 

steam ftw!