Mass Effect 1 PS3 details – Edge of Reality helping, texture popping/performance improved, more

Mass Effect external producer Ryan Warden comments on the improvements made to Mass Effect 1 on PS3, reveals the co-developer behind the port, and more.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
DigitalRaptor1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

Looks to be the definitive version, at least on consoles. Just a shame it's taken so long, exclusivity clauses and all...

3 Blu-ray discs?? What the hell is the point in that BioWare??? Utter waste of space... /facepalm

PopRocks3591938d ago

I was gonna say, shouldn't all of this be on a single Blu-ray? I guess they're trying to compensate for the packaging.

shoddy1937d ago

I read an article that said MS demand equality and should not surpassed xbox version for multi platform games.

In this case goes to discs number.

Eyeco1937d ago

If that's true then Microsoft is even more laughably pathetic than I thought , that said I remember hearing a similar story to FF13 being gimped by the 360 remember that ?not sure if its true but it wouldn't surprise me considering its Microsoft

Neo Nugget1938d ago

Well how much space does ME 1-3 take? It probably doesn't include much DLC, but that's gotta take up some room.

These aren't PS2 classics here, so maybe it really doesn't fit!

1938d ago
vortis1938d ago

@pcps3gamer, snap, just checked again and you're right, ME2 is only 11GB...good gosh, what a waste of two extra Blu-ray discs.

badz1491938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

360 uses DVD9 which only has like 8GB of usable space. ME1 is on 1 disc, ME2 on 2 disc2 and ME3 on 2 discs for the total of 5 DVD9 for the 360 version.

5 X 8GB = 40GB at the very most! that's way less than a 50GB Bluray! it can be done on 1 disc, PERIOD!

EDIT: somebody beat me to it but got the point!

Larry L1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

While you're right on the most basic level that all 3 games could fit on a single dual-layer Blu-Ray're actually wrong in thinking that the games would work properly with all 3 games on a single 50Gb Blu-Ray. Here's why.......

Blu-Ray diodes, particularly the older version in PS3, are notoriously slow readers being that they're single speed. Even on a single layer 25Gb disc. To make up for that slow read speed, and you can look this up to confirm it if you don't know, they put the game data on the disc 2 and sometimes 3 times, so that the laser can find the required data much faster regardless of where the laser is on the disc.

50Gb is ALOT of data space to be sifting through in real time. The few PS3 games that actually used a 50Gb disc, had HUGE installs on top of the dual data. Think MGS4 and Gran Turismo 5.

So while I do think it IS possible to get all 3 games on one disc if they only had the data on the disc a single time AND had a huge install on top........I think even with that huge install, you'd be seeing HUGE performance issues with whatever data still had to be streamed off the disc.

So to just sum it all up, it really wouldn't work on a single disc if you think it through. Single speed Blu-Ray drives are just too slow. Due to that, the data MUST be on the disc multiple times. And there's not enough space for that even on the 50Gb discs.

Larry L1938d ago

Hmmmmm.....disagrees when my facts are right on. Interesting. Anyone care to fill me in on what part of that I'm wrong about? Sounds like you people are 1) uninformed gamers and 2) just want to be mad at something and complain (it's the internet.....surprise, surprise !!! lol).

It's a fact, sorry folks. And it's not like I'm bashing PS3 here. It's my console of choice. The reality is, the Mass Effect Trilogy would NOT fit on a 50 Gb Blu-Ray disc, because each game has to be on the disc twice to have no texture steaming and pop-in issues.

EeJLP-1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

"mass effect 3 is 13gb on ps3
mass effect 2 is 11gb on ps3
mass effect 1 on pc is 7gb"

pcps3 already listed the PS3 sizes of two of the 3 games. Even if they tripled the entire ME1 and made it 21GB, they'd still fit.

21 + 11 + 13 = 45GB

I doubt ME1 would need to be almost bigger than ME2 & 3 combined. It's more likely that the 7GB would be raised to 9GB or 10GB (if at all), so:

9 + 11 + 13 = 33GB

With 17GB left for DLC they should have included, or rewriting any more files they wanted/needed to. Whether right or not, people are disagreeing with your math.

Also, there are prior examples of multiple full retail 360 games on 1 PS3 disk:
Assassin's Creed on AC: Revelations disk
BioShock (original) coming on BS: Infinite's disk
etc. (even though here we're talking 3 instead of 2)

andibandit1938d ago

I dont see the problem with them putting each game on a seperate disc, it will problably give faster load times and you can actually lend your friend ME1 while you play through ME2.

EeJLP-1938d ago

ME2 and ME3 are also smaller on PS3 than on 360 due to the 360 needing to have basic files on multiple disks:

If pcps3's numbers are correct:
"mass effect 3 is 13gb on ps3
mass effect 2 is 11gb on ps3"

And if this site is correct for 360 install sizes:

ME2 on multiple 360 disks: 12.4GB
ME2 on 1 PS3 disk: 11GB

ME3 on multiple 360 disks: 14.6GB
ME3 on 1 PS3 disk: 13GB

So that also goes against your claim that the PS3 needs to copy more files and take up more disk space.

Larry L1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )


ahhh, I missed that "ps3 version on 2 and 3. My bad. If those are accurate file sizes for the PS3 versions discs, then my math is off and the numbers for 2 and 3 wouldn't need to be doubled. But I'm not sure if those ARE 100% accurate because those file sizes match the PSN digal version sizes of 2 and 3. I'd like to know if that data is based on the PSN sizes (which wouldn't have to be doubled up) , or if they're official disc data numbers. (and hey, if those numbers are right they weren't doubled up even on the discs since they match the PSN sizes, which may account for the issues 2 had/have on PS3)

But I think either way, my read speed comment stands. I think ostensibly having 6 games worth of data on one disc could cause some major issues with data streaming. I think it makes more sense to have them on seperate discs.

Edit just to add- One thing though, I didn't say anything about PS3 needing to copy more files or having larger file sizes. I said developers who know how to get their games running properly on PS3 put the game files on the blu-ray twice and sometimes 3 times to offset it's slower read speeds. Obviously a 2 disc 360 game would have to be bigger just due to needing important game data on both discs. Everything else you're right about if those disc data numbers are accurate.

EeJLP-1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

@ Larry - read speeds

All the information I can find looks like the PS3's disk has a faster read speed than a 360 Dual layer (DVD9) disk that the ME games are printed on.

That link and other research I did show that the PS3's read speed is a "Constant Linear Velocity (Same speed across entire disk)" of 9MB/s, while the 360 has a "Constant Angular Velocity (Speed Varies from edge to edge)".

So while the specs show the 360 with a higher Max read speed (15.85 MB/s vs. PS3's 9 MB/s) it looks like the 360 only hits that speed with data printed on one edge of a single layer disk (outer I assume) and drops to 9.25MB/s for the data on the other edge of the disk (inner). An average of 10.57 MB/s overall (according to the source).

That sounds like a small advantage for the 360; 10.57 vs. 9.00, but it's slower for dual layered DVDs. Max 10.57 MB/s on one edge, but drops to only 4.36 MB/s on the other. Apparent average of 7.93 MB/s (source).

They don't have data for a PS3 dual layered disk at that link, but from searching, it sounds like dual layered PS3 disks are also ~9 MB/s constant read speed.

10.57 MB/s avg. - 360 DVD5 Single layer (not ME disk)
9.00 MB/s constant - PS3 25GB Single layer disk
9.00 MB/s constant - PS3 50GB Dual layer disk (needed for ME trilogy)
7.93 MB/s avg. - 360 DVD9 Dual layer (ME disk)

mantisimo1937d ago

I gave you a + EeJLP not because you are correct (because i don't know ) but because you researched a lot and gave us some pretty figures and a lot of typing, and for that you deserve a + bub :)

pixelsword1937d ago

@ Larry L, pcps3gamer, & EeJLP;

You're all right, but you're all wrong:

Digital raptor placed the following twitter from Ryan Warden as the first link, and in the first link it said answering about three discs:

"not so much space as layout and loading issues. I couldn't guarantee that loading times wouldn't suffer."


"it would also mean putting three builds through Cert and not one, which would delay getting the games to you."

That's probably since ME 1 is on the same disc as the other two that all three would go through Cert instead of standing on the other two's Cert and just having Cert for ME1.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 1937d ago
BitbyDeath1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

Even at max DVD size they could still fit all 3 on a 50gb Blu-ray.

pain777pas1938d ago

I knew this was the reason that they were being so quiet on the PS3 version. I could only hope that they adopt the Mass effect 2 shooting mechanics etc... That is the only reason why Mass effect 2 is better than 1 in my opinion. Mass effect 1 was awesome but the combat is atrocious compared to the later installments which makes the game hard to go back to for me.

MASTER_RAIDEN1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

pardon my french but ive always fucking HATED that about all game developers when it comes to ps3. they all seem to have this crazy idea that customers want more discs because it looks like theyre getting more bang for their buck. its really just a cumbersome, clusterfuck of wasted space and discs. i would LOVE to see a full blown game + soundtrack + behind the sense + deleted behind the scenes + whatever elseeee, all on one disc. but nah...instead theirs a disc for everything.

"dude how do you activate magic?"
"id bro we didnt watch the game manual disc"

SolidGear31938d ago

LOL! Bubble + for humour!

VideoGameJimmy1937d ago

God of War 3 was on one disc. Behind the scenes content and all.

Vortex3D1938d ago

All you keep forgetting that on PS3 version, it's cheaper to use the existing ME2 and ME3 Blu-ray discs than reprinted a new version with all the games on one disc.

I guess most of you will fail coming to cost of reauthor a new disc vs reusing discs already made.

Plus if Bioware still plans to sell individual ME game, it's also cheaper to have the same set of games for each one (except ME1).

wicko1937d ago (Edited 1937d ago )

they'd also have to code and build UI to support switching between games (see MGS collection) - which isn't hard but could be another factor.

Dno1937d ago (Edited 1937d ago )

this is the only reason good call bubs up

Godmars2901938d ago

Just because it can be done much less make sense, never underestimate the stupidity of marketing. Its what made Mass Effect the series it is today!

And before you ask: its crap. Its made the series into crap. It could have been better than is it, might have sold less than it has, but it could have been better if it had been looked at as the central product. Not just another component in a marketing machine.

Thanks to that was got diminished results from ME1 to ME3. Probably why Shepard will be in ME4 despite the ability to make the character look like anyone.

showtimefolks1937d ago

ps3 version will be in early 2013- that means we will get all the dlc from 1st game and 2nd game and maybe even some from 3rd game.

i could careless about them including the dlc for ME3 but they better include all the DLC from ME 1-2

geddesmond1937d ago

The more info stored on a blu ray disk, the slower the laser can read it. I don't see why 3 disks would be a problem. Its not like you have to swap disks through each playthrough.

Jason_Tanner1937d ago

Why? Because you might actually have to get up off of your fat ass to change bluray discs? Yeah, keep crying about your first world problems douche bag.

Rettom1937d ago

Touchy? It disrupts the fluidity of games. Now there's an exception, and that's when separate games are on separate disks. And with the First World Problem thing, are you from a Third World country?

Jason_Tanner1937d ago

Thanks for the Disagrees, you guys must be fat asses too.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1937d ago
1938d ago Replies(1)
jerethdagryphon1938d ago

so isnt this one of the last 360 only (3rd party) titles jumping ship

Perjoss1937d ago

It never was a 360 only game, ME1 was available on PC too.

Burning_Finger1938d ago (Edited 1938d ago )

I dunno how EA manage to release that to the PS3 since Microsoft originally funded and publish mass effect 1.

I guess publishing rights doesn't do squat anymore. There's still a chance for Bayonetta 2 on both console. XD

Take Note Sega from EA. lol


I'll just wait for Bayonetta Trilogy then.

Yodagamer1938d ago

I think ea might have found a loophole since microsoft owns the retail right, while bioware owns the games code so they could sell the digital game. Kinda like microsoft selling digital versions of n64 games (which i assume were nintendo funded as well).

BitbyDeath1938d ago

Maybe it was a loophole due to being bought out by EA?
No idea though, just guessing.

cloud4951938d ago

Timed exclusive maybe? Only had publishing rights for 5 years. Or EA made a deal. Xbox is getting an exclusive beta for medal of honour, might be part of it.

Knight_Crawler1937d ago

So your ok with waiting 3-4 years to play a game -_-

N4G never stops to amaze me.

Perjoss1937d ago

Mass Effect 1 is easily the best of the 3 so its worth the wait. Its the only Mass Effect game that actually feels like an RPG, 2 & 3 are very good games but they are just long 3rd person shooters.

Kingdom Come1937d ago

EA, presumably, will have paid Microsoft.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1937d ago
AntsPai1938d ago

I look forward to this alot >:3 Although I kind of regret playing through Mass Effect 2 about 3 times now o_o Although I do still need to play ME3 and get 2 more trophies so I'll certainly get this trilogy. So glad this and the Killzone trilogy are coming out (I never played any of the Killzones ;__;)