TGS explains why PS3 gamers deserve to get their hard drives back from developers.
I really don't mind installation,maybe it's because I was a PC gamer for some times!
Hell yea brother i know how that is.
Which has more installs? I was thinking that maybe if it is the multiplat games then it would have to be because of the devs using compressed data like the 360. Has there been a real world comparison on a compressed game playing back on the 360 and ps3. I am not sure but didnt someone say the 360 can read compressed data faster into memory than the ps3? Would that explain the install issue? Installing to eliminate having to stream compressed data from the disc to memory. Just a guess.
Not really. The blu-ray lens is slow...and it's just that. So to make up for it's slow read speed compared to DVD, developers usually choose to install some data to eliminate the need of reading from the disc. As for other reasons, maybe to make the game run better...and whatever else I dunno.
I don't care about intalls either, as long as its not 45 mins like Devil May Cry 4. That was ridiculous.
You'd have to either delete previous game installs in order to install another mandatory game install with the amount of games exampled in the article... or buy another HD if you're a 20GB PS3 owner. That's an added cost. And with so many replies saying mandatory PS3 game installs aren't so bad... why then are multiple 360 game discs so bad? It takes time to install PS3 game data doesn't it? Changing a 360 game disc isn't going to take any longer.
Never really had a long install time, and besides. don't you people own computers? jesus.
I personally would prefer if all games had an option to install since it helps reduce load times and I really don't mind waiting for it to install. Afterall, being a PC gamer too, I'm used to it but I mainly wanat it for the performance increase.
"And with so many replies saying mandatory PS3 game installs aren't so bad... why then are multiple 360 game discs so bad? It takes time to install PS3 game data doesn't it? Changing a 360 game disc isn't going to take any longer. " Some would argue that while the install takes time, havingf to swap discs takes you out of the gameing moment because you have to get up and insert the next disc. It is a matter of preference I guess.
and why its one of the most technically advanced games ever developed, and it doesn't need an install, and in fact stream loads. Just like Killzone2 and well as most ps3 exclusives? Installs are used on the PS3 by developers that aren't as talented as Sony's first party. But even some third party developers manage to do without it. The logic of slow bluray speeds is silly as a measurement when its proven to be able to stream load just fine. The reason for installs is because they don't prioritize the data being read with SPUs. Games need to start streaming more, which the 360 just simply can't do with "advanced" visuals. Only if you install the data. Like Mass Effect. Multiplatform games will always have a bottleneck in the PS3's favor because they aren't utilizing the PS3's superior hardware to run on the less powerful Xbox360. Sure multiplatform games have differences that the 360 has over the ps3, but those multiplatform games are lower quality, and less technically advanced than the ps3s exclusives. They aren't optimized for the SPU's, because when you do you get second to none performance like Uncharted2. DVD is old technology. It doesn't have enough space on a disc to fit modern games. Requiring disc swapping like its the 1990's. Common sense dictates when we get to this point as with tapes, cd's, and well DVD's, its time to move onto the bigger media. Multiple disc installs is sad in the year 2009. The 360's weakest point outside of the hardware failure is definitely the DvD and lack of a real storage system. Now with direct downloads you're going to have to download multiple discs to a hard drive which costs 500% more than normal HDD's. The same people pretending they don't need a bigger disc over DvD's were the same people pretending installing 20 floppy discs was better than using 1 cdrom. Or the same people pretending installing 5 discs was better than 1 dvd. Its just silly logic. The only reason people try to pretend dVd is the better option, is because its their only option.
I own 2 PS3s (I have two HDTV)... I ran out of room on my original 60 gig too often, so for my second one, I bought a 500gig drive ($70) on Ebay right away (before I even turn it on!), and since I didn't want to waste the drive that came with it, I also bought an external aluminium case for $4.79 on Ebay as well ($0.99 plus shipping) from H.K. Best thing I ever did. So, for $75, I now have a 500gig PS3, and a nice external hard drive! That's not much more than the price of a single game... This allowed me to install Linux, all my pictures, quite a few movies, and I don't even have to delete a demo from now on until I don't know when. But even before doing that, I didn't mind the install since that normally save wear and tear on the BluRay drive, which is pretty expensive...
Then I am all for it.. It's funny the people complaining about the installs don't own PS3s. The fact is if the 360 had mandatory HDD it would also have HDD installs. How many games does one person play at any given time?
I play five or more at all times
I do tend to agree they should be optional, but the game should tell the player if there is some advantage to installing, even on 360. If you are playing Fuel on 360, INSTALL! It will shave as much as five seconds off every loading screen. No joke...
I agree there is something definitely strange here because why almost every game I have in my PS3 ask me for the mandatory installs? I lost time and space in my almost full 40 GB hard drive. I wish to know how much space the others ps3 gamers lost in this mandatory crap until now? We need to protest against this to stop this madness because I don't wish to make routine the delete and install process every time I change a game in my ps3.
although installs aren't ideal it will definitely prolongue the life of your console because instead of repeatedly loading stuff off the dvd drive the data is loaded off the the hard drive. even ms said they introduced hd install (game install) as option because they said it could prolongue the life of the the console (as well as decreasing load times). the main reason developers use installs is because the max read speed of the blu-ray drive. on average, the read speed of the blu-ray disk is the same as a dual layer dvd disk. however the max read speed of the dvd drive is much faster than the max read speed of the blu-ray disk. this has caused problems with developers who aren't versed in arranging data around the disk and managing the cache. the thing with a dvd drive is that it has to spin around much faster (than a blu-ray drive) to get the same amount of data (because the data is spread further apart due to the fact that the laser in a dvd drive has a longer wavelength). this can cause real problems if the dvd drive unit is accidentaly moved during playback (notice the sticker on every new xbox that says don't move the xbox when the disk is spinning). http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/... . you will notice this especially when you are buying secondhand xbox games because most of them have scratched discs whilst ps3 disks tend to be spotless (although a non-scratch coating on all blu-ray disks does help). this is also the reason why the dvd drive on the xbox is so damn noisy. so my point is if you do use your xbox often i would recommend installing the most frequently used games because the laser is the most regularly failing component on ANY EQUIPMENT (launch xbox 360 excepted) that contains a dvd/blu-ray drive. finally, you might complain about install sizes but a lot of people complain about having multiple disk games. a lot of xbox games now come in multiple disks (most of the recent jrpg are multi-disk). take forza 3 on the xbox for example. the game will come in two disk but get this: to experience the full game you have to install a 6 gig onto the xbox. so unlike ps3 owners who all have hard drives as standard, anyone with an arcade is screwed if they want the full experience and anyone with a 20gb is pretty much stuffed as well: http://dlb-network.com/2009... splitting games across two disks isn't goint to work very well because the game engine and textures will still need to be stored on both disk and you can't have data for one car on one disk and another car on another disk when playing online. ps3 does have installs but xbox has mutli-disk games. this multi-disk will become a common trend as games get more and more content. so i do agree that installs should be optional since it can be done (see unchart, infamous and killzone) but having forced install isn't the end of the world because it will save you a lot of money in the long run because it will prolongue the life of your console. furthermore if developers focused on creating games using just a hard drive and not optimise with a slower bl-ray drive they might be able to reduce development time - no need for optimisation.
I've lost about 24 gig just to Mandatory installs.
I've lost over 40 gig to required installs from the following: Bioshock GTA IV RE 5 Lost Planet LBP MGS 4: GotP Devil May Cry 4 Gran Tourismo 5: Prologue The Bourne Conspiracy Oblivion GOTYE
Installs are mandatory because BR is optimized as a "movie-format" first. It is desinged to read a single file, from front to back. As a result, the throughput rate is not fast enough for games. So, the developers do two things: A) multiple copies of the same file written to multiple locations on the disk and B) Mandatory installs. "techniques of DVD and Blu-ray. By nature, the outer and inner parts of a disc move at different speeds while a disc is spinning, regardless of format (CD, DVD, Blu-ray, HD-DVD, etc.). While DVD drives can read data at those differing speeds, Blu-ray reads at one speed" http://multiplayerblog.mtv....
I’m going to get hate for this but it’s the truth and I have facts to back me up. The reason for the mandatory installs is because while BLU RAY offers greater capacity means more stuff to search through to get to the item you are looking for; in addition BLU RAY doesn’t offer a significant increase in seek times to match the capacity. You have seen things like developers duplicate items on the disc to get around this. The other way around it is install to the hard-drive which has a faster seek time then disc. Now am I saying BLU RAY sucks or that DVD is better than BLU RAY? NO! I am saying there are trade offs for BLU RAY larger capacity with no real increase in seek time will make it harder to find data on the disc. BLU RAY works really well for items such as movies that stream in order. DVD has the smaller capacity but the seek times are fast enough for data to be streamed from it with a slight buffer; and since it has a smaller capacity to seek through it can be faster than hard drives. I am not saying DVD is better than BLU RAY, just giving factual information on why we have the install to hard-drive. http://playstation.joystiq....
@Greywulf Now the reason games such as Uncharted and KZ2 don’t have mandatory installs is because they use a different approach. They don’t install everything to the hard-drive at one time but still use the hard-drive for streaming. It’s just done in the background more intelligently. Put what’s needed to run on the hard drive as temp and in the background keep reading from the Disc and queuing it to the hard drive. Bottom line is still the same BLU RAY while increased capacity will still need to improve the seek time of the drives in order to make streaming directly from the drive more viable. If you were a PC gamer you would understand these limitations in hardware and would know what we are talking about is true. @Darthv72 – Agree it’s a matter of preference both have tradeoffs; DVD capacity, BLU RAY seek speed.
Optional installs is a must on every game! Installs aside, it is really the perfect balance between mandatory and no installs. Case in point: a) SF IV the install significantly improved performance, without the installs it was slooow. b) KZ2 had no installs (other than the patches), but instead I got long waits between major chapters and frequent 2-5 (some closer to 10 sec) waits in the chapter itself. Given the option of optional install, I can personally decide if I want to install to shorten wait time or save hard drive space/up front time and just play the game with longer wait time. There is no excuse!!! I don't want to invest $50-70 on a 320GB hard drive. I already paid a sh!t load of cash for the PS3.
It's either mandatory or it isn't? If it's optional then it's not mandatory...no? I purchased a bigger HDD after DMC4 had a 5 gb install, MGS4 had an install, etc because it seemed like installs were here to stay. All you guys can easily erase any concerns over an install by simply paying 50 bucks, at the cheapest, for a 180gb hdd. For like 30 bucks more you can get simply crazy with the amount of storage.
Well having the option would be great for people that own the 40 gig version to save on some space.
I am in favor of installs, and I have no problem with mandatory installs if they are done correctly. I had not that the installs increase the life of you console but it makes sense. I always opted to install because I wanted the smallest possible load times, and since I bought a machine with a standard hard drive I wanted to use it whenever possible. Now I have another reason to always opt to install. Bubbles for ang_duong. Howver, I think the writer of the article is intend to say that the developers are using the hard drive as a crutch and that they don't really have to use the hard drive in order to achieve their current level of performance. I agree with him. The exception is Metal Gear Solid 4, which used mandatory installs and was one of the best looking, and the best overall games EVER. Other than MGS4, none of the games with mandatory installs have any noticeable advantage over any of the PS3 exclusives that don't have mandatory installs. I think there is a reason for that. Most of these multi-platform developers clearly don't know what they are doing with the PS3. They don't want to study the machine and/or learn how to properly manage memory and/or storage. Therefore it is easier for them to use the standard hard drive as a crutch and dumb down their games until they run virtually the same on both platforms. If a developer, Naughty Dog for instance, made a game that was properly coded and memory-managed for the PS3 but required data so quickly that it still demanded a hard drive, I would be all for that. But such a game would be PS3 exclusive by definition because only the PS3 has a standard hard drive. In the mean time we have to deal with mandatory installs from devs who don't know what they are doing. At least until they figure out what they should do.
I feel the same way dude. I guess PC gamers are so used to it that it becomes expected when playing new games.
Does that means we should start a petition against PC game install too? I seriously think we should. My PC has a 40 gig hard drive and I had to uninstall sooooo many games, it's not even funny anymore. So go let's go people, and vote YES, I WANT TO BAN PC INSTALLS. P.S.: I'm just joking, I have a PC with 1.25Terabyte of storage : ) (Soon to be full too, but I have plenty of free sata plugs available) But a more serious note, why didn't anybody complained against PC install? They have to sell them with huge drives now. With no install, they could sell PCs with cheap 40gig drives! LOL
Pure has the option for an install and the first thing I did after booting up the game was install it. Quicker load times and less pop-in are totally worth the few minute installs IMO.
I wouldn't go as far as saying they are lazy, stuff happens during the development process that may force their hand. Although optional installs are much preferred.
Fun read. I personally never get bothered by the whole install process. Just makes me anticipate the game even more before I actually play it.
One of the many reasons I prefer the Xbox 360. /fanboy
Wow, who GAF?
Judging by the amount of comments in two hours.
I hate waiting for it to install...it takes a ridiculously long time.
Within 1-5 minutes I'm fine, any longer and it might be a stretch on consoles at least. I've had to wait a few hours for PC installs at times, dedication at it's finest when you game on a PC :p
I don't have the money to buy a PS3, purchase games, and put in a 500 gig HDD. The 40 gig i'm rockin' right now is dangerously full.
Spend $50 on an external hard drive. That'll probably buy about 200-300GB. Then you can put all of you movies and games on it and use you internal 40GB drive strictly for game info.
"Lazy" is a little strong. Like the article lists there are several reasons why a developer may go that route. Or potentially lack of architecture knowledge (happened more in the early days) or how their engine is handled by the system(s). Unless your a developer yourself, not a blogger (or a forum poster), I dont think its really fair to go pointing the finger. Imagine that will bring the hate. EDIT: LOL... Article seems to have had a crafty title change from "PS3 intalls = developer lazyness".
installing doesn't bother me, we don't live in a cartridge age anymore but I will agree there are things that can be done to take down the size of these installs.
Yea I think a lot of media thinks gamers are bothered by the whole wait, while it's worth the wait if the game is great.
I don't own a PS3, but I don't get why some people make a big deal about mandatory installation. Just go make a sandwich or something.
When your in the mood for gaming would you really want to wait 20 or so minutes for lets say DMC 4 to install? Odds are it will just discourage you, or if you have some time to kill and want to get some gaming in, 20 minutes can go a long way.
My concern is the space it takes up, I've had to erase games so I can fit installs.
That's what I do. When I get a game that has a mandatory install, I fix myself a few snacks and just chill before jumping into the experience. I do the same with an XBox 360 game. It's just that the game is installing on the PS3 while I do these things.
So have I, my friend, and that was not fun at all. :(
Kojima Productions = lazy? Hard drive installs with a purpose, such as MGS4, don't annoy me, it's when Capcom come along with multiplatform game and make you install pretty much the whole game.
I have to agree with you. MGS4 was worth every minute of the install. The game was quite large and i'm sure required it, and it was worth it.
I agree, I loved the MGS4 installs, which is weird when I think about it but it's true. I only wish they gave you the option of installing all of the acts at once... my PS3 has a 300gb HD so obviously it wouldn't matter for me. It was frustrating when trying to show off some of the more amazing scenes from the game to my friends and having to wait for it to install each time I loaded a save. Then again, MGS games are clearly meant to be played start-to-finish. Also, I'd have gladly sat thru a Killzone 2 install if it meant co-op or split-screen co-op. I can't help but feel that their desire for no installation crossed out that option.
I wish they'd allow an install of some kind for Killzone 2, not so much for co-op, but just those few times during the campaign where it loads during and between missions, just to speed it up a bit.
but in the end I can't help but agree. Its a well known fact that Hard drive installations will help any game on any system run more smoothly and decrease load times. However, mandating the use of that hard drive in a console is a bit ridiculous. The option to choose whether or not to do so would be strongly appreciated.
My suspicion however is that the PS3 can't run those game without the installs, hence it mandatory installs.
If I was a programmer looking for a job in the gaming industry I would start looking on the MS side cuz it is just easier. What you learned on your bachelor's degree is what you use. But if I went with Sony I would need to take additional classes to learn to program for Linux and special techniques for their new and strange hardware, architecture, etc. If I take a moment to think about the future of gaming I only see MS. And that's a scary future! I don't like their vision nor the pay to play online(plus internet service). =(
I disagree. I don't really mind the installs.
Why are we bringing it back up again? Nothing to see here people.
Because what else is there to b1tch about besides this and the price?
That never seems to stop an RROD story,from random bloggers, getting posted here....EVERY TIME.
Let me know if they solve this issue. You dont need to beat a dead horse.
Mandatory vs. optional = optional ftw
I don't mind installs as long as they speed up loading times. That's why I install games on a 360 and not a PS3 lol! Game installs aren't the biggest problem though. What's even worse is that PS3 owners have to install demos and even updates. That's just embarrassing.
I'd install games on 360, but Microsoft only supplied me with a 20GB hard drive and no logical way to upgrade.
And somewhere a bridge is left abandoned; children cross without fear. I envy them.
I don't mind installs as long as i play my games on a reliable hardware, that's why i install them on the PS3 lol!
I install games on the Xbox 360 to avoid the very loud noise made by the DVD drive and to avoid the DVD drive waring out prematurely. It also makes some games more stable like Fallout 3(doesn't crash like it does running from the DVD drive). So for me it is mandatory to install games to the hard drive on the Xbox 360.
@piratethom there's a way to use real HD's and hook them up to your 360, you have to take apart the HD enclosure for your 20gb but at least it doesn't void your 360 warranty, and you can pay a reasonable and rational price for a bigger HD. there's also ways to use a laptop as a wireless adapter instead of paying $70 or $90 for the xbox-specific one.. there's a lot of ways around MS' price-gouging with a little google-magic. also ways to fix the rrod.
And since you payed $599 for your PS3 there's no way you can afford to upgrade lol! Since I didn't make the same mistake myself I have a 60gb. Even with the 20gb it's possible to install at least 1 game. I even had 2 at one point.
if you KNOW that you'll need a hard drive you'll buy the 360 that comes with one! if you're 14 and just wanna play games and don't have any other need for your xbox 360 you'll just be getting the arcade system. you won't be concerned with game installs, you won't care about how much faster a game will load if it WERE installed. microsoft didn't gimp anything, they did the right thing. optional installs ftw!
I cant say that it bothers casual gamers, and most hardcore gamers will just upgrade there hdd, my 320gb Western Digital cost £40! what a bargain.. whereas it costs u £60 in the uk to get a 120 gb Xbox Hdd.
The thing is though its not actually needed, Uncharted proved that... Its just the easy way out for devs.
Not really, an exclusive game will have the engine designed to take advantage of a consoles strengths and try to cancel out the weakness'. But I do agree, in some cases it's just an easy route for the developer.
...seriously. If it can improve anything then I will install first.