Sony touts benefits of Blu-ray for PS3

The benefits of the Blu-ray technology in Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 3 gaming console will become more obvious as video games become even more complex, a Sony top executive said Tuesday.

"It's a huge advantage," Jack Tretton, president and CEO, Sony Computer Entertainment America, said about Blu-ray. Speaking at the official launch event for the PricewaterhouseCoopers "Media and Entertainment Outlook 2009-2013" report, he added: "What is often lost are the advantages from a gaming standpoint."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
theEnemy3343d ago

when the world goes blu.

edgeofblade3343d ago

Or, ya know, we could do away with the Rah-Rah cheerleading and think like rational individuals...

Blu-ray is great for movies. But games? I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: games don't look good because of huge texture files... they look good thanks to shaders.

For all intents and purposes, these days, there is very little correlation with the way a game looks and how much disk space it takes up. The processing power has SO much more to do with a game looking good than the disk space.

And no amount of fanboy cheerleading is going to change that.

gaffyh3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

Always bet on Blu.

@1.3 - Everything makes a difference. Or are you telling me that if a game has fantastic shaders and crappy textures it'll still look good?

edgeofblade3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

Yes, gaffyh. That is exactly what I'm saying.

For the majority of games, if you look at the actual textures, they are quite muddy. But after the right shaders and the right mapping techniques, they take on an "actual" texture that isn't possible with texture files alone.

The honest truth is that most people don't know that much about HOW visual effects are actually achieved. And even more are willing to assume Blu-ray has everything to do with that realistic look, as their Sony overlords have told them.

Here', I'll use Sony's own material to prove it. You need to download the Behind the Bullet feature on PSN. Flip through the different visual filters showing normals and shine. Those are all "textures" are done with shaders... not texture files. That's all done on processing power.

All-33343d ago

"What is often lost are the advantages from a gaming standpoint."

The high Blu-ray disc storage capacity means that for more complex games, competing gaming platforms will at times need several discs for one game, while the PS3 will need only one. "It's like the old intermission," with gamers having to swap discs and wait, Tretton quipped. More discs, of course, would also mean higher costs.

Not all that much to say besides the above?

There haven't been many PS3 exclusive games with 15+ hours of actual gameplay - for all that blu-ray disc space...

gaffyh3343d ago

@1.5 - I see what you're saying, but it depends on each game, shaders and lighting affect the look of the game more than textures yes. But the better the textures look, the better the game will look right? The more space the better in that case.

edgeofblade3343d ago

Ah, it's refreshing to have someone willing to respectfully discuss and debate.

Yes, games can have large texture files, scale back the shaders, and bank the performance gains at the expense of disk space. I suppose if you make that case, Blu-ray offers more general flexibility to create larger worlds of lower fidelity (like Fuel for example), or smaller worlds of higher fidelity.

It's certainly a trade-off, but for the best looking games, the disk space correlation still does not hold.

Of course, I would love to hear from someone who is more of an expert set things straight. I'm just speaking from a general CS background.

heroicjanitor3343d ago

Blu ray is pretty important for a lot of jrpgs, since they use cgi cut-scenes which take up a buttload of space...

INehalemEXI3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

each level of KZ2 took up 2GB+. 10 levels x 2 rougly 20GB for this data alone....and there is more then just the level data. We are not even far into the PS3 life cycle and game file sizes don't get smaller as time progresses...

FamilyGuy3343d ago

I like CGI cut-scenes, so unless the games graphics are on par with Uncharted 2, im all for blu-rays addition storage space. The additional storage space also gives room for things like stream loading, as we've seen with InFamous. Having no loading during your ENTIRE gaming session is just awesome.

But yeah, games themselves don't take up that much space, the characters, their animations, ect take up little disc space. But the maps themselves, depending on size and detail, can take up a good amount of space each and if you have a large game with many different maps then blu-ray will definitely show it's usefulness.

gaffyh3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

@1.8 - Just asked my brother (this is actually his account which I'm using :D), anyway he is relatively advanced at 3D modelling, and Photoshop. Basically he said that shaders and lighting is used for games with less textures such as Team Fortress, makes the game look good. But you can't achieve next-gen quality (and by this he means most next-gen games) without good textures.

These are some of the stuff he's made, just for the hell of it :).

Greywulf3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

You have no idea what you're talking about. As usual..

Shader networks ... require space..The more space you have.. the more detailed shader networks you can have. Which is why Ps3 exclusives run circles around all other console games. 0's and 1's is all we are talking about here.

Your "texture" argument is just some lame crap you read online. If you have a 2k diffuse map, and a 2k reflection map, a 2k normal map, etc, it adds up. The ps3 uses higher resolution textures due to bluray, you don't need to compress these textures either due to the space, which means you have a higher fidelity image for say Nathan Drakes pores. Where as Gears of War's texture detail was low resolution and pixelated because it had to fit on 1 dvd.

A shader combines textures, and how it reacts in the world. Unless the textures are procedural -- which means they aren't based off of an image. Shaders & Textures are one in the same most of the time. Here..


and just go away. You can try to downplay everything sony related all you want, but at least get a clue about what you're talking about.

How many time can the dvdfanriders pretend that you don't need more space? Its the exact same argument for CD vs DVD.

Megatron083343d ago

if blu ray is so great why is sony already abandoning it for DD ?

onanie3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

Thanks for the insight, greywulf.

However complex the shaders are, they still require data to work on. The higher the data resolution, the more detailed the outcome will be. You can't possibly forgo the resolution without consequences, unlike what edge suggested.

I think higher disc capacity does not necessarily need to show its benefit in terms of game length. A 15 hour game is justifiable if the visuals surpass those that were limited by disc capacity.

@Megatron - Sony did not abandon blu-ray for DD. where on earth did you get that?

INehalemEXI3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

my bad it was 8 levels still 16GB+ of level data alone. :D I mean one of the biggest (file wise) games I ever played started at 17GB on PC and it was VGSoH an MMO. This is mad data. I think KZ2 is going down as a technical marvel in console history, all those impressive visuals with no install aside from installing DLC.

Lifendz3343d ago

I became a believer!

then you came out with Killzone 2

it blew my mind!

now Uncharted 2....ohhhh...ahhhhh

I'm a believer...I couldn't leave Sony if I tried

* cue the music *

ZuperAmazingCooKie3343d ago

Regardless, they fail to acknowledge the fact that DVD9 limits games in comparison to Blu-ray. It's not that Blu-ray helps render advanced shaders (making the position look ridiculous and proving the ridiculous position they made up instead of the actual position), it's not JUST that blu-ray helps the machine display higher quality assets; it's the fact that some games are impossible to slash into multiple discs! Not all games are linear.

"FIFA 2011: If you wanna play with Italy, Brazil, or USA, use disc 1; if you wanna play with the rest of countries, use disc 2"; is this ever gonna happen? Of course not, so the devs are limited to DVD9 size.

"GTA5: You just arrived into Vice City, please insert disc 2; Oh, it was a mistake? insert disc 3 again then" No, that's never gonna happen, it would be annoying, so open world games are gonna be as small as GTAIV was.

Same goes for fighting games, racing games, and other sports games, aside of open world games.

Open world games belong to one of the most important genres nowadays, if not THE most important genre. Any game limited to DVD9 will suffer for this.

The question is, do Xbox fanboys like edgeofblade or All-3 fail on purpose, or accidentally?

Serg3342d ago (Edited 3342d ago )

As John Carmack pointed out in his QuackeCon 08 keynote: "We lose 300 MB behind the couch on next gen games."

CDs weren't enough for the PS1, DVDs weren't enough for the PS2, Star Ocean 3 used 3 DVDs but if "my" console has no other option, it's enough! No, it's not. If the 100GB Bluray discs don't become standard during the PS3s life cycle, we will see 2 disc games on the PS3.

DVD cripples this generation. Look at GTA4, if this would be PS3/PC only it would turn out 10 times better. Yes it would be multi disc on PC but you can install all the data and the need to switch discs would vanish. Not so on 360, GTA can't be done with the solution of swapping discs while playing. There is simply no way to do it. Look at Devil may Cry 4, if somebody could please tell me a valid reason on how visiting the exact same levels and killing the exact same monsters and bosses, twice, is a great gameplay addition instead of a way to make the game fit on 1 DVD.

Creating games with the DVD in mind nowadays will only lead to worse quality games, not better. It's a no brainer, but I guess you still need some sort of brain to see this.

And the shader guy: You know that shaders are multiple image files with some code to let the engine know how to combine them, right? A low resolution texture will still look like one even if you apply 100 different effects to it. And if the texture resolution goes up, the shader images need to go up as well, upscaling doesn't cut it if you want the details to come out. And you guessed it, you need more space for them.

Again, explain to me how BluRay is not an addition to gaming? This "DVD is enough we play Forza on 2 discs and Lost Oddyssey on 4 discs" argument is dumb, pure and simple.

Honestly whenever I see a scientist on TV talking about intelligent life on earth, the first thing that comes to my mind is: He obviously has never been on the internet.

Syronicus3342d ago

Sorry, but for anybody that argues that BD is not needed for games int he future need to look no further than FOrza 2, Final Fantasy XIII and many more. There have already been games that show the need for more storage and so arguing that it is not needed is silly.

If you are not a developer and are arguing the "no need for BD" argument then please, take note that your words fall on deaf ears. They mean nothing because the proof is in the current games we are seeing. Nothing on DVD rivals that of Killzone 2, Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank and more. More to come like God of War III, GT5 and The Last Guardian.

If anything, the release of Final Fantasy XIII should be the perfect note for those who do not believe BD is needed this gen. When in a DVD this game will need a minimum of 4 discs and for BD, it will need one.

People need to stop condemning Sony for thinking outside the box and doing what will in the end, benefit the gamers and start giving them props for doing the right thing, despite the price.

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 3342d ago
Stryfeno23343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

"A new study by Harris Interactive notes that currently, one in ten Americans (10%) own an HD DVD player, while just 7% own a Blu-ray player. Crazy, right? More Americans own HD DVD right now than the 'winning' format, Blu-ray. If you think about it, that statistic isn't that shocking. When HD DVD was around, it was far and away the 'budget' format for high-def. The players were cheaper, the films were cheaper. In other words, it was a format more ready to thrive in a down economy. Blu-ray was always viewed as a niche format for those absorbed in A/V, not the common man's format. The survey also found that on average, consumers purchased approximately six standard format DVDs in the last six months, compared with one in HD DVD format."

Hey don't get mad at me, I'm just a messenger.

rucky3343d ago

"I won, get over it"


ultimolu3343d ago

Annnnnd...bluray is winning sales over HD-DVD so what's your f*cking point?

Stryfeno23343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

Tsk, tsk, tsk...Your 2 haven't even bothered to read the article.

EDIT: @PirateThom Its referring to 'STANDALONE PLAYERS'.

EDIT 2: Why is it a stupid report? If the format was so healthy the standalone players would be flying off the shelves also. This report just shows you not all consumer are jumping in. Maybe because of price, upconvert DVD, or whatever. This is more proof the only advantage Blu-ray has is the PS3 and outside of that no-one cares.

PirateThom3343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

Oh yes, that report that everyone laughed at because it completely ignored PS3s as being blu-ray capable.

How amusing.

HD DVD lost because neither studios or consumers supported it, get over it.

Exactly, that's why it's a stupid report.

Nineball21123343d ago

YOu're exactly right Pirate Thom...

That poll was skewed:

NegativeCreep4273343d ago (Edited 3343d ago )

The very first person to comment on such a story is a dip-sh*t MS troll who still thinks HD-DVD is still relevant and who avoids all the statistical articles claiming Blu-Ray continues to acquire market share month in, month out!.

Delusions will take you anywhere! Xbot d*ck-heads know that more than anyone else!

Edit @ nlvwithgms

Thank you for corroborating my last statement up there. When you think of the Xbox 360, you inherently mistake it for the PS3; You want to talk about things breaking and being a piece of junk, The xbox 360 is your source material.

user39158003343d ago

If it has the name sony on it stay away from it, because the junk will might reach the one year warranty and than it will break short after. Blu ray its crap in all sense of media adaptability, hell the hd-dvd was better and cheaper, but the support was not there. 2011 the released of MS with a 400gb disk media from pioneer will be available, although, natal will come out christhmas 2010 as an attachment, it will not be incorporated into the 360 until 2011 and a 1TB hd to go with it, enhanced graphics and siver light compression tech.

Bubble Buddy3343d ago

I think Patchstation 3 is stuck in early 2008 ;) , Blu-rays all day.

Oner3343d ago

Man it's f'ing hilarious when a biased, uninformed immature person gets their a$$ handed to them with proper facts and proof! Way to go "Patchstation" you have yet again managed to further embarrass yourself...

All Time Greatness3343d ago

lol Blu ray won and PS3 still got stomped XD

"I won, get over it"

-Xbox 360

Oner3342d ago

Um can someone try and explain how 2nd place is "winning"?...

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 3342d ago
ultimolu3343d ago

Blu power! :D

Just bought Transporter 3 and Quantum of Solace on bluray. Ultra, ultra sharp and clear.

darthv723343d ago

Those are just movies. They don't showcase the benefit of blu as it relates to the PS3.

On topic, I can see devs using the capacity to really make a big open world type of game. Right now it seems like they are holding back on something of that magnitude. Perhaps it is $$ related (wouldnt surprise me) in that (just like movies) to make a big fancy game takes lots of cash. Will the effort be rewarding?? will people buy the game in droves to recoup what they spent in making it?

Those are the questions on the devs minds.

Off topic: why don't more movie studios create compilations of movies or tv series on a single blu? Granted the higher capacity is beneficial for newer movies with lots of high res camera shots but older stuff could get a "boxed set" sort of single disc treatment. Right now I am not really seeing studios take full advantage of the capacity. The movie itself may be in HD but lots of the extra stuff is still in SD which is the same as on a reg DVD.

If you are going HD then go all the way with your content. Just my 2 cents.

IdleLeeSiuLung3343d ago

No compilations because they probably figured with multiple discs movie studios figure they can charge more. A compilation tends to yell "cheap"...

Ever seen those two unrelated DVD movie packs? Yeah!

el zorro3343d ago

Blu-ray is great for movies, but it isn't that important for games this generation. Most games can fit on a standard DVD. Even games that do use more space on a Blu-ray disc could often fit on a DVD if more effort was taken to arrange the data in an efficient way on the disc. So far the games I play on the PS3 don't seem any bigger than the games I play on the 360. When all is said and done though, even if a game has to use multiple discs, who cares? I know I don't.

TheBand1t3343d ago

You might not care about multiple discs, but devs do. They cost more to produce.

gaffyh3343d ago

@zorre - Rage, Star Ocean 4, Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Forza 3, FF13 etc. say hi. That shows you that DVD is not enough because they are on multiple discs.

Obviously people don't mind multi-disc, but the fact that there are multi-disc games shows that DVD is not enough, and now it's starting to affect games that aren't only RPGs e.g. Rage, Forza 3. I know you have to defend your beloved system, but it's incredibly naive to think that Blu-Ray isn't needed when the proof is right in front of your eyes.

ultimolu3343d ago

I disagree el zorro. Sooner or later, developers will need more space.

Games are getting bigger, not smaller.

Oh, and I have eighteen games and only five bluray movies.

pippoppow3343d ago

More disc space is welcome. So would you mind if the 360 used cds?, multiple discs are no problem right. If there was an option for 360 fans to buy a cd or dvd version of a game I'm sure most would choose DVD. I guess it'll take someone to finally make a great huge open world game that can only be properly done on the PS3 due to disc space to end this nonsense about how bigger disc space isn't needed. As for now you have for the most part better texture quality and sound which takes up most of the Blu-ray disc space. Also what Band1t said above.

D4RkNIKON3343d ago

"Right now it seems like they are holding back on something of that magnitude." Multiplat games are what holds things back, because it has to work on 360. That is why I am excited for Agent because Rock Star North plans to take full advantage of the PS3 because they wont have to worry about 360. This might be the sandbox title you were just talking about with MASSIVE environments.

el zorro3343d ago

No, you guys are misunderstanding what I said. I think that DVD is sufficient for the vast majority of games this generation. This is proven by the extremely small percentage of games that actually require more than the 9GBs that DVD provides. Furthermore, I simply stated that for the small number of games that do push over the 9GB limit, I really don't think it is a big deal to have to switch discs at some point through the game.

None of what I wrote above means that CD is sufficient, because obviously the vast majority of games would have to be multi-disc. The reason DVD isn't an issue this generation is because the opposite is true: the vast majority of games are not multi-discs.

I'll be perfectly honest, I haven't bought a single game for the 360 that used multiple discs. Not because it would bother me, but because none of those few games has personally appealed to me. When huge games like ES4 Oblivion and Orange Box with its 5 full games can fit on a single DVD I don't think we can claim that DVD is a problem this generation. It might not be ideal in a few cases, but it can hardly be seen as a big issue.

onanie3343d ago

DVD will always be sufficient if it is a limitation of your platform.
PS3 exclusives paint a different picture.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3343d ago
Ron Zook3343d ago

well that and the fact that blu ray movies own!

darthv723343d ago

It helped get the format into lots of peoples hands. Wether they buy movies for it or not still remains to be seen. At least you know when someone buys a samsung or rca player they are going to be using it for movies.

The same can't be said about the ps3. I know a few who got it strictly for movies and some who got it strictly for games. In either case it is still a win for sony and their blu-trojan horse.

IdleLeeSiuLung3343d ago

I think in the earlier days this was true and helped the PS3 gain traction (and mounting losses in the gaming division). Now, the PS3 is over priced as a standalone blu-ray player as one can be had around $150.