| Home | Forums | What's new | Resources | |
| Blu-rays in PS3 will cost Sony $100 per unit! |
| Kuta - Sep 4, 2005 |
 |
Kuta | Sep 4, 2005 | ||
|
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25901... The above article explains how the Xbox 360 will have a massive economical advantage over the PS3. Sony are putting too much emphesis on ability and are not giving enough attention to comercial competition. The PS3 may have a lot of advantages over the Xbox 360 technicaly but are those advantages going to be utilised and will the extra cost make it worth while. It is worth noting that although the release of the PS3 is less than a year away I have not yet seen any blu-ray products on the store shelves yet. Looking at past situations like when DVDs were first introduced to the market it took a good 5 years until it got anywhere near a decent market penetration. Even if it takes only a couple years for blu-ray to pick up in popularity it will almost be time for the next generation of gaming machines!! So that leaves the game developers to utilise the new tech in the PS3 but perhaps someone could explain to me; exactly what would a game programmer do with a massive 50gb of storage on a single disc? With the current level of storage requirments for top of the range games, why couldn't you fit everything you need on a single 9G DVD even without compression? I am sorry to say that the Xbox is making a lot more bussiness sense than the PS3 is and I would anticipate that Sony will end up loosing quite a lot of market share with the next gen of consoles. What are they thinking? | ||||
 |
Berty | Sep 4, 2005 | ||
Im sure there will be a FF games that will eventually utilize that much space... unfortunatly  | ||||
 |
lordofduct | Sep 4, 2005 | ||
|
I am SO with Berty... I swear that franchise has to DIE! Oh and that Xenosaga crap will too probably... Jesus those games put shaim to the RPG name | ||||
 |
ExCyber | Sep 7, 2005 | ||||||
The article mentions no actual source on this, so I'm skeptical. Even if it does turn out to not be made up, I really doubt that the marginal cost of production is going to be $100; more likely engineering costs are being figured into that price. And even if that is the cost of production, it doesn't necessarily mean a higher retail price for PS3, since Sony might eat part of the cost for the sake of establishing a large installed base of Blu-Ray players.
The traditional console lifecycle is 5-6 years, not 3-4 and many hang on for a while even after their "deaths" (NES, PSX, and Dreamcast are good examples), and this is obviously a move by Sony to massively accelerate Blu-Ray adoption. As much as I think UMD movies are silly, the market response (movies are selling almost as well as games despite their high cost and limitations, and Universal has announced support for the format) shows that Sony has the marketing and business expertise necessary to pull this sort of thing off.
I don't have firsthand knowledge of this, but I've heard that art assets (textures/models) tend to be massive in their native formats and have to be compressed/decimated/subsampled to actually fit on the disc in many cases, independent of the question of the video hardware actually being able to render them. Yes, you can do some neat stuff... with procedural textures/models and the like, but that probably doesn't support the effort/reward ratio that industry players want. Then add in that Sony and Microsoft see HDTV as the Next Big Thing, and all of a sudden those textures and models will need to get a lot larger to remain cutting-edge. MS may be banking on getting rid of FMV in order to make room now that realtime scenes are looking almost as good as prerendered ones. Of course Sony is predisposed to use Blu-Ray since they want to get the standard established. QUOTE(ExCyber @ Thu, 2005-09-08 @ 12:48 AM) The article mentions no actual source on this, so I'm skeptical. Even if it does turn out to not be made up, I really doubt that the marginal cost of production is going to be $100; more likely engineering costs are being figured into that price. And even if that is the cost of production, it doesn't necessarily mean a higher retail price for PS3, since Sony might eat part of the cost for the sake of establishing a large installed base of Blu-Ray players.
I don't have firsthand knowledge of this, but I've heard that art assets (textures/models) tend to be massive in their native formats and have to be compressed/decimated/subsampled to actually fit on the disc in many cases, independent of the question of the video hardware actually being able to render them. Yes, you can do some neat stuff... with procedural textures/models and the like, but that probably doesn't support the effort/reward ratio that industry players want. Then add in that Sony and Microsoft see HDTV as the Next Big Thing, and all of a sudden those textures and models will need to get a lot larger to remain cutting-edge. MS may be banking on getting rid of FMV in order to make room now that realtime scenes are looking almost as good as prerendered ones. Of course Sony is predisposed to use Blu-Ray since they want to get the standard established. QUOTE(KuKzz @ Tue, 2005-09-20 @ 03:35 PM) Microsoft Games Studios don't make games ? That's news to me!
 [post=139780]Quoted post[/post] [/b] | ||||||||
As far as I know, Microsoft Games Studios is just a collection of bought out developers..
If you can find a game that was developed by Microsoft (other than Flight Simulator), then that's news to me!
QUOTE(ExCyber @ Wed, 2005-09-21 @ 11:40 AM)
Yes, just like a MOD may be bigger than an MP3...
[/b]
[post=139809]Quoted post[/post]
[/b]
I'm sorry, you lost me.