PS3 Dev Says New Game Takes Up 22 GB on Blu-Ray Disc >

	2006/08/22 11:42:04: Posted by Josh
	MTV News reports that PS3 developer Ryan Schneider in a recent press showing of his Fall FPS title "Resistance: Fall of Man" claimed that the title takes up an unprecendented 22 gigs on a Blu-Ray disc. Schneider explained that the size is partially due to textures and the soundtrack, but noted that it's something that just isn't possible with HD-DVD's 15 gig limitation (note: he's referring to the single-layer HD-DVD flavor). Resistance is reported to feature 40-player online matches, a ranking system with 60 levels (unclear if this is ranking or actual game levels), and gyro utilization with PS3's Dual Shake controller. >Link
	Labeled With  PS3 Blu-Ray Resistance Comments [41]  | Rate this article: -- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Avg. rating of 8.0

I am so excited about this game, I can hardly wait until I get a PS3. 40 player online matches, amazing.

it must have hours of cut scene's or is a hude game but graphics are only all right plus it reminds me a bit of half-life and its not going to be a ps3 seller

mixed with call of duty

22GB's there better be 30+ hours or so of gameplay to justify that much space. Considering that GOW looks better and is being delivered on a paltry DVD9.

Why even mention HD-DVD... that just comprimises his comment and makes it seem more like propoganda. And I thought it was Blu-Ray having trouble making dual layer presses, not HD-DVD.

Sorry to be a fanboy here but Ryan should let his game speak for itself. All he really needs to ever talk about is 40-player online. I would love keyboard + mouse on ps3 too, i hate playing FPS on the dual shock analogs.

I obviously didn't say this in the post, but it's interesting Schneider seems to want to take a knock at HD-DVD, when a 12cm double layer HD-DVD can fit 30 gigs at this point, and that the 360 HD-DVD drive is just for movies. If it looks good, plays well and was easy to code then more power to em.

Just b/c in your opinion you think GOW looks better doesn't mean it is going to be a better game. Content is a major contributor I am sure. Halo wasn't the most beautiful game by any stretch of the imagination, it was the content that sold the game. To use your opinion on what looks better as justification for an argument really is lame. Some people thought Windwaker was a breathtaking graphical experience, I thought it was crap. If the game is using 22 gigs, is having more for you money really a bad thing?

GOW may only be two hours long for all we know. This being said, GOW is definitely, w/o a shadow of a doubt, the one game I look forward to the most of any title being released this year. Let's hope it doesn't flop.

Nicely put. If the game delivers, does it matter if it's 22gb big or 4gb? The 360 fanboys just HAVE to take a go at the Blu-ray, don't they?

GOW may look better, but will it PLAY better?

the size of a game in space means NOTHING to the game's length. also it should be noted that he is refering to the game in uncompressed form. no way do textures of that quality take up near 4gigs in compressed form.

if developers leave their games uncompressed expect VERY long load times and other performance hits because game compression (of which there are many types) have been developed to improve game performance and quality.

its humerous how much missunderstanding there is between gamers and game development

Wow 22GBs, that is a clear sign of piss poor optimizing and compression technique out the ass...

itaintrite, lay off the "fanboy" talk as you are the last person who should be talking. why get so sensitive to your precious console of choice when nothing really bad was said? there was missinterpretation (spelling?) that game size judges game lenth and questions to why the developer even mentioned HD-DVD to begin with which is a good question as it makes the developer comment look like paid advertisement.

which plays better is irrelevent as they are two different styles of game

The current development size is 22gb; its bound to be optimised for release simply so that it runs better if not to reduce the size. And, I wonder why he brings up HD-DVD, since it will be a very long time before a console game ever gets released on HD-DVD.

What is really exciting is the uncompressed 5.1 audio.

Ok dickwads! GOW and resistance come out in Nov. Come back here and let's see which is better and if BR and 22GB made any difference to make it better than GOW. If it does you can justify having BR as the media of choice (and I'll admit defeat) if not I'll send you a picture of my ASS so you can kiss it. Deal?

22G worth of content and its due to high quality textures and soundtrack? Unless they're using BMP, TIFF, WAV or AU files I find that hard to believe. One would think the larger the media files (textures/audio) the longer the load times are going to be.

I'm going to have to go with Hardwood's comments about poor coding/optimization. I still dont understand will all this power why nobody wants to use procedural graphics.

"I still dont understand will all this power why nobody wants to use procedural graphics"

Because if they did, why have blu-ray? And that my friend would be a bad selling point for Sony.

I thought flaming was not permitted here. Just b/c someone contradicts a very vague and biased statement with reasoning is no cause for namecalling .

My bad Vae, I didn't direct anything towards anyone in particular. But I know where you're coming from. If I could delete my statement I would.

Yeah, i'm incredibly unimpressed by how he made a misleading crack at HD-DVD. It's all propaganda, and a whole lot of half truth. I've seen some spectacular textures and levels come out for PC that only took a couple of cds. Nowhere near 22GB.

Also, with 40 players online at once, you had better have a mighty good internet connection. You know, the kind most people don't have. If you thought halo2 was bad with only 16 players, think how laggy it will be with more than twice as many people

Yeah, you are right KonamiKid. The internet connections will likely be a major issue with so many people at once. I am one of those people who always gets host b/c my internet connection is so good. I always hate when I don't b/c the game lags so badly otherwise.

HD DVD was mentioned simply because whenever Microsoft gets the chance, they take a knock at Blu Ray's inclusion in the PS3. it's fair play, if you ask me.

also, someone said Gears of War looks better, and will be on a paltry DVD9. last i heard, the title was going to be on *MULTIPLE* paltry DVD9s. i could be wrong, and i'm not trying to flame. but if Gears of War does indeed ship on only *two* discs, that means that DVD9 was not big enough to house the game. period. again, that's assuming what i've read about it being on multiple discs is true.

No biggy Silver, just remember that not everyone who posts for or against a specific platform is a "fanboy."

I've heard the same thing Fig about GOW.

as for poor coding and optimization? i'm no programmer, but i find it hard to believe that a developer that has been making video games since the PS1 isn't aware of how to optimize code, regardless of the complexities and difficulties of developing on a new console. Insomniac and the Resistance team bring over 10 years of developing experience to the table when creating a video game. are some of you saying that Disruptor, Spyro the Dragon, and Ratchet and Clank tought them nothing about game design and coding? i'm curious?

it's also getting a little tiring seeing Gears of War constantly brought up when an even marginally nice-looking title for the PS3 comes into the light. yes. Gears of War is beautiful. and judging by Unreal Tournament 2K7, Heavy Rain, Final Fantasy XIII, MGS4, the Untitled Naughty Dog Game, Assassin's Creed, Heavenly Sword, and Resistance: Fall of Man, the PS3 will be very capable of producing visuals on par with Gears of War. the system isn't even out yet. developers have been working with 360's longers. it'd be pathetic if there *weren't* games looking like Gears of War on the console, considering the system has been out a year. once the PS3 has been out a year, we can judge it thoroughly.

The only listing I've seem for GOW with two disk is the special edition one. Figboy, while I understand what you're saying it does go both ways. How many times will I hear MGS4 everytime a good looking Xbox 360 game comes out? Anyways in regards to storage capacity here's an old but good read on the subject. Thought you guys might enjoy it.

www.gamesfirst.com/?id=1132

With PS3 less than 3 months away, i suspect there will be more and more PS3 development news .... ... meaning, more fanboys on either side pussy-slapping each other.

So a PS3 Developer is praising BR and saying everything else sucks. I don't consider that news. It's just marketing.

Well a developer can say whatever he wants. I mean Peter Moore bassically says he wants to piss on the PS3 and everyone loves him, while Sony people say they piss on the 360 and people call them cocky bastards. I say both sides of the war are full of cocky bastards, but their game consoles are still great. Gears of War "looks" really good, but really the gameplay mechanics isn't all that innovative its just a normal 3rd person shooter. The graphics of course will automatically make it fun cause you wont be able to believe you are playing a video game, but for me that type of game will get boring after a while. Resistance's online gameplay is really promising, but I have a feeling the story is going to be lackluster. Basically, what will make Resistance amazing is its online multiplayer and i cant wait for that. Whocares if the developer says BR discs are superior to HDDVD or if the 360 GPU can support 4xAA and HDR at the sametime. Where are those great games mudda f**ka? lol

IT'S TIME TO GET OUR FACTS STRAIGHT:

1. The Independent Playstation Magazine has made it clear that Resistance: FOM does NOT have 40 player online support. In an interview with the magazine, it was announced that this has been reduced to 32 players, and the final version may be only 24 player. This is similar to the way Perfect Dark Zero for the Xbox 360 was originally planned to be 50--yes FIFTY-- players at the same time, but ended up being 32 player, because the developers didn't have time to add that feature since the Xbox 360 launch was rushed rather than delayed like the Playstation 3 launch.

2. In an interview with the Independent Playstation Magazine, the designers of Resistance: FOM make it clear that they originally had the goal of making the game run at 60 frames-per-second, but they were unable to achieve that goal on the Playstation 3. Resistance: FOM is a fast-paced game like Unreal--it requires a frame-rate of 60 frames-per-second; however, on the PS3 it now runs at only 30 frames-per-second. Fast paced games need a frame-rate of 60 frames-per-second, but slower paced games only need a frame-rate of 30 frames per second, as long as Anti-Aliasing and V-sync are used properly. It is a BIG mistake for the developers of Resistance: FOM to even consider releasing this game without achieving their originally required goals for the frame-rate.

3. The only reason Resistance: FOM uses up so much disc space is because of marketing purposes. Let me explain: Rather than compress the game data in any way, these developers deliberately allowed the file to be HUGE. The reason they did this is so they can say, "This game takes up over 22GB of space, and Blu-ray is the only format that could hold it." This is all marketing nonsense--don't listen to it. The fact that these people didn't even bother to mention that a dual-layer HD-DVD could hold it PROVES this as a fact.

A First Person Shooter could EASILY be put on the dual-layer standard DVDs used on the Xbox 360. When you consider that Elder Scrolls 4, which is a Massive-Multiplayer-Online-Role-Playing-Game, doesn't even come close to filling a dual-layer Xbox 360 DVD, then there is no way that a First-Person-Shooter would EVER hold SIX-TIMES the amount of data, unless it was deliberately NOT COMPRESSED!!! That is exactly what is being said in the article, the audio and textures are NOT COMPRESSED...So, don't listen to this marketing nonsense that isn't true!!! Sony is just trying to "add perceived value" to this game and other PS3 games so they can deceive people to pay extra money for a Blu-ray game, even though the game could have EASILY been placed on a dual-layer DVD.

4. The Independent Playstation Magazine compared Resistance: FOM to the Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 is capable of displaying 500 million polygons per second, while the Playstation 3 can only display 275 million polygons per second. In the still screen-shots shown in the Independent Playstation Magazine, they show Resistance: FOM next to the Xbox 360 games Call of Duty 2 and Gears of War. The Independent Playstation Magazine makes it absolutely clear that second-generation Xbox 360 games like Gears of War are the reason why the Playstation 3 will NOT have the best graphics when it launches.

The Independent Playstation Magazine says that Resistance: FOM looks slightly better than Call of Duty 2. This makes sense because Call of Duty 2 runs at 60 frames-per-second, whereas Resistance: FOM runs at only 30 frames-per-second. When you divide 500 million by 60, you end up with approximately 8,334,000 polygons per frame in Call of Duty 2. When you divide 275 million by 30, you end up with approximately 9,167,000 polygons per frame in Resistance: FOM. This is the reason why the Independent Playstation Magazine pointed out that the screenshot of Resistance: FOM looked like it had a slight advantage over Call of Duty 2. When you subtract 8,334,000 from 9,167,000, you see that Resistance: FOM displays 833,000 more polygons per frame, which is the reason why the screenshot of Restiance: FOM looked “slightly” better. However, Call of Duty 2 runs more smoothly because both games are fast-paced and its frame-rate is twice as high as Resistance: FOM.

However, the screenshot of Gears of War on the Xbox 360 looked a LOT better than Resistance: FOM. The reason for this is because the designers of Gears of War ALWAYS had the goal of displaying 30 frames-per-second. Gears of War only needs to display a frame-rate of 30-frames-per-second, because it is much slower paced than games like Unreal or Resistance: FOM. So, when you divide 500,000,000 by 60, you end up with approximately 16,667,000 polygons per frame!!! When you subtract 9,167,000 from 16,667,000, you see that Gears of War displays 7,500,000 more polygons per frame when compared to Resistance: FOM!!!! This is almost twice as many polygons per frame!!!

This is the reason why the Independent Playstation Magazine points out how much superior Gears of War looks compared to Playstation 3 games. In fact, the Independent Playstation Magazine actually said, "Thanks to second-generation Xbox 360 games like Gears of War, the Playstation 3 will NOT have the best graphics when it is released."

what i find even funnier about some of the comments posted here, is that when a Microsoft developer is saying how lame the PS3 is to develop for, it's taken as the gospel truth. and when a Sony developer toots their own horns (like most people truly proud of their work), it's dismissed as complete and utter BS. it's retarded, and it makes me think that most of the people visiting this site are under the age of 12, and base everything off of what they read on the internet, the most trustworthy source of information....EVER! (/sarcasm)

@ figboy

I'll make this simple for you. Go back over the past year and compare the bs spewed by both companies. No, go back over the past 6 years and look at the amount of bs spewed forth. Sony has, without a doubt, far and away, the greatest amount of either outright lies and/or half truths of the competing console companies. Ever here of the boy who cried wolf? Well if not go read up on it and you will understand why people no longer believe what Sony and those associated with them tell the public.

12 years old... I think most 12 year olds understand this basic concept.

all i want is the games with resonable graphics....let the unifider shaders ,edrams ,cells etc....to the developers....since the create great games everyting is ok.

if they create great games on wii i will go pick one, simple.

His comments read more like an advertisement. The game isn't even that good looking. Maybe it just runs in 1080p. Big deal.

Resistance runs at 720p.

Also good post mike.

Has anyone else heard of this 'Independent Playstation Magazine'?

Anyways, the final multiplayer count wont matter...32 or 40, who cares, multiplayer games get waaaay to complicated with more than 20 ppl.

Who really knows what the final framerate will be. No on really, not even mike no matter how loud he screams.

Also, 5.1 uncompressed audio takes up space. So, does 1080p cutscenes. (the game runs at 720p upscaled to 1080p, so instead of using the game720p game engine to generate the fmv they are using prerendered video at 1080p).

Gears of War will bomb. Its been hyped so much that they are afraid to release a demo...the demo would show fanbois that they've aited all this time for a turd and thus affect sales. Now, it will sell well at release of course, then tank ..much like other overly hyped games like all of the 360 lunch titles (PDZ in particular).

wow things got heated quick! Resistance looks good, but its not the greatest looking game out there. As far as people criticizing GOW's online, the game screams team play and everyone that has touched the game had nothing but praise.

3 more months people. let the Sony fans get all excited and when there are no systems on shelves and the initial systems have their problems then all the 360 supporters can really have fun with the flame throwers. either way I know that if I manage to get one, you will definately find it on ebay for a nice markup. Plenty of great 360 titles coming to keep me occupied until they drop the price and more are available.

>Written by Jay360 (6) on 2006/08/22 =mike_mgoblue

It is not put on the market by 360. → Mike_mgoblue changes ID. → The lie is written again as an another person.

oh my only 720p and 30fps and lacks more interactivity like sand bags spurts out sands when shot or walls get peeled or scratch

RESPONSES

1. Jay360, thank you for the compliment about the article I wrote; it took me a long time to write that article because I want everyone to have accurate information that is based on facts.

2. (T_T), I am NOT Jay360, if that is what you are saying...I would like to confirm that I ONLY post information under the name, mike_mgoblue.

3. sjs, you are correct, Resistance: Fall of Man only runs at 30 frames-per-second at a resolution of 720p. The developers made it clear that their original goal was to have the game run at 60 frames-per-second because of the fast paced gameplay. This seemed like something the developers were disappointed about while being interviewed by the Independent Playstation Magazine. After all, fast paced games usually require a faster frame-rate. With slower paced games, it is not needed, as long as Anti-Aliasing and V-Sync are used properly in order to satisfy expectations. Sadly, Resistance: FOM is a fast paced game that was not able to achieve its original target frame-rate.

4. Figboy, the reason why people generally congratulate Microsoft for their accomplishments is because they are telling the truth when they say things. Sony, on the other hand, deliberately tries to create numbers on paper that may seem impressive, but in reality they are not.

For example, Resistance: FOM takes up a lot of data space only because it uses uncompressed data. If Microsoft wanted to, they could create a game that uses uncompressed data in that same way; they could say things like, "This game is so amazing that it takes up TEN dual-layer DVDs of information, which the players will change as they progress through the game." That may sound impressive to some people, but in reality, it would just be a marketing scam that is based on a lie. Microsoft doesn't do things like that with the Xbox; however, Sony does tell lies like that with the Playstation 3. For example, Sony said the PS3 would have TWO HDMI ports at the 2005 E3. COME ON…that is a HUGE lie that they KNEW would NEVER happen!

5. Smarty Pants, The Independent Playstation Magazine is one that you should be able to find in any store. The issue I am referring to is last month’s issue, and one of the things advertised on the cover is an interview with the developers of Resistance: FOM. To answer your question about, “who actually knows what the final frame-rate and resolution will be,” I can tell you that the developers of the game do. The developers made it clear that the game is fast-paced, which is why their original goal was to have the game running at a frame-rate of 60 frames-per-second at a resolution of 720p. However, the developers made it clear that the final version of Resistance: FOM will only run at 30 frames-per-second at a resolution of 720p. If that is the information you were looking for, I hope it helped.

6. Smarty Pants, Epic is much more interested in putting all of their time and effort into the final version of Gears of War. This is the reason why they will not use the remaining two months to develop a demo of the game; that would OBVIOUSLY be waste of valuable time. Gears of War has been in development for over two years. Using the last two months to develop a game demo rather than making sure that the final version of the game is perfect would be a very dumb decision. Gears of War doesn’t need a demo to convince people to want to play it; it is already one of the most advertised and hyped games ever.

Gears of War has also received an incredible amount of encouraging publicity, mainly because of all the awards it received at the 2006 E3 trade show. The developers of Gears of War are making the correct decision to concentrate on the quality of the final version of the game; it will succeed just like Halo because of this attitude that is based on releasing a high-quality product and willingness to delay the product if necessary. My friends and I can’t wait to play Gears of War!!! We will be there on the first day it is available!!!

7. greenlynxx, I couldn’t have said it better myself; the way you said that Sony is like the boy who cried wolf is absolutely perfect!!! I am NOT kidding when I say this, but I actually thought of that when I was writing my article! Seriously, I have lost count of the number of major lies Sony has told over the last six years, and it is getting worse over time; the number of lies told with the PS3 is TERRIBLE!!! Sony said the PS2 would have real-time graphics as good as the movie, “Toy Story,” thanks to the “Emotion Engine” CPU. This was obviously a lie based on marketing hype.

The same lies were told when Sony showed the “Cell” CPU at the 2005 E3. All of the game demos, such as Tekken 6, were a HUGE lie! Those game demos actually were prerendered computer graphics that were NOT running on a PS3, like Sony said!!! Thankfully, all of this caught up with Sony at the 2006 E3 when people saw how disappointing the actual games like Tekken 6 are; they didn’t look anything like the 2005 E3 demos.

8. I thank everyone for responding to me. I certainly hope that I am not offending anyone in any way, but I am simply stating the facts. I always try to look at things from all points of view, but when you consider that even the Playstation magazines and websites said that Sony disappointed them at the 2006 E3, it is pretty easy for you to see why it sounds like I am deliberately ripping on the Playstation 3 because I am a “fanboy” of another system like the Xbox 360 or the Wii. Actually, I was looking forward to the Playstation 3 a lot, but it really is a huge disappointment that did not live up to the hype.

I am primarily interested in the Xbox 360 at this point in time, because I am into things like High Definition video and 5.1 Digital sound, which are things that the Wii doesn’t offer. You can be that I will be looking forward to seeing if the Wii will actually offer a new kind of fun gameplay, like many people have suggested. The Wii disappointed me a lot with its inferior hardware technology, though. I mean, when you consider that the original Xbox offered 5.1 sound, but the Wii doesn’t, that is NOT a good thing. And when you consider that there were actually several original Xbox games, such as Soul Caliber 2 and some of the EA Sports games, which ran at 720p on the original Xbox, and you compare that to the fact that the Wii will not display resolution higher than 480p, it is VERY disappointing. But, I will still be looking forward to giving the Wii a try. Thanks again, everyone.

Update: In sentence two of the last paragraph, I meant to say, "You can BET," with a "T" on the end. I accidentally forgot to type the "T."

As for the lack of gow demo. All they have to do is tweak the E3 demo and let it loose on XBL ... what would the incremental cost of that be compared to the benefits? Pretty good i think .. the demo is being held back for PR/marketing reasons.

And, with 2 good months of development time. Who knows what the final build of this game is gonna look like.

mike , i know a lot of stuff about consoles.

i mean you know

MAKAVELI,

Thanks for the compliment, MAKAVELI. You are a very nice person.

loll im serious,,,you really know.