Persistance doesn't need a hard disk as much as some seem to think either, though. Or certain kinds of persistance. If you look at the save-file sizes for Morrowind, for example, you should see that it's not exactly something that'll tax a standard size memory card/stick nextgen. Even scaling up for complexity or whatever. A slightly OT point, though..
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
PSM: Sony adding more system memory and upgrades to PS3
- Thread starter monkeymagic
- Start date
- Status
TheInkyVoid
Member
terrene said:
What will all the peecee developers do when they try to make PS3 versions of their games and they can't patch their bugs after the game goes GM???
Stupid Sony.
Gek54 said:
OMG. The HDD in the Xbox was rarely, if ever used, as virtual RAM. Ask any Xbox dev. They really didn't use the HD beyond save games and patches for online play.
No. Again I will say it. More RAM != LESS NEED FOR HD
It doesn't replace or even help in what a HDD is really used for. Data persistence.
Can I save my MP3's in RAM? No.
Can I save user made mods and maps in RAM? No.
Can I save my games in RAM? No.
Can I save my MMORPG data in RAM? No.
RAM and Hard Drives are two totally seperate beasts. Hard drives are only used as virtual RAM in Windows for the most part, not in consoles. You would never want the HD in the Xbox to be used as virtual ram because compared to RAM, virtual RAM is EXTREMELY slow.
Yeah, I guess PC developers shouldn't even bother targetting the vast majority of their userbase.
I actually don't mind it, depending. For instance, I would gladly scale Halo 2 down to the detail seen in 4player split screen to reach 60fps. I expect developers to shoot for what they're currently shooting for, but allow anal people to turn things off to achieve 60fps. Can't see anything wrong with that.
THAT'S dead wrong. There were plenty of games that used the HDD for cache.
Why do you think games like Chaos Theory and Doom 3 make you sit through the opening movie when the cache has been emptied? It's loading data onto the drive for faster access. Same deal with stuff like Halo and Halo 2. Ever notice that, when you save and quite in Halo and return to the game later on (after a power down) that the game will pick up where you left off with no waiting? Data is cached onto the HDD. Team Ninja games did this as well...
It's obviously a different situation than using ram as a cache for data, as it would not remain there after a power down. They'd need to load data into ram in a more strategic fashion in order to hide it from the user and they'd need to do so every time.
FLASH MEMORY. The system uses memory sticks just as the PSP does. Why not simply use those for patches and downloadable content? Obviously, there are limitations there as one can't expect everyone to have a large memory stick, but they may not need it in all cases.
dark10x said:
I'm going to stick by my rarely used comment. Halo I know used it. I will assume that you are correct and Chaos Theory used it as well as Doom 3. Let's talk about ratios here, which will prove my statement. Number of games using HD as cache/Total Number of games = SMALL NUMBER.
Small Number means RARELY USED.
Also, it made for really damn long load times that were particularly annoying if it's true it was used in Chaos Theory.
Flash memory is small compared to a HDD. You run out of room fast. It's not a reasonable storage choice for patches, especially patches that include extra content.
Guy LeDouche
Banned
Tivo? The X360 doesn't have TV inputs, does it?terrene said:
dark10x said:
AFAIK, though, you won't be able to do this to the same extent with X360. You can use it to speed some things up still, as you give examples of, but if anything actually required it to function..that won't fly. Apparently in this regard, games have to function without the HDD. You can't do anything in terms of caching that would make it a necessity, just a "nice" luxury. I'm not sure if any Xbox games used the HDD in such a way that the game would be impossible to function otherwise, though?
Dr_Cogent said:
But its faster than streaming it off the disc. Several Xbox devs needed the caching for their games to run they wanted and if they had more ram they would have LESS need to cache.
Dr_Cogent said:
All it takes is for one game to need to cache for it to matter.
Dude, obviously. I'm going to buy both. I'm just making a business critique. The 360 is casting its net much wider than "nerdy guys who want to play games." And even if it wasn't, you've spelled out the benefits that hard drives can bring to games perfectly -- let alone the fact that it's NECESSARY to have an upgradable system to do online games.dark10x said:
The lack of a hard drive sucks, any way you cut it. Period.
Gek54 said:
I, as well as others, want more than just that. We want to be able to store our music, game saves, mods, and anything else that can be dreamed up in a single place that has plenty of room. Unfortunately, bumping up the RAM gives us none of that.
I'm not going to argue this point further with you.
More RAM = Good
More RAM != less of a reason to have a HD - IMO
You can disagree all you like though.
Guy LeDouche
Banned
As far as I know, the PS3 still has the 2.5 HDD slot. That hasn't changed. If this rumor is true, we get beefed tech stats + HDD.Gek54 said:
Gek54 said:
GAH!
PS3 isn't even coming with one anyway.
You said that more RAM will make it so there is less of a reason for a HD. I'm saying that your contention is incorrect and that it does diddly for making a HD less necessary since I am asserting you need a HD for all of the items I have listed so far.
And now you have made a liar out of me because I said I wouldn't argue this point further with you.
sonycowboy
Member
Gek54 said:
It is pretty amazing how one person can change an entire thread's discourse.
The point is we may see a bump in RAM, although many of us consider the entirely speculative on the basis that the damn thing is expensive enough as it is for Sony to produce without adding more cost for RAM.
However, more RAM would make a HUGE difference in what devs can do and I doubt anybody outside or Ms Cogent would argue that. In fact, after 4 pages, no one else has.
I'd love to see it happen and I know devs would, but it's almost certainly not going to.
sonycowboy said:
sonyfanboy is a master of spin I must say.
Like I said, I never once said that it wouldn't make a difference in what devs can do. I was simply trying to dispell the myth that more is more in computing. It isn't always.
Quit making up lies sony. I never argued that PS3 wouldn't benefit from it. Way to spin and lie some more.
The HDD will be an add-on.KingOfF00LS
Member
Dr_Cogent said:
If it helps, I knew exactly what you meant the first time around. Then again, I'm not one of the crazed sony fans. Although I will say the 2 consoles I'm buying next gen are Revolution and PS3 (not wasting my money on another XBOX).
Don't sweat it, mate. You said exactly what you meant to say just fine. Don't worry about some who want to distort your words.
- Status