nowhat
Member
Yes, because *drum roll* the games were never designed around certain seek/transfer times. Funny, that.The loading times were never an issue until this generation though lol.
Yes, because *drum roll* the games were never designed around certain seek/transfer times. Funny, that.The loading times were never an issue until this generation though lol.
The loading times were never an issue until this generation though lol.
The loading times were never an issue until this generation though lol.
Oh not only that, but you maybe had to adjust the tape heads as well.I guess you weren't around for the ~10 minute loading times of yesteryear then.
If it's still playable, nothing should limit it in my opinion.Yes, because *drum roll* the games were never designed around certain seek/transfer times. Funny, that.
I don't remember even 3 mins on 360 GTA V, but so much time has passed so I digress.![]()
This weekend i decided to fire up my ps3 and play GTA V for a little bit and then I was reminded why I've not been playing it. The load times are terrible. Using the disk version of GTA V from turning on the ps3 till actually playing GTA V single player is over 11 minutes. Loading screens from there are a couple of minutes. Even the pause menu takes a bit to come up. is there anything I can do to speed things up? Is there a hard drive defrag on te ps3?
- Baron_Calamity
- Replies: 46
- Forum: Gaming Discussion
This is from 2014, and even though 11 minutes was abnormal, most people chiming in saying 3-5 minutes is what to expect. It's insane to think that anyone in the era of Tiktok would wait that long for anything.
Before my time.
![]()
I guess you weren't around for the ~10 minute loading times of yesteryear then.
If it's still playable, nothing should limit it in my opinion.
One thing that always bothered me, why don't games have an option to fully cache themselves into RAM?
This particular game is 40GB. I have 64GB of super fast RAM. Why not have the option to load the whole thing and completely remove any later loading or streaming into RAM?
Even RAMDisk doesn't work that way. It will still load from RAMDisk to the remaining RAM.
There are at least two reasons.There's no reason in my opinion I shouldn't be able to still play it off my HDD now in 2025.
I'm not saying to keep a game in RAM, i'm saying to pre-load the whole game in RAM so no streaming/loading is needed while playing.Don't understand what you mean? You can't keep games stored on your RAM
That's why PC is great, because you can even decide to make dumb choices like playing your games on a USB-connected mechanical hard drive.If it's still playable, nothing should limit it in my opinion.
Thank you for explaining and understanding.There are at least two reasons.
One is that the code gets more and more bloated after every update and the faster speeds can cover for the crappy devs.
Another is that with every update, more stuff and assets gets added that needs to be loaded and the HDDs were already at their limit before that.
Fair point.On console, you get what you get. That's the whole point - everything is pre-configured for you so that everyone has the same experience.
Interesting.The SSD I bought December 21st for $320 on sale. Is now $480 on sale . . .
In a general sense, loading of data is constrained by CPU performance not storage performance. This is easily seen by the relative lack of any improvement in game loading speeds going from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0 to 5.0 SSD's. This is why putting the whole game on a RAM disk doesn't net dramatic performance improvements in game loading speed. For awhile there, some workstation video cards were coming with SSD slots on them to speed loading for professional work and that just didn't net meaningful enough improvements in performance for this to become generally implemented or availableOne thing that always bothered me, why don't games have an option to fully cache themselves into RAM?
This particular game is 40GB. I have 64GB of super fast RAM. Why not have the option to load the whole thing and completely remove any later loading or streaming into RAM?
Even RAMDisk doesn't work that way. It will still load from RAMDisk to the remaining RAM.
MS's shitty software installed Forza Horizon 5 to my HDD instead of my SSD. It was a fucking mess, the entire world would disappear if you drove too fast.I don't mind longer loading times. Not aware of streaming issues as well...
It's also obvious some didn't read the OP fully.
On PC right?MS's shitty software installed Forza Horizon 5 to my HDD instead of my SSD. It was a fucking mess, the entire world would disappear if you drove too fast.
MS's shitty software installed Forza Horizon 5 to my HDD instead of my SSD. It was a fucking mess, the entire world would disappear if you drove too fast.
I hope entering the next generation, all games aren't required to be installed on them in order to play it.
As a fan of Xbox, it is one of the negatives the Series S/X has had this generation as they only offer proprietary SSD options. Sure I don't need 10 plus games installed at one time, but who doesn't love the convenience of having a digital library sometimes?
Who can relate?
SATA will be good for awhile I think just because there is only so much memory to stream in to - and that isnt increasing at a massive rate and the AI debacle is likely to slow that progression to larger RAM/VRAM.Let's just hope SATA SSDs will be good for a while and games won't start demanding NVMe speeds. I have a total of 8TB from Sata SSDs but only a single 1TB Nvme...
You will not get that pony, ever.
Yep, MS is the issue while the problem doesn't really exist on PS5 (or PS4 before).This is an Xbox problem not an industry problem
Microsoft used proprietary HDD during the 360 era too, you couldn't use any off the shelf HDD to upgrade a 360 storage you had to buy the overpriced ones from them
Fortunately now that Microsoft is fucking off from being a platform holder this won't be an issue anymore. The PS3, PS4, PS5, Switch, Switch 2, and Steam Deck can all take off the shelf upgrades to their internal storage using industry standard parts
I have a habit, and I'm not alone in this (it takes a "special" kind), of directly translating English idioms to my native language. For the benefit of a few, and confusion of many. So when my daughter was a toddler, and would ask for all kinds of ridiculous things, I'd reply with "yeah, and I want a pony".Cold blooded.
If it's still playable, nothing should limit it in my opinion.
I hope entering the next generation, all games aren't required to be installed on them in order to play it.
As a fan of Xbox, it is one of the negatives the Series S/X has had this generation as they only offer proprietary SSD options. Sure I don't need 10 plus games installed at one time, but who doesn't love the convenience of having a digital library sometimes?
Who can relate?
Unfortunately NVMe has been more or less required for some time now, some games are noticeably worse if they don't have NVMe streaming speeds like Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart which requires the PS5 SSD speed or better or gameplay is severely impactedLet's just hope SATA SSDs will be good for a while and games won't start demanding NVMe speeds. I have a total of 8TB from Sata SSDs but only a single 1TB Nvme...
Ratchet and Clank is the only game i know of that makes use of the extra speed. What other games require it?Unfortunately NVMe has been more or less required for some time now, some games are noticeably worse if they don't have NVMe streaming speeds like Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart which requires the PS5 SSD speed or better or gameplay is severely impacted
And what's the problem with Xboxes proprietary solution? It's not that much of a price difference.I hope entering the next generation, all games aren't required to be installed on them in order to play it.
As a fan of Xbox, it is one of the negatives the Series S/X has had this generation as they only offer proprietary SSD options. Sure I don't need 10 plus games installed at one time, but who doesn't love the convenience of having a digital library sometimes?
Who can relate?
I modded my 360 HDD, you had to use very specific models, but you could swap out the drive for a bigger one and have no issues. Not sure how many people did it, but it was significantly cheaper.This is an Xbox problem not an industry problem
Microsoft used proprietary HDD during the 360 era too, you couldn't use any off the shelf HDD to upgrade a 360 storage you had to buy the overpriced ones from them
Fortunately now that Microsoft is fucking off from being a platform holder this won't be an issue anymore. The PS3, PS4, PS5, Switch, Switch 2, and Steam Deck can all take off the shelf upgrades to their internal storage using industry standard parts
It's not that weird. GAF went through a Sony-hating phase during the 360 and PS3/Vita eraArtistic MS did yall a favor with proprietary ssd because you guys don't know how to use a screwdriver.
Isn't it weird how nobody complains about the 360 and series proprietary ssd yet we had tons of complaints about the vitas proprietary cards?
You chose the home console that has the most restrictive storage upgrade options of any console since the Xbox 360. You made a poor purchase decision.As a fan of Xbox, it is one of the negatives the Series S/X has had this generation as they only offer proprietary SSD options. Sure I don't need 10 plus games installed at one time, but who doesn't love the convenience of having a digital library sometimes?
Why should developers compromise on their games because you want to use storage that's not fast enough for modern games?I want flexibility to choose if I want to install(and play) the game on the internal storage and an external standard HDD.
Many games on PC tell you to use an SSD and will often have streaming or stuttering issues when played from a mechanical drive. Just because you CAN use an HDD, doesn't mean you should.I have that option on my PC. Not on my Series X.
It's not just longer load times. You have to redesign your entire data streaming and asset duplication strategies if you want the game to work well on an HDD.I don't mind longer loading times. Not aware of streaming issues as well...
I've added storage to every console I've owned going back to the Xbox 360. If you don't want to add storage to your system, then delete games you're not playing. Every console contains plenty of space for games you're playing at the time.My main point is you're pretty much expected to upgrade the storage regardless this generation no matter what. That wasn't a requirement in any other generation.
Yes, Xbox uses proprietary storage that is much more expensive than the options available for Nintendo and Sony platforms. This is an Xbox problem that you chose to deal with when you bought the console.![]()
Just did a quick Google search. This isn't relatively cheap in my opinion. I bought a 2TB HDD for the Xbox One brand new for $60 that I still use to this day.
It's already a paperweight.All I want is the flexibility of being able to use my HDD. Otherwise it becomes a paperweight outside of older games.
Again, developers aren't going to compromise just because you want to use an HDD.Never said I didn't trust it, but being forced to utilize it when I have extra storage is crazy to me.
Again, this doesn't mean you should.I'm not required to install all my PC games on my SSD, why should I have to on console?
You're not forced to do anything. Just delete some games.I don't want to be forced to buying an external SSD specifically for my Series X because the base 1TB isn't enough. Yes I can technically still buy it if I truly feel it's a necessity, but I already have a 2TB external HDD that is underutilized.
You clearly don't.Understood all this already.
I put all my PS4 games on a cheap SATA SSD when I got my PS5. Such a nice upgrade. I also swapped out the mechanical drives in my Xbox One X and modded 360. Everything got faster and more responsive.No thank you. I don't even use mechanical HDDs as my cold storage/backwards compatibility drives anymore. I bought Samsung EVO 870 2.5" SATA SSDs and put them into enclosures for both my XSX and PS5. Swapping to external SSDs made load times and texture load times significantly better for older games.
I get it, the memory market playing games is making it all expensive again but even with the increased cost I can't see a reason why I would ever want to go back to slow ass HDD load and seek times, even for backcompat titles.
DamnMS's shitty software installed Forza Horizon 5 to my HDD instead of my SSD. It was a fucking mess, the entire world would disappear if you drove too fast.
Ratchet and Clank is the only game i know of that makes use of the extra speed. What other games require it?
If what you say is true, then Sata SSDs will become the shortest lived medium of all time. They dethroned a 3 decade old HDD dynasty only to give it to NVMes after what, 5 years?
It is revolutionary, or have you already forgotten last gens load times?SSD was never going to offer whatever you thought they were. Xbox isn't holding the gaming tech back with their SSD tech. You just bought into Sony's promise of it being revolutionary.