PS3's Blu-ray drive speed could be reason for Oblivion delay
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Jan 17th 2007 at 5:57PM }
GameSetWatch has singled out a tidbit about the PlayStation 3 version of Oblivion that's sure to ignite fanboy ire. According to comments made by Bethesda's Todd Howard in the latest issue of EGM, the development team is using extra space on the Blu-ray disc to duplicate crucial data and improve load times. "Drive speed matters more to me [than capacity], and Blu-ray is slower," Howard told EGM.This is a sketchy workaround, as it could be susceptible to issues caused by data irregularities; GSW notes, "What happens if you don't have your pieces of data correctly sync-ed and one of them is an old version of an object/piece of code and one is a newer version?" A better, albeit unpopular solution, is to include an option to install a chunk of a game directly onto the hard drive (Genji has this option; so does Ridge Racer). Bethesda's use of the extra Blu-ray disc capacity is clever, but hopefully won't become the standard.
Overall, we know that the Xbox 360 drive reads data faster than PS3's. While the Blu-ray drive might consistently read data at the same speed, the 360 drive is faster at reading data on the outer layers of the DVD disc; and that's were devs tend to put the biggest files.
While EGM makes no note of it, it's worth considering that drive speed concerns played into Oblivion's delay. Will this become an issue for other cross-platform titles?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mr. Khan @ Jan 17th 2007 6:08PM
But if they use the extra space to boost load times
Then they've used the extra space
Kind of self-defeating, right?
kilodelta @ Jan 17th 2007 7:03PM
no no no. thats not it AT ALL.
its delayed because the human eye has not yet evolved to witness the brilliance that the PS3 will show when they release oblivion on it!!!!
(or insert some other nonsensical Fanboy statement here)
kodec @ Jan 17th 2007 6:07PM
The next gen doesn't start until Sony says so, and it starts...
...Loading...
Peppe @ Jan 17th 2007 6:07PM
Uhm ... let me see ... can these guys install part of the game on the HD of the PS3 and speed up the whole thing since the PS3 comes with at least 20 Gig HD-Drive ? .. just a thought ... !! What is the limitation in doing that ? If so the whole discussion on the Blu Ray being slow just fails !!
Peace
polly @ Jan 17th 2007 6:13PM
PS3 FT........wait for it........comments....still....loading....L!
alexanderwales @ Jan 17th 2007 6:18PM
If they put it on the hard drive then they're using up my hard drive space - which I need for my downloads, demos, music, etc. Consider also that Oblivion is only 9GB max (the size of the 360 DVD) and there should be plenty of room to back up the data so that the load times don't suck.
The truth is, Blu-ray isn't needed for gaming. All of the 360 games will use 9GB max. What are you going to use the extra space for? I honestly don't care if my RPGs need disc changes - I didn't care when FFVII made me do it, I don't care now.
nick @ Jan 17th 2007 6:18PM
wow, and i thought the 360's load times were a little long, so much for blu-ray
Frosty22 @ Jan 17th 2007 6:19PM
This could become a big problem for a system that is supposedly known for its RPG titles. Most RPG games are sandbox style and need to be quick on the loadtimes. Will this also affect games like Grand Theft Auto and the like?
Steve2 @ Jan 17th 2007 6:38PM
Just ridiculous.
Production of discs isn't done by some guy dragging files in Windows explorer. You write a script and run it over and over. If the same file has to be on there 3 times, it dupes it 3 times, it's not going to forget one time.
This rumor really reminds me of the article that says that rumors are only correct 50% of the time. And I can predict coin flips at that same success rate.
Why would I care if games use extra space on the BD and that becomes the standard? Am I charged more for a BD that takes 20GB when it could have been fit in 15GB? Nope. It doesn't even cost more to produce.
Bethesda originally wrote the game to run off HDD on PC. I'm sure they can figure out how to use the PS3 HDD to speed things up.
At to Mr. Khan, the space is reserved for this use. There's no real advantage to not using it. And there's no reason the game can't intelligently use it, instead of the braindead copy function Ridge Racer 7 used. If you boot up PGR2 on an Xbox for the first time after playing other games in between, you can't exit the main screen until it copies a bunch of itself to the hard drive. Did this cause an uproar? Nope, it's done well, and no one even notices. If Bethesda know what they are doing, they can do the same.
DBX00 @ Jan 17th 2007 6:22PM
My PS3 doesn't seem to have problems loading any of the games I have and it hasn't been an issue really focused on with magazine reviews. Sounds like Bethesda just doesn't have any PS3 developers to call on giving them advice on how to decrease the load times. I know they've heard of cache information to the hard drive or a installation. Regardless, other developers aren't using this as an excuse, so why is it an issue for them?
Btw, if you're one of the many that haven't used a PS3, try to leave the misinformed comments to a minimum. Thanks.
daxiang12 @ Jan 17th 2007 6:22PM
Someone else had a very good comment on this. The basic point is that instead of duplicating data onto blu-ray to make loading faster due to the slower read speed of the blu-ray drive, why not just use DVD-9 in the first place? But I guess Sony doesn't allow anyone to use DVD on PS3.
aegies @ Jan 17th 2007 6:21PM
I actually think this is a pretty good solution to the issue of load times on the system, and in the game in general. This is something that would be great to see more games that don't use full capacity do this kind of thing to boost load times in general. There's no good reason to eschew compression on content just because you have the space, especially considering how little drive speeds have progressed in comparison to storage capacity. Anyway, even if the PS3's drive were the same speed as the 360's, this would be great. The load times in Oblivion are already pretty bad in sections.
http://eat-sleep-game.com
daxiang12 @ Jan 17th 2007 6:24PM
"But I guess Sony doesn't allow anyone to use DVD on PS3."
I meant as game media.
RSA @ Jan 17th 2007 6:24PM
No Frosty22 those games should be ok, the devs should just load part of the game on the hard drvie, the 360 uses this for oblivion to cache loading, but anyways this is still just bad promotion of news on joystiqwehatesony.com
Johnny Kielbasa @ Jan 18th 2007 9:38AM
Nothing new about the differences between HD-DVD and Blu Ray. Would like to know how this difference will translate to the user's experience.
Nothing to have an ire about...yet.
Jonathan Abbey @ Jan 17th 2007 6:28PM
I think Oblivion was delayed due to the slower than expected launch sales of PS3. I recall hearing some podcast or other, in which Bethesda staff discussed the risks of launching with a console and then having your game seem 'old and stale' by the time enough people own the console to make decent sales possible for your title.
Given that Bethesda was talking about launching Oblivion months ago, I suspect that it is this sort of commercial, and not technical, question behind the delay of the title.
logikil @ Jan 17th 2007 6:31PM
Here is the same basic article from ArsTechinca. I guess they must be anti-Sony as well.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2007/1/17/6658
joe smith @ Jan 18th 2007 7:17PM
This is nothing unique to Oblivion and in fact makes a lot of sense. I would be very surprised if there is a game out there for PS3 that doesn't do something similar. Blu-Ray drive speed is very slow and if you have hte extra space you might as well use it to good effect. I would assume that they also do intelligent caching to the HDD like the game does on Xbox 360.
Robert @ Jan 17th 2007 6:39PM
logikil read forum members replays ,pretty much everyone is saying the guy is wrong including a dev
V1L3 @ Jan 17th 2007 6:42PM
Considering how glitchy and slow the 360 version was to stream in game data, I can't imagine the PS3 version being worse. Is it even physically possible? I'd have sworn it would concoct some manner of slow-loading-temporal-vortex into which all matter and light would seep away...
CHachi @ Jan 17th 2007 6:42PM
"This is a sketchy workaround, as it could be susceptible to issues caused by data irregularities; GSW notes, "What happens if you don't have your pieces of data correctly sync-ed and one of them is an old version of an object/piece of code and one is a newer version?"
According to the above logic even shipping a game is a sketchy workaround. In order to ship and get a game through QA the right file has to be in the right place. Always has been that way.
Optimizing seek times using duplication is a very good solution for improving load times. It is a valid solution on any optical drive (HD-DVD included). No need to seek when you don't have to. Blu-ray's higher capacity offers more opportunity to optimize load times in this way.
Many developers will take this approach, but its not as if entire levels will be duplicated...what will be duplicated are commonly accessed objects / information that will be accessed when loading most any level. No reason to make the head seek all over the place to get a grass texture that could easily be stored redundantly on the disc.
Also, I am afraid that all the super hi-def graphics everyone is craving take up more disc space. Load times are a reality
Gianni Gotti @ Jan 18th 2007 4:00PM
Brought to you by the people who refuse to publish the FACT that GOW on the Xbox 360 is so short because of the DVD9 space limitation!
The march of yellow journalism knows no bounds.....
bandit @ Jan 17th 2007 6:48PM
FIRST and FORMOST the REAL issue at hand is seektimes. Whether they used DVD or Blu-ray doesnt matter because the seektimes suck which is why they HAVE to use blu-ray to duplicate the files. so that they artifitial decrease seek time. You people are idiots the only thing that added duplicate files would do is make MORE files to transfer to RAM. THE duplicate files are SOLEY for the purpose of improving seek times. Thats not to say that the load times on PS3 as far as transfer rates still does suck, because they do.
Anyway sandbox games like oblivion, and open ended games require VERY low seek times because of the randomness of the game. Thats where you sometimes experience slowdown because all that crap isnt going to fit in RAM. A simpler solution would be to use the HDD, but it still needs to be playable without the HDD as that component is removable. Hence its file structure on disc.
sanctimonious @ Jan 17th 2007 6:49PM
@10: Yes, they do have access to developers who know how to optimise for the PS3... they're called "developer support", and collectively they're about as intelligent a bunch of guys you're ever going to meet.
Load times are a serious issue on the PS3, and one that isn't going to go away. Caching to the HDD is just that - caching. There is only a certain amount of space that can be reserved for caching on the HDD, and to get it there it still has to, at some point, load it via the very drive that is the bottleneck to begin with.
As soon as games with large, open environments and gameplay (a la GTA, Oblivion, etc) start appearing on PS3, you will start hearing problems as devs try to get the data off the disc faster... one solution is to load less data, but this means lower resolution textures... oh dear.
Dedge @ Jan 23rd 2007 9:29PM
Wow. Instead of the PS3 being a platform to push BluRay, BluRay is becoming an albatross for the PS3.
tack @ Jan 17th 2007 6:54PM
If you actually read the article the developer says flat out that bluray is not good for oblivion. But I'm a fan of underperfomance and overpaying so WOOT! PS3!!
Robert @ Jan 17th 2007 6:56PM
~Load times are a serious issue on the PS3, and one that isn't going to go away.~
Correction not only ps3but also 360
fester @ Jan 17th 2007 7:04PM
We all know the ps3 is bottlenecked. Any clever person worked out at least 6 months ago that the whole "ps3" ruse was merely a way to force Blu-ray into mass acceptance as it needed all the help it could get.
The very last thing on Sony's mind was how to make life better/easier/more fun for developers and gamers alike.
For every so called "advanced" feature they added, many more standard/accepted/needed features were removed.
If you don't know what they are yet you really haven't been keeping up.
Those that bought PS3s please just go away and play your 2 games (at ~ 30fps if you are lucky) without rumble... when you get bored you could probably stick in a blu-ray film if the discs weren't so flawed. Don't come here spreading FUD about it being a great machine just because you feel guilty having spent the kids tuition fees on this POS and need something to justify your purchase to the wife.
Sean @ Jan 17th 2007 7:05PM
They mention it in the article. If you're going to be caching data onto the harddrive, then what's the point of blueray again? Why not just ship the game on 2 DVDs.. an install disc and a play disc.
deivn @ Jan 17th 2007 7:16PM
There was an identical article about this in this month's EGM (with the Best of 2007 on the cover) so to the one genius (Steve2) who wrote this off as fake, take a look at your local book store.
ill trooper @ Jan 17th 2007 7:11PM
Loading games on both the PS3 and the 360 hasn't been noticeably different to me, despite the slower drive speed. As for the hard drive workaround, Devs can't really count on the 360 having a drive to cache to, as not all 360s have hard drives, so it could even out for these early years of 'Next Gen.'
I'm also thinking none of these machines have enough RAM to get severly bottlenecked by load times from the drives - extreme hyperbolical examples like 'OMG imagine loading 25gigs off teh BluRayz!' can't ever happen, so I don't see this being that serious.
Exciting fanboy fodder, however, sure to ignite a few arguments.
Anonim @ Jan 17th 2007 7:17PM
THE ULTIMATE INFO ABOUT BLURAY SPEEDS
http://www.emedialive.com/articles/readarticle.aspx?articleid=11404
BRx2 IS EQUAL TO 6.5 DVD speed!
12xDVD X360 Drive is ALWAYS FASTER! No matter from where it reads data! At slowest point its about 6-7xDVD max speed.
Also it's a myth about constant read speed of BR!
IT'S CONSTANT *ONLY* FOR MOVIES
For constant speed you NEED to slow down / speed up disc EVERY laser JUMP.
Doable for movies - laser changes position gradulay and slowly
NOT DOABLE for GAMES!
IT WOULD KILL MOTOR in few weeks of gameing!
BRx2 slows to about 1xBR on the inside areas of disc!
Chachi @ Jan 17th 2007 7:18PM
I can see that there are a few posters in this thread who work in game development.
OK Fanboys go back and read through the posts and see if you can tell who has their shit together.
While you are at it see if you can tell which posters are the psycho biased (and often stupid) fanboys. (see fester for an example)
Apply the appropriate filter to eliminate the retarded comments and you will be left with the obvious conclusion that this is a non story.
ill trooper @ Jan 17th 2007 7:29PM
"Those that bought PS3s please just go away...Don't come here spreading FUD about it being a great machine just because you feel guilty having spent the kids tuition fees on this POS... fester"
Eat a dick. Don't worry, I'm not planning on sending my kids to a $600 school. Maybe you're thinking of the cost of some online course on repairing 360s. 'Go away?' why would I 'go away' from a discussion on the PS3 if I bought one? Isn't the usual fanboy rhetoric to tell someone to 'go away' if they DON'T own one?
It's the truth: as I play on both, my PS3 and my 360's effective load times are indiscernible to me, BOTH ANNOYING. The joke should be 'The load times are shorter on the PS3 because I'm loading more games on my 360...' Maybe someone on YouTube has some comparison of the same game loading on both systems...
SuicideNinja @ Jan 17th 2007 7:40PM
"Drive speed matters more to me [than capacity], and Blu-ray is slower," Howard told EGM."
Seriously.
I bought my PS3 yesterday, and after a few hours with the system...I really want to return it. It's slow, the menu system is crap, the controller keeps dropping out, and even at $100 off with PS2 trade in...the console is STILL not worth it. Playing online Resistance is like playing in a graveyard...it feels like going through the motions without enjoying it.
Resistance takes up two DVD9's worth of space...but it really doesn't matter. The game isn't that great. There's no intensity, the sound is subpar (even with optical!), and the graphics are just moreso standard than "amazing new gen". Granted, there's some nice textures, and a little extra work in the environments, but nothing that justifies the cost of the console and the space on the disc.
Before going to bed...I had to reset the controller to get it to shut off (I stopped playing for 10 minutes, came back, and the controller didn't work anymore). Is this their idea of a "console that wasn't rushed to market?"
Did I really pay $500 for this thing? I made a mistake.
TeddyN @ Jan 17th 2007 8:02PM
Just play Oblivion on the PC!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So much fuss over console this, console that blah blah blah.
YOU decide the load time with a PC. We're already getting to the stage where PC users can affordably play Oblivion on super high settings. With consoles, they're still struggling over load times. Just dump 2 Gb of memory into that case, overclock the CPU and plump for one of those newfangled DX10 graphics card. Voila- the REAL next gen. (and if you feel like HD video, just buy the xbox add-on and plug it in to the PC).
just_a_guy @ Jan 17th 2007 8:18PM
And then they somehow stupidly port Metroid Prime, Prime 2 and Windwaker and find that the system has to load every few seconds to minutes, when the Gamecube had the best graphics of the last gen, and had the shortest loading times (almost non exsistant!)
DBX00 @ Jan 17th 2007 8:19PM
SuicideNinja
1) Resistance looks fine on my HDTV; maybe you should check your television
2) The controller is supposed to shut off (umm....battery management) when you don't use it for 10 mins. In order to reconnect, you only have to press the PS button. You could just shut off the system by going to the console. Also, you may want to charge your controller before heavy use because it doesn't drop out for me or anyone else I know with the latest firmware updates.
3) I don't know what you think is fun online gaming, but Resistance is a pretty fun experience in my opinion. Anyway, everyone has their own opinion of the console and features.
Steve2 @ Jan 17th 2007 8:22PM
SuicideNinja:
So return your PS3.
Having an install DVD and play DVD is a non-starter for consoles as the space on the PS3 is dedicated. It's 9GB of space, and only one game gets it at a time. This is similar to how Xbox did it (although it had multiple smaller dedicated areas).
If alternate two games, and both use the HDD space, each wipes out the other. So each time I put in the one with two discs, it's going to have to ask for the install DVD again and reinstall. That is no fun. If you fit it all on one disc, then that goes away.
The #1 reason not to use multiple DVDs is because you don't need to. PS3 has BluRay. Why not use it?
deivn:
You burned me. I feel chastened by the same people who reported PS3 has no FF wheel support when it already shipped in NFS:Carbon two months ago.
Digi Smalls @ Jan 17th 2007 8:29PM
hey ill trooper,
don't you mean loading your 'game'. snicker.
but seriously, you didn't notice Resistance and the Genji Demo politely tell you it was going to take 2 minutes to cache data to your hard drive BEFORE you started playing? those games still had non-trivial loading between levels even after that new piece of next-gen niceness Sony is introducing.
when Xbox 1 cached the last four games played it was unnoticeable. just sped things up next time you played. the 360 caches games like this too, it just can't be a requirement.
.
Steve @ Jan 17th 2007 9:18PM
Every form of technology has tradeoffs where an inferior aspect in one area is traded for superior performance in another, and video game consoles are no different.
For 14 years Nintendo tolerated absolutely terrible screens on its handheld system in exchange for lower costs and better battery life. It was a decision I disagreed with, but someone at Nintendo clearly thought other aspects of the system were far more important than being able to see the screen. Microsoft, on the other hand, tolerates software and hardware bugs in exchange for getting products out on the market faster. Sony, on the third hand, tolerates extremely slow load times on its video game systems. That's the way it was on the PSX, on the PS2, on the PSP, and now that's the way it is on the PS3. Someone at Sony has obviously decided load times are not an issue and therefore their systems will always skimp out on load time performance in favor of other things.
ZB Dog @ Jan 17th 2007 9:43PM
I think I can clear up many of the complaints people have with the new systems. I think, personally, that all systems have their major faults, and I'm not going to get any of them. The Wii is going to have horrible games (to cash in on the Motion-Sensing Technology thing). The 360 is cashing in on the frat boy scene, and the Playstation 3 is getting people who loved the PS2 to love that system, even though it's outrageously priced and has no real good games coming out in the near future (Although, I admit that Metal Gear Solid 4 is looking sexy).
RogueStorm @ Jan 17th 2007 10:11PM
This reminds me of the scene in the last Raiders of the Lost Ark movie, where they have to choose the right chalice/goblet and the one guy rushes and picks the shiniest, most decorated one, drinks the water and dies horribly. Indy, being the educated and wise one of the two, chooses "wisely" and picks the less flash wooden cup to drink from and then saves his father from the same fate as the guy that snatched up the shiny cup. Just an interesting analogy to throw out there.
mietha CAG @ Jan 17th 2007 10:24PM
I wish more games would use the "install to hard drive" option. It's there and a pretty decent size. There really is no reason not to use it as long as they make it where you can delete the install, without deleting the save, when you are done.
Freakhead @ Jan 17th 2007 10:32PM
So they aren't including a load game to the hard drive option????
Why the f not? IT's easy as sin to add a hard drive to a PS3 from what I've read. I'd add a large hard drive in a second if I could load entire games to it especially ones like Oblivion.
YOu'd think the Oblivion folks would do this considering they developer for the pc too.
pukerua @ Jan 17th 2007 10:41PM
So that's why the PS3 needs the BD drive....cause the loading times are so shity they need all that extra room on the disks to duplicate the files so they can be accessed quicker. I guess that's what you get for using the cheapest parts available (PS2 DVD drive all over again)
Optimus Prime @ Jan 17th 2007 10:51PM
VAROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
Hear that? Thats the sound of your 360 12x DVD drive spinnin' to offload data. Yea, 12x drives are teh bomb, they make your 360 sound like a wind tunnel.. and thats cool. Get used to it morons.
lol @ you
Foetoid @ Jan 17th 2007 11:45PM
LOL @ 44
Optimus Prime is such a noob PS3 fanboy, the only logical arguement he can muster to Sony's defence is the loudness of the 360 DVD Drive...LOL!
I have a 360 and a Wii, probably play the Wii more. Either way, i can't hear anything from the machines unless the room is dead quiet.
hemmy @ Jan 18th 2007 12:16AM
"29. THE ULTIMATE INFO ABOUT BLURAY SPEEDS"
Ultimate DISINFO, would be more appropriate.
There so much wrong about your post I dont even know where to begin. Aside from the obvious fanboy FUD, emedialive is also wrong about what they wrote about Blu-ray. it's old and inaccurate information (June 2006).
Not to mention that ARSEtechnica article (a site that I used to admire and respect), the author of that one is also uninformed and anyone with moderate knowledge of the workings of DVD and Blu-ray drives will spot the obvious glaring errors.
mark @ Jan 18th 2007 12:22AM
joystiq, you guys are awesome.
i've been in a lot of pain the last couple of days, the worst i've ever felt. the doc said i have "swimmer's ear", and makes me glad i'm not really a swimmer.
anyway, i just wanted to say that you guys choose the best graphics for your articles. that tourtise and hair f**king kills me. it's probably even better since i'm a 360 fan. and the 'oh boy it's wednesday' cat made my day.
keep up the good work.