Why some PS3 games need installations

by Justin McElroy { Apr 2nd 2008 at 9:00AM }

Back in the golden days when we did a lot of gaming on PC, installations were known as "get pumped" time. You looked through the instruction booklet, you saw if you could wear the cloth map as a scarf, you'd watch the bar grow and, in short, get totally pumped. But PS3 owners today are, understandably, a little less jazzed when it happens to them.

MTV did a little digging to find out why some games need it and some games don't and the answers may surprise you. In short, different parts of a disc move at different speeds. DVD players can read at different speeds, but Blu-ray players read at one, so DVDs being dropped onto Blu-rays causes the problems. A similar problem doesn't exist with the hard drive. There are ways around installing (obviously), but they sound like they require a bit more work for the developer.

For you PS3 owners: How much of a problem is installation? Is it a pain? Or do you welcome the return of "get pumped" time?

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)

nerrrrrrd @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:06AM

This isn't a surprise. It's one of the reasons why some people actually prefer their games on regular DVD discs than Blu-Ray.

Bleu @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:38AM

This is not a big deal, OMG people just need a reasn to complain nowadays.

LJ @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:54AM

Don't know anyone who prefers DVD over blu-ray.

DemonGSides @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:59AM

I prefer DVD over Blu-ray.

nerrrrrrd @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:09AM

Blu-ray definately has more storage and a Blu-ray movie looks better then a DVD movie, but I'm talking about read speeds for video games. As it stands today, the DVD out performs Blu-ray for read speeds. Maybe that will change in the future but for now DVD is still better.

And for PC, a spindle of DVDs is a lot cheaper then Blu-ray.

mr nimblewick @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:21AM

I prefer DVD.

primetime4 @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:27AM

People who think that DVD is simply faster than Blu-Ray need to know exactly what the article is saying and that is DVD read speeds vary depending on where on the disc the data is stored. At the highest speeds it can be faster but at the low end slower than constant Blu-Ray. Developers will need to account for this to prevent required installations and obviously some already have.

Demaar @ Apr 2nd 2008 5:30PM

When you're paying money for something, you can complain about things that bug you all you want.

ViagraFiend @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:30AM

@ nerrrrrd

Of course DVD read speeds are faster than Blu Ray. How long has Blu Ray been out? If I remember correctly, read speeds on CD were much faster than DVD drive read speeds when they first released.

WiiSports Machine...Fernandos in disguise PSN: Killjebus @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:40AM

Here you go AGAIN. The FUD on read speeds is just unbelievable. MOST 360 games are on DVD9's which have a MAX read speed of 8x's NOT 12x's. The 12x's is for SLDVD or SINGLE LAYER DVD.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2x Blu-ray Drive (72Mbps(9MB/s))
Single Layer (2x CLV) - Constant Linear Velocity (Same speed across entire disk)
Double Layer - Couldn't find any data but no games have been released on a double layer yet.

Entire Blu-ray Disk is read at 9MB/s.

12x DVD-Rom Drive SL (9.25MB/S-15.85MB/s(AVG ~8x(10.57MB/s) DL (4.36MB/s-10.57MB/s(AVG ~6x(7.93MB/s)
SL(DVD-5) 12x Max (5-12x Full CAV) - Constant Angular Velocity (Speed Varies from edge to edge)
DL(DVD-9) 8x Max (3.3-8x Full CAV) - Constant Angular Velocity (Speed Varies from edge to edge)

SL DVD is 1.57MB/s > SL Blu-ray
DL DVD is 1.07MB/s < SL Blu-ray

Majority of 360 games are on DVD-9.

Sources:
Hitachi 12x DVD-Rom Faq (Page 2)
http://www.hitachi.us/supportingdocs...ead%20speed%22
What is DVD?
http://www.videohelp.com/dvd
Blu-ray.com Blu-ray FAQ
http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/
Wikipedia - Constant Linear Velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_linear_velocity
Wikipedia - Constant Angular Velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_angular_velocity

The MAX read speed on a DVD9 is 10.57MB/s. Since on the outer edge (like 3% of the disc) reads at this speed, in REALITY the DVD9's average read speed is SLOWER average is 7.93MB/s than the BDx2 PS3 drive which reads at a CONSTANT 9MB/s.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND? WHAT IS YOUR MALFUNCTION NUMNUTTS?

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:05AM

@LJ

I prefer dvd over Blu-ray.

NATO_Duke @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:07AM

hmmm lets see, page 3 of comments, oh yes, there it is...

*copy

back to page one of comments,

*paste

I is teh Sony interweb hero!

WiiSports Machine...Fernandos in disguise PSN: Killjebus @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:27AM

hmmmn, lets see Nato

What's worse, me having to re-post the SAME thing over and over or most everyone else on this site continuing to believe NONsense.

FYI, if people stopped being so ignorant as to the drive speeds of the PS3 and the 360, I would not feel compelled to re-post FACTS over and over again.

vidGuy @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:45AM

It's not a surprise, I prefer DVD, and I abhor the installation times. I think it completely breaks the console and it's one of the main reasons I won't buy a PS3.

nerrrrrrd @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:48AM

Thanks for all that technical crap about the blu-ray read speeds. I still have to wait to INSTALL my games on a console with a 'faster' constant read speed then standard dvd.

Installing games on a console sucks, end of story. I still like the PS3, this is just one of the many issues it needs to resolve before there are more then 1 or 2 games worth owning on PS3.

Synner @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:49AM

The fact retard are:

PS3 Takes for-fucking-ever to load and play games. You have to wait an average of 10 minutes to play pretty much any game on that system and it gives you ZERO benefit.

So please kindly take your FACTS and stick them up your ass.

LaughingTarget @ Apr 2nd 2008 12:00PM

BluRay disks are 5.5 times larger than DVDs so the drive has to be considerably faster, not just a little faster, for them to equal the apparent speed of a DVD drive. Is BluRay around the same speed as a DVD average? Yep, but it also has a ton more real estate to cover.

Let's say some data is located at the inner ring of the disk. You needed this to access an early part of the game such as a character texture. Now, you're at the end of the game and need to access that inner ring data AND outer ring data. This is where you'll run into some problems. The load times will suck, so you can either suck it up, install common data to the HD (DMC4) or utilize redundant data to get around this (I suspect this is why MGS4 is so big). This issue is minor for linear games since redundant data can be loaded at predictable times but I suspect it will be Hell with open ended games (GTA) that can't predict when an asset is used. We may see more install requirements for those types of games.

This will be mitigated with faster BluRay drives, but this doesn't help the PS3 any. You can't increase drive speed via firmware updates.

upz @ Apr 2nd 2008 12:22PM

"I prefer DVD, and I abhor the installation times. I think it completely breaks the console."

The irony here is that using DVDs on the alternative console...breaks the console.

na2ru1 @ Apr 2nd 2008 12:50PM

a 360 girlfriend: "i prefer DVD anyday baby"

Well of course you would! You dont have a Bluray lol. Your a 360 only owner. What else can we expect.

And your beloved Live is laggy. Frankly, paying for this is simply fucked. Yeh yeh we know already. U still cum all over it

umm....hello??? @ Apr 2nd 2008 1:00PM

@WiiSports Machine-

WHERE DID IT EVER SAY 360 VS PS3 or DVD9 vs BLURAY?? the article compared DVD with BluRay, Numbnuts. Thanks for playing.

also, thanks for misusing the term of FUD again. (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). FUD does not equal misinformed/misinformation. so thanks doubly, asshat.

why not the LS2LS7? @ Apr 2nd 2008 1:34PM

Laughing Target: it doesn't really work that way.

If you want to measure "relative speed", you have to measure it against the RAM in the machine. That is, the longest possible load time (in theory) is how long it would take to load 512MB from the disc (as both consoles have 512MB).

Unless you think PS3 collateral (textures, geometry) or code is several times bigger than the 360 equivalent, there isn't anything "eating up" the speed of the BluRay drive.

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Apr 2nd 2008 3:38PM

I thought it was a given that PS3 "collateral" is several times bigger than on a 360 disk.

All I ever hear about is "uncompressed audio" and "True 1080p textures".

So yes, the actual amount of data for the same asset is larger on a BR disk (because its uncompressed or lightly compressed) than on 360's DVD9.

LaughingTarget @ Apr 2nd 2008 4:27PM

Um, location matters when determining access speeds. Overall drive speed isn't dictated by how fact it can access a contiguous file. There are other factors to deal with. A major factor is WHERE the file is located. A better test would be to see how quickly a drive can access a piece of fragmented data or groups of data that are in random places around the physical media itself.

Hard drives are considerably faster than optical media when it comes to reading since the read head can cover the entire area of the disk as it spins, yet hard drives still slow down when data is fragmented all over the place. Optical media is much more susceptible to this problem since its reading tool, a laser, is a thin piece of light that has to reflect itself off a ridiculously tiny groove on the face of the disk. Since BluRay is a much bigger storage medium, this grove is about 5.5 times longer and thinner than the one on a DVD9. Because of this, the laser has to cover more area when attempting to find the data it needs to access.

Random access speed is highly important in the gaming world. When it comes to music or movies, which only has to deal with a continual data string, games need to have quick random access speeds. Since a good chunk of this is a physical limiatation, the unit can only move the laser around so quickly and keep up its precision, BluRay takes a massive hit since it has to be considerably more precise to find the data in a groove that is roughly 20% the width of that on a DVD9.

So, if what you're saying is true, that games on the PS3 have shitty to non-existent compression technologies because of what I can only gather is a poor development toolset, this is only a double whammy as not only does the PS3 need to take more time just to find the data, it has to take more time loading it as well.

Zertoss @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:06AM

"Please insert the Play disc to continue installation."
"Please insert the Cinematics disc to continue installation."
"Please insert the Install disc to continue installation."

Obie @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:39AM

Lawl, gimme my 360 k, thx.

Sir Fidlious Wong (Zeon Defense Force) @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:05AM

I am sooooo glad DVDs are now the standard in PC game distribution.... There was one came I bought, can't remember it now, but it was six CDs to install.... SIX! Turns out, DVD was the "collector's edition"

Zertoss @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:08AM

So how many PC gamers here, when given the option, always opted for the full installation to minimize load times? I know I did.

Sir Fidlious Wong (Zeon Defense Force) @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:12AM

I did too.

And I really have to say, recently, game developers have quit requiring the discs to verify a purchase on PC.... I fucking love this. I love not having to "no CD" hack my new games....

KarlW @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:13AM

Yea, but it's not that big a problem, as you only need one disc with BluRay - it's large enough to hold everything.

I don't see this as such a big problem - Sony had to make an engineering decision between high capacity (BD) and high speed (DVD). The BD+HDD solution seems to work well as a compromise system. I'm certainly not that bothered by having to install the game.

They needed a large capacity disk format for HD games (as we've seen - most PS3 games go over the DVD9 restriction, whereas most 360 developers have been begging Microsoft to allow the same), and as their official position was that Blu-Ray was the superior format, it made sense to go with that.

KarlW @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:13AM

upz @ Apr 2nd 2008 12:24PM

Double standards for double posts!

ZeroCorpse @ Apr 2nd 2008 1:50PM

Only six CDs? You apparently never purchased games in the old days when we'd get one or two DOZEN floppy disks in a box. . . THAT was painfully slow.

Seriously... I swear I had games with over 20 install disks!

After that, CDs looked like heaven.

Mooseman721 @ Apr 2nd 2008 2:36PM

Please Insert This Disk Into An Xbox 360

Nguyen @ Apr 3rd 2008 1:17PM

Please keep your lame x360 fanboyism out of a discussion between DVD & Blu-Ray.

Poisoned Al @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:11AM

Blu-ray drives can't change speeds?

How the fuck did this win the format war again?

baby sea tuna @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:13AM

$$$

Richard @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:20AM

Umm, Blu-ray reads at the same speed throughout the entire disc, whereas DVD reads faster at the outer edge of the disc. For DVD, the disk spins at the same speed no matter where the laser is, so if the laser is at the outside of the disc then it reads faster than if it is at the inside of the disc.

I'm not sure how blu-ray does it but I know the first CD drives would adjust the speed of the motor according to where the laser was, to get the same speed throughout the disc.

Blu-ray is faster than dvd at the speeds at the inside of the dvd disc, but the speeds on the outside of the dvd disc absolutely pwn blu ray. However, future blu-ray drives may rectify this.

For more information, wikipedia is your best bet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_linear_velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_Angular_Velocity

Intentless @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:20AM

BST got it right SONY unloaded a wad to the different production companies to go bluray....

StrangeBum @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:25AM

@ BabySeaTuna

Pretty much nailed it on the head. If Sony hadn't have handed everyone the cash, I don't think we would have seen a victor for awhile yet to come.

I'm not sure if HD-DVD would have stood a better chance, but it seemed like a more logical progression to me. I can imagine the average consumer moving to it from standard DVD simply by name alone.

Poisoned Al @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:25AM

Is it just me, but isn't Sony's strategy of late is to say "wait, it'll be better later"?

I mean I don't hate Sony for the sake of hating Sony (LOVES my Bravia TV), but they sure make it hard for me to like them.

Phranctoast @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:41AM

I keep forgetting how poor Microsoft and Toshiba are. HDDVD swayed Paramount because of its less space, less studio support, and less hardware manufacturers.

NATO_Duke @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:45AM

Oh this should turn bloody eh?

Anyway, I seem to recall that HD DVD reviews were fairly better than Blu Ray becasue of the interaction features HD had. I think CNet or some like site did some side by side movie reviews that detailed it well. So I was pretty sold on the war being long or HD being able to win it - then as Sony pushed harder and started selling more and more PS3's, it became obvious that their solution of spending/losses to get this off the ground would work.

Funny thing is, Sony spends boatloads to win the format war and they are heros, while MS is the devil for all the money they blew to get the XBox off the ground and gain exclusive titles (which Sony says they don't pay for). Both companies use the same tactics to win battles, then pretend those tactics are wrong on another issue.

Yet here we sit, eating it up when they do it.

upz @ Apr 2nd 2008 12:32PM

Duke, you took the words straight out of my mouth. Well said.

Welcome to Business 101, folks. Feel free to leave your ethics at the door.

Mein Bratwurst @ Apr 2nd 2008 3:24PM

Blu Ray won because it is the superior format. Geeze, the fanboys are out in full force today. Go ahead, down vote me (Oh no! My feelings will be hurt!), I don't really care but the fact remains that the better format won. Also, lol @ people saying Sony dished out cash for Blu Ray to be successful.. Why is it that the HD-DVD camp was so hesitant to throw in the towel?

NATO_Duke @ Apr 2nd 2008 3:46PM

Mein Bratwurst, thanks for dropping by from PS3 fanboy for that.

Whether you accept it or not, there is a lot of money being passed around on developing a new format. Its your opinion that it was a better format. I dont personally know if HD DVD was better or worse, as I never had it and only have BR, but there were comparisons that appeared to favor HD. Pointing these generally known issues out doesn't make people fanboys.

Mein Bratwurst @ Apr 2nd 2008 3:56PM

NATO_duke:

With all due respect, I don't see why your "Thanks for stopping by from ps3fanboy" was neccessary but whatever. I frequent a blog site which posts articles about the system I own. That doesn't make me a fanboy, I don't go to XB360FB.com or WIIFB.com and troll like these other morons do.

Anyway, I would like to know which features you speak of that were so highly touted. Through firmware updates, Blu Ray has been made that much more awesome.
Just my $0.02

Nguyen @ Apr 3rd 2008 1:25PM

Awesome double-standards guys! So in Business 101 ethics is "leave it at the door", but when companies go around throwing cash to get their product out in the market suddenly it's evil? Y'all should sit right there and accept the fact that we as consumers sometime has little influence in what gets put out on the market. I waited before getting any HD systems because I knew one HD format would beat out the other within the year and I actually thought HD-DVD would win because it was all I heard about for a while. So all you people who went out and bought HD-DVD, did you really think you could help it win the format war?

copa @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:14AM

"For you PS3 owners: How much of a problem is installation? Is it a pain?"

Please don't bother asking. Sony could announce that PS3 games require you to insert your DualShock into your rectum to enable 1080p, and the usual crowd would be here defending Sony and saying that's the cost of having such high-end technology.