MTV demystifies PS3 mandatory installs
by Majed Athab 
{ Apr 2nd 2008 at 8:30AM }
Large mandatory installs have been a crux for us PS3 gamers for quite some time. By now, many of you have probably sacrificed your precious gigs in order to play Devil May Cry 4 or Hot Shots Golf: Out of Bounds on the PS3. Sure, we all knew we'd be getting better load times from downloading data on to the hard drive, but why did we need to put up with it in the first place? MTV's Multiplayer blog investigated further into this, citing that it all comes back to developers getting to know the Blu-ray technology and utilizing its unique characteristics. For multi-platform games like DMC4, the issue is that developers are not optimizing their titles for Blu-ray tech. There are two factors: the disparity between DVD and Blu-ray reading techniques, and the size of Blu-ray discs compared to DVDs. If developers just simply plop down their DVD data onto a Blu-ray disc, essentially, all that extra space on a Blu-ray and the single speed that the data on it is read will cause excessive load times. Think of it this way, if DVD is looking for a needle in a haystack, then Blu-ray is looking for a needle of exact same size in a haystack three times larger.
So what about PS3 exclusives like Hot Shots Golf? A similar concept is involved -- there's too little data on the disc and too much excessive space. Despite this, many other devs have found a work around. One way is to copy data multiple times to fill the entire disc; this allows for data to be read quicker as there are more areas to read from. It's all rather an interesting read, why not check out the entire article over at Multiplayer.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Justin @ Apr 2nd 2008 8:34AM
While I'd prefer people not get into flaming, a few points I'd like to make:
* While I'm all for the concept of faster load times, a few things trouble me. Namely, the forced inclusion of the feature. Load times are a tricky thing. They can hamper you if too long, but at the same time, any properly optimized game should be able to load in a respectably brief time. Anyone who has played Burnout: Paradise can attest to the single load at the beginning, you won't see any more of them. A company should be able to code appropriately and then offer installation as an OPTION ONLY for those that desire even quicker loads. Then create a disc-read-only standard for online loads.
* The idea itself creates a slippery slope. Right now 5 GB isnt too much (though the 20 and 40 owners may disagree). However, nothing is really stopping game developers from going much higher, especially with the proposed increases in game and Blu-ray disc size. 5 GB is probably alright, but imagine 10 or 20....all while still requiring the disc put in ever time.
* The PC argument. Many people say the PS3 is a PC and should be accepted as one with installations. I can't subscribe to this argument. The PS3 is a game console. One of the paramount beauties of console gaming is it's quick "pick up and play" ability. Kids take games to friends' houses, pop stuff in, eject stuff, never having to think about dealing with installations, available memory, hardware restrictions, etc. The second you accept the PS3 is a PC you accept all the drawbacks of a PC. Waiting 30 minutes once at home to install may not seem so bad, but take your game to a friends' house and then accept a 30 minute wait after school or work, and things aren't so fun anymore.
Anyway, those are my main thoughts on the matter. Feel free to agree or disagree, but keep it clean. Thanks for reading.
Tom @ Apr 2nd 2008 8:38AM
Not sure what HD DVD has to do with this.... did you mean DVD?
mathab @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:20AM
Yeah, sorry about that guys. Mistake on my part. It's fixed.
SG @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:14AM
I'm confused... why are they comparing HD DVD to Blu-ray? With 360 and PS3 games, it's DVD VS Blu-ray.
Personally, I'm surprised at how underused the ability to pre-install is with PS3 games. I'd gladly sacrifice a chunk of my hard drive (and wait the oh so agonizing 15 minutes to install once) if it means that I deal with less load times in-game. I think people who make the argument that installs take up too much space aren't really thinking it through. I have a 60 gig PS3, and I have a crapload of content on it, and still plenty of space.
But it's also clear that developers CAN make a game (even a multi-platform one) with impressive load times without pre-installing. Just look at COD4.
adolson @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:27AM
Yes, the ability is underused, however, the problem is that not everyone is like you. I constantly have to delete demos that I'd prefer to keep around, or video files that I'd also rather keep, just to make room to install data for games. I am not the only one. The problem is that these installs are generally mandatory, when they should be optional. Why can't I have the option to wait an extra 5 seconds on each loading screen if I don't want to clear out my useful data for what is, essentially, from the end-user's perspective, useless data? It should be optional, especially when a game hits 5GB and more! I remember the good ol' days when I did some PC gaming. Most games had a mandatory install that was low on disk usage, but had options to go to higher disk usage to improve load times.
John @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:08AM
Good to know all that extra space is being put to good use.
SG @ Apr 2nd 2008 8:48AM
That's a stupid article, actually. It claims that Dark Sector doesn't require installation. Interesting, because I seem to recall being made to wait a few minutes before getting to play it the first time (not that I think there's anything wrong with that), and there's a 1300 meg Dark Sector data file on my PS3. I love it when the media write about things they don't understand.
Brodie-san @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:28AM
@Justin
You make some valid arguments and I agree for the most part. I've never seen the comparison between PC and PS3 before though. That's usually something that people say about the Xbox; especially taking into account DirectX etc.
My opinion is that the phenomenon of "compulsory installs" will be phased out going forward as the developers become more efficient with the technology. Right now it doesn't affect me in the slightest and if people are disgruntled about having to wait a few minutes before playing a game as it sets itself up they really need to compliment their gaming hobby with something else. 20 minute install? Go walk the dog, play the guitar, makes some tea, read a book, surf the web.
Are we really a cadre of people who can think of NOTHING to do when faced with 20 minutes of waiting?
This is the (current) price we pay to be part of this age of gaming. If you really don't like it then stick to consoles where this is not a factor. I hear the Genesis has fast load times.
Justin @ Apr 2nd 2008 5:34PM
If you'd carefully read what I said, waiting the 20 minutes isn't the total issue. It's the way it removed immediate portability, to a friend's house for example. You bring it to a friend's place, and then you're stuck waiting. That sucks.
The PC argument is there because people frequently use consoles as an alternative to the PC. Once you meld the two...what's the point?
I found the shot about the Genesis a little insulting. We shouldn't have to pay a price for "advances" in technology. This has all come down to lazy coding. We have companies that CAN do it without loads, and we have companies that don't. The games that can't do it without the HDD are not markably better (in fact they're typically worse) so it's obvious that the feature isn't necessary.
DaveC @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:23AM
Well this was a helluva lot more readable than Joystiq's take on the story.
But you used HD-DVD where you should've used DVD many times.
mathab @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:27AM
Yes, I apologize. I've already made amendments. Remind me not to do an early morning post again in the near future!
Nate @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:36AM
"Quite some time now"? You mean "The last three months"? I don't think there was much for compulsory installs before DMC4, that was the first big one.
The problem is that the devs aren't changing how they code, which is to wait until they need some data, then stop the game entirely, load the data, then keep going. Instead they say "our old, easy way doesn't work with Blu-Ray, guess we'll have to use the hard drive". Devs who have a better handle on blu-ray and the cell processor realize that the solution is to stream data continually from the disk, which is what things like Burnout and Uncharted do.
More devs will realize this and start putting it to use in their games, but expect a few more big install games while developers from last gen realize that reading off disk isn't instantaneous when you're reading gigs worth of data.
Popfrogs @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:17AM
This. ^^ Uncharted should be the gold standard when it comes to the 'stream your data' argument. Nothing says "I'm streaming so you don't have to wait" like updated textures as you enter a new area. Incognito and Insomniac both are pretty friendly with sharing techniques, if Capcom gave a damn they'd go have a chat once in awhile.
One thing that irks me is the way data is handled on _another_ hard drive. Why am I bolted to the internal PS3 drive for everything? I can't even edit metadata (album info, filenames, etc.) when I save media to my external hard drive. Also you can't install game data to an external drive. Why not? Since I have a quickly-shrinking 60GB and a 500GB external usb drive, let me deal with large files on the external. I hope Sony changes this in the future.
TimBob @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:58AM
Virtua Fighter 5 isn't a mandatory install, but 2.5GB or over 10% of available HDD space on my 20GB PS3 is uncalled for.
2.5GB install for a fighting game... Unbelievable.
deaftly @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:10AM
4 gigs for a friggin golf game is worse.
Phour ZwanZig @ Apr 3rd 2008 12:47AM
Yeah, so what is the big deal about BluRay for games if it has to install..
astravian @ Apr 2nd 2008 12:07PM
I'm all about fast load times. I only have a 40 gig, but at least I can expand it if need be. (my game library is currently quite small)
Though, it is interesting to see why the large installs are necessary.
Mak @ Apr 2nd 2008 1:20PM
Biggest load of tripe I have ever heard, firstly, the author clearly does not know the difference between DVD and HD DVD, secondly, Blu-ray in PS3 is faster than 360's DVD drive (see FUDbuster below), so on multiplatforms, where the textures are supposed to be the same, there should be no difference in load times. Unless of course, you have lazy developers.
It sounds like the later, as some of the best looking PS3 games, have very little in the way of load times. Namely, Ratchet and Clank Future tools of destruction, and Unchartered Drakes Fortune.
FUDBuster:
1. The 360's DVD drive is quoted by Microsoft as being 12x. However, here is the first catch. That is ONLY for single layer discs. with DVD9 dual layer, it's actually only 8x.
2. The 360's DVD drive is CAV, which means the data transfer rate varies across the disc surface. Microsoft of course, quote the fastest, 8x (88.8 mbps), on the inner of the disc. At the outer, it's closer to 4x. (44.4 mbps)
3. the 2x Blu-ray drive in the PS3 (used for both movies and PS3 games), use CLV, delivering constant data transfer rates across the entire 50GB of the disc. (72mbps)
As you can see, the 360 is marginally faster for a very small part of the DVD disc. It can deliver about 1-2GB of data on a DVD faster than the PS3, however, the PS3 can deliver the full 50GB of data faster than 90% of the 360's DVD.
In the real world applications, and certainly with the current
multi-platform titles, there is little to choose between PS3 and 360 load times, unless of coarse you use the standard HDD in the PS3, in which case, unless the developers have royally screwed up, the PS3 will always have much shorter load times.
Bootleg Zani @ Apr 2nd 2008 2:17PM
When exactly did MTV become a credible source for anything especially gaming news?
The Sound @ Apr 2nd 2008 3:40PM
Since they are basically right.
I despise MTV, but they have hit the nail on the head with this one.
The Sound @ Apr 2nd 2008 3:43PM
I don't think we'll be seeing many more mandatory installs on many games. People who aren't into hardcore gaming (read anyone who doesn't read this and other game blog things) are going to eventually get tired of having to install some games while other games will work right off the bat (DMC4 V Uncharted).
Remember, this is the generation where devs can no longer let once unnoticeable issues go unnoticed any longer. Lazy development is going to separate the 'haves' from the 'have nots'. Installing, graphics, gameplay, glitches, etc. are all fair game this go 'round/
theclub83 @ Apr 2nd 2008 4:36PM
it might be a hassle now, but all the room for growth will be a blessing 3-4 years from now.
(ps if i can play a game like uncharted, 1 load at the beginning, then i think other devs should take notes or something.)
ajiezer @ Apr 2nd 2008 10:04PM
Still it makes no sense that you but a game on a BRD and it uses exactly the amount of hd space that a dvd has, Devil MC4 is kinda of a ripoff for that, the xbox users only needed a dvd and we a BRD and the hd space of the dvd WTF!?
Highlader @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:41PM
Um....wasn't the original report of this published on APRIL FIRST? Perhaps there's a little significance to that date, you know April 1st?
Perhaps it's foolish to consider the date, perhaps now. But it does sound a little more than implausible to essentially say that the empty space on a blu-ray disc causes it to perform slowly. That's a little like saying a Nascar race car will slow down as it's fuel load lightens because the fuel pump has to work harder to pump the fuel to the engine...