I found this interesting, and I thought some of you console gamers might as well.

Microsoft's Xbox 360 will be released shortly, and will utilize normal DVD format. Sony's Playstation 3, scheduled for next year, will be using BluRay discs, and there is also some debate about the Nintendo Revolution maybe using HD-DVDs.

Check out the article here:
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000623059130/

I was thinking about this the other day, realizing I knew nothing at all about the subject. Hope some of you nerds find this interesting.

Essentually what it comes out to is, Playstation 3 is going to kick X-Box's arse.

I shall further elaborate on my stance. Blu-Ray will hold around 60% more memory (25 GB vs 15 GB), where on tests it outclasses it 200% and then some (100 GB vs 45 GB). In theory, the HD is near it's limit - 60 GB. Where Blu-Ray is only half-way there - 200 GB. Blu-Ray will cost slightly more, due to the layerings on the CDs needing changing/replacing, Blu-Ray also boasts far more secure data-saving (although this amounts to essentially nothing in today's world), and has almost the entire technology world backing it up.

This reminds me back when Nintendo kept the cartridge for the N64, and thus it was quickly out-classed with the Playstation's CDs. It's a pity that X-Box isn't going to learn from Nintendo's mistakes - I can only hope Nintendo WILL remember that idiotic move, and take the Blu-Ray.

My only regret over this is that Halo won't be as cool in the next gen. But Final Fantasy will tear the world a new one.

Although, I am unaware how X-Box will be attempting to compensate for this obviously downfall. Perhaps they'll be utilising the hard-drive, much like computers do. But then you'ld run out of memory fairly quickly - at least, the avid Gamer would.

Well, and the other thing we have to consider is the fact that no one has ever used that much information on a game disc. Blu-ray can hold 100gb sure, but no one has ever done that to a game, they've just been split in the past, as well as having been MUCH smaller. I don't think PS3 will use 100gb on a disc, at least not any time soon.

The other issue is that HD-DVD and Blu-ray aren't compatible, which doesn't really affect gaming, but does affect next gen movie players.

100GB offers far greater detail in arts, and minimizes the number of discs necessary to play a game. Anyone else remember the 4 discs we needed for FFIX? The five for FFXI? Yea. No more. 1 disc. Blu-Ray.

I don't know, I don't think most people really give a rat's (_|_) what kind of disc/cartridge something takes. Sure, the 12-year-olds of the world might get off on the fact that their software medium looks cool, but I really only care about how the game plays and possibly how sweet it looks...neither of which I believe are really effected by the disc/cartridge.





It's the games that truly matter. Hardware speed, "power", and bells-and-whistles like the disc/cartridge don't really matter that much. When it comes down to it they're just buzzwords to catch the sheep of the world's attention and to make the marketing guy's job easier.

I primarily play FPS games, Xbox is king of the hill in that arena. Playstation probably has the best Sports and RPGs. Nintendo has everything else...no matter how strange and "kid-ish".

On another note, Microsoft's choice of a DVD drive allows my 26 Xbox titles to be played on it. Also, it shall continue to happily play my wide collection of DVD movies and CDs.

Pick your genre and base your purchase largely on that...the rest just gets in the way.

- bw
(resident xbox fanboy )

We can already fit all of FFIX on one disc, the PS1 discs were very limited in size compared to the PS2 discs, which I believe were DVD CDs.

60GB? Pah... who nees more than 64K?


EDIT: With current technology, a game is faster on 5 disks of 600MB then on 1 4GB disk because of the time it takes to find the information on the disk. The RAM will affect the speed more than the size of the disk.

Remember VHS vs. Beta. Beta was "technically superior".

Microsoft and Intel have endorsed HD-DVD rather than BluRay, so that may end up factoring in what format will be more successful.

Check out the backing companies on the end of that article, it's pretty interesting.

And what's Beta? I'm not familiar with it.

Its what VHS would have been if marketing did not exist.

These interesting facts say to me that HD DVD will be the main format. Three reasons.
1) Microsoft is very anti Java
2) TDK is not a subsidary of any of the companies listed as major suporters (which means HD DVD will be cheaper for those companies than Blu-Ray
3) I believe the people who owned BETA helped push VHS. (Sometimes you can make more money by selling out your product as a rival then by actually being a rival)

I still have my beta.. with Leonard Part 6.

Anyway, I think Sony is going too far with the Playstation 3. Sure, you can push past the current limitations of games into something more.. PC-like, but most developers are content spending less than a year of development to shell out a new game, and I doubt we'll even see its potential for a long while (Until like an FF13 has Advent Children graphics).

But at least we'll now have absolutely pretty, yet decent games. If Xbox costs that much with a HDD I dread the Playstation 3's cost if they include that option. Aren't they using BlueTooth technology (Which is freakin awesome if you ask me)?

I don't even have to speak about Nintendo. They've always done well with whatever they've brought to the table and made the most use of it.

Yeah, production costs are a big worry, especially since games cost about $11-12 million to make currently, and are expected to rise up to $15 million.

Fear the $60 games. *whimper wallet*