Mark Deloura Comments on Relevance of Blu-ray (Oddly, We’re in Violent Agreement)
Saw that Mark Deloura (former head of Sony Developer Relations and an industry friend of mine) had some things to say about my recent Blu-ray disc speed/capacity post. Not a surprise considering his background, but I have to say the most interesting aspect of the conversation is that we’re basically in violent agreement on most aspects. Strange but true.
Some quotes and comments:
My good friend Ozymandias has been going off lately about the decision to put a Blu-Ray drive in the PlayStation3. Aside from the fact that he works for Microsoft, I really don’t see how he could argue that the Blu-Ray drive is not exactly the right move for games on PS3, when it comes to capacity. Here are two reasons why.
Mark goes on to list a historical perspective discussing how games have grown over time, as well as a content perspective where he gives some hypothetical numbers to illustrate why he believes games will need significantly greater capacity in this generation than afforded by DVD-9. I won’t quote his entire article here – it’s worth reading for yourself – but I’ll say that we’re in a bit of an argument bind in that the numbers we have to play with are a bit apples to oranges. Here are just a couple of examples:
The texture resolutions have increased closer to 16x, which would push us to 32GB if all that data was texture. Yikes!
Resolutions have increased, but so has compression technology – especially over what was available five years ago for the PS2. Add to that the greater real-time decompression capability of today’s more powerful hardware, and that it’s really not possible to compare the two without a great deal more sophisticated side-by-side testing on common assets. And that’ll be tough, unless Mark has an old PS3 devkit he might want to bring over for an afternoon? 
Audio on PS2 was mostly stereo, two channels. PS3 is 5.1. That’s a 3x size increase without even considering fidelity.
True, but the Xbox had 5.1 audio and managed to fit just fine on standard DVDs. Sure, you might have multiple languages and other localized content stored on the disc, but you don’t have to have it there for the game. Shipping distinct localized versions of the game works just fine (and has been common for years).
Default video format has moved from 480i, or roughly 640×480 at 30 frames per second (9.2 million pixels per second), to 720p. 720p is 1280×720 at 60 frames per second (55.3 million pixels per second). That’s about a 6x size increase. 6 x 2GB would again push us over the DVD-9 size.
This one comes back to codecs and compression again. We don’t know what these numbers are based on (MPEG2? VC-1? Super Special Sony Fractal Compression Technology? ), nor do we have common assets and tools (aka Sony/Microsoft Devkits and SDKs) to get real numbers off of common assets. But as with texture resolutions, significantly more powerful hardware enables the use of much more efficient compression mechanisms that just weren’t possible on the PS2 or Xbox.
Mark had some other candid thoughts as well, particularly around Blu-ray vs. DVD throughput and market demand. This is where the “argument” gets a bit odd, because… well, we’re basically in agreement.
The Other Sides of the Coin: Throughput and Market Demand
Admittedly, Blu-Ray looks dicey from several non-capacity angles. Blu-Ray movies require a 1.5x Blu-Ray drive, or 54Mbits/second. Sony announced that PS3 uses a 2x BD drive, which is 72Mbits/second or 9MB/second. The Xbox360 uses a 12x DVD, which should give it about 16MB/second. That is significantly faster for games and will result in shorter load times. And that 12x DVD drive should be a whole lot cheaper. (Note that the PS3 drive will do 8x DVD, and even that is faster than 2x BD.)
What can I say? This is pretty much what I’ve been saying regarding drive speeds. <shrug> A good example of where we’re pretty clearly agreeing. He goes on to poke a hole in the “cheap Blu-ray player” theory (which basically states that Blu-ray will drive PS3 sales just as DVD support did for PS2 sales).
Of course the big play from Sony is that Blu-Ray will not only be popular for games, it will also be popular for movies. One of the reasons the PS2 initially sold so well in Japan is that it was very inexpensive for a DVD player. But unfortunately we’re just a bit early on Blu-Ray awareness at this point for something similar to likely happen with PS3.
According to Wikipedia, DVD players launched in Japan in 1996. They came to the US in 1997, and by the spring of 1999, DVD players had reached down to the $300 price point. PS2 launched in the US in 2000.
Contrasting that with Blu-Ray, BD players launched in Japan in 2003. They really didn’t hit the US significantly until this year, 2006. BD players currently are around $1000 in the US. And the PS3 is launching this year, 2006. From one perspective PS3 is launching just one year earlier than the time from DVD launch to PS2 launch in Japan. But Blu-Ray drives and discs have been very sparse so marketplace awareness is slight – it is more accurate to compare against the BD launches of 2006, which would make Blu-Ray for PS3 significantly earlier in the marketplace than was DVD for PS2.
The result is that the Blu-Ray drives for PS3 are expensive, and the demand for Blu-Ray movies in the marketplace has not flowered open yet. PS3 could stoke that fire, but it doesn’t seem likely that Blu-Ray will significantly drive sales of the PS3 beyond a small hardcore market, in the short term.
It seems the decision to include Blu-Ray on PS3 must have been a difficult one. Long term it seems like a smart move, at least from the perspective of capacity. But short term that decision has definitely had some striking ramifications for PS3.
Again, we seem to generally agree from across the (former) divide. Blu-ray as a system driver would be a lot more effective if there wasn’t this whole format war thing going on. Until that’s satisfactorily resolved (or dual-format players come on the market), consumers are just going to hold off. From my perspective it doesn’t really matter as I’ll have both a PS3 and an Xbox 360 HD-DVD drive the day they come out. But people with families to support or less disposable income are going to be deciding their PS3 purchase decision based on the system’s merits as a game player, not a movie player.
Mark’s final quote?
Now don’t get me started about the idea of shipping an HD-DVD drive for Xbox360!
A consumer choice, my friend… a consumer choice. 
Related posts:
72 Comments
Comments are closed.
If we’re going to be stuck with a new format for the next 5+ years then the better specced the beter for all. PS2 defined the spec for the previous 5 and that spec in the PSP is now the new spec for portables for the next 5 years. PS3 will define the spec for the next 5 years and then PSP2 based on cell will be the portable spec for the 5 years after that. Sony’s business model is transparent predictable and sustainable and publishers like that consumers like it, a few hardcore gamers may fester over minor details but have lost all semblence of reality in the wider consumer world. Just deal with the fact that your comments and mine on this and other forums are insignificant and dont matter, mabee you should all find something more productive to do with your lives.
Bloody hell Ozzy, read some of your older post, seems those fun loving mature ps3 owners i look up to are touching up your posts.
Craig (#24) seems to be correct
Hitachi has some specs on one of the drives used in the 360.
http://www.hitachi.us/supportingdocs/support/manuals/gd7500,0.pdf#search=%22Hitachi%2012x%20dvd%20read%20speed%22
5-12x SL, 3.3-8x DL
(6.25-15 MB/s SL, 4.125-10 MB/s DL)
Where PS3 is 9 MB/s, constant, both SL and DL.
I can’t believe that even people who work in this industry can be so naive.
First of all how many games for the 360, going forward, will ship on DVDs over DVD9s??
Now tell me how fast the 360′s 12x DVD drive reads DVD9s at.
And saying DVD 8x is faster than 2x BD is a bit misinforming as DVD speeds are rated using the peak possible performance that the disc is only capabe of on the outermost edge of the disc. If you average out the speed at which a DVD is read at 8x you’ll see the 2x Blu-ray, which read at a steady 8.57MB/s across the entie disc, is faster on average.
The amount of data you can fit in the part of a DVD9 that reads between 8.57MB/s and 11MB/s is not enough to account for all load times in most games.
So you are talking about a very minimal advantage that could become a disadvantge as more and more data is streamed into memory throughtout the entire game.
A second of all.. why is anyone kidding themselves that more disc space isn’t something that will dramatically effect the quality of a game??
Of course the option of higher quality assets and more variety can have an actual effect on the quality of a game.
Forget rendering a Direct X 10 sky in realtime (which the 360 supposedly won’t be able to do).. just look up at a sphere-mapped layered HD video stream in the sky on the PS3.
We are blessed at a time in the industry where we are getting such great hardware to play with on both sides here and yet there is so much insecurity and bashing coming from the Xbox camp that it almost makes me question what horrible weakness in the 360 architecture don’t we yet know about?
Why can’t anyone at MS just be proud of what the 360 DOES have instead of trying to skew people’s perspective of the PS3 all the time?
What the *** are you talking about Bastard11?
This is a MS blog and yet half the commenters are Sony fanidiots running damage control. Who’s the scared team again?
Who started this? Not MS but a bunch of Sony people claiming Xbox 360 sucks because of DVD-9 and the PS3 is so great because of Blu-Ray. Then when MS tries to defend themselves just a little bit you get mad at MS? That’s real cute. Why doesn’t Sony shut the *** up and stop saying 360 sucks because of DVD-9? What are they scared of? Why cant they just "be proud of what their system does" instead of attacking MS all the time, to use your words?
>>Forget rendering a Direct X 10 sky in realtime (which the 360 supposedly won’t be able to do).. just look up at a sphere-mapped layered HD video stream in the sky on the PS3.>>
This shows your complete idiocy on all matter technical anyway. I’ll just qoute it to laugh at you. You dont even know what Direct X 10 is (obviously, from your qoute) and if you did you’d know X360 comes a lot closer to being a mythical DX10 GPU in features than the PS3 does, even though it’s still completely absurd the way you framed it (what, pray tell, is a DX10 sky?)
And the part about the sphere mapped (wtf?) HD video stream sky? Huh? Is that why Resistance looks so crappy? (I kid because I love)
Hmm . Its interesting .
If you look at ps2 games to xbox games you will see that the size of the games went down . That is because between the ps2 and xbox new texture compresion like dxtc were included in the xbox . Now we have newer compression something like 32 diffrent kind in the xbox 360 and more to the point we have a large increase in processing power .
I simply don’t see why we need more than 7.6 gigs of storage space in most games and why those that don’t fit in 7.6 gigs wouldn’t fit in two discs
Large streaming worlds are going to come up to the system limitations and not the disc limitations . GTA 3 didn’t have poor textures and so many repeating textures because they ran out of storage , but because they simply couldn’t load more than the ps2 had storage for . The xbox 360 and the ps3 will both be using less than 512 megs of ram and that would be the limitation in a gta type game long before disc size .
I hardly see what Fall of man is doing with its extra storage space adn I’m sure that is there just as proof that its needed . However I know what the darkness is using the extra storage space for .
High res popeye shows . However they admit that the xbox 360 will have the increased texture quality. Most likely because of its better texture compresion (3Dc ) and the fact that its os takes up less space. I believe it fits in 32 megs while the p3 fits in 96 megs .
As for my personal opinions , I don’t care really . I played some Final fantasys switching between 4 discs . Why would 2 or 3 bother me now ? On the flip side , if i don’t have to change 2 or 3 discs who cares , its nice , but not a deal breaker. Its not a 2 hour movie where getting up to change it is annoying , it could be a 10 hour plus game and there I really don’t care. At some point i’d have to get out of my chair anyway
Why don’t you care about your business first? A lot of 360 games have horrid loading times. Burnout loads 5-10 seconds longer then the XBOX version, Prey loads incredibly long and often, Oblivion has problems with the streaming from the disc so that there are constant pauses in the game. You really need to work on these problems instead of making jokes how the PS3 will have longer loading times. Fanbois will object here, but that’s what I think nevertheless…
There’s some interesting stuff in this thread but back to the capacity issue I believe the extra is useful.
yes you can use compression but then you have to waste processor time uncompressing, or in some cases lose quality.
A lot of the graphics that are rendered and drawn could be prerendered for most situations and therefore save more processor time.
The point isn’t really whether it’s needed at the moment, but for a console with a 10 year life it give developers the most flexability to get the most out of a machine.
Say for instance you wanted to store the OS’s premium UK mapping data in vector format for some new application you’d need 400GB – 4TB in uncompressed format, 35gb compressed. Who knows why you’d do this or what for but the point is you could.
No prizes for guessin what field I work in
Guys what more proof do you want?
the 360 will NOT be faster. Just read Chris and Techni post. He has PROFF
http://ozymandias.com/archive/2006/08/31/Mark-Deloura-Comments-on-Relevance-of-Blu-ray-_2800_Oddly_2C00_-We_2700_re-in-Violent-Agreement_2900_.aspx#52
I have no problem with giving the "top speed" crown to the PS3, neither the greater "fuel tank" crown, heck, I’ll even give the "price tag" crown to the PS3. I’m fine with that because it’s only on paper. And Sony wants to be superior on paper. Being superior on paper makes life easier for the salesmen, and so the salesmen become happier and so they’ll happily promote Sony products.
The salesman can point at a paper and say:
"Look! The PS3 has higher Teraflops than the Xbox 360. So, it is better."
"Look! The blu-ray discs have higher capacity than DVDs. So, they are better."
"Look! The price of the PS3 is $600 and the price of the Xbox 360 is $300. So, the PS3 is twice as good, right?!"
This is all on paper. Remember the time before HD DVD and blu-ray was released for movies? Everybody said that blu-ray was going to be better than HD DVD, because it said so on paper. However, reality showed the opposite.
In fact, Microsoft has shown that HD DVD has no limitations in showing the true master in both video and audio quality of a movie. They have shown that by simply using only less than half of the bandwidth of HD DVD they can make a transparent transfer between the master and the HD DVD disc. The last step of the transfer is not limited by the technical aspects of HD DVD, but by the ears and eyes of the men and women at the studios who make sure that each movie is frame by frame transparent to the master.
Thus, there are virtually no limitations on HD DVD to show a movie that is truly transparent to its master.
In fact, I’m willing to bet that the only limitations on the quality that you will get from HD DVD is due to your own home-theater set-up. So, by buying an HD DVD player instead of a blu-ray player, you will save money that you can spend on better speakers, receiver, HD display etc.
So, why is it that the movie "Chicken Little" is coming on a 50GB blu-ray disc? Doesn’t a 1 h and 21 min movie fit on an HD DVD 30GB disc? Why yes it does fit perfectly. In fact, HD DVD can fit a 4 h movie in 1080p, so there are no limitations here. Is it that a BD-50 disc give higher resolutions? No. HD DVD and blu-ray both give 1080p, and I have already shown above that HD DVD can make a true transparent transfer from the master both in terms of picture quality and lossless audio. The only reason Sony is pushing BD-50 discs is so that the salespersons can point at a paper and say "Look! Blu-ray has 50GB. So, it is better, right?!".
In terms of movies, blu-ray are winning on paper, but are losing in reality. They have claimed that they have greater movie studio support, but in reality HD DVD has the most movies and the better looking movies. Heck, even CEO of Disney Bob Iger himself has said that Disney probably will publish movies on HD DVD soon.
Now, here we are a few months before the release of the PS3, and Sony are claiming its superiority on paper. Still, it is the Xbox 360 that has delivered, and soon a new wave of games will be released for the Xbox 360. Sony has yet to show gameplay that surpasses the Xbox 360 – I doubt that they can.
Here are 3 reasons why Sony act the way they do:
1) Remember the slogan of the PS3? "This is living". If you throw about the words and add a few, you get the slogan for Sony: "This is how Sony makes a living (for the next 5 years or so)". Yup, for the next 5 years or so, Sony are going to make a living by selling blu-ray discs for either games or movies. However, I have already shown above that you do not need blu-ray for 1080p movies, HD DVD already delivers this true to the master.
2) Sony sells expensive products, and this makes retailers happy because they make more money by selling expensive merchandise. Also, Sony claims
vanTom:
That only happened becouse early movies using Bluray used MPEG2 codec. Bluray accepts all codecs that HD-DVD has. Why they were using MPEG2? I have no idea, but it will change, and it already started changing, Warner Bros already stated they will be using VC1 in theyre next movies. Seeing as both formats can use the same codecs, Bluray has better audio codecs, and bluray has bigger storage, Bluray has everything to be better. Bigger size = Less compression = Better quality.
Metalmurphy…
You are still making arguments on paper. Microsoft has already shown that it is not the technical specifications of HD DVD that limits the quality, it is the ears and eyes of the movie studio staff. Are the ears and eyes better over at the blu-ray supporting movie companies?
I don’t know why you think that blu-ray has better audio codecs, so far blu-ray has had worse on many titles using Dolby Digital while HD DVD has used Dolby Digital Plus. Already, HD DVD has even delivered titles with lossless audio that is true to the master audio, i.e. no need for uncompressed LPCM to deliver lossless sound. Blu-ray has yet to deliver this advanced audio codecs.
There is no reason to believe that blu-ray will be better (only equally good) since the difference between HD DVD and blu-ray will be a subjective one made by the guys and girls at the movie studios.
Also remember: More lossless audio compression = more room for better video quality.
I think sony is going to have a much bigger problem with the inclusion of blu-ray then they anticipate…
They are trying to satisfy everyone, but should have included it ‘after market’.
Here is my reasoning.
Most family’s that have a HDTV keep it in the living room and it’s the main tv for viewing news, shows, movies, etc for mom and dad. When you have children, you get them a playstaion/xbox, put it in there room (or second tv room), to keep them occupied while you watch/do other tings. 95% of the time, that second tv is not HD. These families probably won’t be buying blu-ray movies because the ps3 will not be attached to the homes single HDTV, and they are too technologically inept to attach it every time.
I think the people that this device was designed to catering to (by including everything) is the ~25 year old ps-fan boy, with a HDTV, no children, good job, and an early adopter willing to spend $40 on a blu-ray movie.
The problem is, that a huge percentage of the core console buying population is probably 10-20 year old (beg your parents for Christmas) crowd, and if your not going to be plugging in to the family HD tv (IF your family has one), then blu-ray is moot… it’s going to be a hard sell to mom and dad to explain why we are not saving $300 buying an x-box 360?
The PS3 has 7.1 Dolby Surround and not 5.1 Dolby Surrond as Mark Delora said, check it on the official PS3 website and since it has a HDD there will be certainly be smaller load times. PS3 is a next generation console and it is not being rushed to the market as the Xbox 360 was, and we will see less problems with the PS3 compared to the Xbox 360 .. ‘Dead Rising Kills Xbox 360s’, ‘Red Ring of Death’ , etc. I wish to see how the Wii wiil perform in the face of this competition. And by the Way Xbox Live is a walled Garden, unlike the PS3 and the Wii.
Aside from Game Consoles, I was thinking of buiding a Core 2 Extreme PC loaded with ATI 1950 XTX or nVidia
GeForce 7950 GX2,
Ameen,
http://www.gamebot.co.nr ,
http://tech.jhatkaa.com .
We should look at the issue from a developers point of view. When a Developer creates a game they think about story, artwork, creativity, budgeting, scheduling, and sounds. I believe depending on who develops the game some of them may have some broader ideas. One of the phases of getting ready to release the product is not only getting steady FPS, but also to debug correct? Do you no believe also trying to fit it on one disc is a factor? I love my xbox 360 and it is a great system, but I know in a long run its going to start losing the race. I believe Microsoft does not have plans to support the system for 10 years. I believe they may in a since but as soon as they find their wall they will develop a new system. I don’t know about you all but I still buy games for my PS2 and love the system. I believe its lifespan lived up to its price. YOU CAN’T EVER BE FUTURE PROOF, but you can at least give the developers more freedom. We don’t know the future or which format wins. Movies from BD may sell it may not, does the PS3 sales get affected by that…I DOUBT IT. Why you say its because the system is a gaming machine. IS THERE A SYSTEM THAT HAVE HD no except for a future add-on. The only system that offers HD movie player is PS3 out of the box. If the format becomes a bust oh well…its still a game system. I am not a sony bandwagon, i just go where the games are. I agree with some that say that people with more concerns about money will think twice because of the price, but this should be considered too which is the lifespan of the consoles. Microsoft has yet to prove that department because of the 360 coming out so soon after the xbox. Playstation and PS2 has proved it. I had my PS2 since release. If 600 dollars is going to survive till 2016 then its worth it. I think for a stand alone HD player is too expensive same with BD Player. Now that were they should talk about the format war at, don’t bring it to the consoles. Consoles do their jobs which is play games. Yes I will be buying BD movies when I get the PS3, but if the format victory goes to the HD well I guess I’ll just go buy a HD player and by that time I expect much cheaper rates and at least my BD are still being played by my PS3. My concern is that people talk bad about PS3 too much. What I want is both Microsoft and PS3 to do Very Well and have a split market. Could you just imagine a market thats split in half by Microsoft and PS3. So many great games will come out for both systems it would be better than a dominating market.
Someone stated earlier that the 360 has no HDMI option. Thought I would share:
Looks like it does have HDMI and it will be available 12-06.
http://xe360.com/article/Xbox_360_Accessories/3768.html
Whoever that Bill character was that flamed my post obviously doesn’t have any idea what he is talking about.
http://ozymandias.com/archive/2006/08/31/Mark-Deloura-Comments-on-Relevance-of-Blu-ray-_2800_Oddly_2C00_-We_2700_re-in-Violent-Agreement_2900_.aspx#54
Nice try though. Just to clarify I’m talking about the author of this high profile blog misleading the uneducated fanboys.. I’m not referring to all the mindless slobbering from PlayStation or Xbox fans who clearly have no idea what is going on.
You are obviously in the Xbox camp and upset with my post but I’m not trashing the 360. I think the 360 is a great system.. it just doesn’t trump the PS3 hardware in every way imaginable as some of the MS staff would have you think.
But I don’t know where you get off patronizing me with your obviously limited knowledge on the matter.
Hi, I make games.. what do you do again?
I am a Sony Fanboy, but not the blind type.
Was a nice read. Yeh I understand that games will load slower, but that really doesn’t concern me…but that is just me. You HAVE to admit that the extra space is nice, but seeing that it is a brand new product, it’s not surprising that it’s slower than DVD9. I just want to play MGS4 with nice extra long cinematic’s, not saying the 360 can’t do that now or in the future. It just gets your brain thinking gah..maybe one day a game will be out in the near future with a development team large and dedicated enough to atleast fill a BD-Rom half way with pure gaming….maybe. If not then oh well. I am a what if thinker so yehh lol. Also I like the HDMI idea Microsoft is doing, good call because they didn’t really need it a year ago. Microsoft is making some good descisions, but I will always worship Kuturagi.
I think Midway is right saying this time around it will probably be a draw.
Also I can’t wait till their all released…so we can just get along again.
This Blu-ray vs DVD is interesting, but ultimately, a total red-herring..
It’s the game that sells the console, not the other way around.
I would have purchased a 360 from day one if Halo 3 had come out with it (blu ray or not!) but no way am I buying a 360 until a "must have" title becomes available, and no such beast yet exists IMHO.
So the same thing goes for the PS3. If Sony, at launch-time, can show me a truly "briliiant" game I’ll buy the system on the spot. If Blu Ray contributed to the brilliance of the game, then great, but I’ll bet there will be a lot more factors involved than just that, eg. the creativity and quality of the developers.
Point in case is Oddworlds Strangers Wrath. Made me wonder why every xbox game couldn’t look and play as well as that game did. If his team could pull off a game like that on the XBOX then the new gen hardware is good enough, xbox or PS3, blu ray or not. Sadly, Lorne has left the gaming industry, and ironically, the direction of the next-generation consoles was one of the reasons why he quit the biz.
My understanding is, developers come a very distant second to consumers when it comes to console design. We want a super computer in our lounge for the price of a regular consumer electrical appliance, and somethings got to give.
I just can’t believe we’re looking at a new format already. How long has DVD been out? There’s no way I’m replacing my discs, higher res or not. Frankly it doesn’t seem worth it.
On a similar not, I’ll not be buying a PS3 either mind you. 360 looks promising and the brief goes I’ve had of Dead Rising and PGR 3 all make it seem very worthwhile.
RE: Mark Deloura Comments on Relevance of Blu-ray (Oddly, We’re in Violent Agreement)
Andre (who works in our Developer Relations group) over at his Ozymandias blog has posted some thoughts
RE: Mark Deloura Comments on Relevance of Blu-ray (Oddly, We’re in Violent Agreement)
Andre (who works in our Developer Relations group) over at his Ozymandias blog has posted some thoughts