ISO images dumped from PS3 Blu-ray discs via Linux
By Paul Miller 
posted November 27th 2006 6:57PM
posted November 27th 2006 6:57PM
[Thanks, Tam]
posted November 27th 2006 6:57PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
"However, the XBox360 will not be left out of HD game storage. If by holiday season 2007 there are great games that need more than DVD9 space then Microsoft will be able to sell the HD add-on for $100 by then, and they will probably do a game+HDdrive bundle for $150 for the first title that needs it. It will prove their brilliant strategy: release a console a year ahead of the competition and give people a great upgrade to spend their holiday dollars on in 2007."
Exactly, just like the highly successful and widely supported PS2 HDD......
they have said countless times they will not use the HD-DVD add-on for games. just movies. and yea i know its their word, and companies break their word. i still rather though dont see the big deal of using 2 disks if needed to put one game on.
Wow, using dd to create a bit for bit copy of a DVD. What a novel idea.
You know....no one really ever complained about multiple disc...so why should they now? Also, by the time the X360 games utilize every millimeter of space on DVD 9, we will have a format winner (or none at all) and there will be another console coming out.
What's the life cycle of consoles? 4-6 years?
I never had a problem swapping discs on the Playstation with FF7 for example... not sure why people complain about it being a problem now.
I'm sure in 90% of the cases a game can fit on a DVD... but I don't see any problem in having a second disc. To me saying you "NEED" a larger capacity media is overkill in terms of gaming. The cost just doesn't yet provide the benefit. Now if we were talking 5+ DVDs on every major title then you'd have a point. So far I'm aware of one 360 game that will have more than one disc (Blue Dragon) and it still has less discs than I recall swapping on my PSX.
In 5 years, this will probably be a bigger issue and at that time we'll have a new XBox to actually fit with the times instead of forcing an expensive unnecessary technology down a consumers throat.
And for those of you still griping on about this... think of it this way... when the Wii made you move to play the game we called it revolutionary. If MS starts releasing multi-DVD games, by getting up to swap the disc you'll soon be getting exercise while playing the 360. Think of it as a free upgrade.
Im just wondering if MS may ditch the drive on the 360 for games distro altogether. How do we know that as the 360 evolves we may see what they are "demo'ing" with XBLA and the new Video marketplace move onto something alittle bigger like steam and allow the downloading of actual games to hard drive... i know that as we head towards the mid term of the 360's life the availible bandwidth that us home users will be given will increase and we will beable to reasonably beable to d/l a full game maybe even larger file sizes than blu-rays max file size in the same time it takes me to get off my lazy ass and go to a game store and pick up the latest version of GoW.
All we need is MS to pull there fingure out the ass and release a larger HDD at a resonable price and they would make a killing from game royaltys...
When the PS2 was released didn't most of the games fit on a CD? And eventually the game sizes grew till a single layer DVD was necessary, and now a few PS2 games need dual layer DVD's. So what would make someone think that it would be any different on the PS3?
last @ Nov 27th 2006 9:27PM
"So you Xbox 360 fanboys plan to buy a new console in 2 years? Fine by me its ur money...i'd rather spend $500 next year and get a console that will last me 5+ years... External HD DVD with what 9 movies? yaaa veery useful... "
If you bothered to check your facts you will find that HDDVD has actually 113 out now with 33 more in 2006, while blu-ray has 103 out now and 26 more in 2006, 17 more titles and in my opinion the best selection of titles, plus with the HDDVD player sold out in multiple countries the films are hardly gonna dry up just yet.
Final Fantasy III (Final Fantasy VI) is my favorite game of all time. The rom clocks in at a few megabytes. Size means nothing to me, its all about the game.
All this talk about IF programmers optimized the code they could fit it all on a DVD with plenty to spare... but the key word is IF. The current trend shows no desire to optimize code. Storage is getting more capacious, transfer speeds are increasing, memory is abundant... why optimize? Why take the time and effort to optimize when a programmer can just "spew out data" and get a similar result with less effort.
Sure XBox360 developers can optimize code for DVD games, but my guess is that if they have a choice they'll more readily spit out the easier stuff knowing that they are contributing to a trend, if they start a trend of optimization then they will forever have to abide by it, if they take the easy way out and continue the trend of less-optimization their work will forever be a little easier while helping to grow the hardware industry in its quest for ever larger storage space and higher bandwidths.
I personally try not to base my arguements on really big IFs.
I'd just like to add that Blue Dragon is a little over 30 gigs, so it wouldn't fit on a single-layer BR disk anyways! To be fair the 3rd disk has the soundtrack on it, so I hear
Maybe console fanboys need to learn more about how their games are made, then all this talk of "developers need to optimize the code" can stop.
If you had any idea how many advancements have taken place over the years you would have nothing but praise for them. They choose to use that much space on the DVD because that is what YOU(the consumer) demands. You want your high-res textures and sounds, which are pretty much the biggest space hogs. Unless you find a way to compress different image formats into some tiny archive and are able to access the archive quickly without using much of the processing power of the system to extract files on the fly....you should just let them do their job making good games for you to play. Let them worry about the limitations of the system and what they have to do in order for it to work on all the systems the game will be played on.
Compared to a couple years ago, nearly all new games on Xbox and up have some sort of visual improvement that was developed with almost no impact on rendering speed. Characters and models can now use virtually triple the number of polygons thanks to normal mapping which is basically just all the precise details of the model saved into an image file. Sure those files take more space but to make your blocky character with 2 accessories turn into a super detailed assasin with multiple added features with no impact on the speed of the game is worth the extra MB.
The problem is the consumers don't understand the business aspect of the industry they're buying products from. Sony isn't the one making the games.....but, they have put in place a standard of storage over 16gb in case developers care to use it. Movies can already take advantage of it and if a developer wants to limit himself to one target audience(PS3 owners), he could make a game with 20+gb of content and it could be the most detailed and beautiful game to date, but he would probably make more with a game he could sell on all 3 of the top systems and also not having to spend the extra time and money on creating all the extra content.
Anyways, just stop being on the offensive people. You buy the games to play them and the companies know that. They have already had study groups and investigations into all your concerns and questions, what your upset about right now was thought about months/years ago by them and their marketing/research data has ruled it out as a concern for one reason or another.
Blah, enough of this. These blogs are starting to get ridiculous and most of the time it seems pointless to post any response due to the thickheadedness of some people and the inability to think for themselves.
Well, I'm a gamer. Plain and simple. Have been since the first release of the NES.
I agree that the Blu-ray is a needless format being shoved down consumer's throats. For example: both the Gamecube AND the Dreamcast use(d) proprietary formats EXCLUSIVE to their systems (minus Naomi GD-Rom hardware, but we're talkin consoles.) Did we have to pay more to be able to play those games? Not really. It was simply a base to keep folks from ripping off games - and for the most part, it worked.
Blu-ray is a different story. Not only is it the medium that the PS3 uses, it's also on the up-and-up for HD movie formats. It's a business strategy yes, but at the same time, it's making the system 200+ dollars more.
Next, we run into what's already an established medium -> DVD. Yes, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD offer pretty much the same thing, but HD-DVD isn't ONLY connected to Sony. We saw them try to do this with the UMD and the PSP. While the UMD's sight was a little less focused than the broad destruction of HD movies, it was an attempt to get folks to switch to their medium. It failed.
The business world is finicky just like the consumer world and chances are, Sony will get the shaft when ALL the businesses realize (and they already know this if they are established vendors) that throwing all your eggs in one basket behind ONE company is a NO-NO. Using some common sense and history to back this up, I'm betting that the more readily availble medium (both players, copiers, and movies) will be deemed HD-DVD in the end.
Years down the road, there will probably be another medium created to further get more of a bang, but Sony is just ahead of its time, not to mean out of its gourd for expecting the casual gamer ilk to all pick up a PS3. We also have HD-DVD player owners who just want hi-def movies - they bought a player which is extremely more common than a Blu-ray player.
Granted, we'll all eventually have a PS3, but that blu-ray movie format will be somewhat useless compared to our HD-DVD players sitting next to the Sony machine.
The most amusing fact in this entire console wars/format wars debate is the fact that if you walk into a BestBuy or a GameStop, you'll notice a stack of unwanted PS3s in a cage. You can't find a Wii unless you wish upon a star however.
forgot to mention Betamax - pointing out that Sony has attempted to do this before...heh.
BD is good for HD. Wat do u think bout the size of GTR HD. Is that can fit into DVD9? I dont think so. And how many of u like to keep one game in a few DVD? As we know all these think will be cheaper and is good for who "not so rich". Soon all movies/games will be in HD and microsoft will upgrade their system for xbox. cheers!
my buddy in the know said you won't see the full potential of the ps3 till 2010, about the time the new tech for hd tv's is stable, said the next gen tv's deal with lasers, and supposed to blow away lcd and plasma. just hearsay, but he seems to know what he's talking about. anyway back to the subject, what are your guys opinions on how they will get the backup games to play? internal mods, external blue ray?
Sony has projected that the PS3 will last for 10 years. While the storage (BlueRay) may last you 10 years the processor and video chips will not last that long. Microsoft has made the right decision deciding to go with a 4 year shelf life before there next console. So in 4 years XBOX 360 owners will be ready to upgrade to a new XBOX with probably a dual Blueray/HDDVD format and between both consoles they may spend a $150 more then the PS3. For those PS3 owners they will be stuck with that $800 investment that finally uses blueray but the rest of the technoloy is outdated. Come on, what last 10 years besides dept.
Sony has projected that the PS3 will last for 10 years. While the storage (BlueRay) may last you 10 years the processor and video chips will not last that long. Microsoft has made the right decision deciding to go with a 4 year shelf life before there next console. So in 4 years XBOX 360 owners will be ready to upgrade to a new XBOX with probably a dual Blueray/HDDVD format and between both consoles they may spend a $150 more then the PS3. For those PS3 owners they will be stuck with that $800 investment that finally uses blueray but the rest of the technoloy is outdated. Come on, what last 10 years besides dept.
4 year Shelf-life for a console is pretty sad if you think about it. So what you are saying here is every 4 years there going to be a new Xbox which is going to get more and more expensive everytime they release a system. Well for me personally I will keep my $600 dollar investment for 10 years and continue to watch my Blurays and play my PS3 games. Well that means that there are going to be 2 and 1/2 new Xbox's before the PS4 comes out. Xbox is going to be rich!
So according to your calculations you don't mind paying more than thousands of dollar in the span of 10years, other than paying $600 with the PS3.
M$ love people like you because you are going to make them rich in the next couple years with 2 more consoles!