Second Chance, the article says "...SCHEDULED to weigh in at 22 GB" which implies that's the final number anticipated on the retail disc (ie. compressed, if they choose to do so). But like you I find it hard to believe that there will really be 22 GB (or more) of meaningful game data in any PS3 game. Sure, they can stuff the disk with cutscenes and other extra content, but I don't anticipate 22 GB of textures and levels. The PS3 doesn't have any more RAM than the 360, so it can only use a small chunk of that at one time. And what game developer is going to spend the time it takes to create that much game content. Heck, Oblivion uses only 4.5 GB and it took 5 years to make.
Blue Ray in the PS3 is a sham. It will provide SOME minor advantage but not nearly enough to justify the price or the 1 year delay vs. the 360, which is getting true second gen games NOW.
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.
Second Chance, the article says "...SCHEDULED to weigh in at 22 GB" which implies that's the final number anticipated on the retail disc (ie. compressed, if they choose to do so). But like you I find it hard to believe that there will really be 22 GB (or more) of meaningful game data in any PS3 game. Sure, they can stuff the disk with cutscenes and other extra content, but I don't anticipate 22 GB of textures and levels. The PS3 doesn't have any more RAM than the 360, so it can only use a small chunk of that at one time. And what game developer is going to spend the time it takes to create that much game content. Heck, Oblivion uses only 4.5 GB and it took 5 years to make.
Blue Ray in the PS3 is a sham. It will provide SOME minor advantage but not nearly enough to justify the price or the 1 year delay vs. the 360, which is getting true second gen games NOW.