Sections

The Saboteur PS3 has a 7-minute install

Thursday, 3rd December 2009 18:20 GMT By Patrick Garratt

saboinstall

The PS3 version of The Saboteur has a mandatory install of approximately seven minutes.

We know because we’re about to grab the opening sections of the game for you. Except we can’t yet. Because it’s doing its transferring files shizzle.

The Pandemic WWII adventure’s out tomorrow. We’ll have some nice footage up for you in a tick.

Breaking news

24 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. onlineatron

    Damn =(

    #1 5 years ago
  2. Michael O’Connor

    lolconsoleinstalls

    #2 5 years ago
  3. natesaninja

    thats exactly why if its out on xbox and ps3 I buy it for Xbox not to start a never ending fight but why does it take so long to download anything for the playstation the simplest update takes 5-10 minutes to download and install its not my connection 20 down 5 up and xbox brings out these huge updates that take like 2 minutes

    #3 5 years ago
  4. mike3648

    THE game looks like a turkey-probably will be similar to that other turkey Pandemic made, Mercenaries. I will avoid this one

    #4 5 years ago
  5. Gekidami

    I’ve never had an update take more then 2mins + install. Unless there are several updates in one go. Blame your ISP my friend.
    Same goes for downloads; For some reason it took some people here over 24hours to get th GoW3 demo whilst it only took me about 10 minutes. Open your ports people!

    You can also take into account the fact the Sony dosnt impose a limit to patch sizes whilst MS does.

    #5 5 years ago
  6. Michael O’Connor

    @ natesaninja

    The PlayStation Network and Xbox Live patch games very differently from each other. Sony allows company to install their patches directly to the hard-drive, big files that patch the game in the literal sense.

    Xbox Live patches on the other hand only allows for very small sizes, and it only holds five of them in memory at any one time, so they don’t take up disc space on your hard drive.

    Having to install a game on a modern console is idiotic and horrendously bad design on Sony’s part, but it’s really their own fault for providing a disc-drive with such a slow read speed. If a gaming is multi-format and it has an install, I will always end up buying it for the 360. I should not have to use up huge chunks of space on my hard-drive just so I can play the game.

    “You can also take into account the fact the Sony dosnt impose a limit to patch sizes whilst MS does.”

    Imposing a limit is a good thing, because it forces developers not to be sloppy and it also means you don’t have to sit around forever while a 400mb file downloads just so you can play the game properly.

    #6 5 years ago
  7. natesaninja

    thanks Mike and Gekidami your a liar and Mikes post proves it

    #7 5 years ago
  8. reask

    Problem been gek if you live in Ireland you are stuck with slow broadband.
    I dont reckon we are alone either.

    #8 5 years ago
  9. Gekidami

    LUL WOT @7

    #9 5 years ago
  10. Michael O’Connor

    Geki isn’t a liar. He just clearly have a much better internet connection than we do.

    But even on an average connection, downloads *are* much slower on the PlayStation Network than they are on the 360. This is a simple fact.

    #10 5 years ago
  11. natesaninja

    I kid just wanted to see what reaction I got thanks I think 20mbs download and 5mbs upload should be a good download speed

    #11 5 years ago
  12. Michael O’Connor

    I just updated LittleBigPlanet. It took 20 minutes for a 70mb update, on a 7mb/s connection that is consistently reliable.

    Make of that what you will.

    #12 5 years ago
  13. Aimless

    Michael, my 2Mb connection downloads patches more promptly than that. I suspect the ports you have open and the ISP you use are likely factors in your slow speeds, not necessarily the quality of Sony’s download servers. Not that they’re infallible — downloads over Live can slow to crawl sometimes too — but if your connection is under performing so much I suspect extraneous factors are at work.

    Anyway, apparently The Saboteur‘s install weighs in at over 4GB which is pretty gobsmacking. It doesn’t exactly sound like the pinnacle of technical achievement, though…

    #13 5 years ago
  14. OlderGamer

    “I just updated LittleBigPlanet. It took 20 minutes for a 70mb update, on a 7mb/s connection that is consistently reliable.

    Make of that what you will”

    My kids call it the SlowStation 3. We enjoy it, but it don’t DL anything fast. 70mb would take just cpl of mins or less on my xbox360. We have found that pulging in a cord speeds up the PSN, but not by too much. Its still slow.

    #14 5 years ago
  15. FeaturePreacher

    With the PSN, you get what you pay for.

    #15 5 years ago
  16. reask

    Why oh why the need for installs?
    I mean I can live with it OK.
    Go off have a cup of tea or something but it just seems silly really.

    #16 5 years ago
  17. zoopdeloop

    With the ps3 you get what you pay for ;)

    Anyway…aren’t there enough WWII games already…so who cares.

    #17 5 years ago
  18. theevilaires

    Yes Ireland does have bad Broadband :( and this kind of install only shows what crap devs pandemic were. They deserved to be fired. Games like Killzone2 and UC2 have no installs and are better than anything the 360 has even in spite of the year head start.

    #18 5 years ago
  19. natesaninja

    @theevilaires
    Jesus Christ you have got to be the biggest Sony fanboy ever you go from page to page talking up sony like your a fucking Sony sponsor Play the game don’t play the game shut the fuck up and the year head start are you fucking kidding me with this its been out for 3 years the year head start shouldn’t have anything to do with this FANBOY FAG

    #19 5 years ago
  20. Withnail

    If you guys with slow PSN downloads are using wireless then TURN OFF MEDIA SHARING. It bogs down the connection horribly. PSN is not inherently slow.

    As for the patching issue, the main difference is that on the PS3 DLC is distributed via patches (and you just purchase unlock keys from the store), whereas on 360 it all comes via the marketplace. This is why some of the patches on PS3 are so huge. The 360 method is indisputably better.

    Finally the only reason there are mandatory installs on the PS3 is because they are allowed, the speed of Blu-ray has very little to do with it (the transfer rate of Blu-ray is actually pretty good, seek time can be an issue but it’s pretty easy to workaround when you have that much disc capacity). If mandatory installs were permitted on the 360 you would see them there as well. Why should devs spend time optimising their game for disc when they can use the HDD? That’s what it’s there for.

    #20 5 years ago
  21. Quiiick

    How big (in MB) is the mandatory install for Sabotør on the PS3?

    #21 5 years ago
  22. FeaturePreacher

    From the internetz, it seems the install size is 4096 MB.

    #22 5 years ago
  23. Michael O’Connor

    “DLC is distributed via patches (and you just purchase unlock keys from the store)”

    This is completely untrue, and applies on an entirely game for game basis. You can look at the file size of the vast majority of downloadable content for proof of that.

    “the speed of Blu-ray has very little to do with it”

    The speed of Blu-ray have *everything* to do with it, and to assume otherwise is ridiculous. Almost none of the PS3′s games require the read/write capabilities of a hard-drive to run (I can’t actually think of any off-hand that do), and the *only* reason it exists is to significantly speed up loading.

    I have seem games that take almost twice as long to load on the PS3 without an install, and I can think of a few games that would be near-unplayable without one, hence why some games have *mandatory* installations.

    “Why should devs spend time optimising their game for disc when they can use the HDD?”

    Because games on consoles have been optimised solely to play from discs for the last 15 years, maybe? It’s a lazy cop-out option for lazy developers. I should not have to use large amount of my HDD (over 30% of 60GB HDD was installs at last count) just to be able to *play* the games.

    #23 5 years ago
  24. Withnail

    “This is completely untrue, and applies on an entirely game for game basis. You can look at the file size of the vast majority of downloadable content for proof of that”

    Got any examples? Nearly all the games I have on the PS3 distribute DLC via patches, and the few that don’t always have small (say <20MB) patches. You don’t think that 400MB patch mentioned above (or the 70MB LBP one) is purely game code do you? Do you know how little space game code takes up? The things that take up a lot of space are textures and maybe audio, and you only usually need to download stuff like that for new content.

    “The speed of Blu-ray have *everything* to do with it, and to assume otherwise is ridiculous. Almost none of the PS3’s games require the read/write capabilities of a hard-drive to run (I can’t actually think of any off-hand that do), and the *only* reason it exists is to significantly speed up loading.”

    Yes so it installs to HDD because the game isn’t optimised for BD. I think you’re agreeing with me.

    Oh and lazy devs LOL. Blame Sony instead for not enforcing certain things that you don’t like. Devs are perfectly entitled to use the hardware in any way they want, providing they don’t break the TRCs.

    #24 5 years ago