I think the solution to game size (aside from optimization) is breaking up the game into optional downloads. Things like, 4k textures, high poly models, multiplayer, singleplayer etc.
This would be a great feature. However some of that has shared resources. SP and MP probably use 85% same stuff. Have seen UHD Textures as a separate download in some games.
And starfield could easily be way larger. The textures in Starfield aren’t actually that high res (part of why, despite it being a very demanding game, it doesn’t use much VRAM, generally topping out at 8GB)
You don’t uNdERstAnD, a game must be less than 1GB in size or it’s unOpTiMiZeD.
But at the same time, man I’m sick of these last gen/old non raytracing cards are holding us back! Where are my rig melting next gen games?!?! Oh wait I have to download 100GB and still turn down settings to High!?!? unOpTiMiZeD!! furiously leaves bad steam review
And that’s just comparing the storage, nevermind one being a vastly faster NVME drive that also takes up less space, is more power efficient, and doesn’t have two annoying cables to manage.
IMO huge file sizes are more of a download speed issue than a storage issue
Y’all wanted 4K Next Gen Gwaphix well that shits gonna cost you some storage space lol
Sucks but whatever. Been happening since the beginning.
I think the solution to game size (aside from optimization) is breaking up the game into optional downloads. Things like, 4k textures, high poly models, multiplayer, singleplayer etc.
This would be a great feature. However some of that has shared resources. SP and MP probably use 85% same stuff. Have seen UHD Textures as a separate download in some games.
I would be happy with optional localization files
Cyberpunk is like 70GB
And that size was outrageous just 5 years ago.
deleted
And Starfield is more than twice that. It’s ridiculous.
There’s no reason for it.
Starfield is pretty huge though isn’t it? I dunno, it feels like if any games should take that much storage space, it’s a massive space game.
well space is mostly empty/sSo is the entirety of starfield tbh
And starfield could easily be way larger. The textures in Starfield aren’t actually that high res (part of why, despite it being a very demanding game, it doesn’t use much VRAM, generally topping out at 8GB)
The area of space in the game doesn’t cost data like that lol.
The install size is because of textures and sound files. They don’t know how to compress or optimize files.
Do you have like solid number of reasonable gigabytes a game can be? How did you arrive to this number exactly?
You don’t uNdERstAnD, a game must be less than 1GB in size or it’s unOpTiMiZeD.
But at the same time, man I’m sick of these last gen/old non raytracing cards are holding us back! Where are my rig melting next gen games?!?! Oh wait I have to download 100GB and still turn down settings to High!?!? unOpTiMiZeD!! furiously leaves bad steam review
deleted
And SSDs are ludicrously cheap now.
My first SSD was 240GB, for £300. (£1.25/GB)
I can get a 2TB one now for £64. (£0.032/GB)
And that’s just comparing the storage, nevermind one being a vastly faster NVME drive that also takes up less space, is more power efficient, and doesn’t have two annoying cables to manage.
IMO huge file sizes are more of a download speed issue than a storage issue
deleted
Sometimes my internet goes down to 100Mbit/s and I have to fiddle with my switch to get it back to gigabit.
Life is a nightmarish hellscape.