This game is ridiculously huge

[John Hadley]

I just noticed the size of this when I was browsing my Steam discover queue and I just had to stop by and say the size of this game is just disgusting. No chance I'll ever buy this just due to how much disk space it takes.

[txfeinbergs]

I think the OP needs to stick to Indie games. The larger the game, the more likely I am to buy it. (I like to get my money's worth).

[=Palynzer=]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MancSoulja:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von John Hadley:

It is a real criticism. I won't buy this game due to this. I won't even buy Final Fantasy XV which is 100 GB. I own most of the other Final Fantasy games and they have much more modest requirements and yet they were completely adequate, even the ones with PS2 era graphics.

Now maybe there are enough other people that actually want huge games that have huge loading times and games that won't even operate properly if they aren't installed on an SSD because otherwise they would take 10 minutes to load or the video in them would stutter because their videos or streaming textures require such high bit rate that a regular hard drive can't even possibly keep up that losing me as a customer is just not a big concern because I am replaced by someone that thinks gaming on a 4K screen is actually a good thing when I think that it is the stupidest thing you could possibly do if you want good game performance.

I saw today that Baldur's Gate 3 says it takes 150 GB of disk space and yet it has over 500k positive reviews. That's a hell of a lot. GTA V takes something like 110 GB of disk space and is one of the top selling games of all time. I can't deny that there have been some successful games that take what I consider to be extremely much more disk space than I want to devote to a single game. All I can say is that your game better be the best game on the planet if you expect people to devote more disk space to it than any other game on the planet otherwise they may as well not buy your game and not play your game and instead opt for a half dozen or more other games.

Don't you have tens of terabytes of storage like most people? You realise it 2024 right?

I have like 25TB of just SSD storage. You can get a 1TB SSD for like $30 these days, how can you afford the game if you can't afford that?

A 1TB SSD will cost $30 in your stupid bubble...here it's almost $100.

[Megalomaniac]

Your loss bozo, FFXVI is a fantastic game. It's a hundred or so GB because it has a lot of content.

It's not like CoD, where it's a copypaste of the last 6 games, yet somehow gets larger.

[GoldInfinit7]

I was curious and got the following by doing an online search:

"The full version of Final Fantasy XVI for PlayStation 5 will take up exactly 94.91GB of space."

If the PS5 version also takes up 170 GB (it doesn't) then it can be explained as the game actually has that much actual data for textures, meshes, and other resources.

Since it doesn't, then the discrepancy between versions seems unjustified without a very good explanation of what additional content does the PC version have to justify such a massive increase.

I also disagree with the developers being excused because "we can all afford" terabytes of storage space. So, by that logic, gas stations should start selling gas for $10 per gallon because we can all afford it, what's the big deal? Just get a better job.

[MADOX-01]

Why are people defending this? A game should not be taking this much space.

[Raggle]

i got somethin ridiculously huge for ya right here

[Red Duke]

Cutscenes are all pre-rendered. Game is full of them. That's why.

[qsdww]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Red Duke:

Cutscenes are all pre-rendered. Game is full of them. That's why.

Sorry but please stop spreading misinformation.

[MancSoulja]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Palynzer:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MancSoulja:

Don't you have tens of terabytes of storage like most people? You realise it 2024 right?

I have like 25TB of just SSD storage. You can get a 1TB SSD for like $30 these days, how can you afford the game if you can't afford that?

A 1TB SSD will cost $30 in your stupid bubble...here it's almost $100.

Oh look, A 1TB SSD in Argentina, cost £21. Cheaper than anywhere in Europe.

https://www.desertcart.com.ar/products/394224762-san-disk-ssd-plus-1-tb-internal-ssd-sata-iii-6-gb-s-2-5-7-mm-up-to-535-mb-s-sdssda-1-t-00-g-27

[kiteless 凧無し]

It’s ridiculously bad as well

[Sirno]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von CH13F:

... we been getting over 100gig games over half a decade. this s nothing new. with new internet speeds its nothing actually.

also ssd/hard drive prices are cheapest than any other components nowadays, used to be RAMs the cheapest, now drives even cheaper than RAMs.

storage is the least of a problem in this era of gaming. most trouble is GPU prices thanks to bitcoin farms. which going to continue till 2030.

personally i think games shouldnt go past 100 gbs. we dont need games looking hyper realistic or whatever. or preferably make them an optional free dlc or something if possible

[kiteless 凧無し]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von SirnoSBF:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von CH13F:

... we been getting over 100gig games over half a decade. this s nothing new. with new internet speeds its nothing actually.

also ssd/hard drive prices are cheapest than any other components nowadays, used to be RAMs the cheapest, now drives even cheaper than RAMs.

storage is the least of a problem in this era of gaming. most trouble is GPU prices thanks to bitcoin farms. which going to continue till 2030.

personally i think games shouldnt go past 100 gbs. we dont need games looking hyper realistic or whatever. or preferably make them an optional free dlc or something if possible

Became tone deaf devs decide to include 4k textures by default when the majority of pc gamers are still playing at 1080p inflating the file size by a good 60-70gbs

[Haseo8]

New thing to complain about it seems. Moved on from the performance and the cutscenes, and on to the size of the game. Just trying to find anything to complain about at this point.

[Seppuku]

Final Fantasy games almost always are on the larger end of the scale when it comes to disk space because they're usually big games.

And as graphical quality improves and graphical density grows and worlds get bigger in terms of assets and as audio quality improves too, games just get bigger.

Which has always been the case. But now we're in the era where they're 100+GB

My earliest video game experiences were in the floppy disk era, a 100mb game would seem insane back then. And games like Monkey Island required several floppy disks. Nowadays you'll be hard pressed to find games that small and they'll be indie titles.

During the PSX era, when most games fit on 1 disk. Final Fantasy took 3 or 4.

On the XBox 360, Final Fantasy XIII took up 3 disks.

But the technology keeps up too, because you can get SSD's with enough capacity pretty cheaply these days.

For 1tb external SSD I paid about £50 and it's what I store my games on. I expect you can get something cheaper if going for an internal one.

[kiteless 凧無し]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Haseo8:

New thing to complain about it seems. Moved on from the performance and the cutscenes, and on to the size of the game. Just trying to find anything to complain about at this point.

Elden ring 60gbs
FF16 170gbs

Imagine having to download an extra 110gbs for a vastly inferior game

And you wonder why FF games sales are rock bottom these days, rebirth flopped in case you needed reminding

All flash, no substance