Why is this 74 GB?

[YellowJello]

There's no reason for these games to take up so much space. They're 20 years old. Even with the extra content and increased texture resolution included there's no reason for that. Is there just zero optimization or compression with this game?

[YellowJello]

Originally posted by XKorpion:

The correct answer to this reasonable inquiry is: What's your problem? Is it just too big to fit into your potato?

I have tons of games installed, it's just annoying to have to uninstall several other games to keep the base 100 GB open so that other functions on my PC work. In total I have 3 TB of space across my different hard drives, and I use them. It's obnoxious to have this much space used up for virtually no reason at all.

[mdesaleah]

4 games + 2 Movies.

The AI upscale textures adds an extra 30+gb.

[MaChao]

Originally posted by YellowJello:

Originally posted by MaChao:

Excuse me, what? What year of "modern" are we talking about?
1TB HDD's have fallen below 50 bucks, 1TB SSD's sit at about 70.
Personally, i'm running 11TB of HDD space and 3TB of SSD space. Not sure where you got your average from...

You and I are not the average. The cost of the hard drive is irrelevant. The average PC user has one hard drive, and it's generally part of a pre-built machine, and generally 512 GB is what is picked. Your average user has no idea how to custom build anything or how to add extra space. You have no idea how many times I've seen people throw out an entire PC because of a hard drive failure. The average user is clueless.

But you are aware that Steam Hardware Surveys exist?
The May '24 survey says:
250 - 499 GB = 19,68%
500 - 749 GB = 3,25%

Above 1 TB = 58,89%

So no, the average is not 512GB. Not even close.

Originally posted by YellowJello:

Originally posted by MaChao:

And there is a reason very few games offer that option for content such as that.
I'd love games to be a pick-and-chose to only get what i absolutely need from them.
But there's a reason why it isn't regularly done, and it's stability and support.
Splitting your product up creates more "Products" on the backend side of things, which creates more work.
Go ask 343 how fun the Master Chief Collection was to maintain and how stable everything was...

The Master Chief Collection was dumb to begin with. Having it all handled within the launcher is mega dumb. The way it was handled with the MGS collection and the Hitman games is the way I'd lean. Have each release handled within Steam, giving users the ability to pick and choose what to download.

Yes, that's splitting up a product into several products (in this case, 3 split into 9) which causes more work at the backend.
And you're seeing how well SE is able to handle 3 products...

Also, don't forget, you're talking about collections that are 11 years old at this point.
restructuring those from the ground up would cause even more work.

[Soul]

Originally posted by YellowJello:

Considering the average modern PC sits around 512 GB of total storage, that's a ton of space to take up.

According to Steam Data surveys (which are public) almost 60% of people have a Total Hard Drive Space of over 1TB, and while Steam is not the only gaming platform it's definitely the most used, having the majority of users on it.

Also, the survey maxes out at 1TB, so you can't even tell how many people out of those 60% own a lot more than 1 TB.

Saying the average is 512 GBs might be true for the average PC user, but prolly not for the average PC gamer.

[Casurin]

The games are just bloated.
NONE of the textures are even close to anything that could be called high-resolution - they are just a blurry upscaled mess.
And the videos also are of a rather poor quality: High quality 4K movies with multiple languages take ~30GB - this has non of that.

As a reminder: The original KH1 was just shy of 2GB and basically all that has been done in this "remix" is using upscalers. Most of that can be done on modern hardware on the fly.
And there had been pre-moded ISOs of the original PS2 version with included actual HD texture overhauls that had been less than 5GB in size.

So yeah - this is just broken.
The size only makes the download, the launch and every load-transition slower for no reason.

[Jimmy Hunter]

Originally posted by Casurin:

As a reminder: The original KH1 was just shy of 2GB and basically all that has been done in this "remix" is using upscalers. Most of that can be done on modern hardware on the fly.

Friendly reminder this collection contains the PS3 version of 1.5, not the original PS2 version of 1.0.

[RainbowGamx]

Originally posted by YellowJello:

Originally posted by MaChao:

Excuse me, what? What year of "modern" are we talking about?
1TB HDD's have fallen below 50 bucks, 1TB SSD's sit at about 70.
Personally, i'm running 11TB of HDD space and 3TB of SSD space. Not sure where you got your average from...

You and I are not the average. The cost of the hard drive is irrelevant. The average PC user has one hard drive, and it's generally part of a pre-built machine, and generally 512 GB is what is picked. Your average user has no idea how to custom build anything or how to add extra space. You have no idea how many times I've seen people throw out an entire PC because of a hard drive failure. The average user is clueless.

Dude really thought that a majority of people are gaming on their office computer at work or something

[Oscar92player]

Originally posted by YellowJello:

Originally posted by Iron Maiden:

Also updated graphics are going to increase the size as well 74gb is really not all that big.

74 GB is absolutely all that big. It's become the norm these days because there's no attempt at optimizing or compressing data anymore. Textures can be made into a smaller file size, it just requires a company that gives a ♥♥♥♥, and Square Enix is one of the four or five major publishers that absolutely don't.

Oh, really, you don't want to see how much the size of the assets of these games when the PKG files get unpacked.

KINGDOM HEARTS II -Final Mix- has a size of 14 GB with the assets compressed into PKG files. Unpacked, those assets and folders have a size of 40 GB.

The game size could really be bigger than 74 GB, MUCH more. But the devs cared about compression.

Your complains would be understood in such case, but... not with the actual compression the games have. It's good enough.

[PKblaze]

Just buy a bigger hard-drive.

[garfywarfy]

74gb for 5.5 games? cry harder
whatever you do, don't look at modern AAA game file sizes

[YellowJello]

Originally posted by PKblaze:

Just buy a bigger hard-drive.

Originally posted by garfywarfy:

74gb for 5.5 games? cry harder
whatever you do, don't look at modern AAA game file sizes

> Doesn't read the thread
> Responds anyway

[MaChao]

Originally posted by YellowJello:

Originally posted by PKblaze:

Just buy a bigger hard-drive.

Originally posted by garfywarfy:

74gb for 5.5 games? cry harder
whatever you do, don't look at modern AAA game file sizes

> Doesn't read the thread
> Responds anyway

What do you want to hear? They're both completely on point and everyone else in this thread already gave you the answer.

You wanting SE to rebuild 11 year old collections from the ground up is your thing.
But it has nothing to do with the games being too big or lacking compression.

For what this set contains, the size is more than appropriate.
Everything beyond that is just your personal prefference that that has nothing to do with your initial topic.

[Casurin]

Originally posted by Jimmy Hunter:

Friendly reminder this collection contains the PS3 version of 1.5, not the original PS2 version of 1.0.

Friendly reminder: The PS3-"version" was also just a simple remaster of the PS2 version.

Originally posted by MaChao:

For what this set contains, the size is more than appropriate.

Not even close. the PS2 mods gave better visuals for less than 20GB TOTAL.

[MaChao]

Originally posted by Casurin:

Originally posted by MaChao:

For what this set contains, the size is more than appropriate.

Not even close. the PS2 mods gave better visuals for less than 20GB TOTAL.

Some of you folks don't even pretend to know what you're talking about anymore, huh?
What are you going to tell us next?
That non-accurate emulators with access to modern PC hardware actually produce higher clock speeds than the native hardware?
Crazy times, let me tell you.

[Mendax]

Bad port.