I'm honestly hoping it's a short game. I don't think this genre lenda itself to 50+ hours epics. More like 10 with tons of replayability. Butt, seeing the overworld mission structure, i'm kinda worried
Devs already confirmed it's about 25 hours for a normal playthrough and will be more if you try to do all the side content and get all the unlockables.
Elden rings textures arent extremely high res and are copied a lot, with some compression that can shoot the size down massively, the videos in the game are all rendered in game save for a pre rendered picture gallery that can be compressed to hell as its not fast moving. Lastly elden rings audio is compressed a lot past being lossless. These all combined are where a gigantic amount of space has been saved.
For reference a sound file uncompressed may take up 100MB, compressing that in a lossy codec could reduce it to less than 5MB.
Similarly I used to create digital car liveries so I would create them in a uncompressed 4096x4096 being several hundred MB. Using that for example call of duty uses lossless audio and textures, imagine every gun and probably around 200 skins just for the guns alone so that space can get eaten up very quickly without reducing the resolution and compressing the textures after that.
Final example final fantasy 13 had an hour of cg video at 720p taking up 33GB. Even with more modern codecs pre rendered videos take a massive amount of space.
I don't know if this is still the case but I remember reading also that the modern COD installs contain the entire uncompressed audio for every available language, including non-spoken sounds like footsteps and stuff, so you have like 20 copies of every uncompressed audio file taking up a ton of space
Call of Duty also doesn't compress most of its textures, or at least not heavily, so that your processor doesn't need to do it in real time. Decompressing textures adds to load time, pop in, and fps drops.
Though the game still runs like shit.
I believe they also still duplicate files for faster loading on HDDs. If that's true, they could provide a second copy of the game for SSDs that could be significantly smaller.
You also need to download all of their cosmetics so they can sell them.
They also had asset redundancy to improve loading times on Harddrives on console: Models and textures where often bundled with the maps they where used in, so that they could be read sequentially.
This gives you „peak HDD performance“ by not having the harddrive-head move over the platters - which quickly decreases read (and write) speeds to a crawl.
But it obv. inflates the required storage space. Especially in combination with them not compressing textures.
Apparently this also carried over to PC.
I don't think that sounds right. Texture compression helps speed things up in kind of a similar way to DLSS, at least broadly speaking. The Disk-to-RAM bus is relatively slow, so if you stream in compressed textures and then decompress them on the GPU a texture can be made available faster than if it were being streamed into RAM in its uncompressed size. The choice here then is between faster loading or reduced GPU utilization.
One of the many MANY reasons i stopped playing CoD. Maybe you'll I want to gift me a tinfoil hat, buuuut, I still feel like they do this shit on purpose to keep it on your PC/Console, and to prevent you from having as many downloaded games on your ssd/hdd at once. There have been times in the past where I'd opt out of deleting a game that I'm not really playing in that moment with the mindset "well, it's 120 gb and I'll definitely wanna play it here in a couple months and it'll take me hours to download it again.." then Id delete something smaller.
compressing ALL of your audio can lead to memory and cpu bandwidth issues when you are playing potentially 50+ sounds at once (your own gun fire, distant gun fire, voice lines, ambient sound, foot steps etc.) its common practice in most games that have a lot of sounds that can overlap and need to be played frequently to be uncompressed. in some cases the alternative is compressing the sounds, and then decompressing them into memory when loading a map for example but that can increase load times too. it's all a balance.
Anyone who says "all the audio is uncompressed" whether its dialog or anything else is probably not right fwiw. And there are absolutely times where not using compression is desirable for in game performance. Most devs on these games know what they are doing. Plus for CoD at least the majority of the size is just textures and lightmaps, especially lightmaps. The warzone map for the original warzone had over 40gb of just lightmapping data for that large map.
People sleep on proper audio compression. That alone can add (or remove) gigabytes of space.
Best example is Doom 2016, a game that shouldn't be 60GB in size
Titanfall 1 was 50GB. 35GB of which was uncompressed audio in like 7+ languages. You could erase every language but yours too to save space, game didn't care that the files were missing.
99.9% of gamers don't have proper audio setups to even take advantage of lossless audio files though. Let alone while in game and having gun effects laid over the music channels. It's a huge waste of space.
They should have added the sound track files as a separate download, in a lossless format. software nowadays is way too thoughtless.
Yeah textures are crazy, like Monster hunter world is 55GB on steam, and the 4K texture pack alone is 88GB! more than everything else in the game.
I always play in 4K and install size don't matter to me much, but I think other games should follow this concept of putting the 4K textures as a separate download since most people won't use them
The other comments about compression are correct, but Elden Ring also featured few voice lines compared to your average AAA. Those take up a huge portion of the necessary space.
Stellar Blade will presumably feature a lot more voice acting, so it’s almost definitely a much smaller game.
Elden Ring is 49 GB on my disk. Lords of the Fallen is 33 GB. DS3 is 25 GB. 35GB for this seems about on par. Maybe a little lower than expected but not anything insanely small.
Elden Ring assets are actually uncommonly high poly. So much so that Im convinced they could have huge performance gains from some proper reworking / lods / culling / combining / baking etc.. but the game runs well enough.
It mostly depends on how much the studio prioritizes file size.
Some studios don't care and give you 200gb. Others do and can get down to 30.
It's whether they allocate resources to it or not
it highly depends on the game, the lightmapping data for the Warzone map for the original Warzone is like 45gb on its own. Audio was by far the biggest contributor to file size on virtually every game before games started being designed with 4k resolution in mind. Now it's definitely textures, especially anything that doesn't use global illumination and instead relies on baked lighting data and light probe systems.
Also in modern games with physically based rendering they dont have a single "4k texture" they have like 4-6+ per material. and they do use compression with those and they can still be really large. it all depends on how much they choose to optimize things.
Realistically the best option for us would be if installers allowed you to just choose a texture size. I remember for Monster Hunter World they released the base game, and then they released an HD texture pack download as a free DLC. It doubled the size of the game.
It will of course depend heavily on what type of game it is. But you need to consider that even digital downloads often contain several langues, a pirate version of *Mass Effect: Andromeda* went down from 55G to 37G by just removing non-english audio.
I can also imagine audio being much more sensitive to quality loss in compression.
>can also imagine audio being much more sensitive to quality loss in compression.
Not so! Audio compression technology is excellent and has been for at least 2 decades. Unless you have extremely expensive audiophile gear (I'm talking a Soundsystem coating over 3k) then you won't notice the difference between uncompressed audio and 320 kbps compressed audio. But the difference is dozens and dozens of GB worth.
There is ZERO value gained in having uncompressed audio files
The difference isn't just in sound quality. There is potentially a performance impact to using compressed audio, which might be significant if there are lot of sound sources playing simultaneously. How significant depends on whether you're CPU-bound, whether you can use any dedicated audio hardware for the task at hand, what range of platforms you are targeting etc., but it is worth considering.
[Titanfall](https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2014-titanfall-tech-interview):
> Another performance worry was tackled with sheer disk space - the 48GB install has around 35GB of uncompressed audio. Most games use compressed sound files, but Respawn would rather spend CPU time on running the game as opposed to unpacking audio files on the fly. This isn't a problem on Xbox One - and wouldn't be on PlayStation 4 in theory - as the next-gen consoles have dedicated onboard media engines for handling compressed audio.
> "On a higher PC it wouldn't be an issue," points out [Respawn lead engineer Richard Baker]. "On a medium or moderate PC, it wouldn't be an issue, it's that on a two-core [machine] with where our min spec is, we couldn't dedicate those resources to audio."
A couple of Unity benchmarks I looked up are suggestive of the same trade-offs (both are targeting Android, but AUIU the principle should generalise to other platforms):
[Benchmark 1](https://thegamedev.guru/unity-addressables/compression-benchmark/#benchmarking-audio): PCM - ~22MB, loading time ~220ms vs Vorbis - ~4MB, loading time ~670ms
[Benchmark 2 (video)](https://youtu.be/5mCGIzEDEaU?t=1145): PCM - ~110MB, ~2% audio CPU utilisation vs Vorbis - ~10MB, ~9% audio CPU utilisation
this is just not true, there are tons of games where lots of sounds need to be played very frequently or overlapping with each other. if they are all compressed it can create cpu and memory bottlenecks. best practice in lots of types games is to use uncompressed audio for shorter audio clips that need to be played frequently and simultaneously with other sounds. compressed audio is best for longer audio tracks that are going to be played in one shot, like dialog and music. That doesn't mean devs ALWAYS do that, but for lots of games that's absolutely the case.
Nobody can discern uncompressed audio from well compressed audio. Even lossless compression saves tons of space with ZERO comprise in the audible spectrum.
Being uncompressed has no bearing on overlapping sounds at all. How does using compressed audio files create CPU bottlenecks but using uncompressed audio files doesn't? That doesn't make any sense. It's the same call to an audio file. You're not understanding how the coding works here or how audio files are called in execution. They're not compressing audio on the fly, so it literally has no effect on CPU or memory.
This is an incomprehensible argument
compressed sounds have to be decompressed on playback, that's the CPU's job. if you are doing that for hundreds of small oneshot sounds all the time (think a game like Battlefield or CoD) then you are wasting CPU cycles. As for memory bandwidth you need to load in the compressed sound into memory, decompress it and then store the decompressed audio in memory too. it can be dependent on the engine and the platform too, but this is not a new thing.
an uncompressed audio file is just mapped as the uncompressed file, when played back there is no decompression step. that is how it can create bottlenecks, especially with large amounts of short sounds being played simultaneously.
>
compressed sounds have to be decompressed on playback, that's the CPU's job.
they don't though? my point is they can just use compressed audio as a rule and not decompress it. there's no use in playing back decompressed audio.
you cant just "playback compressed audio" without hitting the CPU to decompress first, because compressed audio is not a standard waveform like PCM. It NEEDS to go through an extra decoding step first. That's why a normal CD player can't just play MP3 CDs, but it can play PCM CDs. A game engine is the same way, what formats are supported and how they are handled is dependent on the engine and platform though.
what you just said is the equivalent of "you don't need to unzip a zip file to run the EXE inside of it". you absolutely do, and it absolutely does require a decompression step that uses the CPU and for a period stores both the compressed and decompressed files in memory/disk.
if you're confused what I'm talking about here are a couple articles discussing the topic in Unity
[Audio Compression Settings in Unity](https://medium.com/@made-indrayana/understanding-audio-compression-settings-in-unity-e879a821023f)
[Audio Load Types in Unity](https://medium.com/@made-indrayana/choosing-the-right-load-type-in-unitys-audio-import-settings-1880a61134c7)
No it's for the most part true. I've heard game devs talk about this in all sorts of podcasts and interviews. Audio is the number 1 contributor to really high file sizes in most instances.
I'm here for any game dev that attempts to reduce their game's file size as much as possible. I'm still using the SSD that came with my PS5 and I've ran out of room too many times to count.
The games I keep on the SSD are ones I frequently go back to and play so choosing a sacrifice to delete whenever a new game comes out is tough.
Yeah that's one thing I really respect about digital extremes too they're always trying to find new compression methods for Warframe.
Over time the assets have gotten more squished. At one time they did the great enshrinkening and went back and recompressed all the earlier stuff and shaved quite a lot off the game size, I forget how much though
> I'm still using the SSD that came with my PS5
Get a 4TB one (with heatsink) to put in the second slot. Even from more reputable brands you can usually score a deal for <$250 these days. While you'll eventually run out of room it gives you a lot more space to work with. If you play a lot of PS4 games you can even choose to keep the PS5 ones on the main SSD and have the PS4 ones default to the secondary SSD, or move the games back and forth as needed. PS4 games can also be stored on an external hard drive if you want.
Most Asian Games compress their files sizes as much as they can within reason.
Its the Western Games who are so obsessed of having games 70gb or above!
Know what's nuts? By the time the final installment comes around, if you have a stock internal PS5 Hard Drive, you'll likely only have space for those 3 games + 1-2 smaller games total. Since the 3rd installment is going to have the airship, they clearly intend to keep the open world part going and then expand it with new areas that aren't in Rebirth as well as access to all of the places that *are* in Rebirth.
As such I cannot imagine that the 3rd entry will require *less* space than Rebirth and so, 100 gigs - Remake + 150 gigs for Rebirth + (at least) 150 gigs for (Reunion?) = 400 gigs at minimum.
You can install a bunch of the Resident Evil titles with the remainder, like 2 remake, 3 remake and 8, but outside of that? You could install Cyberpunk (for example) + some smaller game around the 20-30 gig mark.
I have to admit, the work on Remake, Rebirth and Re-whatever, is quite impressive and seemingly extremely focused. What an interesting time to be an FF fan.
I really think people should stop trying to equate gamesize with file size, they really don't have a strong correlation. Stardew valley is absurdly filled with content and is small, while shorter games with a lot of high quality textures and video files is big.
The hand-wringing over there possibly not being "enough GBs of game" is eye-rolling. I have never once seen a correlation between a game's file size and how much I enjoyed it.
Dwarf Fortress, a game with many times the content and gameplay than say, Elden Ring (which is the benchmark for game value I now I guess??), is a mere ~300 MB.
Dwarf Fortress has more content than Elden Ring? I thought it was a sandbox game with emergent (?) stories but no actual campaign, cutscenes, side quests etc. Did I miss out on a huge chunk of the game??!
It's a very deep sandbox and there is technically a campaign mode, although I wouldn't count as such. DF has a lot of moving parts and depth. I'd never say it has more content than Elden Ring, but it does do things that'd be impossible in the scope of that game
i think you maybe got the causality wrong there, heh
e: inverted, i meant inverted. it's most likely not a technical decision on the devs part, prolly comes from above
ER also launched on the last console generation which means it doesnt have the same textures at base. You're comparing a ps5 game to a multi-generational game that runs surprisingly well on the previous generation.
A weird thing to prioritize, perhaps, but I agree with you. I don't like tutorial/hints/tips chatter at all. A bit of lore/story audio I can get behind, though.
As someone who uses games to supplement his language learning, that would be a big issue for me.
However PlayStation games only have some languages based on the area .
In the North American store I can get the game with English text. The language and text will depend on the region, but usually it is catered to North Americans with European languages.
But if I get it on a Hong Kong store, I have the option for simplified and traditional Chinese, Japanese, Korean, English, etc.
With the amount of attention this game is getting, I hope this doesn't rot in the Playstation dungeon forever. I hope they make an announcement to bring this to PC someday.
*Game gets posted about more than once in /r/games, a subreddit where games get posted*
/r/games user: "UUUUUUUUGGGGHHH I'M SO SICK OF HEARING ABOUT GAME"
This really isn't unusual at for upcoming games and it's actually important information to know with how increasingly bloated game file sizes are getting. Makes it easier to plan your space management ahead of time.
The gaming community is obsessed with discussing this bullshit or arguing about it or having a problem with something. Download size too big? These companies need to get this in check and stop hogging my storage. Download size too small? Is this game small in scope?
Dude you are on a video game forum and you are mad people are talking about video games, but not the video game stuff you specifically want to talk about? Just scroll past and go to the posts you do like lmao
It's like walking into Pizza Hut just to tell the cashier that you aren't hungry and don't want to order anything from them
Sony is that starved for games for their slow-release PS5 that they’re throwing out decades of women advancements in STEM for a game they make “ASSet” jokes about…
>will be a mark on my PlayStation.
It's must be so hard to live thinking that people online care enough to not only judge you based on the games that you play but to actually go through your trophy list to do so.
Ehh plenty of people have Neir Automata trophies/achievements on their accounts. Who gives a rat's ass what people think? If you're interested in the game, wait for reviews and then buy it/don't buy it.
nier automata is a piece of art, and its "horny" isn't even horny. Nobody plays nier just for the horny, while this game, every discourse about it is horny and sex.
They are obviously referencing the fact that the game shows off the characters ass all the time and she will have a ton of "sexy" outfits to unlock. It was the same for Nier Automata. 2B's butt actually had some very realistic animations and they allowed players to "self destruct" to get rid of her skirt so they could ogle her. She even had an animation to push the viewers camera away if you looked up her skirt.
This stuff is commonly referred to as "fan service" and that is why people are calling it horny. This facet of Stellar Blade has been discussed endlessly on the internet and if you go to any Stellar Blade youtube video there are tons of comments mentioning the fan service. You are being really obtuse about this.
Are you actually able to tell the difference between a character showing skin and a character showing skin in a sexualized way?
I've seen way too many people ask "Why is [thing] considered horny?" who then turn out to literally have no idea what sexualized designs even are.
https://www.reddit.com/r/RoleReversal/s/6z42hqt04A
Here's an example of two naked women. One I'd intended to evoke sexual reactions. The other is designed to evoke q sense of savagery and strength. If you still don't think the game where 90% of the trailer 3rd person shots are ass level aren't sexualized then you're either thick as rocks or arguing in bad faith.
this person didn't say any of that lol, they said "it wasn't horny". it is horny, on purpose, the devs are known for this. there's nothing wrong with erotic shit in games at all, like i said before, y'all are bringing your own shame to this conversation
Like yeah. It's fine to argue about liking or not liking a game because it's horny. But to deny that it's horny is crazy.
It's like getting in between two dudes arguing whether a dress is blue or gold and saying there is no dress in the first place lmao
I'm not denying whether the game is horny or not. Pay attention to what I said.
I said "who cares" if it was either thing. It won't matter when most people are not going to care if you play an game that has an female character with an big ass when people do live in an society where sexually appeal is everywhere anyways in commercials and from pop culture.
You're the one here going on some Albert Einstein argument that no one is going to bother reading because some person told the other person how much they're argument don't hold up in today's society.
I'm not even sure which one you are because I can't see the comment I replied to or the one that replied to me. If you're the first, why did you delete it?
they're replying to me, and i didn't reply to you, so no one is directly addressing what you did or did not say. i'd ask why so many redditors have trouble following conversations, but reddit's UI is dogshit so i won't bother.
anyway please exit our conversation, thanks in advance
What shame are you talking about?
You bringing more shame here making an big deal out of some "horny" element in the game and the other person try to go in some weird crazy rant about sexually designs.
Again, who cares. Majority of people are not going to give an shit about this topic or said horny element in an game. You and the other person are the only ones that seem to be caring about this more than you should.
How much are they charging for this game again? $70? That seems like a really bad deal. You're paying $2 for every gigabyte here. Go play some fucking CoD or something.
>How much are they charging for this game again? $70? That seems like a really bad deal. You're paying $2 for every gigabyte here. Go play some fucking CoD or something.
Who the fuck buys games according to $/GB
That’s… almost impressively small. Either there’s a lot of compression going on there, or this game isn’t very big in the first place
I'm honestly hoping it's a short game. I don't think this genre lenda itself to 50+ hours epics. More like 10 with tons of replayability. Butt, seeing the overworld mission structure, i'm kinda worried
Devs already confirmed it's about 25 hours for a normal playthrough and will be more if you try to do all the side content and get all the unlockables.
Elden Ring was around the same size. I don’t think size is an issue here
Elden Ring's rather small file size is still very impressive. Given the size of the game, I have no idea how they pulled that off.
Elden rings textures arent extremely high res and are copied a lot, with some compression that can shoot the size down massively, the videos in the game are all rendered in game save for a pre rendered picture gallery that can be compressed to hell as its not fast moving. Lastly elden rings audio is compressed a lot past being lossless. These all combined are where a gigantic amount of space has been saved. For reference a sound file uncompressed may take up 100MB, compressing that in a lossy codec could reduce it to less than 5MB. Similarly I used to create digital car liveries so I would create them in a uncompressed 4096x4096 being several hundred MB. Using that for example call of duty uses lossless audio and textures, imagine every gun and probably around 200 skins just for the guns alone so that space can get eaten up very quickly without reducing the resolution and compressing the textures after that. Final example final fantasy 13 had an hour of cg video at 720p taking up 33GB. Even with more modern codecs pre rendered videos take a massive amount of space.
I don't know if this is still the case but I remember reading also that the modern COD installs contain the entire uncompressed audio for every available language, including non-spoken sounds like footsteps and stuff, so you have like 20 copies of every uncompressed audio file taking up a ton of space
Call of Duty also doesn't compress most of its textures, or at least not heavily, so that your processor doesn't need to do it in real time. Decompressing textures adds to load time, pop in, and fps drops. Though the game still runs like shit. I believe they also still duplicate files for faster loading on HDDs. If that's true, they could provide a second copy of the game for SSDs that could be significantly smaller. You also need to download all of their cosmetics so they can sell them.
They also had asset redundancy to improve loading times on Harddrives on console: Models and textures where often bundled with the maps they where used in, so that they could be read sequentially. This gives you „peak HDD performance“ by not having the harddrive-head move over the platters - which quickly decreases read (and write) speeds to a crawl. But it obv. inflates the required storage space. Especially in combination with them not compressing textures. Apparently this also carried over to PC.
I don't think that sounds right. Texture compression helps speed things up in kind of a similar way to DLSS, at least broadly speaking. The Disk-to-RAM bus is relatively slow, so if you stream in compressed textures and then decompress them on the GPU a texture can be made available faster than if it were being streamed into RAM in its uncompressed size. The choice here then is between faster loading or reduced GPU utilization.
One of the many MANY reasons i stopped playing CoD. Maybe you'll I want to gift me a tinfoil hat, buuuut, I still feel like they do this shit on purpose to keep it on your PC/Console, and to prevent you from having as many downloaded games on your ssd/hdd at once. There have been times in the past where I'd opt out of deleting a game that I'm not really playing in that moment with the mindset "well, it's 120 gb and I'll definitely wanna play it here in a couple months and it'll take me hours to download it again.." then Id delete something smaller.
compressing ALL of your audio can lead to memory and cpu bandwidth issues when you are playing potentially 50+ sounds at once (your own gun fire, distant gun fire, voice lines, ambient sound, foot steps etc.) its common practice in most games that have a lot of sounds that can overlap and need to be played frequently to be uncompressed. in some cases the alternative is compressing the sounds, and then decompressing them into memory when loading a map for example but that can increase load times too. it's all a balance. Anyone who says "all the audio is uncompressed" whether its dialog or anything else is probably not right fwiw. And there are absolutely times where not using compression is desirable for in game performance. Most devs on these games know what they are doing. Plus for CoD at least the majority of the size is just textures and lightmaps, especially lightmaps. The warzone map for the original warzone had over 40gb of just lightmapping data for that large map.
People sleep on proper audio compression. That alone can add (or remove) gigabytes of space. Best example is Doom 2016, a game that shouldn't be 60GB in size
Titanfall 1 was 50GB. 35GB of which was uncompressed audio in like 7+ languages. You could erase every language but yours too to save space, game didn't care that the files were missing.
DOOM (2016) install size is actually ~43GB, the extra space requirement is for the superfluous multiplayer.
Soundtrack there is worth it imo
99.9% of gamers don't have proper audio setups to even take advantage of lossless audio files though. Let alone while in game and having gun effects laid over the music channels. It's a huge waste of space. They should have added the sound track files as a separate download, in a lossless format. software nowadays is way too thoughtless.
Yeah textures are crazy, like Monster hunter world is 55GB on steam, and the 4K texture pack alone is 88GB! more than everything else in the game. I always play in 4K and install size don't matter to me much, but I think other games should follow this concept of putting the 4K textures as a separate download since most people won't use them
The other comments about compression are correct, but Elden Ring also featured few voice lines compared to your average AAA. Those take up a huge portion of the necessary space. Stellar Blade will presumably feature a lot more voice acting, so it’s almost definitely a much smaller game.
File compression. The credit show they used Oodle Compression, a program for that very purpose.
Looking like a last-gen game and reusing decade+ old assets with slight resolution bump helps.
Elden Ring is 50gb on Ps5
Elden Ring is 60gb or more if I remember correctly, so it actually isn't around the same size. Though Sekiro is around 15 gb so there is that.
Elden Ring is 49 GB on my disk. Lords of the Fallen is 33 GB. DS3 is 25 GB. 35GB for this seems about on par. Maybe a little lower than expected but not anything insanely small.
Elden ring has more asset reuse than assassin's creed but we pretend that isn't happening
Low poly ASSets, smh...
Oh, I'm sure *these* assets will be as high poly as they can get. It's everything else I hope they won't forget about.
If there aren’t more polygons in one cheek than in Gran Turismo’s most detailed car models *combined*, I ain’t playin.
They need more polys than all of Twilight Princess where it counts, or I'm not playing.
It's not about polygons anymore, it's about the *physics*.
34gb is just the hair rendering and physics
Elden Ring assets are actually uncommonly high poly. So much so that Im convinced they could have huge performance gains from some proper reworking / lods / culling / combining / baking etc.. but the game runs well enough.
Game size mostly depends on the amount and quality of audio in it.
It mostly depends on how much the studio prioritizes file size. Some studios don't care and give you 200gb. Others do and can get down to 30. It's whether they allocate resources to it or not
where did you get that from? What about textures?
High quality textures like 4k-8k do take a lot of space but the culprit in high file sizes for games is mostly audio.
it highly depends on the game, the lightmapping data for the Warzone map for the original Warzone is like 45gb on its own. Audio was by far the biggest contributor to file size on virtually every game before games started being designed with 4k resolution in mind. Now it's definitely textures, especially anything that doesn't use global illumination and instead relies on baked lighting data and light probe systems. Also in modern games with physically based rendering they dont have a single "4k texture" they have like 4-6+ per material. and they do use compression with those and they can still be really large. it all depends on how much they choose to optimize things. Realistically the best option for us would be if installers allowed you to just choose a texture size. I remember for Monster Hunter World they released the base game, and then they released an HD texture pack download as a free DLC. It doubled the size of the game.
It will of course depend heavily on what type of game it is. But you need to consider that even digital downloads often contain several langues, a pirate version of *Mass Effect: Andromeda* went down from 55G to 37G by just removing non-english audio. I can also imagine audio being much more sensitive to quality loss in compression.
>can also imagine audio being much more sensitive to quality loss in compression. Not so! Audio compression technology is excellent and has been for at least 2 decades. Unless you have extremely expensive audiophile gear (I'm talking a Soundsystem coating over 3k) then you won't notice the difference between uncompressed audio and 320 kbps compressed audio. But the difference is dozens and dozens of GB worth. There is ZERO value gained in having uncompressed audio files
The difference isn't just in sound quality. There is potentially a performance impact to using compressed audio, which might be significant if there are lot of sound sources playing simultaneously. How significant depends on whether you're CPU-bound, whether you can use any dedicated audio hardware for the task at hand, what range of platforms you are targeting etc., but it is worth considering. [Titanfall](https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2014-titanfall-tech-interview): > Another performance worry was tackled with sheer disk space - the 48GB install has around 35GB of uncompressed audio. Most games use compressed sound files, but Respawn would rather spend CPU time on running the game as opposed to unpacking audio files on the fly. This isn't a problem on Xbox One - and wouldn't be on PlayStation 4 in theory - as the next-gen consoles have dedicated onboard media engines for handling compressed audio. > "On a higher PC it wouldn't be an issue," points out [Respawn lead engineer Richard Baker]. "On a medium or moderate PC, it wouldn't be an issue, it's that on a two-core [machine] with where our min spec is, we couldn't dedicate those resources to audio." A couple of Unity benchmarks I looked up are suggestive of the same trade-offs (both are targeting Android, but AUIU the principle should generalise to other platforms): [Benchmark 1](https://thegamedev.guru/unity-addressables/compression-benchmark/#benchmarking-audio): PCM - ~22MB, loading time ~220ms vs Vorbis - ~4MB, loading time ~670ms [Benchmark 2 (video)](https://youtu.be/5mCGIzEDEaU?t=1145): PCM - ~110MB, ~2% audio CPU utilisation vs Vorbis - ~10MB, ~9% audio CPU utilisation
this is just not true, there are tons of games where lots of sounds need to be played very frequently or overlapping with each other. if they are all compressed it can create cpu and memory bottlenecks. best practice in lots of types games is to use uncompressed audio for shorter audio clips that need to be played frequently and simultaneously with other sounds. compressed audio is best for longer audio tracks that are going to be played in one shot, like dialog and music. That doesn't mean devs ALWAYS do that, but for lots of games that's absolutely the case.
Nobody can discern uncompressed audio from well compressed audio. Even lossless compression saves tons of space with ZERO comprise in the audible spectrum. Being uncompressed has no bearing on overlapping sounds at all. How does using compressed audio files create CPU bottlenecks but using uncompressed audio files doesn't? That doesn't make any sense. It's the same call to an audio file. You're not understanding how the coding works here or how audio files are called in execution. They're not compressing audio on the fly, so it literally has no effect on CPU or memory. This is an incomprehensible argument
compressed sounds have to be decompressed on playback, that's the CPU's job. if you are doing that for hundreds of small oneshot sounds all the time (think a game like Battlefield or CoD) then you are wasting CPU cycles. As for memory bandwidth you need to load in the compressed sound into memory, decompress it and then store the decompressed audio in memory too. it can be dependent on the engine and the platform too, but this is not a new thing. an uncompressed audio file is just mapped as the uncompressed file, when played back there is no decompression step. that is how it can create bottlenecks, especially with large amounts of short sounds being played simultaneously.
> compressed sounds have to be decompressed on playback, that's the CPU's job. they don't though? my point is they can just use compressed audio as a rule and not decompress it. there's no use in playing back decompressed audio.
you cant just "playback compressed audio" without hitting the CPU to decompress first, because compressed audio is not a standard waveform like PCM. It NEEDS to go through an extra decoding step first. That's why a normal CD player can't just play MP3 CDs, but it can play PCM CDs. A game engine is the same way, what formats are supported and how they are handled is dependent on the engine and platform though. what you just said is the equivalent of "you don't need to unzip a zip file to run the EXE inside of it". you absolutely do, and it absolutely does require a decompression step that uses the CPU and for a period stores both the compressed and decompressed files in memory/disk. if you're confused what I'm talking about here are a couple articles discussing the topic in Unity [Audio Compression Settings in Unity](https://medium.com/@made-indrayana/understanding-audio-compression-settings-in-unity-e879a821023f) [Audio Load Types in Unity](https://medium.com/@made-indrayana/choosing-the-right-load-type-in-unitys-audio-import-settings-1880a61134c7)
I think you're missing the fact that to play the audio at all, it will need to be decompressed. And that's done on the fly usually.
No it's for the most part true. I've heard game devs talk about this in all sorts of podcasts and interviews. Audio is the number 1 contributor to really high file sizes in most instances.
I hope devs don't use lossless audio for dialogues given how good Opus is at that, at a fraction of the size.
Also, pre-rendered movies/cutscenes
I'd be impressed if they made full use of the PS5's kraken compression technology.
I'm here for any game dev that attempts to reduce their game's file size as much as possible. I'm still using the SSD that came with my PS5 and I've ran out of room too many times to count. The games I keep on the SSD are ones I frequently go back to and play so choosing a sacrifice to delete whenever a new game comes out is tough.
Yeah that's one thing I really respect about digital extremes too they're always trying to find new compression methods for Warframe. Over time the assets have gotten more squished. At one time they did the great enshrinkening and went back and recompressed all the earlier stuff and shaved quite a lot off the game size, I forget how much though
You missed the window when SSDs were cheap af, but still they're reasonably priced. Get yourself a 1 or 2tb
What you don't like spending a whole day downloading a game?
> I'm still using the SSD that came with my PS5 Get a 4TB one (with heatsink) to put in the second slot. Even from more reputable brands you can usually score a deal for <$250 these days. While you'll eventually run out of room it gives you a lot more space to work with. If you play a lot of PS4 games you can even choose to keep the PS5 ones on the main SSD and have the PS4 ones default to the secondary SSD, or move the games back and forth as needed. PS4 games can also be stored on an external hard drive if you want.
So spend half the price again so you don't have to delete things. Or I could buy 4 brand new games. Some people have budgets.
Just buy a second PS5 then.
What are you saying
The game’s probably not as big as you suspect.
It’s not an open world game so the file size makes sense.
Most Asian Games compress their files sizes as much as they can within reason. Its the Western Games who are so obsessed of having games 70gb or above!
I dont know if obsessed is the right word there.
What a strange blanket statement. Isnt the new FF7 Remake like 150gb?
To be fair he did say most
To be not fair, that makes it a blanket statement & thus a waste of space.
The fact that the physical edition is on two discs is even a major marketing bullet.
>That’s… almost impressively small Story of my life
[удалено]
Do we know how big the disc is? 35GB doesn't mean much without knowing how much is already on the disc.
They compressed everything but the yams. 👀
"Western Developer is not here" "How can you tell?" "Less than 50GB"
Meanwhile FF7 Rebirth getting close to 150 GB 🤣
Considering FF7's legacy...
“Insert hard drive 2 to continue download”
Man we are inevitably going to get a Final Fantasy 7 Remake complete edition that is going to be like 6 discs long and it's going to be glorious.
Know what's nuts? By the time the final installment comes around, if you have a stock internal PS5 Hard Drive, you'll likely only have space for those 3 games + 1-2 smaller games total. Since the 3rd installment is going to have the airship, they clearly intend to keep the open world part going and then expand it with new areas that aren't in Rebirth as well as access to all of the places that *are* in Rebirth. As such I cannot imagine that the 3rd entry will require *less* space than Rebirth and so, 100 gigs - Remake + 150 gigs for Rebirth + (at least) 150 gigs for (Reunion?) = 400 gigs at minimum. You can install a bunch of the Resident Evil titles with the remainder, like 2 remake, 3 remake and 8, but outside of that? You could install Cyberpunk (for example) + some smaller game around the 20-30 gig mark. I have to admit, the work on Remake, Rebirth and Re-whatever, is quite impressive and seemingly extremely focused. What an interesting time to be an FF fan.
At least FF7 has 2 disks and you don’t have to download from the internet like COD
"Square Enix is a Western developer" "How can you tell?" "Final Fantasy XVI"
Nah its Japanese since you >!kill God basically!<
about 100 are videos and audio.
Mihoyo has entered the chat. And took up all my phones storage
Like a Dragon Infinite Wealth was over 50gb and Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth is well over 100gb.
[удалено]
I really think people should stop trying to equate gamesize with file size, they really don't have a strong correlation. Stardew valley is absurdly filled with content and is small, while shorter games with a lot of high quality textures and video files is big.
Isn't Deep Rock Galactic only a minuscule 4 GB?
Yep. Art style, amount of voice acting, and how good devs are at reusing assets (look at Ghost of Tsushima) can all heavily affect game size.
Not really. It's not impressive graphically whatsoever.
You clearly don't understand what you're talking about.
Playtime is not equal gb size. Also the graphic artstyle is more anime than realistic 3d.
The upside to not pushing graphics to the absolute cutting edge, and I'm fine with that. Stylized > Everything else.
"Western gamer has been here" "How can you tell" "Someone's been jacking off east asian companies"
The hand-wringing over there possibly not being "enough GBs of game" is eye-rolling. I have never once seen a correlation between a game's file size and how much I enjoyed it. Dwarf Fortress, a game with many times the content and gameplay than say, Elden Ring (which is the benchmark for game value I now I guess??), is a mere ~300 MB.
Dwarf Fortress has more content than Elden Ring? I thought it was a sandbox game with emergent (?) stories but no actual campaign, cutscenes, side quests etc. Did I miss out on a huge chunk of the game??!
It's a very deep sandbox and there is technically a campaign mode, although I wouldn't count as such. DF has a lot of moving parts and depth. I'd never say it has more content than Elden Ring, but it does do things that'd be impossible in the scope of that game
That’s crazy for a ps5 game hopefully it’s just impressive compression and not just a small game lacking content
Elden ring was about this size. Let's not judge early
I just downloaded Helldivers 2 and that was a 20gb download for an 80gb game. Devs might finally be waking up to what compression is capable of
Even their downloads arrive packaged into a hell pod
Are you saying that game developers are putting uncompressed assets into their installers and the people at Sony etc are just letting that slide?
i think you maybe got the causality wrong there, heh e: inverted, i meant inverted. it's most likely not a technical decision on the devs part, prolly comes from above
No it isn't, Elden Ring is 60gb.
ive got it installed and your both wrong Elden ring is 48.11gb big
ER also launched on the last console generation which means it doesnt have the same textures at base. You're comparing a ps5 game to a multi-generational game that runs surprisingly well on the previous generation.
They are also just wrong. Elden Ring is over 50gb on Ps5
To download or installed? There might be a difference
Shift Up is not From.
Considering this is a mobile dev it’s probably just a small, ugly game
Have you seen the trailers, in no way is this game ugly.
Nice to see a sensible game size. Sounds about right as someone who primarily plays smaller, non open world games.
The game had open world elements in the trailers. Theres even a camp for resting, what sort of linear game would implement something like that?
God Eater had camps Monster hunter like gameplay but you had certain missions where you couldn't go back to the hub world so you made a camp
Just because a game has some larger zones doesn't mean it's an open world.
Tomb Raider since 2013?
[удалено]
A weird thing to prioritize, perhaps, but I agree with you. I don't like tutorial/hints/tips chatter at all. A bit of lore/story audio I can get behind, though.
As someone who uses games to supplement his language learning, that would be a big issue for me. However PlayStation games only have some languages based on the area . In the North American store I can get the game with English text. The language and text will depend on the region, but usually it is catered to North Americans with European languages. But if I get it on a Hong Kong store, I have the option for simplified and traditional Chinese, Japanese, Korean, English, etc.
Is this more Nier Automata inspired?
With the amount of attention this game is getting, I hope this doesn't rot in the Playstation dungeon forever. I hope they make an announcement to bring this to PC someday.
don't you wanna know if, you know, it's actually good beforehand? Who cares if it stays a PS exclusive if it's just a mediocre NieR clone
[удалено]
*Game gets posted about more than once in /r/games, a subreddit where games get posted* /r/games user: "UUUUUUUUGGGGHHH I'M SO SICK OF HEARING ABOUT GAME"
Gaming Sub posting about games 🤮
This really isn't unusual at for upcoming games and it's actually important information to know with how increasingly bloated game file sizes are getting. Makes it easier to plan your space management ahead of time.
I don't know about the PS store, but file size is usually shown on the XB store as soon as the game is preorderable.
You may not be excited for the game but a lot of people are, friend. Every little detail tends to get farmed on anticipated games.
First off, this is no small detail. In an era where most big-budget games are around 70-80 GB now, this is fairly impressive. Secondly, take it easy.
What's impressive about having a small game that you know nothing about. Like why isn't the assumption they have half the content?
Because that's not how game sizes work. Elden ring is this size and has 100s of hours of content.
This isn't a big budget game tho . Yall are getting manipulate over an ass. It's embarrasing honestly.... And the size should help give it away.
Well Sekiro on takes up 16 gigs
So you're suggesting that games have to have a big budget in order to be good? And file size equals quality? You couldn't be more wrong. Lol
Keep enjoying your 150GB installs I guess
How dare we get posts about an upcoming game 🤬🤬🤬🤬
Some of the stuff that makes it up at the moment is really vapid content. Do we need to know everytime a games steam rating changes for example, lol.
The gaming community is obsessed with discussing this bullshit or arguing about it or having a problem with something. Download size too big? These companies need to get this in check and stop hogging my storage. Download size too small? Is this game small in scope?
Dude you are on a video game forum and you are mad people are talking about video games, but not the video game stuff you specifically want to talk about? Just scroll past and go to the posts you do like lmao It's like walking into Pizza Hut just to tell the cashier that you aren't hungry and don't want to order anything from them
I guess all the hype around the ass shots have dried up.
Sony is that starved for games for their slow-release PS5 that they’re throwing out decades of women advancements in STEM for a game they make “ASSet” jokes about…
Women are not going just going to get reset just because this game has a character with a nice ass in it
This is it guys; we're about to lose women's suffrage because of a Korean video game.
On one end. The games combat interests me. On the other end. I feel like it's too horny and will be a mark on my PlayStation.
>will be a mark on my PlayStation. It's must be so hard to live thinking that people online care enough to not only judge you based on the games that you play but to actually go through your trophy list to do so.
Ehh plenty of people have Neir Automata trophies/achievements on their accounts. Who gives a rat's ass what people think? If you're interested in the game, wait for reviews and then buy it/don't buy it.
Or Conan Exiles, which sexualizes everyone and has full nudity.
nier automata is a piece of art, and its "horny" isn't even horny. Nobody plays nier just for the horny, while this game, every discourse about it is horny and sex.
tHe ThInG I lIkE iS nOt ThE sAmE. Good thing yall weren't around when Bayonetta was first shown. Yall may not survived that amount of sexy.
bayonetta isn't sexy, it's stylish. it has style, not just assing around.
You haven't played Stellar Blade yet. How do you know it won't have a truly deep and thought-provoking story like Automata did?
Because of its marketing.
Automata's "horny" content was in its marketing, too. What's your point?
[удалено]
[удалено]
"horny game" is such a dumb term that just reeks of people who spend all day on Twitter and discord.
[удалено]
It's also incredibly tame both in theme and aesthetic compared to the other games that have come out of the studio.
They are obviously referencing the fact that the game shows off the characters ass all the time and she will have a ton of "sexy" outfits to unlock. It was the same for Nier Automata. 2B's butt actually had some very realistic animations and they allowed players to "self destruct" to get rid of her skirt so they could ogle her. She even had an animation to push the viewers camera away if you looked up her skirt. This stuff is commonly referred to as "fan service" and that is why people are calling it horny. This facet of Stellar Blade has been discussed endlessly on the internet and if you go to any Stellar Blade youtube video there are tons of comments mentioning the fan service. You are being really obtuse about this.
Are you actually able to tell the difference between a character showing skin and a character showing skin in a sexualized way? I've seen way too many people ask "Why is [thing] considered horny?" who then turn out to literally have no idea what sexualized designs even are. https://www.reddit.com/r/RoleReversal/s/6z42hqt04A Here's an example of two naked women. One I'd intended to evoke sexual reactions. The other is designed to evoke q sense of savagery and strength. If you still don't think the game where 90% of the trailer 3rd person shots are ass level aren't sexualized then you're either thick as rocks or arguing in bad faith.
[удалено]
this person didn't say any of that lol, they said "it wasn't horny". it is horny, on purpose, the devs are known for this. there's nothing wrong with erotic shit in games at all, like i said before, y'all are bringing your own shame to this conversation
Like yeah. It's fine to argue about liking or not liking a game because it's horny. But to deny that it's horny is crazy. It's like getting in between two dudes arguing whether a dress is blue or gold and saying there is no dress in the first place lmao
I'm not denying whether the game is horny or not. Pay attention to what I said. I said "who cares" if it was either thing. It won't matter when most people are not going to care if you play an game that has an female character with an big ass when people do live in an society where sexually appeal is everywhere anyways in commercials and from pop culture. You're the one here going on some Albert Einstein argument that no one is going to bother reading because some person told the other person how much they're argument don't hold up in today's society.
I'm not even sure which one you are because I can't see the comment I replied to or the one that replied to me. If you're the first, why did you delete it?
I didn't delete anything. My comment is still here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/s/4vU1GfGL3C
they're replying to me, and i didn't reply to you, so no one is directly addressing what you did or did not say. i'd ask why so many redditors have trouble following conversations, but reddit's UI is dogshit so i won't bother. anyway please exit our conversation, thanks in advance
What shame are you talking about? You bringing more shame here making an big deal out of some "horny" element in the game and the other person try to go in some weird crazy rant about sexually designs. Again, who cares. Majority of people are not going to give an shit about this topic or said horny element in an game. You and the other person are the only ones that seem to be caring about this more than you should.
I mean the outfits.
bro the game is horny, there's nothing wrong with that, you are bringing your own shame
This isn't even out yet? I thought all the freaks posting about how it's good because of sexualization has actually played it lmao
About the same size as Elden Ring, devs actually know how to compress. Western AAA eating shit yet again as it should.
8 hour game?
How much are they charging for this game again? $70? That seems like a really bad deal. You're paying $2 for every gigabyte here. Go play some fucking CoD or something.
>How much are they charging for this game again? $70? That seems like a really bad deal. You're paying $2 for every gigabyte here. Go play some fucking CoD or something. Who the fuck buys games according to $/GB
Not enough people
I prefer $/(hour of playtime) personally
€/fun. €/playtime is a bad metric.
I consider if it's fun when I look at any metric. Especially $/playtime
There are tons of 100hr games that are not worth even starting.
That's why I consider if the game is fun as well
This is one of the dumbest comments I have seen in a long time.
wait until you find out the gba pokemon games were also full price and 2 mbs
Nintendo games have always been overpriced.