Current Events > Games today are too big

(+) Yeah! (+)

Especially when now it's up to you to have enough space in most situations

Waiting like 10 years to play AAA games seems like the best option now, 100+ GB won't be that much by then

Yet that is what people clamor for.

I just don't have the time anymore. I put a month of full time play into Elden Ring and it was just too much

That's why I stick to indies, 10 hour action games and rpgs that don't ask too much of your time.

The most fun I've had playing a game in the last few years was the remastered Mafia 1 game. Short, punchy and engaging

Damn_Underscore posted...

Especially when now it's up to you to have enough space in most situations

Waiting like 10 years to play AAA games seems like the best option now, 100+ GB won't be that much by then

Why do you think games will be measured in GB 10 years from now? If the trend holds steady, we'll be having 1TB games sooner than that. Companies are going to seriously run into people not being able to download their games because of data caps and will probably have to consider releasing their games on SSDs.

Nota214 posted...

Companies are going to seriously run into people not being able to download their games because of data caps and will probably have to consider releasing their games on SSDs.

...then a terabyte of day-one patches anyway.

Nota214 posted...

Companies are going to seriously run into people not being able to download their games because of data caps and will probably have to consider releasing their games on SSDs.

This made me irrationally upset,mainly because I can absolutely see it happening.

Most games aren't worth the time they demand. Like Elden Ring or even the new style Zeldas

@haloiscoolisbak posted...

I just don't have the time anymore. I put a month of full time play into Elden Ring and it was just too much

@Nok_Su_Kow posted...

That's why I stick to indies, 10 hour action games and rpgs that don't ask too much of your time.

TC meant install size, not game length. Read the first post.

Auto_Chrisbot posted...

TC meant install size, not game length.

I know, was just jumping off from there to vent about another issue with modern games being so big

haloiscoolisbak posted...

I know, was just jumping off from there to vent about another issue with modern games being so big

great, so literally we'd be paying 70 for short as fuck games because people like you don't have the time to play them? Oh sounds like a wonderful idea.

Heres another wonderful idea: Why not find a different, less time consuming hobby?

Kimbos_Egg posted...

great, so literally we'd be paying 70 for short as fuck games because people like you don't have the time to play them? Oh sounds like a wonderful idea.

Heres another wonderful idea: Why not find a different, less time consuming hobby?

Average age of the users here meant many of us spent > $70 adjusted for inflation for games that took only a few hours to beat.

Quantity =\= quality. These 40, 50, 60 hour games hit those lengths because of padding. Nothing warranted FF7R being as long as it was. Nothing introduced in Assassin's Creed Valhalla warranted taking 2x as long to beat the main story as Black Flag or 3x as long as AC2. Length is a detriment and unfortunately a vocal minority of people that do nothing but game and don't care about diversity of experiences demand it

Most of a game's install size is due to the texture data. Wasn't too long ago that 4k/"ultra" textures were an optional free DLC in some games to keep the default size smaller, but nowadays most games pack the highest level detail textures (which is now 8k or 16k for the newest AAA games) in the install even if you don't plan to run the game at that level.

SSDs are cheaper than ever, with a 2 TB costing what a 1 TB used to just a few years ago, so I'd say the relatively hefty sizes are here to stay.

I really wonder what the size of games is going to look like in 10 years.

Either we're all gonna have 10-20 terabyte drives, or something is gonna need to happen to make our massive, photo-realistic games a lot smaller by then. (Which I kinda doubt)

If games increase in size at the rate we've seen over the last 10 years, some AAA games might be a whole terabyte.

I've heard that voice acted lines contributes greatly to game size as well.

AndreLeGeant posted...

Average age of the users here meant many of us spent > $70 adjusted for inflation for games that took only a few hours to beat.

Quantity =\= quality. These 40, 50, 60 hour games hit those lengths because of padding. Nothing warranted FF7R being as long as it was. Nothing introduced in Assassin's Creed Valhalla warranted taking 2x as long to beat the main story as Black Flag or 3x as long as AC2. Length is a detriment and unfortunately a vocal minority of people that do nothing but game and don't care about diversity of experiences demand it

Quantity certainly matters to someone like me. If I'm paying $60-$70 for a game, I want to make sure I'm getting my money's worth and not just getting a 2-week experience. Every game I play, I want to play for a long ass time.

Monster Hunter World for 1,300hrs, Nioh 2 for 970hrs, Elden Ring 600hrs and counting, Monster Hunter Rise for 450+ hours and counting, and other past games too. Dragon Quest Monsters Joker for 700+ hours, Animal Crossing, Monster Hunter Freedom Unite for 2,000+ hours. You get the gist. God knows how much time I put into Final Fantasy XIV and the LittleBigPlanet trio games.

To me, those are god-tier games (barring current FFXIV). I'm not looking for a cinematic experience. I'm looking for a game to play. If I can get 1,000hrs out of a game for $60, why would I spend the same money on a game that ends in 30hrs?

Kimbos_Egg posted...

great, so literally we'd be paying 70 for short as fuck games because people like you don't have the time to play them? Oh sounds like a wonderful idea.

Heres another wonderful idea: Why not find a different, less time consuming hobby?

Um lol. Chill out buddy. I'm not up in arms about this it's just a thought I felt like sharing

Auto_Chrisbot posted...

TC meant install size, not game length. Read the first post.

Adding "Especially" leaves 'how big a game is' open to the peanut gallery, so I chimed in since TC wasn't really asking a specific question and was more adding a comment themselves. So I feel under "Games today are too big", it's still a relevant comment.

VFalcone posted...

Monster Hunter World for 1,300hrs, Nioh 2 for 970hrs, Elden Ring 600hrs and counting, Monster Hunter Rise for 450+ hours and counting, and other past games too. Dragon Quest Monsters Joker for 700+ hours, Animal Crossing, Monster Hunter Freedom Unite for 2,000+ hours. You get the gist. God knows how much time I put into Final Fantasy XIV and the LittleBigPlanet trio games.

I'm going to ask you to please take a look at these numbers and realize that the average person WORKS less than 2000 hours per year. You game like it's a job. People with normal schedules that want to play 2-5 hours a week shouldn't have to lose out on complete gaming experiences because a few obsessive people demand games be their whole life

New consoles should come with 2TB minimum.

1TB doesnt get you shit anymore after the OS and other stuff you cant delete. Hell, the PS5 doesnt even have 1TB to begin with. You can install like four AAA games.

AndreLeGeant posted...

I'm going to ask you to please take a look at these numbers and realize that the average person WORKS less than 2000 hours per year. You game like it's a job. People with normal schedules that want to play 2-5 hours a week shouldn't have to lose out on complete gaming experiences because a few obsessive people demand games be their whole life

Do you think that I put in all of those hours within a single year each time? Lmao