- cross-posted to:
- gaming@kbin.social
- gaming@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- gaming@kbin.social
- gaming@beehaw.org
On PC, the game is 139.84 GB. On console, it’s 100.19 GB for Standard or 117.07 GB for the Premium Edition
You must log in or register to comment.
I remember when Titanfall being 50gb sparked an outrage, it’s a good thing SSDs are cheap now.
I picked up a 1TB NVMe for literally $38 this week. Absolutely absurd how inexpensive SSDs are right now.
Be careful, most cheap NVMe drives have low endurance. Llike, not “Oh, you’re just hand wringing about nothing,” endurance ratings but an actually and relevantly low number of terabytes that can be written before the drive becomes failure-prone. They also usually lack a DRAM cache, so certain operations can be as slow as a mechanical hard drive, thereby negating the major advantage of opting for solid-state storage.
What low TBW numbers have you seen that give you concern?
They were all that price unless I went up to PCIe 4.0, which my laptop doesn’t support. I got a well-known brand. But thanks for the heads up!
Well known brand like Sandisk?
For future proofing it can be worthwhile to get a pcie4 drive for a pcie3 machine.
That said, even if you have a pcie4 machine it may not be worth it to bother with pcie4 storage. I was annoyed about loading times with baldurs gate 3 and decided to try installing it to a RAM disk (yes, using 130GB of RAM)… Barely loaded any faster. Turns out the main bottleneck is elsewhere and my storage was not the issue
It was for a laptop. I’m not going to be changing the motherboard to a PCIe 4.0 compatible one. By the time I buy a new laptop, I may need PCIe 5.0. I’m not sure, but I don’t want to overspend now when by the time I need something it is cheaper. If PCIe 4.0 is more than $38 cheaper when I need it than now, then I saved money. And I doubt I’ll be in the market for a new laptop any time soon. Mine is only 2 years old and still kicks ass.
If you’re running a database server or something with lots of writing and data you don’t want to lose, I can see the concern.
But a drive for gaming is the best possible use case for a lower endurance drive. Even a poor drive can write the whole thing 200 times. I doubt many people would even get close to that.
This could be a problem for console players though, especially those with a Series S which can’t run new games off an external.
Not if you have a PS5. I just added a $99 2TB Samsung 980 Pro to mine. Microsoft really shafted Xbox owners with their Seagate partnershit.
I completely agree, Microsoft shouldn’t have been greedy and used proprietary storage. Sony did it the right way by allowing you to add your own which lets you find a good deal.
Which is ironic since Sony spent two decades trying to make Memory Sticks, UMDs, and MiniDiscs happen. I think they’ve finally learned their lesson on proprietary storage.
PS5 will also support up to 8TB of additional storage. Series X maxes out at 2TB.
Don’t worry, you can buy a Starfield themed external drive that can’t actually run Starfield:
Oh yeah, let’s create 250GB SSD cartridges per game because thry each cost about 26€
You know how ridiculous that sounds, right?
deleted by creator
Yes, that does sound ridiculous, good thing I didn’t say it.
Yes, everyone realizes how ridiculous that sounds. Why did you post it?
Also, please don’t give EA any ideas.
I mean if you really wanna maximize your spending you can get 150 1gb flash drives and trick the OS to thinking its one device.
Or like just gets bigger drive that’s cheaper per GB like someone with a brain.
And like how would cartridge games work anyways? most PCs have really limited sata slots
And like how would cartridge games work anyways? most PCs have really limited sata slots
Like this? picture
clickbait is stupid. It’s 125GB.
Thanks
Time for another SSD
We have gone from cartridges, to CDs, to kind-of cartridges.
We have kinda gone full circle! Now we need something lile a holocron or like a Cortana AI chip to store an even bigger amount.I’m here for data holocrons.
Just like set into an interface built into your desk and boom, hard drive.
Make it open up like jedi holocrons and I’ll buy 10 just to play with them
Yeah, add to that MSFS with all extensions, and now my 1 TB 970 Pro isn’t enough : (
So it’s about the size of Baldur’s Gate 3… Better have just as much content!
What a weird take.
You can just play a game for fun you know.
Comparison is the thief of joy.
Eh, it’s a full priced AAA game. I think it’s fair to have some expectations from it.
This is how we end up with 100+ hours of Assassin’s Creed
deleted by creator
Baldur’s Gate 3 has a download size of 97.4 GB and an install size of 121.47 GB.
Comparing to Terraria is stupid, Terraria doesn’t have the same quantity of graphical and audio assets.
deleted by creator
It is between games with similar assets.
Terraria doesn’t have GBs of 3d rendering, voice acting, etc., it’s a poor comparison.
deleted by creator
Pretty sure that is the point. Both are current gen AAA games with similar graphical fidelity. You trying to compare Terraria is like trying to compare 140p video with 4k, we’re comparing 4k with 4k.
Nobody likes a pedant, mate, you’re not adding anything to the discussion
deleted by creator
When I got the Series X I thought “oh good, I won’t have to juggle my games now that I have so much space.”
Dammit.
Do we have any sort of information on how big the Shattered Space Story Expansion is supposedly going to be? Because 30 bucks extra seems excessive, especially when the game is already 70 bucks. Kinda feels like they just want to lure you with the early access, which will likely be a hot mess anyway.
I am going to take a few days and wait on it. The last game I preordered from bethesda was fallout 76, and that was a wake up call.
No one in the video game industry is beyond delivering a poor experience for tons of money.
That game was pretty obvious though. It was purely building on that stupid multiplayer pvp sandbox hype at the time.
yup. I am really excited for this game, but I’ll be giving it a few months at least. It’s not just 76, FO4 was… fine. Still replay it. But if starfield has to much in common with that gameplay loop I’ll probably skip it.
I don’t have a lot of patience for AAA releases with a repetitive loop and nothing but better polish to distinguish them from all of the innovative indie games that are out these days.
That sounds like an overly negative take, and it kind of is, but I am definitely rooting for this thing.
I think it’s a reasonable take. Skyrim was the last good game they put out, but I even preferred Oblivion to Skyrim - it captured my imagination more and there was more depth to the role playing - so I think it’s a fair view to be cautious.
I’m hoping it’s great, but with the size and scale of the procedurally generated content I’m kind of expecting it to be mostly soulless cookie cutter shooty shooty content with four times the detail but little actual role playing. It’s Bethesda so we know it’s going to be buggy, that’s nothing new.
Very much hoping to be blown away though.
Setting down the reasonable take: it does look realllllllly good. Meant what I said I’m rooting for it. I’ve just been hurt before lol.
They’ve been saying all the right words, it’ll come down to feel. Bugs don’t, well, bug me, when there’s soul. And I shouldn’t be overly negative on FO4, there’s some excellent characters there. Nick Valentine in particular will always be a favorite, and while the main plot could be a bit better there’s a lot of heartfelt content along the way and in the side missions.
I do think this is the lesson a lot of AAAs are learning the hard way though. When you do what blizz did to overwatch, what bethesda did with 76, the damage is lasting. I would have been a day 0 person for starfield if not for that. Hell, I still haven’t gotten around to cyber punk, even though it seems pretty OK now.
Don’t let me down Todd.
Jiminy fuck that’s too much
Lmao, I was right in taking a new SSD during the sales
It’s the first time Todd has ever heard someone tell him “Omg it’s so big”
