The Big Bad Console Thread - Sway your Station with an Xboner !

Ronne_sl said:

I don't know why anyone is surprised. Welcome to the land of not using shitty 10 year old last gen textures? PC games have regularly been north of 20gb for the last half a decade and that's not even counting whatever bullshit/voodoo devs have to pull with consoles to reduce disc load times.

Click to expand...

Disclaimer: This post is not directed at you.

Holy fuck, if anyone buys for a second that 49 Gb isn't just shitty coding by Activision, I have a bridge to sell. HD textures and higher end graphics have been around on the PC for 5+ years that will already look three times as better as even the next gen consoles. Witcher 2 installed at 15.6 Gb. Tomb Raider, even with Tesselation, Hair FX and everything else that made it look fantastic, loaded in at under 20gb. With four times the art assets.

The fact that a bullshit run of the mill copy cat shooter is taking up 49 Gbs should really make people concerned as to what the hell is in that thing. And it should also make you concerned how little publishers are doing to save your disk space on the console.

What a joke.

Edit: It's also listing the PC requirement at 6 Gb of Ram.

That's like Pong requiring 2 Gb in 1976!

Quit buying this shit.

Call of Duty: Ghosts PC Spec Requirements Revealed

Man and I thought they figured out some new compression in the last few years that would avoid approaching this bluray cap. HD textures is good news. 49GB installs being standard really sucks. I'll have to double check my Skyrim installations but I think even with all the HD shit we're talking 20-25GB.

At least I just bought a new SSD that would allow me to install TWO games! horray...

Sean_sl said:

PC games have rarely actually had HD texture packs, Ut. When they do it's usually a fairly sizable download too. Also, some of the Skyrim custom installs with mods that add ultra high quality stuff in are absolutelygargantuan. Note that Killzone Shadowfall was290GBbefore they wrangled it in and got it down to 40GB for the final build.

49GB is not outrageous if they're holding back on compression in favor of quality. Plus, HD audio takes up a lot of room as well. You're looking at a few gigsperlanguage there. That's a European copy of CoD so it possibly has up to like 6 or 7 languages on there.

Personally, I'm all for maxing out blu-ray discs and using as much of the space as possible in the pursuit of quality. That's what those discs are there for.

Click to expand...

Last I looked, Tomb Raider and Witcher 2 on launch (PC) had better textures than any HD Texture pack released for the games I downloaded them for (Skyrim and Crysis 2) and will most DEFINITELY have better textures than any Call of Duty game ever created. Especially where this game is only being upscaled at the lowest common denominator because it is Activision. I will be waiting for actual screenshots for all these supposedly great HD textures the PS4 CoD will have and at which time will compare them to a game designed in 2011 with 65% of the storage and promptly tell these lazy asses to start coding their shit properly.

And it also doesn't excuse that somehow, Call of Duty Ghosts is requiring 6 Gb of RAM.

Xarpolis_sl said:

I just heard that Game Stop is supposed to have 1 year PS+ cards for sale on Black Friday for only $30. I'll have to pick another one up just to have it for next year.

Click to expand...

You can also pick up a 1 Year sub online for PS-Plus and get 10 dollars playstation store credit.

Sean_sl said:

Not sure why you're hung up over this. RAM is dirt cheap, who cares if it requires that much? 6GB is going to be a standard going forward anyways.

Click to expand...

I am talking about piss poor coding and how none of the ram / drive space will be utilized for better games. It's ridiculous that 6 Gb of Ram is now required for the most basic of FPS shooters which will offer * NOTHING * new in terms of graphical prowess or gameplay features/functionality. My concern here isn't that the sky is falling. My concern is that publishers wanted all this extra allocation of resources to make better games, and now that they have it, all those publishers will now do is cheese their way out of really trying to squeeze every morsel out of the memory/CPU cycles that they can and rather throw a bunch of shit at their new great wall of China and we see nothing in return. In other words, we get stuck with the same damn games we have always played except now they do not have to be as creative to get things to work properly. Case in point, GTA 5 and pulling from two separate bandwidth sources to achieve desired graphical/play-ability results.

It all comes down to optimization. And this latest batch of launch titles (And to be realistic, this happens all the time during launch so nothing new) leaves a lot to be desired to be called "Next Gen". And when I see a game with triple the requirements of a more complex RPG with higher end tesselation features, textures, art, gameplay mechanics, and depth requiring half the resources and made almost 3 years ago compared to what really is a canned FPS shooter on the PC with limited everything, it should be a high light for concern with a hope that these assholes at Activision do not set a new standard of mediocrity with all their new resources.

Hope that makes sense.