Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Requires 130 GB of Disk Space

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Requires 130 GB of Disk Space

cod-infinite-warfare-320

And you thought Gears of War 4's 80 GB was bad...

Activision has confirmed via an updated F.A.Q on the official Infinite Warfare homepage that the combined install size for both Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare and Call of Duty 4 remaster will total 130 GB.

"This is a high-end estimate, which includes both games, any Day 1 updates, as well as the additional Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered multiplayer maps to be released before Dec. 31, 2016," wrote the publisher.

Those who have early access to Modern Warfare Remastered are reporting that the game comes in at approximately 40 GB, meaning that Infinite Warfare is a whopping 90 GB. And you thought Gears of War 4's 80 GB was bad...

This gigantic size could have something to do with PS4 pro support, which allows developers to take advantage of high resolution modes. It could mean that the Xbox One version of the game doesn't have quite a big size.

Both the PS4 and Xbox One come standard with a 500 GB hard drive. 130 GB is a considerable chunk of that.

We also recently learnd that if you buy the physical edition of Infinite Warfare, you'll have to keep the disk to play Modern Warfare Remastered, despite the game only existing as a download.

Source: Activision

Permalink

Sony: Alright developers, we want to push people to make them buy the new and expensive console. What can you do?
Devs: I suppose we could leave everything in the game uncompressed?

I suppose that leaving everything uncompressed would mean that the limited architecture wouldn't melt as it tried to run the game and handle decompressing assets in the background.

Wow, only reported like a week after everyone else.

What the fuck is in there that requires 70 fucking GB a game? Seriously, the biggest thing on my computer by far is Skyrim at 13 GB.

Ya know, it is very interesting to find out where your lines are. I generally love Call of Duty, despite certain awful things. This memory thing is possibly what will keep me from getting the game. I guess it depends on pressure from friends.

Arnoxthe1:
What the fuck is in there that requires 70 fucking GB a game? Seriously, the biggest thing on my computer by far is Skyrim at 13 GB.

There's not a good texture compression format for images beyond 2048x2048 as far as I know. JPEG is the closest thing we have, but I think it's fair to say we've all seen the quality a JPEG can be. Combine that with more realistic shaders that need 4-5 other textures to display properly and that space requirement really balloons.

Arnoxthe1:
What the fuck is in there that requires 70 fucking GB a game? Seriously, the biggest thing on my computer by far is Skyrim at 13 GB.

Actually, the divide is 90 GB for Infinite Warfare, 40 GB for Modern Warfare Remaster. Still ludicrous either way.

To think, I was bummed that I'd need to keep 55 GB free for Witcher 3 & it's DLCs. Hell, I'll happily take a 55 GB chunk for a long-assed Open World game & it's DLCs over 90 GB for what's probably going to be a corridor shooter.

Also really makes you appreciate how powerful the CryEngine and Fox Engine are. The former gives Halo-esque "big corridors with multiple strategies for each corridor" while rivaling other games in visuals, and doing so while only taking up 15 GB at most. The latter gives an Open World that takes up a relatively-reasonable 28 GB, while still rivaling the latest games in graphical fidelity.

Dr.Awkward:

Arnoxthe1:
What the fuck is in there that requires 70 fucking GB a game? Seriously, the biggest thing on my computer by far is Skyrim at 13 GB.

There's not a good texture compression format for images beyond 2048x2048 as far as I know. JPEG is the closest thing we have, but I think it's fair to say we've all seen the quality a JPEG can be. Combine that with more realistic shaders that need 4-5 other textures to display properly and that space requirement really balloons.

Games don't usually store their textures in formats like jpeg but in ready to use by the graphic card hardware formats.
Standard formats in DirectX(11) are named BC1 to BC7 and provide from 1:2 to 1:8 average compression (far less than jpeg, but but much faster to process by the gpu).
Different hardware has different support / limitations/ quirks related to those formats and the best formats (BC6/BC7) need more optimization /processing time from the developers so... f*ck that noise let put everything in there uncompressed and why not compressed also for the lulz...
Wait wait... put also future DLC/microtransactions related assets to unlock later when the suckers pony up the dolla.

Bloody hell... o.o

That's about all I've got. Seriously, that's nucking futs.

This is starting to get a little out of hand, guys.

Dr.Awkward:
There's not a good texture compression format for images beyond 2048x2048 as far as I know. JPEG is the closest thing we have, but I think it's fair to say we've all seen the quality a JPEG can be. Combine that with more realistic shaders that need 4-5 other textures to display properly and that space requirement really balloons.

*sigh* Of all the things for AAA publishers to focus their money on today, it has to be the one thing that in the end, doesn't make all that much difference. Graphics...

Dr.Awkward:

Arnoxthe1:
What the fuck is in there that requires 70 fucking GB a game? Seriously, the biggest thing on my computer by far is Skyrim at 13 GB.

There's not a good texture compression format for images beyond 2048x2048 as far as I know. JPEG is the closest thing we have, but I think it's fair to say we've all seen the quality a JPEG can be. Combine that with more realistic shaders that need 4-5 other textures to display properly and that space requirement really balloons.

JPEG would be absolutely terrible for use as a game texture format. It's very processor intensive. You don't notice it when you load up a few JPEGs on your computer, but handling them as textures would require a fuckton of GPU time just to pull up, which means stutter and/or pop-ins galore. It doesn't even do alpha channels.

But yeah, past 2048x2048 textures, sizes get pretty ludicrous. For example, 2048x2048 is 4,194,304 pixels. 4096x4096 is 16,777,216 pixels. Shit adds up.

Isn't Black Ops 3 sitting at around 40GB total, with all DLCs?
Why the hell is this more than double on its own, TRIPLE with MW1R?

So you could have Bloodbourne or Rare Replay, The Witcher 3 (and all of its DLCs) and several good indie games with room to spare, or you could have a remastering of a game you probably already own and another sequel that nobody cares about. Your choice.

And then you finish the main game in 4 hours and wonder why the AAA industry hasnt infact imploded on itselfe allready.

Karadalis:
And then you finish the main game in 4 hours and wonder why the AAA industry hasnt infact imploded on itselfe allready.

The campaign (which almost no one who buys these games even plays) finishes in 4 hours, the multiplayer grind is forever.

So more than a fifth of my fucking PS4. Wonderful. I guess once I have the greatest game ever, Infinite Warfare, I won't need any other games.

Hey, Infinite is in the name. They gotta try to live up to that too!

This is actually a well known paradox in software development re: hardware.

More resources means less motivation to optimize
Less optimized code makes you need more resources

I'm pretty sure that some old schoolers could look at some of my sql and strangle me for my sins, but, within reason, I only have to really worry about page locks.

And thats one of the many reasons why console gaming is just dumb really.
Literally no reasons not to get a $400 PC instead.

Is there no standard anymore?

Activisions new play to increase the amount of people playing their games is apparently to make it so that people can't install any other game besides CoD on their console. So you either delete CoD to play something else or you just play CoD. I wouldn't want to drop 130 GB and then maybe have to redownload it later in case I want to play it again.

If the graphics aren't literally the second coming of Christ then it's not worth 130 GB of space. If this really was a bid to leave more processing power for the rendering rather than decompressing, this just shows how incredibly weak the consoles are.

This is vomit-inducing, to say the least. What the hell do they have stored on that disk?

It's stuff like this that makes me feel justified about my constant bitching about internal space in modern consoles. Yes, I know that I can buy and external hard drive if it's that much of an issue but it really shouldn't have to come to that. It was annoying enough when the PS3 wouldn't let you play a game without first loading it onto the console but now this kind of thing is standard. What's even the point of console gaming anymore if you can't just put a game into a box and play it within seconds? More importantly though, what's the point of having a console if I have to take hours out of my day to uninstall several shiny games so that I can play one allegedly shinier version of a game that was already kinda shiny several years ago?

Arnoxthe1:
What the fuck is in there that requires 70 fucking GB a game? Seriously, the biggest thing on my computer by far is Skyrim at 13 GB.

That's Funny my Skyrim with mods take up 55.6gb that being said that is a lot luckily for me my I have a 6tb hard drive with 2.5tb free.

So, how expensive is this in storeage? Current dollar per GB for HDD and SSD.

I only buy games digitally now so that i don't have to store them, the downside is i live in the UK, last year i got upgraded to 17mbit broadband which for me feels really fast but to the rest of the world is seemingly pathetic.
So, 9 hours for Forza Horizon 3, 12 hours for Gears 4, 19/20 hours for this... no thanks. Modern COD games get patches and DLC updates fairly regularly and if one were to occur during the download on Steam it would start from the beginning, this download and storage burden is enough of a put off to not bother, in all likelihood the COD4 remaster will be released by itself a little time after launch so while i wouldn't mind playing Infinite as well, that will be a much better package for me.

K.ur:
So, how expensive is this in storeage? Current dollar per GB for HDD and SSD.

4 cents a gig currently using Amazon pricing for PS4s, with a cap at 3TB

...And to think that not that long ago a 12GB game was considered massive, something that would require your gaming library to needed a whopping 200GB of Hard Drive space.

Moore's law is a truly astounding thing.

Wow. Not only late to the game but also attempting to stir up a shit-storm over nothing. Great job. At least you're consistent.

Why is this surprising? Those 130 gigs comprise the campaign, the multiplayer, the Zombies mode, the campaign for the MW remaster, and the multiplayer for the MW remaster. All of which require standard and 4k texture resolutions, compressed and uncompressed audio, various language support, etc. That's a LOT of content, especially the 4k textures for what essentially amounts to five games.

Fuck's sake, people. Welcome to 2016. It's a wondrous place where cell phones are 'smart', cars drive themselves, and disc space costs somewhere between a whopping $0.019 per gigabyte and a mind-blowing $0.03 per gigabyte.

K.ur:
So, how expensive is this in storeage? Current dollar per GB for HDD and SSD.

See above. (minus the snark)

Basically, less than $2.

Saelune:
Ya know, it is very interesting to find out where your lines are. I generally love Call of Duty, despite certain awful things. This memory thing is possibly what will keep me from getting the game. I guess it depends on pressure from friends.

The largest games I have are like 50 gb and even that's bothersome, I think I learned where my line is as well.

There's just... a lot of warfare in this game.

Gig after gig of warfare.

A veritable shit-ton of warfare.

...Ah, console brethren. The manufacturers offer you 1 terabyte drives and act as though they're being generous. And then crap like this goes on. I am genuinely sorry.

It is my hope to upgrade my PC in the near future. And when I have more hard-disk space on board than I know what to do with... I am not putting COD:IW on it.

What in the actual fuck, are they just not even trying? Is this like Titanfall where every sound file is stored completely uncompressed because not wasting your user's HDD space is haaard?

Skyrim texmodded out the ass only takes up about 25 gigs or so, Crysis 3 packed it down to 28, and I doubt COD is going to get even close to *that* level of fidelity. Either they're storing all the cutscenes as BD-quality prerendered video, or they just stopped giving a shit. NOTHING in the COD series justifies its rapidly increasing file sizes.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here