• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Guardians of the Galaxy Is a Significantly Smaller Download on PS5

XXL

Member

XXL

Member
Details for those who aren’t aware of the size difference...

Thats a massive difference.
Excuse Me Reaction GIF by Mashable
 

Wildebeest

Member
Seems like when SSD drives became common, most PC devs just decided to stop optimizing their data files at all. Like, its users fault if they have slow load speeds or not enough space.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Why are they comparing to PS4 though. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't have the compression tech so will be larger. A better marketing point for Kraken would be XSX (42GB) vs PS5 (31GB). Coming in at 75% the size is still a nice win for the PS5 compression overall and a much more meaningful comparison, IMO.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Ultra High quality.
Unoptimised, leading to very little visual improvement at a noticeable performance cost.
Same damn thing. One sounds better.
Nah textures have very little performance hit (you just have to have ton of memory on your GPU), nothing to do with unoptimalised code. Same algos are available on the PC as on PS5 (xbox too, but not the last-gen, too shitty CPU), sadly the code for Direct Storage isn't ready, but so far what has been...tested on my PC...looks promising enough. But sadly it still quite buggy.

So half of next year, is my guess, to be ready for first releases. Just by going how "ready" the codebase feels like.

Doesn't the lack of compression hardware that consoles have factor in as well?

It is, but still the textures on the PC generally are higher quality, sure I don't have the data for this particular release. Just in general.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Gold Member
Why are they comparing to PS4 though. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't have the compression tech so will be larger. A better marketing point for Kraken would be XSX (42GB) vs PS5 (31GB). Coming in at 75% the size is still a nice win for the PS5 compression overall and a much more meaningful comparison, IMO.
That 42gig is XsS size, XsX could be larger if it uses better assets, although I’m not sure how often that happens. “Smart delivery” seems to deploy same to both skus for some reason.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
That 42gig is XsS size, XsX could be larger if it uses better assets, although I’m not sure how often that happens. “Smart delivery” seems to deploy same to both skus for some reason.

That is the XSX installed size. Several outlets have quoted that figure. Outside of first-party, very few devs have bothered to shrink the files for XSS.
 
Why are they comparing to PS4 though. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't have the compression tech so will be larger. A better marketing point for Kraken would be XSX (42GB) vs PS5 (31GB). Coming in at 75% the size is still a nice win for the PS5 compression overall and a much more meaningful comparison, IMO.

Xbox Series S is 42GB. I'd have to assume that means XSX is a good deal more.
 

Shmunter

Gold Member
That is the XSX installed size. Several outlets have quoted that figure. Outside of first-party, very few devs have bothered to shrink the files for XSS.
Yeah, the 500gig on XsS is really being abused. MS should step in and lay down some rules. Why download textures to a system that may never utilise them, where’s the actual smart delivery?
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Yeah, the 500gig on XsS is really being abused. MS should step in and lay down some rules. Why download textures to a system that may never utilise them, where’s the actual smart delivery?

Might not necessarily be dev laziness. Could be that both versions of the game use the same assets but sample the files differently depending on the hardware profile. MS is definitely leaning toward separate high-res package approach sometimes used on PC, but even there it isn't always an option.
 
Might not necessarily be dev laziness. Could be that both versions of the game use the same assets but sample the files differently depending on the hardware profile. MS is definitely leaning toward separate high-res package approach sometimes used on PC, but even there it isn't always an option.
I think anyone who chose an S over an X should already have come to terms with the fact there are going to be sacrifices that they need to deal with for that $200 savings.
 
Last edited:

Wildebeest

Member
Nah textures have very little performance hit (you just have to have ton of memory on your GPU), nothing to do with unoptimalised code. Same algos are available on the PC as on PS5 (xbox too, but not the last-gen, too shitty CPU), sadly the code for Direct Storage isn't ready, but so far what has been...tested on my PC...looks promising enough. But sadly it still quite buggy.

So half of next year, is my guess, to be ready for first releases. Just by going how "ready" the codebase feels like.
I suppose the performance is loading and unloading the textures. Lossless compression was always about a trade-off between CPU time for decompression vs load time. If I understand it, this "Kraken" compression is just a proprietary closed source tool not owned by Sony, but with fast decompression, that has been around for 5 years or so. Seems that Zstandard is an open-source alternative, so not sure why there isn't more general interest in and usage of this tech.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
I think anyone who chose an S over an X should already have come to terms with the fact there are going to be sacrifices that they need to deal with for that $200 savings.
Even though I bought it primarily because of lack of availability of XSX I'm still very happy with my S unit. It fits very nicely on my desk and I'm using a 1080p monitor anyways.
 

Fox Mulder

Member
It’s great that someone decided to handle this as a console feature. MS and Sony went with SSDs that are expensive to expand on, while devs are putting out bloated games with giant patches like they don’t give a shit.
 

PharaoTutAnchAmun

Gold Member
Most PC releases are also way higher quality with textures, etc. It sucks, but it is what it is.Most PC releases are also way higher quality with textures, etc. It sucks, but it is what it is.
Thats not complete correct, it depense on the power of your rig. There is not a thing like ONE PC, theyr are many many possible setups with diverent results.
 
Last edited:

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I suppose the performance is loading and unloading the textures. Lossless compression was always about a trade-off between CPU time for decompression vs load time. If I understand it, this "Kraken" compression is just a proprietary closed source tool not owned by Sony, but with fast decompression, that has been around for 5 years or so. Seems that Zstandard is an open-source alternative, so not sure why there isn't more general interest in and usage of this tech.
No necessarily, yes the fork of what is Sony using is under proprietary licence, so the container and authoring tools definitely going to be closed sourced, but the algo powering oodle/kraken is open source, you can find it here for example:
powzix/ooz: Open source Kraken / Mermaid / Selkie / Leviathan / LZNA / Bitknit decompressor (github.com)

Even when it's old, it's powerful and it's shame that there isn't more focus on these algos in gaming industry.

Thats not complete correct, it depense on the power of your rig. There is not a thing like one PC, theyr are many many possible setups.

Sure but at least it's supplied by default at high quality, no matter what rig you have.
 
Last edited:

PharaoTutAnchAmun

Gold Member
No necessarily, yes the fork of what is Sony using is under proprietary licence, so the container and authoring tools definitely going to be closed sourced, but the algo powering oodle/kraken is open source, you can find it here for example:
powzix/ooz: Open source Kraken / Mermaid / Selkie / Leviathan / LZNA / Bitknit decompressor (github.com)

Even when it's old, it's powerful and it's shame that there isn't more focus on these algos in gaming industry.



Sure but at least it's supplied by default at high quality, no matter what rig you have.
Yeah, no the result depence on what of type your CPU and GPU and memory and what kind of SDD ore even HDD you have, an older ore lower powered PC wil not run the game at the same way as a high end rig, thats my point.
 

Wildebeest

Member
Even when it's old, it's powerful and it's shame that there isn't more focus on these algos in gaming industry.
Don't mean to say the tech is outdated, just that it has been around long enough for it to be more widely used by now with more interest in open-source developments. From that link it seems that Warframe uses it at least.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Yeah, no the result depence on what of type your CPU and GPU and memory and what kind of SDD ore even HDD you have, an older ore lower powered PC wil not run the game at the same way as a high end rig, thats my point.
True, but again the data is there, there isn't really any other way, how to distribute it. It sucks, but then again with storefronts like Steam it's not so bad to manage games on your slow/fast storage, based on what you are playing.
 

winjer

Member
Doesn't the lack of compression hardware that consoles have factor in as well?

Probably.
But also, the PS5 file system doesn't require data redundancy to maintain high read speeds. Something that is essential for HDDs.
On PC there is still in place an old file system, made in the time of HDDs.
And since Microsoft is lollygagging, we still don't have direct storage. Despite PCs, having SSDs as mainstream, for over a decade now.

So it's a combination of factors. Higher quality assets on PC, ancient file system and dedicated hardware compression on the PS5.
 

Kataploom

Member
Can't wait till Direct Storage is ready so we can see same benefits on PC, and Xbox, since I'm planning to get one if PC hardware issues keep flowing
 

MrA

Member
Details for those who aren’t aware of the size difference...

xbox series s also way smaller than ps4, I'm not doubting it is the compression and lack of redundancy, but a big one is probably shadow maps, It'll be interesting to see if gog uses real time shadows on xsx/ps5 and baked shadow maps on last gen
 

ethomaz

Banned
that is the usual pattern… basically all games are like that with few exceptions that probably didn’t use the PS5 SDK features.
 

Arun1910

Member
This is why the 825GB SSD never seemed like as big of an issue for me. Sure, it would be if the games were about 80GB still, but as time goes on we already seeing more Devs will utilise the compression techniques available and we already starting to see massive decreases in Game Sizes compared to PC and last Gen consoles.
 

Bragr

Member
Seems like when SSD drives became common, most PC devs just decided to stop optimizing their data files at all. Like, its users fault if they have slow load speeds or not enough space.
No other game highlights this more than Total War: Warhammer 2, that game barely functions without an SSD. I have never seen anything like it, the game takes 2-3 minutes to load stuff the previous Total War game took 20 seconds. They completely ignored normal HDD and made the game only for SSD's. It was disgusting, it should have been a warning with that game for normal drive players.
 

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
Often third party games are the same on Series S and X. Only some games have drastically different sizes (like Sea of Thieves) between S|X.

Exactly, some even contain the Xbox One versions as well plus all the language packs.
 
Top Bottom