• 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 PC specs revealed (150GB HDD min.)

drotahorror

Member
I'm having a problem, my 2x 3TB drives are nearly full and I have another 3TB drive sitting right there but I cant be bothered putting it in. Please feel sorry for me.

4TB SSD's aren't exactly cheap (couldn't find a 3TB). Although they are around the price I paid for a 1TB a few years ago.

Seems ridiculous to play really any game on a normal HDD if you're on PC. I use my small 250gb SSD for my OS and random other things and my 1TB SSD for games. Sometimes I just store games on a normal HDD but not typically.

I would never play a modern game on an HDD. If you're saying the game needs 150GB because of insane texture quality etc, then an HDD probably won't even stream the asset quick enough.



I have a lot of space but 150GB games is just lazy for something like Guardians of the Galaxy which is available on last gen consoles. Same goes for the CoD's being gargantuan in size.
 

ManaByte

Member
In comparion:
XSX - 41.9GB
PS5 - 31GB
Switch - 0GB (cloud version)

That's of course before any Day 1 patch, but it's a fraction of the PC install size.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Getting pretty annoying.. I have gigabit internet tho so not difficult for me to make space as I don't worry too much about re-downloading things.

But I'm also used to things downloading in like 20 minutes lol.... a 150GB game is gonna make me feel like the old days.. before I had gigabit.
 

ManaByte

Member
Getting pretty annoying.. I have gigabit internet tho so not difficult for me to make space as I don't worry too much about re-downloading things.

But I'm also used to things downloading in like 20 minutes lol.... a 150GB game is gonna make me feel like the old days.. before I had gigabit.

It's just strange that the PC version is at least 3x larger than the largest console install.
 

bargeparty

Member
150 is indeed a lot, but why are some of you posting like you can't just... delete and download games at any time? If you have slow internet fine, but otherwise I don't get this obsession with keeping 100 games installed at all times, like you even play that many to begin with.
 

Larxia

Member
Given the apparently much smaller size on consoles, it's indeed quite strange.
Could it be possible that maybe the revealed specs are a bit misleading and the 150gb required space is actually for the installation process? I know some games can do that, I think steam does that if you pre-load games, or at least it used to, it would keep the original encrypted download on the disk and unpack it for the final installation, which would mean having the game files twice during the process, and the installation package being removed after. Maybe it's something similar to this, which would mean a 75gb game, which would still be quite huge compared to the 40 gb on consoles, but who knows.
 
Last edited:

IFireflyl

Member
Given the apparently much smaller size on consoles, it's indeed quite strange.
Could it be possible that maybe the revealed specs are a bit misleading and the 150gb required space is actually for the installation process? I know some games can do that, I think steam does that if you pre-load games, or at least it used to, it would keep the original encrypted download on the disk and unpack it for the final installation, which would mean having the game files twice during the process, and the installation package being removed after. Maybe it's something similar to this, which would mean a 75gb game, which would still be quite huge compared to the 40 gb on consoles, but who knows.

This^. Steam downloads and then extracts the game. This means the storage cost is increased (up to double the space needed in some cases), but once the game is fully extracted and installed the total space used is lower. Also, the game isn't out yet. It's very possible they just threw the 150GB number out there to populate the store page, and that could be reduced prior to launch.
 
Are they replicating the assets multiple times or however Warzone does to solve streaming issues on HDD equipped last gen consoles (upgrading the PS4 and Xbox One to SSD's won't solve this either because it's still on Sata) and pc's?

Leave current gen consoles for now, how big is this on PS4 and Xbox One btw?
 
Last edited:

ManaByte

Member
This^. Steam downloads and then extracts the game. This means the storage cost is increased (up to double the space needed in some cases), but once the game is fully extracted and installed the total space used is lower. Also, the game isn't out yet. It's very possible they just threw the 150GB number out there to populate the store page, and that could be reduced prior to launch.

Wouldn't be shocked if SE is going to try to get a correction up there. They seem to be VERY careful with this one to avoid what went on with Avengers pre-launch (this game is NOT Avengers).
 

Sosokrates

Report me if I continue to console war
Min spec is odd, this game is designed around the PS4/X1 afterall.
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Report me if I continue to console war
You sure about that?
No

Edit: just checked its wiki page and it is says ots comong to X1/PS4, its even comong to switch.

If this was current gen only it would ve bad because its not the best looking game.
 
Last edited:

ManaByte

Member
No

Edit: just checked its wiki page and it is says ots comong to X1/PS4, its even comong to switch.

If this was current gen only it would ve bad because its not the best looking game.

The Switch version is a cloud version.

Battlefield is also going to the past gen consoles, but they don’t get the same experience.

As for your graphics comment, have you played it or are you going off compressed YouTube videos?
 
Last edited:

Vagswarm

Member
When it comes to big releases on the PC, I've had to delete certain games before installing new ones. Don't have enough space for them anymore... 150GB feels like the new standard over the past few years.

When you download some of the older PC games, they're like 10 GB!
 
Last edited:

SZips

Member
The game is now taking 80GB after final optimization

And there was much rejoicing. I have the space if it was 150GB but, you know, it's nice not to have to worry too much since other games are coming out in the next couple of months that also need a ton of space.
 

GymWolf

Gold Member
I believe it’s about as long as any linear third person AAA story driven game (think GOW, TLOU, etc). So 10-15 hours probably.
Then hopefully we can reach at least 30 hours with side-activities and exploration on max difficulty.

Do we know if the game is a straight path with zero side-stuff or more like mass effect structure?!
 

xrnzaaas

Member
It's sad to see stuff like this at the same time when Sony and a lot of other devs take initiative to limit the storage requirements. Even Ubisoft allowed people to download the texture pack separately in FC6.

Edit: It's 80GB now? Well, that's still more than usual for these types of games.
 
Last edited:

CrustyBritches

Gold Member
80GB is pretty standard for next-gen(current-gen) games. I think FH4 and AoE IV weigh in right around there. Gears 5 with all modes and HD texture pack is like 130GB. FS2020 is another monster.

I have a 1TB NVMe as primary drive and I'll throw certain games on there, but for the most part I put them on a secondary 1TB SSD. It's still plenty fast. I also have a 3TB HDD for pretty much anything I don't consistently use, and for stuff like GoG, Emu, Steam backups. Most older games and certain titles like DOOM Eternal can play just fine off it, but I don't generally get past 500-600GB on the SSD at any given time.
 
Last edited:

BlackTron

Member
This is the kind of game I would have rented back in the day. Man I miss just being able to hot-swap games. 150 gig install...JFC.
 

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
I doubt it is 150 gigs. Almost likely another one of those games that doubles install requirements due to the way the game is downloaded and installed.

EDIT: Nevermind, already handled upthread.
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Report me if I continue to console war
The Switch version is a cloud version.

Battlefield is also going to the past gen consoles, but they don’t get the same experience.

As for your graphics comment, have you played it or are you going off compressed YouTube videos?

Going from 4k YouTube videos, and even though they are compressed lets not act like you cant tell the level of visuals from them.
The visuals are ok by gen8 standards, should not require a GPU about as powerful as a Ps4 pro to have a good experience. I guess recommend specs are always inflated.
 
Last edited:

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
I'm so tired of these 100gb+ games.

I have around 14.5tb of SSD, NVME, and HDD space and these installs churn through my storage.
 

Kuranghi

Member
What framerate do they mean at these res/detail settings? I really hope its 60fps or I'm going to need to pony up for the console version, which would suck since its like double the price. I'd rather play at 30fps with high settings and 4K and if the graph means 60fps then I think thats doable on GTX 1080 with some headroom.

The game looks really pixelated to me in performance mode (on PS5), the chapter one footage didn't really impress me until I rewatched the gamespot versions thats in 30fp mode. You lose a ton of detail to get 60fps and it makes the awesome grand space shots lack fine detail and specifically the hair looks like shit at lower resolutions, like a crawling mass of pixels even just outside of closeup range.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom