• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Ghaleon

Large filesize games and SSD hard drives

9 posts in this topic

So SSD hard drives are becomming more and more mainstream, but game sizes are getting ridiculously large, to the point where I'm pretty sure most people don't install games on their SSDs despite them probably benefitting the most from a SSD's faster load times. However games aren't generally getting larger and larger simply because of improved technology, higher resolution, etc. A LOT of the time they're getting much bigger than that stuff would indicate because it's becoming relatively standard practice for game devs to not even bother compressing the data files in their games.

So I was thinking, what if some game dev made a relatively high-end game that DOES have some loading times and whatnot, but they ALSO did a great job compressing the files so the install size was much smaller. Do you think game reviewers and whatnot should make note of this, not just because it's smaller, but as an added bonus that it would be small enough that it can reasonably be expected to fit inside your SSD (which tend to be mostly full without any games because of system files or whatever)?  Given how many reviewers talk about VR and not-VR with games that can do both, I think it also reasonable to factor this in since I'm pretty sure most people have SSDs in their computer than VR headsets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While SSDs are becoming more competitive priced and normal in a PC rig, they are mostly used for the OS and have the standard HDDs for game content. Also another thing to note, SSDs have shorter life expectancy as opposed to HDDs which even deters me from putting games on my SSD.

 

For your actual question, I don't think a game's install size would ever matter to a reviewer as it doesn't effect the game. They might mention it if it's ridiculously big like TitanFall but most often than not it's never paid attention to. Having an SSD is a personal choice and game developers don't have to cater to people that have PCs with a lack of available memory. All we can do is hope extra care is taken into optimizing the game's file size.

Mexiguy, Crazycrab and Apex Spartan like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I know most people install games on HDDs, but I imagine if game devs actually bothered to compress their files, that maybe they'd consider it on a SSD. As you mentioned that's optional, and a reviewer shouldn't assume someone makes an option like that, but I kinda think they should at least mention the practicality of a game's filesize for reasons like that. For example most people don't have double SLI GPUs, but sometimes I see reviewers go 'doesn't have SLI/Crossfire support'. Of course you don't have to agree, I'm just wondering if I expressed myself well enough since you mentioned HHD installs anyway.

 

I also wonder if devs might actually consider compressing datafiles once again if some reviewers mention this. I'm pretty sure they are all thinking nobody cares anymore and they can get away with it...which they're kinda right about, but I think some big name reviewers should at least try to incentivize smaller install sizes a little bit more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some games load in the background as you play, others have multiple load screens between levels or sections and some have one big load at the start.  It's only really the latter two that see a significant benefit from being installed on an SSD.  I'm sure as SSD's become more popular, larger capacity and more affordable they will phase out the traditional HDD in a few more years and most of us will have SSD only machines.  Untill then it's best to take a more balanced approach and prioritize the OS, core applications and maybe some games that do get that benefit if your SSD is big enough which is what most people do.

 

As devs continue to make games bigger with more cutscenes, higher resolution texures, larger maps and so on inevitably install sizes are going to continue to get larger.  File compression can only do so much and some file types can only be archived while compressed and not actually used.  We would all like smaller files of course but I think you may have to accept that this is one we can't have both ways.

Mexiguy and Rain like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My gaming system has a SSD for OS and WD Black 1TB for data (including game files). I am waiting for 1TB SSD deal. Don't even consider SSD/HDD hybrid.

For some reason, my Rainbow 6 Siege game loading is kind of slow (always the last one to finish loading)... May be the this game data save toward inside of the disc platter... I try defrag but still not help.... really want upgrade to 1TB SSD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point, but the reason why most people don't install games on SSD's is not because the game files are to large, more because SSD's that sort of size are still to expensive at this point. Game publishers not compressing there shit is annoying, but there's bigger issues than that out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well it's not neccessary the higher Resolution, improved technology or more Gamefiles that takes a lot of space. It's more the uncompressed Audio/Video Files that take a lot of Space. 

 

Game install size is partly considerated in Game Reviews since early 2000s. Most games had installation options. Minimum installation took less space but the loading times were enormous, while complete installation minimized the loading times but took a huge ammount of Space. Many games got a minus point for "long loading times", which affected the Score.

 

I upgraded my 6 year old Rig a few weeks ago. Now i have 2 SSDs. A "Standard" SSD with 250GB for the OS, Drivers and Programs and a M2, PCI 3.0 SSD with 525GB for the Games.

Battlefield 1 on HDD: 1 minute Loading time until i joined the Server.

Battlefield 1 on M2 SSD: 10 seconds loading time until i joined the Server.

Once you go with SSD, you don't wanna go back to HDD.

Crazycrab likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Beatmaster A.C. said:

Game install size is partly considerated in Game Reviews since early 2000s. Most games had installation options. Minimum installation took less space but the loading times were enormous, while complete installation minimized the loading times but took a huge ammount of Space. Many games got a minus point for "long loading times", which affected the Score.

 

Back then many PC games still ran of the disc so you had he option of partly installing the game on the drive and running the rest from the disc which, obliviously increased the load times or doing a full install which took up more space on the drive.  In this age of digital distribution that's not relay an option anymore.

 

21 minutes ago, Beatmaster A.C. said:

I upgraded my 6 year old Rig a few weeks ago. Now i have 2 SSDs. A "Standard" SSD with 250GB for the OS, Drivers and Programs and a M2, PCI 3.0 SSD with 525GB for the Games.

Battlefield 1 on HDD: 1 minute Loading time until i joined the Server.

Battlefield 1 on M2 SSD: 10 seconds loading time until i joined the Server.

Once you go with SSD, you don't wanna go back to HDD.

 

That's definitely the best move in my opinion.  It also has the added advantage in the circumstance that you need to re-install Windows, none of your games or personal files are affected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2017 at 7:20 AM, Crazycrab said:

That's definitely the best move in my opinion.  It also has the added advantage in the circumstance that you need to re-install Windows, none of your games or personal files are affected.

Exactly, if you're going to benefit from SSD while playing games then having 2 is the way to go. You don't want game files messing with your OS and core files because eventually the games will have to go due to updates for both games and system files eating up memory fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0