Expect 100 GB Install Size, 6 GB Patches For Star Citizen

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
100GB is a lot for a game, but not enough to require a particularly big HDD. Even my mother's 5 year old piece of shit laptop has a 500GB HDD. Any computer nowadays can fit that easily.
 

aaronexus

New member
Dec 11, 2012
35
0
0
Denamic said:
100GB is a lot for a game, but not enough to require a particularly big HDD. Even my mother's 5 year old piece of shit laptop has a 500GB HDD. Any computer nowadays can fit that easily.
Yes, but people with shitty ISPs can't be expected to download that. That's the issue at hand, here.
 

SecondPrize

New member
Mar 12, 2012
1,436
0
0
I think I'm going to have to go with thanks but no thanks on that one. That's just not going to happen.
 

Skeleon

New member
Nov 2, 2007
5,410
0
0
Optimize it then, for crying out loud. I don't believe for a second that this size is justified; sounds more like they are lazy/running out of time or some such.
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,225
0
0
Ah Star Citizen ... slowly growing more stupid with every announcement.

I mean, setting a side how this is gonna just have people pull a 180 on the game due to download speeds and or data caps.

This is just ridiculous, I can down load full games with what they're suggesting for the bloody patches.

oh well. stupid as it is. :D not gonna effect me cause I'm not buying this mess :D
 

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
aaronexus said:
Denamic said:
100GB is a lot for a game, but not enough to require a particularly big HDD. Even my mother's 5 year old piece of shit laptop has a 500GB HDD. Any computer nowadays can fit that easily.
Yes, but people with shitty ISPs can't be expected to download that. That's the issue at hand, here.
Oh right. I live in Sweden, where my slowest possible option of internet connection was 100/100Mbit, and I keep forgetting other countries don't have that kind of ISP competition.
 

mastermerrick

Bored. That is all.
Jul 7, 2010
191
0
0
Aeshi said:
And any interest I might've had just went down the drain. Seriously, what the fuck are they doing that takes that much space?!

Games like EVE, X3 and/or WoW give entire worlds or galaxies to play with and they're only in the 15-30GB range.
Elite: Dangerous was around 30GB, and it was a world the size of our ENTIRE GALAXY. This better be the real-life size of a galaxy super-cluster at the very least.
 

Ishigami

New member
Sep 1, 2011
830
0
0
fix-the-spade said:
Move to Europe, our internet isn't stuck in 2005.
I doubt that.
Most ISPs reserve the right to restrict connection speed if a certain traffic limit is exceeded. For example I dare say all German ISPs have such regulations in their contracts fine print.
That doesn?t mean it is enforced but they certainly are prepared in case they need or want it.

Anyway I doubt the 100GB is really that much of an issue as far as traffic limitations are concerned. For me it is more less another indication that SC heads towards being a bloated mess of a game.
The dogfight module is still very mehhhhhhh?
 

chozo_hybrid

Jund 'Em Out!
Jul 15, 2009
3,456
0
0
I thought Total War Shogun was good. Luckily I have unlimited, it may not be the fastest, but should take less than a day to download, my problem is that my system is not up to it, which is a shame.
 

Neyon

New member
May 3, 2009
124
0
0
aaronexus said:
Denamic said:
100GB is a lot for a game, but not enough to require a particularly big HDD. Even my mother's 5 year old piece of shit laptop has a 500GB HDD. Any computer nowadays can fit that easily.
Yes, but people with shitty ISPs can't be expected to download that. That's the issue at hand, here.
So people should be moaning about their shitty ISP not the size of the game.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
100 GB does seem a bit excessive for a space simulator, even by todays standards. Most PC's nowadays have somewhere between 4 and 16 GB RAM. Something between 1 GB and 4 GB video memory. What use is all that data if you can only manage to load 10% of it at any given moment?

And if all ships will be as detailed and high-res as that one from a video someone posted, who is supposed to be able to run this game anyway? I suppose with all the stretch goals that have been stacked on top of it, the game will perhaps release in 6 years and by that time the system requirements will be average.
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
If this game is truly successful and is just as fun as they planned this whole thing to be, I will eat all the negative criticism I've said about this game but until then.

HOLY. CRAP. That is crazy. And NOT in a good way. There are a lot of ways to minimize that download. People here have already put in some good suggestions. Until they find a way to shorten that down though...

 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
Are they still using that bloated clunky excuse for a graphics engine?
 

Gatlank

New member
Aug 26, 2014
190
0
0
Nurb said:
Are they still using that bloated clunky excuse for a graphics engine?
It's already more than late to stop that train. Changing engine at this point would be starting again from scratch.
 

DoPo

"You're not cleared for that."
Jan 30, 2012
8,665
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
100 GB does seem a bit excessive for a space simulator, even by todays standards. Most PC's nowadays have somewhere between 4 and 16 GB RAM. Something between 1 GB and 4 GB video memory. What use is all that data if you can only manage to load 10% of it at any given moment?
You do realise no game is actually literally loaded entirely into RAM (and/or even VRAM) straight from the hard disk, right? Pretty much any game loads what it needs into memory and then works. That's why you have loading screens [footnote]unless the loading is minimised and hidden through some tricks - like the cells in Morrowind's engine, or the elevators/corridors in Mass Effect[/footnote]. Otherwise, you wouldn't need them.

Moreover, it's not like you grab arbitrary files from your drive and stuff it into memory, either. The stuff put there is not necessarily just the files you have. In fact, it's seldom that - it's the in-memory representation of the software you are running.
 

Chaos Isaac

New member
Jun 27, 2013
609
0
0
Hrm. That sucks for someone like me who lives so far from civilization my only option is a 5mb download/1mb upload from ATT with a 250GB cap before they charge more.

Pfft, still waiting for this game to crash and burn just because it feels like it's destiny to this game.

Hopefully a disk version will be made available, for ease of us who have the space and are willing to give it a chance, but if it's download only... eh.

I've had so many shitty problems with downloaded copies of games that I don't even wanna anymore. (Still have GTA V telling me to put in a disc copy 9/10 times I try to start it up.)
 

SirAroun

New member
Apr 27, 2011
84
0
0
It is clear that NONE of you know ANYTHING about Star Citizen. You just saw the (possible, not confirmed) 100GB file size and started freaking out, jumping to conclusions and raving about Doom.
First off, those that buy into in now or have bought into in already are going to get the game piece meal over 2 years.
Second off, do you thing CIG is so stupid that they won't have a plan for when it is out? It is 2 yeas out from release, they have time to make a plan!
 

Jake Martinez

New member
Apr 2, 2010
590
0
0
SirAroun said:
It is clear that NONE of you know ANYTHING about Star Citizen. You just saw the (possible, not confirmed) 100GB file size and started freaking out, jumping to conclusions and raving about Doom.
First off, those that buy into in now or have bought into in already are going to get the game piece meal over 2 years.
Second off, do you thing CIG is so stupid that they won't have a plan for when it is out? It is 2 yeas out from release, they have time to make a plan!
I agree with you. I'm actually surprised that people are complaining so much, "OMG THIS GAME HAS TOO MANY HIGH QUALITY MESHES!".

This is one of the reasons why I love PC gaming, or at least, this is how things used to be before people started aiming their games for the lowest common denominator. PC's are incredible machines and get more and more powerful every year, it used to be that one of the most exciting things was when a piece of software was released that was just so cutting edge that it required the best gear to run it effectively. I actually remember fondly having to upgrade my video card from a CGA to VGA in order to enjoy Quest for Glory in all it's... well, Glory.

Anyway, I'm wetting myself in anticipation of Star Citizen. I don't care if it requires a fricken TB install, I'll figure out some way to make it happen.
 

RedDeadFred

Illusions, Michael!
May 13, 2009
4,896
0
0
SirAroun said:
It is clear that NONE of you know ANYTHING about Star Citizen. You just saw the (possible, not confirmed) 100GB file size and started freaking out, jumping to conclusions and raving about Doom.
I, and many others, find that it's a lot better to assume the worst about a game and be pleasantly surprised than to assume the best and get burned.
First off, those that buy into in now or have bought into in already are going to get the game piece meal over 2 years.
Okay, good for them. What about the rest of us?
Second off, do you thing CIG is so stupid that they won't have a plan for when it is out? It is 2 yeas out from release, they have time to make a plan!
Well they were stupid enough to only release this bit of information without even mentioning that they're working on a plan like you're suggesting, so yes, it would certainly seem possible. Not saying it's necessarily going to happen that way, but again. Better to assume the worst IMO.