GTA V for the PC

[daedalus5]

I pre-ordered this game months ago - originally it was penned in for a January release date, but it came today.

7 DVDs to install - am getting a bit impatient! I was worried I would damage the discs when trying to get them out as they are tough to remove.

Anyone else played it on PC yet?

 

[Stoo]

Installing off 7 disks, it's like travelling back in time to 1992!

I guess the alternative is the sort of colossal steam download that takes about a week if you don't have fibre-optic broadband.

 

[SPCTRE]

60 FPS GTA V is pretty sweet.

Also, the download is not that big. Bit over 50 gig IIRC.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1DQF9fX9uM[/yt]

GTA V in 5K maxed out at ultra settings (2x MSAA + TXAA + FXAA + 8x Reflection MSAA) w/ 4x GTX TITAN X, using about 8GB VRAM.

 

[SPCTRE]

Also, the download is not that big. Bit over 50 gig IIRC.

Okay, actually 60.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

60 FPS GTA V is pretty sweet.

Also, the download is not that big. Bit over 50 gig IIRC.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1DQF9fX9uM[/yt]

GTA V in 5K maxed out at ultra settings (2x MSAA + TXAA + FXAA + 8x Reflection MSAA) w/ 4x GTX TITAN X, using about 8GB VRAM.

"not that big"

"over 50 gig"

You make no sense, sir.

*pets his fiber optic Internet box*

 

[SPCTRE]

"not that big"

"over 50 gig"

You make no sense, sir.

It's 2015, 50 plus is completely reasonable for a high-production-value game

 

[Timby]

I can't imagine being a PC gamer in an era of bandwidth caps. Holy moly.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

"not that big"

"over 50 gig"

You make no sense, sir.

It's 2015, 50 plus is completely reasonable for a high-production-value game

You have an odd definition of "completely reasonable," considering only a handful of games are that large at this point.

I'm not saying it's not worth it, but the explosion in game sizes in recent years is pretty crazy:

Taken from here.

 

[SPCTRE]

Just get with it, grandpa!

 

[Timby]

"not that big"

"over 50 gig"

You make no sense, sir.

It's 2015, 50 plus is completely reasonable for a high-production-value game

You have an odd definition of "completely reasonable," considering only a handful of games are that large at this point.

I'm not saying it's not worth it, but the explosion in game sizes in recent years is pretty crazy:

I have to believe that a large factor in the size explosion is that both major current-generation consoles are using Blu-ray Discs as their physical format. In the last generation, the Xbox 360 stuck with DVDs, so any console game that was also headed for the PC was initially designed for those constraints. Nowadays, they port the PS4 or Xbox One version to PC and then you get 50 GB downloads.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

It's 2015, 50 plus is completely reasonable for a high-production-value game

You have an odd definition of "completely reasonable," considering only a handful of games are that large at this point.

I'm not saying it's not worth it, but the explosion in game sizes in recent years is pretty crazy:

I have to believe that a large factor in the size explosion is that both major current-generation consoles are using Blu-ray Discs as their physical format. In the last generation, the Xbox 360 stuck with DVDs, so any console game that was also headed for the PC was initially designed for those constraints. Nowadays, they port the PS4 or Xbox One version to PC and then you get 50 GB downloads.

That has a lot to do with it, yeah. And as the article I linked notes, BR on PC just never took off (and probably never will at this point), so PC gaming is going to be stuck in download-only land, possibly forever. Great for people with fiber connections (like me) but pretty shitty for everyone else.

 

[Servo]

The data on that graph doesn't tell the full story though. Most of those games have had multiple DLC releases since launch which inflates their size for a new player.

For example; the graph states that Battlefield 4 is less that 30GB, yet on my PS4 HD it takes up 45GB due to DLC. Another example is DC Universe Online. The barebones game was a mere 18GB on release. Now, after 4 years of patches and DLC, it takes up close to 60GB on my HD.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

The "full story" doesn't have to include DLC to communicate the message "game sizes have fucking exploded in recent years."

 

[Servo]

But that's to be expected, no?

 

[daedalus5]

The extra 5Gb of "patches/updates" is killing me - my download speeds aren't that fast, and whne the splashscreen is displaying, I can't use the PC browser's internet for anything else which is annoying. They really do need some form of "auto throttle." Looks like the weekend by the time this thing gets installed now.

(The 7 discs install also reminded me of Klingon Academy and Starfleet Academy days, although I can't remember if they made you insert all 7 discs during installation or not!)

 

[JarodRussell]

It's 2015, 50 plus is completely reasonable for a high-production-value game

You have an odd definition of "completely reasonable," considering only a handful of games are that large at this point.

I'm not saying it's not worth it, but the explosion in game sizes in recent years is pretty crazy:

I have to believe that a large factor in the size explosion is that both major current-generation consoles are using Blu-ray Discs as their physical format. In the last generation, the Xbox 360 stuck with DVDs, so any console game that was also headed for the PC was initially designed for those constraints. Nowadays, they port the PS4 or Xbox One version to PC and then you get 50 GB downloads.

Why not release it on bluray for PC as well? It's been over half a decade already, and people who buy a game like GTA V for PC should have a blu ray drive anyways.

 

[Timby]

Why not release it on bluray for PC as well? It's been over half a decade already, and people who buy a game like GTA V for PC should have a blu ray drive anyways.

Not a ton of computers ship with Blu-ray drives, for a number of reasons:

A) They're expensive
B) No games use them
C) Everyone just uses digital distribution anyways
d) Even if there were a games market, there's no free Blu-ray playback software out there, which is the other potential added benefit to a consumer -- so why tack on the cost?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Why not release it on bluray for PC as well? It's been over half a decade already, and people who buy a game like GTA V for PC should have a blu ray drive anyways.

Not a ton of computers ship with Blu-ray drives, for a number of reasons:

A) They're expensive
B) No games use them
C) Everyone just uses digital distribution anyways
d) Even if there were a games market, there's no free Blu-ray playback software out there, which is the other potential added benefit to a consumer -- so why tack on the cost?

Yup. If BR drives came standard on PCs (and they would if the cost wasn't prohibitive) then PC games would be distributed that way.

Basically: blame Sony.

 

[SPCTRE]

Sony is not to blame for the fact that physical media is dying. (I know you didn't say that they were.)

Inexpensive Blu-ray drives would not reverse that trend, they could only delay it ever-so-slightly.

 

[JarodRussell]

Chicken, Egg. If PC games were released on blu ray, blu ray drives would be bought. And if someone who has a machine that is capable of running games like GTA V or Assassin's Creed Unity can't afford a blu ray drive, then he did something terribly wrong.