• 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.

[PCGamer]The era of 100GB games is upon us, and the average PC gamer is underprepared

Drew1440

Member
I know I'm somewhat of an overkill.
500GB NVMe for Windows.
20TB HDD for all games to update once a month
4TB SSD for the games I actually play.
1TB NVMe for the huge games with lots of loading screens like wow.

I take out the 20TB HDD and only put it back when I'm done with a game or want to play something not on the SSD. I then delete the game on the SSD and copy over the game I want to play from the HDD to the SSD or NVMe and update it.
Very similar to my current setup, though I sometime play older games off the HDD itself since the speed difference isn't that much noticable.
 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Very similar to my current setup, though I sometime play older games off the HDD itself since the speed difference isn't that much noticable.
Pretty much.
Games im actively playing ill keep on the SSD.
Older titles and titles where the SSD makes little to no difference Ill just play straight off an HDD.
I dont cold storage PC titles cuz if I really get the itch for an older game chances are I could download it in no time.
 

Chastten

Banned
While I think developers should try to keep sizes down just out of principle, I don't understand why any of this is an issue in practice. A Samsung 980 Pro 2TB can be had for less than €150. The 970 is even cheaper and other brands are cheaper still. You can have a solid 20 games on there without issue.

Also, half of these are one and done. Once you're done with Hogwarts, there's no reason to keep it installed. Same for Resident Evil and several others. Just, you know, don't be autistic and just uninstall them. I can understand having a few multiplayer or live service games installed all the time, but the rest can go when you're done with them.
 

Thaedolus

Gold Member
Steam makes it really easy to move games between drives, so you can keep downloads on a slow drive then just move them over to nvme when you’re actually playing them. Also, I signed up for gigabit internet as soon as it was available. Also again, Steam Deck and desktop can transfer files back and forth so you’ll only have to download to one or the other one time, then it’ll transfer via LAN if you install on the other device.

So, it’s not so bad
 
Last edited:

Crayon

Member
This is all predicated on the implication that downloading a big game is like retrieving something buried in the reaches of your attic. And that is the worst case scenario.
 

Drizzlehell

Banned
I've been on 2x2 TB drives since 2013 so I'm not really that bothered by this. But I do remember when people were mad when Wolfenstein: The New Order was like a 50 gigabyte download. Seems pretty standard now, but back then that was huge because average game downloads at the time averaged at around 10-15 gigs at best and suddenly this monstrosity comes out and it was a day when it really sucked to have a limited internet plan, lol.


I remember even reading some comments somewhere where people speculated if MachineGames didn't put some redundant data in the game's files to artificially blow up its size and discourage people from torrenting the thing and go buy a physical copy instead, lol.

Pretty funny to think back on this now. History likes to repeat itself.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
How is the average PC gamer “unprepared”? We have the most storage options in the entire industry.

Sounds like click bait.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Or, people can stop hoarding games they're not playing. Keep only the games you currently play in rotation installed. Either way, open market storage is cheaper than it's ever been, ironically with inflation and economies the way that they are.
 
I use a meh-tier gaming laptop hooked to an external monitor as my daily driver for internet surfing, video watching, and non-work projects. It only has a 250 GB hard drive inside, and so for my Steam library I uninstall most large games currently not being played.

Meanwhile, my Steam Deck has a 1 TB SSD installed in it, and is purely used for gaming, and so I'm less hesitant about keeping infrequently played games on it.

That all said, the largest game I've played in the past few years was DOOM (2016), which is around 70 GB. Most of the games I play (AAs, indies, older titles, retro throwbacks) don't have file sizes anywhere near that large.
 
Most people have a decent internet connection anyways. Not sure what this even accomplishes. I guess people with shitty internet connections unite or something.

This is going by my previous post.
 
Last edited:

nemiroff

Gold Member
On PC I'm not worried at all, I'm NVMe-ed out of my mind. But I helped my son make some room on the XSX SSD yesterday and we noticed that the COD MW installation was 176GB.. We both did a double take.
 
Last edited:

Reallink

Member
2tb 3500Mbps nvme's have been $75 for several months now, this isn't a real problem. That's the price of 1 of these games. Even the fastest gen4 drives available routinely sell for $130 @ 2TB.
 
Last edited:

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
2tb 3500Mbps nvme's have been $75 for several months now, this isn't a real problem.
Seriously.
Anyone space limited on PC is doing something very wrong.
The main bullshit with these games sizes is the download.....yeah I know people are gonna post their gigabit uncapped internet plans, but alot of people arent as lucky.
But the actual space....mate, spend 100 bucks you have 2TBs that will last you a while even with all these 100GBs games.
Assuming you somehow clear that 2TB in a year you buy another 2TB....if you finish that uninstall that shit from 2 years ago.
And/or buy then cheap Gen4 4TB drives.

PC gamers have been prepared for years....I dont know anyone IRL who has ever actually thought to themselves shit im running outta space for my games, cuz everyone who got M.2 drives got 1 or 2TB even when they were overpriced, and they have massive HDDs for cold storage or for games where they dont particularly care to have SSD speeds.
So unprepared......PCGamer are clearly out of touch
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
1sCUNPt.png

All Gen 4 NVME or SSD.
 
Last edited:

Tg89

Member
Meh, I got 2tb of NVME and a gigabit connection. Easy enough to swap games out when I need to.

Storage is much less of a problem on my PC compared to my PS5.
 

SegaShack

Member
I hate for them to see how unprepared the average console gamer is. Seems everyone I know with a next gen console is telling me how they can only have 4 games installed at a time.
 
Last edited:
I hate for them to see how unprepared the average console gamer is. Seems everyone I know with a next gen console is telling me how they can only have 4 games installed at a time.

The average console gamer is no less prepared. Only takes a decent internet. It's not like you have to download petabytes per month or anything.

This is nothing more than click bait.
 
Last edited:

A.Romero

Member
I have several 1tb ssd drives and still need to delete games from time to time.

I like to have many games installed so I can play when the mood strikes but it's never enough. I have a single M2 port on my mobo left, I'm waiting for prices to come further down (they lower than before right now) so I can add another 2 tb to the computer.

Games are definitely big. However, I wouldn't want it to be otherwise unless there was absolutely no impact on the game itself.
 

Phase

Member
I'm sure a lot of us are happy OP complimented us and our above average preparedness. Thanks, OP.
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
Thats like 48 PCIE lanes?
You getting full speed on everything?
Not sure of the exact breakdown but the 4090 gets full bandwidth and the rest is spread based on load.

They all bench at full speed. I haven't done any serious benchmarks to stress all at once but very satisfied with performance.
 

calistan

Member
According to Steam, the average American downloads games at around 12MB per second. That's over a 3-hour download for current 2023 size champ Star Wars Jedi: Survivor(opens in new tab), a definite "whim" killer, and the folks on the lower end of that average have it much worse.

That's not to mention the folks out there with data caps. My Windows data usage report says I've used 255GB on Steam alone this month. If you also stream hours of TV and movies every week or, even worse, watch friends stream their games on Discord(opens in new tab), the gigs can add up real fast.
Sounds like a shit ISP issue. Around 20 minutes to download Jedi Survivor for me, and PC gamers can add unlimited storage of any type, from super cheap to high end.
 

raduque

Member
I have a 1tb Adata Legend 800, a 1tb Samsung 960 qvo, a 1tb pny, a 3tb 7200rpm sata and a 4tb junk drawer drive.

The Legend 800 is my boot drive
960 QVO is my data drive
PNY is a scratch disk for DaVinci Resolve proxy cache
3tb is a Hitachi 7200 rpm for archived game storage (games I might want to play again after finishing them)
The 4tb is a WD green with one maybe bad sector, it keeps flipping. I use it for bulk non critical stuff.

I also have a network storage server using Drive Pool that has a total of 38tb for archiving and my collection of Linux isos.

I think I'm good for storage.
 
Last edited:

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
I have a 1tb Adata Legend 800, a 1tb Samsung 960 qvo, a 1tb pny, a 3tb 7200rpm sata and a 4tb junk drawer drive.

The Legend 800 is my boot drive
960 QVO is my data drive
PNY is a scratch disk for DaVinci Resolve proxy cache
3tb is a Hitachi 7200 rpm for archived game storage (games I might want to play again after finishing them)
The 4tb is a WD green with one maybe bad sector, it keeps flipping. I use it for bulk non critical stuff.

I also have a network storage server using Drive Pool that has a total of 38tb for archiving and my collection of Linux isos.

I think I'm good for storage.
We're living in a NAS world, like a NAS girl.

Sporting a 50TB (5x10TB Ironwolf) myself.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
How many PC games currently actually require an SSD, asking genuinely? Is bulk HDD storage starting to become unfeasible?
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
How many PC games currently actually require an SSD, asking genuinely? Is bulk HDD storage starting to become unfeasible?
Yes. And it really needs to advance. We are struggling to take advantage of powerful HW on PC. That means dev/api/software needs maturing more and that baseline needs to go up. Like Moore's Law is Dead channel said, the bottom needs to be an 8GB~ 3050.
 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
How many PC games currently actually require an SSD, asking genuinely? Is bulk HDD storage starting to become unfeasible?
Pretty much only Star Citizen becomes "unplayable" without an SSD.....otherwise there are no games the actually require an SSD.
You can totally survive using an HDD.

I dont think we will even see a game any time soon that forces you to use an SSD or streams anywhere near enough information on the fly to be a huge determent to the gaming experience.

Id love to be proven wrong.
Like Moore's Law is Dead channel said, the bottom needs to be an 8GB~ 3050.

So an RTX2060S or even GTX1070(ti)?
Like the current spec for many AAA games are right now?
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
Pretty much only Star Citizen becomes "unplayable" without an SSD.....otherwise there are no games the actually require an SSD.
You can totally survive using an HDD.

I dont think we will even see a game any time soon that forces you to use an SSD or streams anywhere near enough information on the fly to be a huge determent to the gaming experience.

Id love to be proven wrong.


So an RTX2060S or even GTX1070(ti)?
Like the current spec for many AAA games are right now?
In certain ways, yes. I think the subject is being brushed on by DF and channels like the one I mentioned and needs to continue to be discussed and advanced.

I started saying this privately about 6 months ago in that we are in a time that our high end systems aren't being fully taken advantage of when they are exponentially more powerful than consoles. The consoles always have that advantage of punching above their weight class but the PS5, specifically, has given even the enthusiast PC gamer like me something to admire.

But this is a multi faceted discussion. Bottom line is we need more advanced API and access to the HW implemented yesterday. Some of it seems to be on the way.
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
1TB Nvme, 3TB of SSD and 4TB of HDD. Im already regretting not getting at least a 2TB. My first x86 PC had a 2GB HDD.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
I have a 512GB NVME and 2 1TD SATA SSDs. This setup is practically prehistoric at this point, I got all of the drives 5+ years ago, but I haven't felt the need to upgrade at all.
 

Hoddi

Member
I’m not sure if I’m misrembering but since when is a 100GB game a major issue for PC users? We’ve had countless games in that range over the past decade.

Any desktop tower worth its salt is able to have multiple SATA drives installed regardless of whether it’s SSD/HDD. If you need more space then you simply add more of it.

Hell, you can use SSD caching tools like PrimoCache if you want to keep your games on HDD and you’ll barely notice any difference.
 
100 GB games aren't that much of an issue for consoles either. Assuming you have decent internet. It's not an issue for my series X.

Def not an issue for my PC.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom