• Fallout 76 will require 54.64GB update for day one, totalling 96.6GB
    62 replies, posted
https://www.psu.com/news/fallout-76-file-size-and-day-one-patch/ Just posting so the small overlap of people who have bandwidth limits and people still interested in this game know about it.
doom 2016 is around the same size
I do not have the SSD space for this. I had to uninstall 2 games just to install the patch during the beta.
its 70gb and that's after all of it's updates. this is 96GB and went haven't even reached the daily content update stuff yet.
The patch they released during the 'beta' only added 100mb to the file size, I guess this'll be the same. They've basically asked us to download the game from scratch three times now (four if you had the misfortune of preloading) for what seems to amount to tiny little tweaks and changes, the last patch notes were a joke. If the game does hit near 97GB I will be very surprised.
I could swear we had a nearly identical headline appear in this forum a few weeks ago and it turned out that no, the game will not double in size post-patch.
This isn't so much of a problem for me except that Comcast has a 1TB data-cap that you will ~never use~ even though games are easily topping at 100GB at launch
TESO is about 90gb as well, shit can be wild big. That game also had years to grow, this one didn't.
And I'm guessing just like Fallout 4, once they inevitably introduce paid mods, on PC they're all going to be added right to the base download, bloating the file size even further every single time they add more shit.
This game is technically such a mess
and has a shit ton more content packed into it. Well, more defined content I should say.
This is beyond retarded
Elderscrolls Online is 120gb an you need another 120gb just to install it after you download it.
Shit like this is why I'm so glad to have acquired a GeForce Now invite. There's advantages of not having to worry about file size anymore. Don't care about F76 though.
side effect of rushing your own launcher when you have no idea/literally 0 experience how to handle distribution and delta updating
Good god, whats up with all the game companies that gives 0 craps about the end user? I mean thats kind of their thing but come on
And why exactly couldn't you have put those games on your hard drive and played them with slightly longer loading times? Isn't the point of a gaming SSD to put games that you plan to play very regularly on there?
I was wary about Fallout 76 the moment I tired to imagine a Bethesda game dealing with more than one player running around, but everything that comes out about it makes the game look more and more like a complete shit show.
The point is I had to delete two games to download the update and now I have to redownload them both again. I also can't put them on my SSD now if I want to play Fallout 76. Also games that use content streaming rather than loading screens run worse from a hard drive.
Games will only get bigger in the future. The logistics question of what to put on your SSD is your problem, not for the developer to solve. Get a bigger SSD or deal with it.
how do you genuinely become a game journalist and not understand that a patch does not add linearly to the current disk usage, as if it doesn't replace anything 🤔
If this is how the last patch was, you're downloading an additional 54.64 GB which then replaces existing files. You have that additional 54.64 GB on your disk at the same time as the original 70 for a period of time. That is what they mean.
Either they didn't reveal the full changelog or there is some serious incompetence here. Even by Bethesda's usual standards...
While this might very well be the definition of trivial, after playing Skyrim & Fallout 4 on HDD and then switching them to SSD, I will never, every play a game on that engine on a non-SSD again. Some games it makes no difference at all, but with Bethesda games the improvement is night and day. Same goes for anything running on the Frostbite Engine, or Witcher 3.
I don't think it's trivial, switching to an SSD is night and day, I definitely agree. I just don't see the issue with managing your space. I can't afford a huge SSD so if the game I want to play is large, I keep just that game on the SSD and commit to playing it.
You clearly don't understand the problem. I have enough space on my SSD for Fallout 76 and the games I uninstalled. The issue is Bethesda.net downloads all the files first and then moves then over the existing files. So if the game is 60GB and the update is 30GB you'll need 90GB, even if the actual file size of the game remains 60GB after the update is done. If it were steam it would just download the new files in place. This prevents you from playing the game while it's updating, but you're not allowed to do that while games are updating on Bethesda.net either so it's not like taking an extra 30GB for a patch lets you keep playing. Also, the patches have fucking nothing in them, just files which already exist with minor changes.
I'd rather not be dependent on servers to play a game tbh - I'd just rather install it.
My bad. I had no idea Bethesda.net was designed so poorly.
Steam downloads are compressed. It needs the extra space to uncompress the download and then delete the download files.
It asks for 140 free because it uses the ESO launcher which is just as bad as Beth.net is.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.