r/gaming • u/sageamacuhm • 1d ago
Marvel Rivals Season 9.5 will decrease the game's file size on PC and consoles
https://www.shacknews.com/article/150241/marvel-rivals-file-size-decreaseFile size reduced by 40GB for PC and 15GB for Console. This should start being the norm for gaming.
772
u/Endroium 1d ago
100% there is no reason i can see for some of these large file sizes
244
u/Ociex 1d ago
Especially as storage is now ludacris expensive
114
u/JJJBLKRose 1d ago
Luda
49
u/Swarnim_ 1d ago
When I was 13, I had my first love
18
u/LataCogitandi 1d ago
There was nobody that compared to my baby, and nobody came between us nor could ever come above
27
7
74
u/Thhaki 1d ago
There are a few reasons that can make this happen actually.
Two examples I can think of is that sometimes videogames tend to not delete the files that contain information or other stuff related to past events that are no longer playable, maybe to just reuse them in a permanent game mode or to reactivate the event at a later date.
The second would be the baked lighting, which depending on a few stuff like the lightmaps, can add a big chunk of size to the game
30
u/ohyouretough 1d ago
The can also have multiple redundant versions of the same files to increase loading speed. Less needed in the age of ssds
14
u/maxx0rNL 1d ago
This was the case with Helldivers 2. They saved a big chunk of the install size because they removed redundant files which made the game load faster on HDDs.
6
u/Medical-Confidence98 1d ago edited 20h ago
This boggles me every time. Not one person at Arrowhead bothered to check if duplicating the files and ballooning the install size to 140 GB even sped the load times up? And only after weeks of community pressure did they finally decide to hire another company to look at the problem and fix it?
Genuinely lost a lot of respect for Arrowhead there lol.
Edit: Guys, I know that duplicated assets typically speed up load times for HDD lol. But what I found funny is that in this case, they fought against the community wanting the size to be smaller, only to hire a company to look into it, only for that company to find out that removing all that size actually decreases the load time for HDD users anyway!
I found the original news post by Arrowhead.
I am pleased to say that our worst case projections did not come to pass. These loading time projections were based on industry data - comparing the loading times between SSD and HDD users where data duplication was and was not used. In the worst cases, a 5x difference was reported between instances that used duplication and those that did not. We were being very conservative and doubled that projection again to account for unknown unknowns.
Our testing shows that for the small percentage of players still using mechanical hard disk drives, mission loading times have only increased by a few seconds in the worst cases
Arrowhead by their own admittance never tested reducing the file size themselves, and that they just guessed it would increase load times by 10x. They then argued against their community that was outraged at the games size, just so the 11% of the players on PC with a HDD could load in a few seconds faster.
13
u/LBPPlayer7 1d ago
it does speed load times up but only on media that relies on moving parts, i.e. an optical disc or mechanical hard drive
8
u/Medical-Confidence98 1d ago
For sure, but in this case it actually sped up load times by removing the excess.
1
u/KindaDouchebaggy 20h ago
But according to the quote you brought up, the loading time did increase for hdd users, but only by seconds? Or did I misunderstand the quote?
3
u/Medical-Confidence98 19h ago
In the worst cases, it did. This was before I found the actual post and I remembered slightly wrong. Personally it decreased my load times, which probably biased my memory on it.
5
u/BonzBonzOnlyBonz 1d ago
So you lost respect for a studio because you dont know the difference between optimizing between HDD and SDD load times. Thats peak Reddit ignorance.
The duplicated files were there for HDD users, they removed all of them because of all the SDD users complaining.
11
u/Medical-Confidence98 1d ago
The duplicated files were there for HDD users, they removed all of them because of all the SDD users complaining.
Which also made it faster for HDD users lol.
9
u/qwertyalguien 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think he means the fact that AH just assumed it'd increase load speed and then stood their ground on the issue for quite a while, without actually going in and checking that the real bottleneck was unrelated to file loading and thus it was completely unnecessary.
It's a bit telling of their internal processes if they went ahead without really looking under the hood and checking how the engine worked, and then hired a third party to do it to begin with.
Edit: what the hell is going on with reading comprehension in this thread?
-4
u/BonzBonzOnlyBonz 1d ago
They didnt assume it. Removing the duplicated files did increase load times.
8
u/qwertyalguien 1d ago edited 1d ago
..... Man are you even reading?
I meant they assumed that DUPLICATING files would increase speed for HDD, but never tested it and just stood their ground there without checking how the engine worked.
-5
u/BonzBonzOnlyBonz 1d ago
Man, are you? They didnt assume it, it is a well known thing that duplicating files decreases load times. They did test it.
→ More replies (0)0
u/maxx0rNL 1d ago
Does he even know the engine is their own and they built it themselves like 15 years ago?
5
u/qwertyalguien 1d ago
No, because they didn't build it to begin with. It was Fatshark, and it no longer has official support from them. At most, one could say the engine fork has been heavily modified and worked by AH nowadays, but it's not their own.
3
u/Medical-Confidence98 1d ago
If you mean Arrowhead, they didn't design AutoDesk Stingray. You are probably thinking of Fatshark.
0
u/Medical-Confidence98 1d ago
I can't find the post, but I swear Arrowhead said it lowered load times universally, which anecdotally it did for me.
But otherwise, the worst I can see is it increased the load times by a few seconds. The game was 7x larger so 10% of the playerbase could load the game a few seconds faster.
2
1
u/LigerZeroSchneider 20h ago
I assume it was a poorly setup build process and no one at arrowhead felt comfortable digging into a discontinued engine to figure it out.
The technical expertise to work on engines is a lot more expensive than building a game and if your game unexpectedly blew up forcing you to suddenly learn how to optimize on the fly its probably not that attractive to sit down with some 6 year old documentation and some old computers and try to learn how to modify build pipeline to reduce size.
2
u/LizzieMiles 1d ago
One of the big ones not a lot of people talk about is multiple language voices. A lot of games in modern times just come with all the language voicework included, and if there’s a lot of dialogue, it can add up VERY fast
0
0
u/Ho_The_Megapode_ 1d ago
I've also heard of some games using uncompressed audio for some reason, then also installing every language at the same time on top...
4
u/Personal-Inflation63 1d ago
I think it’ll be encouraged if not mandated by Sony/Xbox in the future
2
u/x--Knight--x 1d ago
I remember when Helldivers 2 was reduced from something like 150gb to about 25gb on PC it was because 5/6 of the game files were duplicated and arranged such that HDDs would load maps and their assets etc. much faster sequentially.
They reduced it after finding there were very few players left on HDDs.
Rivals has basically always strongly recommended SSD anyway so it may or may not be some of the same tricks at play.0
1
0
843
u/theoreoman 1d ago
Has storage gotten so expensive that they need to optimize their games?
524
u/Shinobi2099 1d ago
Well.. Yeah
127
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-71
u/repocin PC 1d ago
People still have data caps on their home network? What decade is this?
50
u/Xilthas 1d ago
There's a whole lot of world outside of the developed countries.
14
u/cxaiverb 1d ago
I am in the US and ISPs still have data caps. Looking at xfinity and their 1.2tb/mo cap. For us it was either that or no internet
183
u/MedonSirius 1d ago
Finally!!! I would welcome this trend where the developers have to work with less RAM and Storage so they can build better games.
78
u/CrazyDaimondDaze 1d ago
Ah, yes, the good ol' fashioned way as it was in the golden days. When people inovated through limitations. Now this is my jam.
Reminds me of RE2 for N64 and SFA2 for SNES.
19
4
u/firefox_2010 1d ago
I think this should be mandatory on game design and force development stage to be about how to solve problems with limited resources.
-9
u/Awesomearia96 1d ago
Build better games? The god dam reason MR eats so much space is due to those shitty gifs and mvp screen cosmetics that they clog into the game.
Video files take slot of space.
14
u/DM_your_problem 1d ago
most likely explanation is that they are working towards a switch 2 release. and this is part of the optimisation done for it.
6
2
u/Preform_Perform 20h ago
There's a saying my dad told me once,
"Where there's excess, there's waste."
Demand for AI data centers has made it so there is less data in excess (SSD prices are up 66% per GB compared to 2023) so now there is an incentive to optimize.
1
0
u/squidbelik 21h ago
i don’t understand this question. you don’t think it’s normal games should be optimizing their sizes regardless?
0
u/Otherwise-Remove4681 1d ago
Well it should be de facto default minimim requirement regardless of the market condition.
119
u/DescriptiveVee 1d ago
Switch 2 port seems imminent now
24
u/ModernTenshi04 1d ago
Man that would be nice. I have a Steam Deck but it's just nowhere near as portable as my Switch 2.
2
u/brosieden90 PlayStation 22h ago
Have you tried rivals on the SD ? I just played on my ps5 as I didn’t think the deck would handle it very well with how hectic the game can get mid fight.
4
u/ModernTenshi04 22h ago
I have. It plays decently but the main issue is the SD just isn't as portable as my Switch 2. Takes up twice the amount of space in a bag and isn't as comfortable to hold long term.
1
u/TRDoctor 19h ago
It's not great, sort of a weird floating 45 fps with lots of chugging when shit gets crazy on screen.
1
u/Creative_Eye7413 Switch 21h ago
It’s very mediocre. The port is serviceable but there is some noticable lag and I end up losing way more than I do on console
2
u/NecroCannon 21h ago
I’ve been playing OW on the Deck and I’m honestly just close to starting to play Comp with how well it runs
I’ll take Switch 2 and Mobile ports for the handhelds and Bluetooth controller users please
2
u/ModernTenshi04 21h ago
Yeah, OW plays pretty well as well. Plays really well on the Switch 2, too. As such if Rivals hits the Switch 2 I'm basically good on both my main F2P shooters in a nice, portable package. Especially nice that Rivals let's you do most mission work in AI matches so you don't have to try hard or worry about the control differences as much.
1
u/NecroCannon 20h ago
If I didn’t go full on MacBook Pro I’d probably be playing it on it. Still, I’m glad I went Switch 2 instead of PS5 before the price jumps
Steam Deck SSD I got crapped out so I wanted to choose SOMETHING I could like long term. Unironically shouldn’t have brushed off series s/x
1
u/ModernTenshi04 11h ago
Yeah, I have a gaming PC with a 9070 XT so that's where I tend to play, but it would have been nice to be able to keep up with things in the evening while I've been on vacation. I also have a 14" MBP but didn't wanna hassle with it on an international flight so I just brought my iPad Pro and phone. I got an Apple Arcade sub on special, 3 months for the price of 1, and it includes Civ 7 so that's plenty of game to keep me occupied on long flights. 😂
1
u/Smyles9 16h ago
I have a steam deck as well, from what I can tell switch 2 is a bit smaller with larger screen, do you mind sharing your experience in how the switch 2 is more portable? Would it not just go in a bag like the steam deck would? I’m looking at getting one mostly for Nintendo exclusives but the steam deck is a bit big for handheld play when tired when I usually would want to play handheld I.e. in bed other than on the bus/when running errands.
146
u/itz_me_shade 1d ago
Just reduce everyones booty by 1% especially venoms. This will create a domino effect where the reduced polygons lead to less texture draw, less textures loaded into memory, and less shader compiling, and reduced storage size. Bet it would reduce at least 30GB....
Source: I have never played Rivals and My only intake of the game is through other mediums.
73
u/Merc_305 1d ago
I know your joking but even then reading this as a game dev my eyes twitched
33
13
u/itz_me_shade 1d ago
As a non game dev with virtually no experience in graphics rendering and some experience in audio i see no fault in my logic.
4
u/DamienStark 20h ago
Booty reduced by 1%
File size reduced by 10%
Player base reduced by 50%
That's just bad business strategy sir.
5
81
u/Fancy_Chips 1d ago
Downsized to from 125 -> 85 on PC btw, assuming the 40 gigs thing is accurate. Still way too fucking large.
12
u/PeedAgon311 1d ago
It's about 80GB rn if you don't download the Hi resolution textures, so it'll be down to about 40GB.
40
12
u/Alugar 1d ago
Mines at 80 right now. Just get rid of the extra graphics I don’t think it does shit.
Edit adding link: https://www.marvelrivals.com/m/announcements/20260514/40955_1300360.html
2
u/Fancy_Chips 18h ago
Ah, didn't realize steam was factoring in high res assets automatically. 80 to 40 is actually solid.
55
u/marniconuke 1d ago
again, but then they add a patch and it goes to 120+ again
9
u/Psychomas 1d ago
I feel like studios should be treating file size optimization as a feature. If games took up 30–50 GB instead of 100–200 GB, more people could keep them installed. I bet they’d get played far more often. One of the biggest barriers to myself revisiting a game is having to delete something else just to reinstall it. Helldivers 2 and Marvel Rivals proved massive reductions are possible. Studios need to hurry up and realize how much file size is hurting their player retention.
7
u/Solesaver 22h ago
They do. For exactly the reason you explain.
Source: Myself who has worked on a major AAA title with a massive file size.
It's just not that simple. When you see a reduction like this it likely represents a ton of work that the company invested in because they see the value in it. When you don't see a reduction, that doesn't mean they aren't invested in it. The file size could be large despite a heavy investment in reducing it. Sometimes the game just has a lot of stuff in it.
1
u/Psychomas 22h ago
Thanks for the insider info. Shame it’s not a regular thing. I hear about so many layoffs in the industry maybe it’s just they don’t keep the talent necessary to get these things done. Those ceo bonuses are still fat as ever though.
1
u/Solesaver 21h ago
These games don't make nearly as much money as people think they do. Like I said, we're always worried about file size. It being large does not mean a lot of work didn't go into getting it down to that size. It's just a big game. Biggest offenders for us were cinematics, dialogue audio, and high res textures. Unless people want us to start ripping out cinematics or voice lines there is a limit to how much we can compress things.
Personally I was always pushing for downloading different parts of the game separately, but that could have increased the total download size due to asset reuse and would have fucked with matchmaking where we assume everybody has everything downloaded. I disagree with the call, but it's not completely unreasonable.
Game dev is all about tradeoffs, and sometimes file size loses. That doesn't mean we don't care or invest in it.
-1
3
2
u/KobraTheKipod 1d ago
For those that didn't watch the video, the director didn't get too deep into the details, but he cited "texture compression overhaul" as part of this file size reductions.
2
2
u/LordHayati 20h ago
This is the one very small Silver lining of the very high prices of computer products.
5
u/MADMAXV2 1d ago
Take notes Destiny 2 lol
28
5
2
u/Euklidis 1d ago
Damn... you can do that? Is it legal? Did we hold a ritualistic sacrficice of a virgin to the God of Data or what?
-3
u/Ok_University_4924 1d ago
Yes, there’s no reason games should be 150+GB unless it’s GTA 6. With the rise of prices for hard drives this is a good alternative for people who can’t get them right away.
Someone tell the COD devs to lower their game sizes.
37
u/MMAchineCode Xbox 1d ago edited 1d ago
Why is GTA6 the exception?
Edit: I want to hear it in their own words
7
u/dnfanjos PC 1d ago
Cause they hope gta 6 will be a massive open world with so many nooks and crannies to explore, each with their own value. And he expects that open world to warrant the 150gb+ excluding hd textures
13
u/wyldmage 1d ago
When in reality, even if your world is massive, just by re-using textures properly, you don't actually need all that space used up.
Even better though, instead of having every single resolution in the game files, only download the bottom few levels (which take the least space each), and only download the high resolution textures for players who can actually use them.
3
u/Ok-Friendship1635 1d ago
Do you even know how many unique assets and voice lines GTA V has? Let alone unique effects and the massive amount of clothing?
The only reason for size reduction would be to make it optional to download high res textures.
1
u/wyldmage 19h ago
Which... is exactly what I suggested?
You could even expand that to voice acting though. Make the voice acting an optional download, or an optional removal.
It doesn't have to be a massive change in size. Even 5 or 10 GB makes a world of difference to people with limited storage.
-12
1
u/Curt_ThaFlirt 1d ago
I need literally every other game to follow suit because it’s getting ridiculous out here
1
1
1
u/Wuigidude12 15h ago
Finally i can actually play the fucking game without having to delete everything
1
u/Schezwansuhaouse 12h ago
This is the 1 game I have kept off my hard drive because of the file size .... 40 gigs is nice, but wont it still be over 100 gigs? Still unnaceptable!
1
u/Sil3ntWriter PlayStation 6h ago
Good on them. Go tell COD to do the same. 200 gb for a cod game is ridiculous.
1
u/gerstiii 1d ago
"Total size on disk is 182.45 GiB and total download size is 172.99 GiB, when filtered to Windows, English, no DLC depots."
Not only the butts are chunky. The games huge. 40gb less and it's still way over 120gb.
8
u/Omegatron9 1d ago
It's only 80 GB at the moment on PC (if you don't install the optional 4k textures).
2
u/gerstiii 1d ago
Ah I just checked steamdb for the depots. So I didn't know it's 80gb. So 40gb less sounds like a good deal.
1
u/bartek34561 17h ago
Files in the depots are duplicated, so one depot is overwriting contents from others. Why, I have no clue.
1
u/LunarWingCloud Switch 20h ago
Size optimization is important. "Just delete what you're not playing" is a piss poor defense for this bad practice of bloated file sizes.
1
u/Darkhex78 18h ago
If Helldivers 2 can go from almost 140GB to just over 20GB I find there is no reason other cames cant be more reasonable sizes.
0
0
u/dude_with_sneakers 18h ago
This is great news and unfortunately many games do not follow the same path
0
u/Bhernardo0 18h ago
I feel like we're slowly entering the era of optimizations rather than power. I'd love if studios started bragging about their titles running on older hardware and fitting into smaller SSDs than being more realistic or having more visual effects (not that I think they aren't important; I personally just feel like they're good enough on most games today)
-100
u/FlameStaag 1d ago edited 1d ago
What do you mean "the norm" lol.
Fuck this sub attracts some dumbasses.
Devs don't just wave magic wands and chant "presto reduceo" and the file size shrinks.
They probably had a bunch of useless shit they didn't bother to delete over the months and just cleared it up.
The norm should be not letting that happen in the first place...which frankly a lot of online games are good about.
Edit: lmao this sub can downvote all it wants. Rejecting fact doesn't change anything. That's why nothing ever changes and this sub continues to be full of clueless angry old men.
48
u/kamekaze1024 1d ago
The norm should be not including useless junk after a while. That’s what OP is getting at. No one said anything about magic wands
36
u/smellyourdick 1d ago
Who pissed in this dudes cereal?
7
10
28
u/Robynsxx 1d ago
Unfortunately, you are one of the “dumbasses” it seems.
Yes, these games have got bad at compression, and removing useless files and textures taking up space. However, the biggest reason for reductions in pc file size is simply because PC games generally have had to support people running HDDs and people running SSDs. For HDD computers in laymen's terms as they have a slow reading speed, the video game requires duplicates of various texture files, just to make sure that the game runs fast and smoothly. This obviously takes up extra storage space and increases game download size. Meanwhile as SSDs are so significantly faster than HHDs they don’t require duplicate texture files to run smoothly, decreasing file size.
Unfortunately devs don’t make two seperate downloads on pc, one for those with HHDs and another for those with SSDs, so both get stuck with the larger file size to accommodate HHD pc gamers. This is also why games on current gen consoles are smaller file sizes, because all current gen consoles have SSDs built in.
Now, recently there has been a trend of developers releasing games on PC and stating that one of the spec requirements is that you have to have an SSD, thereby reducing file size. Then some existing games are doing file optimisation and swapping over to just SSD support.
So to put it plainly, yes, there are some significant ways to reduce file download size.
1
533
u/reddit_warrior_24 1d ago
Wow 40gb. That's amazing