Is downloadable game size increasing faster than broadband speeds?

Ars Technica: "Have game sizes been increasing faster or slower than broadband download speeds in recent years? That is to say, does a game take more or less time to download, on average, than it did in the recent past?

Soliciting some gamers' experiences in this regard got a wide range of responses. Some people felt that big games are much more annoying to download today than they were a few years ago. Others said their downloads are much faster now, mainly due to an improved Internet connection compared to the one they used to have. We could throw our own experience into this mix, but to get something more than anecdotal conjecture, we were going to need some hard data."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
GarrusVakarian1778d ago

I think so, the average broadband speed isn't anywhere sufficient enough for the size of current gen games let alone next gen. I have a decent speed so im ok, but for many it will take a long time to download games and will be near impossible to stream.

us_army1778d ago

This is why the "digital revolution" of games cannot be compared to music or even movies for that matter... Not just speeds alone, but bandwidth issues with caps, are the reason I am sticking to physical discs.

sprinterboy1778d ago

My friend gets about 7mb broadband and he can buy a HD movie off the psn store and play without pauses after about 5 mins of downloading, but I agree on your other points about music etc

Insomnia_841778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )

50mbps here for $60 with Optimum. I think I'm set for it but I prefer my physical copies any day!

This is what everyone was talking about when MS announced the XBone.
Wtf were they thinking???? With no option to upgrade the hdd. It's like they started making decisions for the XBone while being on a molly or some sht!


0ut1awed1778d ago

I also have 50 down/3 up but that's literally the best I can get here and it cost $100 a month. Not to mention I get hassled and charged for going over my 350gb cap almost monthly.

I need fiber or at least a connection that isn't so expensive.

nukeitall1778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )


This is where you and your cronies are completely misunderstood like the sheep masses.

You could still buy your game on disc in-store if you didn't have the bandwidth. The updates and check-in is considerably smaller. The check-in is likely in the KB, which your phone can do in seconds. Heck a dial up modem would work too, if you still use one of those.

Believe it or not, there is actually a large group of people still using dial up modems for the internet.

0ut1awed1778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )


Or maybe you're a pc gamer like myself and you can't really do that, nor should be forced to in todays day and age.

Your dial up argument is mute. It doesn't have anything to do with ISPs enforcing conservative bandwidth caps, especially for people paying the premium cost.

gaelic_laoch1778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )


That is why I like everything I need in the box and not off in some cloud somewhere over the rainbow!

nukeitall1778d ago

i'm opposite, not that you don't have a point.

I rather have it in the cloud for when I'm traveling and not having to bring a bunch of discs (my collection gets huge) and I don't want my stupid optical drive to continuously to spin, wear out and make a lot of noise.

The first part on a console to go tends to be the optical drive. Like all consoles previously I expected my consoles to fail, but with the Xbox 360 came with game installs, I haven't had single problem and expect it to last a long @ss time!

gaelic_laoch1778d ago

Well I hope wherever you travel good quality broadband is waiting for you :)

nukeitall1778d ago

me too! :D

But wherever I can hook up my Xbox One or PS4, it will be modern enough to download a few gigs so I can get started playing while the rest downloads in the background.

Or I can just bring the external hard drive with me. Takes less spess than a stack of 5 discs.

torchic1778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )

travelling where? why do you need to take your console with you everywhere? where do you take your console with you? on holiday? on business trips?

I know there are people who take their consoles with them to say, for example, a girlfriend/boyfriend's house when staying there for a while, but what percentage out of all console owners do those people represent? and of that percentage what percentage took all their games with them? what percentage thought it was an absolutely relevant problem, to have to always carry your entire catalogue with you, that needed solving immediately?

Microsoft were solving non existant problems. it definitely was a nice feature to have, but not a feature good enough to try justify losing your ownership rights of any physical disc you bought and definitely not good enough to base the entire console experience around.

I don't get how people still defend the original concept of the Xbox One. it was clearly poorly researched and rushed and thus flawed.

nukeitall1778d ago


"Microsoft were solving non existant problems. it definitely was a nice feature to have, but not a feature good enough to try justify losing your ownership rights of any physical disc you bought and definitely not good enough to base the entire console experience around."

It's not a non-existant problem when I'm sitting here wishing I had Lost Oddessey, because it was on 4 discs and I didn't feel like bringing 50 discs with me.

"Ownership" is pointless if I have no access to said game when I want to. Not that you even owned your game in the first place.

I don't know about you, but I would rather be able to play my games anywhere I can login and I can share my game instantly.

Point being, some prefer the digital age and some prefer the older way with physical discs.

Just don't try to force your way of doing it on mine, when you had a perfectly fine option with the PS4.

You pissed in the pool, but never really were going to use the pool!

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1778d ago
Pandamobile1778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )

Killzone games are usually a bad example of file size. I can't see why they need 50 GB of data for KZ:SF unless it has 90 minutes of 1080p cut scenes like KZ3.

Most games these days still come in around 12-20 GB which isn't that bad. If you've got a decent connection, that's only an hour or so of downloading.

Gran Touring1778d ago

With next-gen comes higher-quality in game assets. Higher texture resolutions for objects, more complex a.i programming, more dynamic environments... I don't know how big SF will be, and maybe that data isn't compressed, but this could just be the start for downloadable games requiring this much space

GarrusVakarian1778d ago

The fact you even had to explain that to him makes me facepalm.

wishingW3L1778d ago (Edited 1778d ago )

in-game stuff doesn't take that much space. Skyrim at extremely high res and frame-rate with mods that let you put higher res textures than what will ever be possible on the PS4 doesn't even come close to 50GB of data. And not to mention that Skyrim has way more NPCs than Killzone SF just because it's an open-world RPG. But then again, complex AI doesn't take much space either. All this stuff is highly dependable on Ram though.

What fills disc space very quickly is high quality audio and pre-rendered stuff like movies. But none of the stuff you mentioned take that much space.

Pandamobile1778d ago

We've had next-gen games for a few years now, and nothing has come close to 50 GB. Crysis 3 and Metro: Last Light are still the best looking games on the market and neither of those crack 16 GB.

Textures, sounds and video files are typically account for the most space in a game. Models and code aren't that big.

KUV19771778d ago

I also think that the number is a mistake. It didn't come from Guerilla but from a SONY rep and he probably was mistakenly thinking of the current BR-Max-Size. I think the majority of games will shift from pre-rendered cutscenes to ingame-real-time cutscenes and will thus not need 50gigs even with higher quality assets. I would be surprised if Killzone will be over 25GB.

nukeitall1778d ago

I do wonder why KZ is using so much space?

Textures don't take that much space and the only explanation are videos, but most games these days are rendered in engine instead of using rendered videos. That is an old thing used back in they day when your conmsole wasn't pwerful enough.

In fact, I find it kind of jarring to go from one quality to another.

Pandamobile1778d ago

Previous Killzone games have used pre-rendered cut scenes, which accounts for the massive file size on the disk.

SlapHappyJesus1778d ago

Very much so.
Here in the states, sub-standard internet in most areas is a way of life.

Stoppokingme1778d ago

50 Gb is three months data usage for me, so yeah I'll take the solid state any day.

Show all comments (34)
The story is too old to be commented.