After the insane pricing saga for Battlefield 3's PlayStation Network version, the download size has been revealed for DICE's shooter, and it's massive
worse that expected
yes 13 gigs a lot lets see with my slow internet connection it takes about 2 hours to download 1 gig, so 13 gig would be 26 hours fail for me retail copy it is
As big as DCU, Infamous 2 and mass effect 2
No big deal, i downloaded the GOW collection which was roughly 19 gigs
yea men my max download speed is 170kb pretty slow aint it
I downloaded GOW Collection (19 GB) on a 250kB line! It took a long, long time, but was ultimately worth it. As long as it's a great game and at a resonable price, it's always worth it. Though BF3 is rather expencive isn't it? So I'd rather get it cheaper at retail.
I'm actually a bit more interested in this game as a PSN Download. 13 GB isn't bad when you consider that ME2 is 24GB on the PSN.
Damn, makes you realise that digi downloads will be more effective when everyone speeds are at least 30-50mb (consistant)
It's fine when they let you preload a Steam game on PC, because you can have it downloaded before release and not have to wait. When you buy a game after launch and can't wait to play it you don't have to get home first or wait for it to arrive by mail before you can play it. So you would be waiting/delaying anyway most of the time even with a physical copy. 6-7mbps worldwide would be enough for digital download to be appropriate for full adoption. Provided ISPs don't impose crazy FUPs and bandwidth caps - which are usually there just to pressure people into paying for better packages which are the same without artificial 'worsening'. The reason speeds get lower at peak times is because of the servers/data houses and NOT because of the houses of other nearby customers (except sometimes in 100mbps fibre zones or when the ISP neglects to update their LLUs in exchanges). The reason a lot of people suffer bad internet is because the laws controlling what ISPs can/can't do are extremely outdated and/or badly drawn up in the first place. Funny thing is, if digital media was always delivered through the net - it would save a LOT of fuel from being burnt to move the physical media and through the whole production process in general. Lol @ governments not properly investing in network infrastructure (and when they do they mess it up anyway) yet pretending to care about global warming and recycling etc. They only take action when there is press involvement making them look bad, even if the action itself is detrimental. A lot of that plastic and paper you recycle is flown over to china - paid for by taxpayers, sold to manufacturers extremely cheaply - at a loss to the government, made into cheap goods and flown back over to be sold back to you; causing extreme pollution and economic damage. All because politicians don't want to look bad. Oh and the spare goes on landfill anyway because they physically have no other way to get rid of it (yes, even after expensive municipal sorting or you effortly sorting it yourself). Though of course some things do recycle well, metals mostly. Even server energy usage is nothing in comparison per customer. Anyway yeah rant... But it is slightly relevant to this article. (it's entirely feasable that the entire first world should have at least 100mbps fibre in this day and age but stupid things prevent it from happening, emerging markets will have full fibre before we do) I like physical copies of games & films, but it would honestly be better if everything could be done digitally. Oh, at the moment - digital downloads are usually capped at the distributors end anyway. Though as servers get more powerful and high-end connections improve that will of course increase. I do sometimes get my full line speed off Steam but it's regularly much slower (I just change my content server to Norway or something :P 1 data house for 5 million Norwegians or 2 for 65 million Brits? wtf valve).
does PSN has a download limit? Because i can't seem to get much higher speed than 1Mb/s and little bit more about 1.3Mb/s.
I go UP TO what it seems to be 3mb/s, and it's pretty fast. Although I notice it to be more than cut in half most of the time.
Whoa, first the price, and now the massive DL size, I know which version to skip buying.
Yeah, I expected it to be about that. Isn't that the full install size for 360/PC? It's good to have options, even if you hate the idea of a digital future you can't complain about having access to it digitally on release day. And if you're willing to pay the extra, good luck to you I suppose.
Xbox 360 install total is 15.5gb http://n4g.com/news/871217/...
Odd, the PC version was 11.2Gb
The Xbox version probably has additional data, such as for encryption (just my guess).
PC does a lot more on-the-fly and load time decompression so that the install files can be smaller. Can't be done on PS3/360 because of the RAM limitations. I doubt encryption on the 360 install would differ from that on the PC or PS3 unless Microsoft had some reason to force it.
Makes no sense for them to charge so much online, you don't even get a case or disc with it and its not like they have to rent a high street store to sell it so you can discount that as an overhead.
The thing is that if they start selling downloadable games for cheaper than their retail counterparts then retail will stop stocking their games. No company wants this to happen.
Then why not sale the digital copy for forty and the retail version for sixty with free dlc so it makes up for the price difference.
False logic, just as an example the online shop for a store like GAME will sell games cheaper online than it does instore. Why? Becuase they have lower overheads so can afford the lower price. the irony of it, they offer a price match service but NOT with their own online store.
Most people also like to have something in hand, something they feel proud to own a piece of. Especially if its an anticipated title hence special/limited editions.
I remember Ross on the blog saying that there are reasons that the digital cost has to be high and that he couldn't talk about them (but a Google search would bring up answers). It wouldn't surprise me if it WAS about physical stores feeling they were being pressured, GAME have had run-ins with Steam in the past.
"retail will stop stocking their games" And.... so the profits can stay with the developer/publisher. If they could, they would all instantly drop high street retailers - but if one publisher does that then their competitors instantly gain an advantage. The only way it would work is if the console forced digital only but high street retailers are a good way of propagating the console platform so that games can be sold for it in the first place. It's an odd situation where everybody loses lol, though it does bring jobs into existance in manufacture and retail (and their supporting industries) which is important.
I wonder what's the point of releasing this on PSN, if Sony wants to be such a d**k about it. Why would anyone buy this, when there are cheaper and more convenient options available?
Sony doesn't control pricing. It's up to the developer. Sony only charges licensing fees.
Probably less to do with Sony and more to do with EA on the pricing. But yah, when there are cheaper options available, not many are gonna get the digital release.
Various people from Sony have already stated on the blog every now and again that the publisher sets the price for games on PSN. Just because Sony own PSN doesn't mean they're the ones setting the prices for games they don't publish.
It's no different than Xbox having direct-download.Just buy which you prefer,solid copy or hard drive,and be done and stop complaining people !
It's confusing as to why sony has put it's price so high.
Its not confusing, its because they can and EA priced it at that. Fifa is like £55 on there so yeah, not totally shocked. IMO This was always going to be the problem with digital distribution.
OMG how many times do people keep saying this, SCE DO NOT set the price of these games!
Buy disc version, saving money and hard drive space, or download digital version, ripping yourself off and clogging up your console? Hmmm, tricky... Sarcasm node deployed.
Sony has nothing to do with pricing, but the hell, thats size is massive..!!
These disc based games on PSN are always at a ridiculous price, I remember Driver: San Francisco was £57.99 and Fifa 12 is £54.99..I wonder whats the reason for these prices? I mean theres no expenses for disc, case etc
I think its just the RRP of the games, is it not? Of course retailers do sell it for less, but I am pretty sure the actual official RRP is around there,jut that retailers would never sell it for that much.
Digital games are at RRP so that they don't undermine brick & mortar retailers so close to release.
Instead of going for the retail disk version, I probably would have bought it off the PSN store if it wasn't so expensive. Having the game running off of the HD would have improved texture streaming as well as faster loading times.
Take a while to download
I would never pay more than £40 for a brand new game which comes in a case, let alone pay £55 for no solid copy and takes forever to download.
Only 13 gigs? Yeah sounds like they maxed out the PS3! And they even filled that 50gig Blu-Ray! /s
Holy shit! That beats Gran Turismo 5!
Same GBs as the PC version. Was expected.
Only way someone can justice this Buy is if they live in Antarctica, otherwise its stupid
that's it?.. i half expected it to be in the 20's.... not bad...plus when you can get a 500 gig hard drive on your ps3...really shouldn't even bat an eye
too bad this is only on EU psn... i wonder if i can buy it on my eu account with a us credit card? EHHH guess i'll go with retail
Well i already have the retail version so this is not relevant to me,plus i have a 500GB hard drive !
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.