• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    91 year ago

    TLDR:

    This is due to the increased amount of content available day one, including open world Zombies, support for item carry forward from Modern Warfare 2, as well as map files for current Call of Duty: Warzone. (Note: as part of our ongoing optimization efforts, your final installation size will be actually smaller than the combined previous Call of Duty experiences).”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      I would understand a 100 or so GB but 230 for something like Mw3 sounds a bit bloated.
      Even GTA 5 is smaller and has probably more nooks and crannies than the first map of Mw3.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Game size are not determine by the size of the map most of the time but the amount of assets you kept inside the shipping build. Usually the size of the files ranked are textures, audios(especially if you support multiple language), cinematic (pre-rendered), animation.

        edit: MooseBoys reminds me how much cosmetics we have now in our games.

        edit2: If game engine allows artist to paint over game world and save painted virtual textures tiles for location decoration purpose, texture will scale with game map size, see my response below using BG3 as example.

        • @MooseBoys
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Textures have been the biggest size contributor by far for a while.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Will be interesting what GTA6 will bring to the table. The visual fidelity will probably surpass and be as big as RDR2.
          If GTA6 doesnt surpass MW3 I feel like it has no place to be bigger. Even if MW3 supports multi-dub, cinematics, etc.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Actually, my statement might be a bit wrong regarding map size once I think more carefully. Modern trend that allows artist to directly paint on game world could create really heavy virtual texture assets that scale with size of the world. Games that approach “unique” look or feeling per area without making you feel they reuse or have tileable textures all over the place tends to use this as you can just stream in textures that mask over tileable and make it looks really decorated for that area. They basically trade file size with artist freedom.

            One example is BG3, where the VirtualTextures_*.pak have 18 files, 72GB. While normal asset textures has only 4 pak files and aobut 13GB.