Quantcast
When will we see a 1TB game?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - When will we see a 1TB game?

When will we see the first Terabyte game?

10 years in the future. 144 46.91%
 
20 years in the future. 95 30.94%
 
30 years in the future. 18 5.86%
 
40 years in the future. 13 4.23%
 
50 years in the future. 11 3.58%
 
60 years in the future. 1 0.33%
 
70 years in the future. 1 0.33%
 
80 years in the future. 1 0.33%
 
90 years in the future. 3 0.98%
 
More than 100 years in the future. 20 6.51%
 
Total:307

In consoles will take like 10-15 years. We need a petabyte drive to start thinking about 1Tb games.

The culprit will be either a final fantasy or gran turismo.

Dat lightning ass on 8k or tail.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network

Within 10 years, unless we come up with some kind of new magical lossless compression.



It depends on how quickly 4k/8k becomes adopted in the gaming industry.

I expect it to be the standard resolution TV within 10-12 years, so gaming industry will adopt it around 3-5 years after that.



Current Game Machines: 3DS, Wii U, PC.

Currently Playing: X-Com(PC), Smash Bros(WiiU), Banner Saga(PC), Guild Wars 2(PC), Project X Zone(3DS), Luigis Mansion 2(3DS), DayZ(PC)

its a common misconception that 4k/8k=much bigger games. However that's just not the case.

In games, 3 things take up space. Textures, videos and audio. Those are the most space hungry assets of any game. The audio side of this isn't really an issue, you can only have so much audio in a game, so that will never take up more than 3-5Gb (and that's really pushing it). The video part is a major culprit. Even if using videos made from the in game engine and stored as a video file (trick used to allow background level loading) or using full on CG videos, you are basically still storing a video file on there. 1hr worth of full HD video is over 15GB big.

But as game tech and hardware improves, in game IQ is at a level where CG videos aren't necessary anymore. So they won't have to store chunky video files in their games. So that too is not really an issue.

Which brings us to textures. Textures are measured in texels. 500x500kb, 1000x1000kb, 2000x2000kb, 4000x4000kb...etc. The higher the number, the higher the texture resolution used. The higher the texture rez, the more system memory and bandwidth you need to store and move them around respectively.

1080p/4k/8k all have fixed memory allotments. Basically they have absolutely nothing to do with what is actually on the disc. If you take super Mario bros from the 80s, as is, then output it at 4k, it will draw the exact same amount of frame memory (in relation to resolution) that crysis 3 will require. And that draw is all on the system RAM side of things. Not on storage space. Take the textures from that game however, and upscale them to 8000x8000kb texels, and it will cripple a PS4 and will require over 30GB of storage space.

The funny thing is, realistically speaking, games don't even need anything more than a 2kx2k texel rez, anything higher than that is simply overkill. OK, maybe 4kx4k is justifiable, but anything more is just unnecessary and a waste of resources. Reason being that when u get that much higher, it becomes impossible to see the difference in added texture rez.

Hope that clears it up.



Xenoblade Chronicles X with 4K textures.



Around the Network

I highly doubt it will be more than 10 years.



Probably not until the tenth generation. For one there's the lack of a new storage medium, which could serve as a limiting factor (dual-layer Blu-rays hold up to 50GB, while BDXL holds up to 128GB). Of course, it's possible a new commercially available high-capacity storage medium could come about by then. There's already optical discs in development (e.g., HVD) capable of holding over a TB of data.

But the growth of game file sizes over time has been interesting. Some games are just big, while some are artificially big due to lots of FMV/pre-rendered GCI cinematics (this was common on the PS1, and while some modern games do it as well it has become less common, with in-engine cinematics becoming more common). Here's how file sizes have grown over the years:

SMB: 40kB
SMB3: 384kB
Super Metroid: 3MB
Super Mario 64: 8MB
Perfect Dark: 32MB
Tomb Raider: 207MB (PSN file size)
Crash Bandicoot: 460MB (PSN file size)
FFVII: 1.29GB (PSN file size; original may have been over 1.4GB as it took up 3 discs)
Halo CE: 2.35GB (Xbox Marketplace file size) or 3.47GB (NTSC disc file size, original Xbox version)
Kingdom Hearts: 2.83GB
GTA San Andreas: 4.2GB (PSN file size)
Halo 3: 5.7GB (Xbox Marketplace and game install sizes)
FFXIII-2: 14.4GB (PS3) or 7.6GB (360)
Max Payne 3: ~15GB
MGS4: ~30GB
FFXIII: 37.6GB (PS3) or 18.3GB (360)

So, the biggest SNES games were an order of magnitude bigger than the biggest NES games, while the biggest N64 games were another order of magnitude greater than the biggest NES games. The typical single-disc game for the PS1 was several times bigger than the biggest N64 games, but were by definition no greater than 700MB in size, though some of the biggest PS1 games had to be split across two, three, or (rarely) even four discs. The typical PS2 and Xbox game ran between 2 and 4 gigabytes, an order of magnitude larger than most single-disc PS1 games but not considerably larger than the largest PS1 games. Games on the 360 and PS3 had a wide range. Single-disc 360 games were limited by the 8.7GB capacity of a dual-layer DVD, and based on install sizes as well as download sizes the typical major AAA releases ran in the 4-8GB range. Some seventh-gen games ran well over that 8.7GB limit, though, with some tipping the scales at over 30GB. Those that were multiplatform necessitated multiple discs for the 360 version.

For disc-based games, single-disc games grew by two orders of magnitude from the average PS1 game to the average PS4 game. To reach 1TB, they'd have to grow by yet another two orders of magnitude. Given the time it took to go from 500MB to 50GB, it could take a while to pass 1TB. DVDs were still relevant through the seventh generation, but were starting to hit their limits. We're already seeing some PS4 & XBO games hit the 50GB limit for a single dual-layer BD, but better compression could render multiple discs unnecessary for all but the largest games this generation. If BDXL proves to be viable and necessary for gaming purposes, we could see that on next generation consoles. But given the overall growth rate, 1TB games may still be two, maybe even three generations away.



We will not have to wait for a decade, just wait for Johnattan Blow's next game.

I'm pretty sure the guy doesn't know what compression means.



50 years The order size is only 30gb



PS4 - over 100 millions let's say 120m
Xbox One - 70m
Wii U - 25m

Vita - 15m if it will not get Final Fantasy Kingdoms Heart and Monster Hunter 20m otherwise
3DS - 80m

My guess is within 10 years a modded Elder Scrolls VI for example could push resolution and textures insanely high.

On an actual released vanilla game think were 15-20 years off, but hard to say given compression techniques and emerging technologies.

I just think of what impressed me in 1995 in regards to PC specs (I think our hard drive was ~100 megabytes back then on our first home PC). I know the trends have slowed down, but I still think we tend to underestimate large spans of time (20+ years) in regards to modern technology.