Tomb Raider takes more space than FEAR!

S

Saeid

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Messages
435
Here's something i noticed...

Tomb Raider: Legend takes 7GB after installation.... THATS ALOT... i mean FEAR takes up almost 5GB... Doom 3, Prince of Persia TTT all take up around 1.5GB...

Now Tomb Raider has ok graphics... its not top notch, and the game is pretty short... so why the hell does it take SO much space.... more space than FEAR?!?!?!
 
I've noticed this phenomenon, too...
Devs seem to abuse the assumed fact that we have infinite disk space. We need to shove them back to the days of 10gig HD's and force optimization down their throats.

Having about 680gb of disks on my computer, I can't say I mind... but people are honestly getting greedy. It takes hours to install these games; I don't concur.
 
The 'Next Generation Content' option means a completely different set of textures, it seems... That would do it.
 
Netrat33 said:
Pre-rendered cut scenes?
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking. I'd imagine a lot of Legend will be cut scenes with boobs floppin' and nipples pokin'. That's why people still buy the series, right?
 
jubei said:
That's what I was thinking. I'd imagine a lot of Legend will be cut scenes with boobs floppin' and nipples pokin'. That's why people still buy the series, right?
Click to expand...


Nipples?!Boob?! What's this game called again? :p
 
jubei said:
That's what I was thinking. I'd imagine a lot of Legend will be cut scenes with boobs floppin' and nipples pokin'. That's why people still buy the series, right?
Click to expand...
Only reason I bought it.

xD
 
Game looks really good, so I'm guessing Textures probably take up most of the space since it has to hold the regular and next gen versions. None of the Cut scenes are prerendered, so thats not it. They have all the files in archives instead of folders, so its hard to tell how muc space each thing takes up. With Fear half the game took place in random offices and warehouses, so they didnt really need that many textures.
 
HL2 and FEAR.... both look much better.... and they take much less space....

I think your right.... when it comes to PC games... the developers dont want to waste their time to optimize the games.... and dont forget how we get the crappy ports! :mad:
 
everyone must be brainwashed or something. TRL looks like utter crap! The worst is the LC charachter model, looks like a DX8 level model to me. Some of the outdoor scenes are nice but overall it looks like something that should have been out 2 years ago. The engine just sucks , thats why people with 2.6+ opys and x1900 are complaining.
 
i agree, hl2 looks much more sweet. doesnt hurt me enjoying the game. Would be nice if my x1900 could perform well. was getting low teens with next gen on and high 80s with it off :S.

it loads fast for me so thats a good thing.
 
yeah I too don't get why Tomb Raider is so freakin huge. Plus, it suffers from the now-typical case of "this game was really made for a console so you're gonna have a completely unintuitive UI that would only make sense with a controller" effect. Oblivion has it, the new tomb raider has it, the need for speed games have it, on and on.
 
So...fear uses the same textures/models....over and over...

ie....

load officedoor.mat
load officedoor.mat
load officefloor.mat
load officewindow.mat
load officewall.mat
load officechair.mat
load officetable.mat

get the point everythings in an office-type environment. lol good game though
 
LawGiver said:
everyone must be brainwashed or something. TRL looks like utter crap! The worst is the LC charachter model, looks like a DX8 level model to me. Some of the outdoor scenes are nice but overall it looks like something that should have been out 2 years ago. The engine just sucks , thats why people with 2.6+ opys and x1900 are complaining.
Click to expand...



You are a very perceptive man.Too bad more PC gamers aren't like you. I think it's the reason why we get stuck with all these lousy console ports.
 
To say that Legend looks like crap is complete BS. Look at the Africa level with the waterfall (and next gen enabled of course). So much foliage and detail right from the beginning. And one of the only games to use depth of field!

At times the Lara model can look plasticy and barbie dollish, but in the right light her skin looks friggin real.
 
i guess people will complain about anything these days, this does nothing except make installing it a little bit longer which really wasn't that long anyways

also just because its a huge install doesn't mean its going to take for ever to install. WoW for example is the longest installing game in history, both quake4 and FEAR are bigger installs and take about half the time to get on my computer
 
jaguax said:
To say that Legend looks like crap is complete BS. Look at the Africa level with the waterfall (and next gen enabled of course). So much foliage and detail right from the beginning. And one of the only games to use depth of field!

At times the Lara model can look plasticy and barbie dollish, but in the right light her skin looks friggin real.
Click to expand...

yeah I agree...overall I think the lara model is kinda sub-par, but the environments are very pretty. Its not the most beautiful game ever but it does look very nice...and the additions such as depth of field are very nice and very convincing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top