Fallout 3 says no to upfront install
- Posted May 29th, 2008 at 13:08 EDT by
- 15 Comments
We know a lot of PS3 owners are slowly starting to get tired of watching their HDD space fill up with game installs and Bethesda knows this as well. In a recent interview with Joystiq, Pete Hines, Bethesda's marketing genius has confirmed that Fallout 3 will not require an upfront install like so many games before it. When questioned specifically about the mandatory install, he had this to say:
"The answer to that is no, there isn't," states Hines concerning Fallout 3 on the PS3. "That doesn't mean we don't use the hard drive, just that it does it in the background as opposed to a large, upfront install."
Hines wouldn't clarify how much space the game would take up behind the scenes as you played but he did say it would be approximately the same amount as Oblivion. Elder Scrolls IV took up about 4-5 GBs worth of space but you always had the option to delete the data after every playthrough and just let it build back up; something other titles aren't really giving you the option to do.
Source
Email
Related Content
Comments
-
FantasyStar
- 8:22am EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 1
Damn right!! I hate Mandatory Installs, it slowly eats away my HDD. I use my PS3 as a media center too, so I need space for my videos. However with games being about 4-5GB per install at around 10-20 min, the inconvenience factor of uninstalling and reinstalling gets old real quick after the first 5 games. I wouldn't have minded if it was only for a few games, but this is getting out of hand.
Follow the example of Naughty Dog, use the PS3's HDD as a "buffer" not a "cache". IF I was Sony, I would enforce a FW that would forcefully put aside X amount of gigs just for that purpose. I'm sure no one would miss 5-10 GB for the sake of almost no Mandatory HDD Installs. Heck Windows Vista does that already with their "System Restore" app and "Previous Version" app (if you own Ultimate) -
mikeghtmare
- 8:24am EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 2
do people really get tired of installs?
I see it as something good; I install when I'm playing the game, uninstall when done, move to the next. If it's going to improve or eliminate loading time I'm all for it; I'll uninstall it eventually anyway. -
Emo-Mercenary
- 8:25am EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 3
Mandatory installs suck, fact. Kinda late, eh? Knew this 2 days ago..
-
mikeghtmare
- 8:31am EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 4
@FantasyStar, I believe a buffer would use more resources during the game so there might be a trade off; I guess it would also depend on the type of game; whether it's linear or free-roam.
-
lurkingshadow89
- 9:35am EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 5
good new so much space on a disc if neccasary put it on two discs.
-
-
playstnlvr
- 12:05pm EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 7
Mandatory installs are generally a negative, but only because they are mandatory. I would generally prefer to have an up-front install so the game came access the data it needs faster so I don't have to stare at "Loading..." screens for too long, or worse, a performance lag while it's trying to retrieve something from the BD. It sounds like there will be no option to install. I think it's silly to brag about that. I may not like being force-fed, but that doesn't mean I'd prefer to be starved instead. If I have space, I'd rather have the install and have a game with shorter load times. It's not like blank hard disk space does cool tricks or anything. I'd also hate to have it mandatory, because if I didn't have space for it, well, that should be pretty self-explanatory. I'll never understand why it's always one way or the opposite with these people. Developers of late are notorious for not giving gamers options.
-
misterzadir
- 12:39pm EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 8
playstnlvr, I think you misread what the dev. is saying. He said there is no UP-FRONT installation... meaning, like oblivion, it will basically install the 4-5gb worth of data as you play... which also gives you the OPTION to delete the data off your hard drive whenever you want and when you boot the game back up, it will reinstall the necessary data. But I do get the points you're making though.
-
-
-
zarajoe
- 5:09pm EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 11
It doesn't bother me if a game needs to be installed or not, I only use the ps3 for games anyway. Still I thought installs were a good thing by reading data off both the HDD and Blu-ray disc, decreased load times and made streaming things like textures more efficient, or am I wrong?
-
-
InfernoReaper
- 10:56pm EDT - May 29th, 2008
- 13
I don't mind installing the game, just the space it takes. We wait long enough for games, what's another 20 minutes? I bought DMC4 Collector's Edition way back in mid-February and the game hasn't even been out of its case yet. I try to finish games before I start another; something I learned after last generation.
-
-
jphuff |
jphuff- 1:09am EDT - May 31st, 2008
- 15
Once the PS3 was announced with an internal HD, no one should have been surprised at the mandatory installs. Afterall, when done right, they should mount up as a significant advantage for the PS3 over the competition. While this game isn't requiring an install, did everyone miss the point that it will STILL take up about the same amount of disk space, only building it up gradually? Sure you have the option to delete it, but then....you do NOW when you're done with the game!
Also, if this disk cache is going to be built up on the HDD...how are they going to handle this game for the 360? Will this result in some differences between the 360 and PS3 versions? Hmmmm.....
This will permanently ban this user and delete all associated comments. This action is irreversible, are you SURE you want to do this?!
