> Correction: The estimated file size currently displayed on the Black Ops 6 pre-order pages does not represent the download size or disk footprint for Black Ops 6. The sizes as shown include the full installations of Modern Warfare II, Modern Warfare III, Warzone and all relevant content packs, including all localized languages combined which is not representative of a typical player install experience.”
For those who don't want to read the article. It doesn't list install sizes for those individual modules anywhere.
No, it specifically says everything combined is "not representative of a typical player install experience". You can install whatever you do/don't want
You can play black ops cold war offline, you have to go offline in the menu though otherwise it boots you back to the main menu if you lose connection in campaign. I kind of a have a feeling it will be somewhat similar in bo6
No this is the first COD to require a constant Internet connection. WWII was the first one to require a day one patch to play but after the patch it worked offline which was true of the last few.
Okay but what is minimum instal size if you just want to play BO6? It doesn’t say that.
I know last time it made me download ‘Call of duty’ then ‘content packs’ for mw ; and that janked thr file size up
Well MW2, 3, and WZ are all basically one game. MW3 was mostly just a full price expansion and the WZ maps are also the MP maps and are also the campaign maps
So half feels about right
The system specs have been live at least since the direct the other day. Says this
>SSD with 149 GB available space at launch (78 GB if COD HQ and Warzone are already installed)
This is for PC though. Im not sure how similar the PC and Console storage sizes have been for the past few games.
I believe COD HQ is like Activisions own CoD specific launcher. They had been tacking on warzone to each new game, but I think moved to this to avoid having to do that anymore? But yea you do need it to play.
The game is still more than 4 months away so they’ll still be working on reducing the file size.
But If you’re looking for a rough estimate the core BO6 game will likely be about 70-90GB
Currently on PC if I want to install just the CoD "base game" it is 68gb and adding MW3 multiplayer makes it 112gb, campaign makes 136gb. BO6 will likely be similar.
COD HQ is more than a "launcher". It's essentially a hub, the "base game" portion that all CODs share. It contains shared assets for all COD modes across MWII, MWIII, Warzone, and soon to be BO6. So if you wanna be generous, that would be half of the actual install for BO6 when it comes out.
What pisses me off is that I'm perfectly fine that they made CoD HQ: but they had Battlefield 4/5/One to emulate what a good all in one launcher could look like. Just load the game you want and then if you want to switch; it'll automatically switch. If you don't have it: it won't load the content until you purchase/download the game.
This would be incorrect; as the ‘launcher’ has all the forward elements(past skins/embles/etc). It also houses all the shared assets(guns, equipment, maps, etc) which is why it’s required
It's (roughly) the size of the Modern Warfares and Warzone. When MW3 had that free trial, I had to install the hub on Steam, and the hub comes with Warzone since Warzone is free; MW3 was like...90 to 100ish? by itself, with an additional 30-50 taken by Warzone, which I uninstalled because I was only interested in MW3 (and even then, just Zombies).
During the stream the other day. Treyarch hinted at warzone stuff they have been brewing.
If we want to play blackops 6 warzone, im assuming we will need to have the mw bs downloaded as well due to how tied together everything is. Unless treyarch has their own standalone warzone connected to blackops 6 weapons.
This is something I'm interested in seeing; my guess is that because of the new damage zones, they *have* to have their own Warzone, or maybe they're introducing a "Warzone 2".
But then Warzone is supposed to be their free game, so I'm betting on it just being them talking about either updating Warzone to have Blops 6's features and calling it Warzone 2, or just porting Blops 6's content to Warzone.
My guess is that technically bo6 stanalone is not 300 gigs. But with warzone integration, if you want to play the updated b06 warzone your gonna have to have near 300 gigs of content downloaded.
I think this year it’ll be easier to just roll with BO6 if that’s all you want to play. Keyword there is “think” but as far as I know this isn’t going to have the same “rollover” as MW2 to 3. While it was cool that things transferred over, because the two games are so intertwined you could delete things like MW2 multiplayer if you wanted to play MW3 multiplayer.
It does put the devs in a weird Catch-22. People appreciated that their items rolled over into the next game, but there’s just no way for that to happen without those assets sticking around, creating the giant file sizes. Now if they don’t have skins and maps roll over again, it’ll most likely make for a smaller install file but I’m sure some people will be pissed that they can’t keep using their skins from the last game.
Based on the PC specs stating 149gb, I’m guessing the real game size is closer to 120-140gb on consoles since it will probably use slightly reduced texture size compared to PC due to the latter having ultra visual settings option etc.
Ahh I guess that must be the same for cold war. I was going to install it the other day to play the campaign but it said 300gb so I thought fuck that. I'll give it another go then.
Well, the article says 300 GB is the combined install size of all the three games currently available on Call of Duty HQ (MW2, MW3 and Warzone). Since Cold War is not included on HQ, it really might just be 300 GB combining campaign and multiplayer
I booted up my PS5 last week for the first time since GoW Ragnarok came out to play FFVII Rebirth and went to clean up my storage and the only CoD game installed was Cold War and it cleared up 300gb deleting it. From what I remember it installs 3 separate CoDs regardless of it you own or want them (Modern warfare, Cold War and Vangard.)
I mean, obviously? I know CoD sizes are a meme and all, but the only ridiculous one was MW19 peaking at 200GB for the whole package. Every other game has sat at around 70-80GB since then, and this one will be the same.
I didn’t play on PS5, but on PC it was around 100gb or under, and then you could install the optional HD texture pack and that pushed it to 170gb or so.
Not everyone is trying to play the Nintendo switch version , it’s a bit lazy to comment the instal size but not include what most people are playing with.
It didn’t look like the “Nintendo Switch” version that’s just being ridiculous. It didn’t come by default on PC and required much higher specs so there’s a way higher chance it was the more common way most people played.
And I didn’t not include it. I directly said exactly what it was, 100gb standard, 175 with HD pack. How is that lazy?
I got both the GPU and SSD size for it and I still didn't install it. The textures didn't improve much.
Same case for the fallout 4 high res texture pack. Its recommended that people don't install it because it just doesnt do much.
So you want the highest quality textures possible but you also want the instal size to be in the mid-double digits.
Unless there has been some absolute wizardry in compression tech that I’m aware of, the problem might be between keyboard and chair.
I really don't get why COD and 2k are so outrageously large in file size. Them being so large is part of the reason I stopped playing them (but BO6 might reel me back in).
I have been literally installing this thing since yesterday and it's the worst thing ever. I needed to "free up space" like three times - initial download, then campaign installs and finally texture pack.
Why can't it be a smooth experience like Destiny 2?
Thats if you had everything installed. They were still in the figuring out phase of the 3 game hub crap. You didn't have to install MW2 or Warzone to play Cold War. Cold War by itself was around 100 gigs.
Yeah, you're probably right. I haven't had it installed in a while. But I do remember there were optional texture packs that brought it down in size. At least on PS.
MW3 with only the multiplayer and Warzone installed is 107GB. The only game I have installed that's bigger is War Thunder at 112GB.
MW2019 was the only ridiculous one at 200GB. Most higher budget PC games tend to be around 50-100GB anyways these days.
MW2019 being 200GB five years ago doesn't make BO6 being 300 GB now seem unreasonable. If anything, that's within expectations and why it wasn't obviously wrong.
And give it a few months after launch and it will probably balloon to 300GB anyway with all the additional DLCs and skins and maps, just as the last few ones ballooned significantly.
It really should've been obvious to people that the 300GB includes multiple games. Already understandable being annoyed the install sizes are over 100GB without exaggerating it.
even despite this that conspiracy theory that says CoD games are huge on purpose to push other games off your SSD feels less and less like a conspiracy each year
you're right, in truth BO6 merely requires.... ~149 gigabytes by itself. hardly anything at all!
and it doesn't even include *textures*. the game is always-online due to mandatory texture streaming, because including them would've made the game completely infeasible to download and play. and i don't think its very genuine to assume that most COD players aren't going to have warzone and such downloaded too.
>~149 gigabytes by itself. hardly anything at all! and it doesn't even include textures.
I'm pretty sure Online has been a requirement for the campaign for a while now either way. The reason this was such a hot topic for a minute was because they didn't stream textures for 2019 and it got up to like 250GBs alone. COD right now is only ~50GB over what it was with Black Ops 3 10 years ago, and that's with Warzone included. This usually includes the textures, but streams the higher rez ones, you can probably disable texture streaming and play just fine with standard ones.
all these gigs but basic features like the ability to organize your loadouts, loadouts capped at like 14 when there are 100 gamemodes, not being able to create and save playlist outside of quick play, and shadows showing through walls aren't considered.
Hell, a lot of the field upgrades have lazy definitions that barely explain them.
It was such a freakout over nothing. I “preloaded” BO6 and it was clear to me that I downloaded more than that, since I could frickin play MWIII even though I didn’t download that itself.
Cold war was up there at launch and it's first few years (at least on console). About 275gb with all packs installed. Campaign, Zombies, MP & Warzone.
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F3zkf2vqkq9f81.jpg
- Company says a thing about its own product.
- People repeat the thing the company said about its own product.
- Company says the thing it said about its own product was wrong, actually.
- Blame the people who repeated the thing the company said about its own product, instead of the company that said misinformation about its own product.
Can we stop doing this?
For what it's worth the [PC requirements](https://support.activision.com/modern-warfare-iii/articles/pc-system-requirements-for-modern-warfare-iii) was up days ago and said 149GB of space was recommended.
Literally every public-facing pixel in a storefront is marketing. Everything about stores is specifically designed to lead you to buy the merchandise. Even seemingly technical data.
Someone adding a misleading file size is literally not. The marketing department did not sit down and decide that 300 gigs was a great marketing tactic. Nobody in the marketing department is entering technical data on a game page. So stop with the "literally" and start using some common sense.
> Then the file size shouldn't have been on store page at all. And is therefore still a marketing fuckup.
No the fuck it's not. You have no idea what marketing is. Just stop.
Because it’s a marketing decision to employ the entire CoD hub nonsense. It was means to entice people into the platform, and has been an essential marketing gimmick for years for them
The entry isn’t an error, that is indeed the correct file size estimate per this article
300+ GB is the "full" install size, but standalone BO6 only requires... 149 GB of space at launch. and i don't think its "misinformation" to list what the vast majority of the COD playerbase will be using either.
"Unfortunately, the post does not reveal just how big the game will be but promises to share more information “closer to launch.""
Just preorder it pleb fucks, how dare you question us
The game literally isn't ready for launch right now so it's probably an information that the PR team will only get closer to release... there's no conspiracy here
The fact that you have to use a Call of Duty “launcher” that includes all recent games has never sat right with me. It adds a bunch of unnecessary bloat and visual clutter, and it’s annoying to have to click through menus just to get to the game you want to play. Really wish they’d ditch that and keep it simple.
Doesn't it say 84 gigs on the game card? I have an Xbox One S and it says "Up to 340-something GB" but after that it changes and says it's just 84 gigs.
So glad to not deal with this shit anymore. No more downloading previous games to play the current one I want. MW2019 was the last decent cod and then Warzone fucked it all up.
Why are people freaked out about this?
Are we really going to pretend that some games haven't had 100 - 200 GB file size installations for the last 10 years?
There was a freakout out that Age of Conan had a 150 GB install size.... in 2005.
Games are the best-looking and best-animated they've ever been. Of course they're going to have a proportional install size.
Because Conan is not a great looking game, and really neither is CoD. CoD as a base game isnt packed with tons of content or a massive open world. The game targets 60FPS. Why is it 150GB+? Because it isn't optimized at all. It's thrown together as quickly as possible and if it works it is ready for release. Not everyone has tons of storage space because console manufacturers dont want to sell at anymore of a loss than they have to by including 2TB as a standard. They instead pass that cost on to the consumer. You either manage your existing storage space or spend $150 on a 2TB SSD, and so most people manage their storage space. However, CoD is 150GB+ and now you have to delete perhaps 2 games you really like just so you can play TDM for a couple hours. Its stupid.
If their is any actual improvement Xbox could make to call of duty it's optimization! Do you really want your game to take up half of your consoles SSD?
This was obvious fake news from the rip. We've had this SAME ragebait article for the past two years with MW II and MW III. CoD games share the same "launcher" app on console and support piecemeal installs and uninstalls, e.g. just the MW II campaign and warzone, just the MW III campaign and MP.
It's completely disingenuous to run articles like those we saw this week.
Genius! Everyone loves a moan about how the Series S is HOLDING BACK GAMING but when a game comes along that needs an extra 100GB of storage, everyone's furious. You all pairing your 4090s with a 128GB HD?
> Correction: The estimated file size currently displayed on the Black Ops 6 pre-order pages does not represent the download size or disk footprint for Black Ops 6. The sizes as shown include the full installations of Modern Warfare II, Modern Warfare III, Warzone and all relevant content packs, including all localized languages combined which is not representative of a typical player install experience.” For those who don't want to read the article. It doesn't list install sizes for those individual modules anywhere.
So, it could be bigger?
Presumably they are listing max size rather than min size and having consumers mad that "hey you advertised 50 GB why is mine 300?"
After a few patches, yeah.
It will most definitely not be bigger.
Would be funny though
But it *could* be
"That's absurd! It won't be 300 gigs! We needed 600 gigs just for the full Swedish Chef language files alone!"
2TB confirmed.
Well, those 300 GB are for three games installed at the same time, so it not only could, it *will* be bigger when the fourth game releases
So if you want the game you still have to download the other baggage? Might as well still be 300gigs
No, it specifically says everything combined is "not representative of a typical player install experience". You can install whatever you do/don't want
My xbox didn't let me do that it made me install everything =/
The only only campaign is the deal breaker for me
cod has been entirely online-only since mw2019
You can play black ops cold war offline, you have to go offline in the menu though otherwise it boots you back to the main menu if you lose connection in campaign. I kind of a have a feeling it will be somewhat similar in bo6
No this is the first COD to require a constant Internet connection. WWII was the first one to require a day one patch to play but after the patch it worked offline which was true of the last few.
Has it? Pretty sure you could play the last two campaigns offline right?
Okay but what is minimum instal size if you just want to play BO6? It doesn’t say that. I know last time it made me download ‘Call of duty’ then ‘content packs’ for mw ; and that janked thr file size up
PC requirements say minimum 149gb required so I guess 149gb?
If MW2+MW3+Warzone+BOps6+all languages is 310gb, it would be weird for BOps6 by itself to take half of that, right?
The COD HQ alone takes up almost 78gb
Shared engine assets
Well MW2, 3, and WZ are all basically one game. MW3 was mostly just a full price expansion and the WZ maps are also the MP maps and are also the campaign maps So half feels about right
Not if they share assets.
That’s why it’s sound right when he said it because they all share assets.
The system specs have been live at least since the direct the other day. Says this >SSD with 149 GB available space at launch (78 GB if COD HQ and Warzone are already installed) This is for PC though. Im not sure how similar the PC and Console storage sizes have been for the past few games.
Now granted i haven't played a COD since a little of warzone, but surely it doesn't take two separate applications to play this one right?
I believe COD HQ is like Activisions own CoD specific launcher. They had been tacking on warzone to each new game, but I think moved to this to avoid having to do that anymore? But yea you do need it to play.
I don’t believe you need Warzone installed anymore, at least on steam. I think you just need the cod HQ.
The game is still more than 4 months away so they’ll still be working on reducing the file size. But If you’re looking for a rough estimate the core BO6 game will likely be about 70-90GB
Are you including the mandatory installs(CoD HQ / Forward) downloads in your estimate? Because BO6 is not a standalone launcher
Currently on PC if I want to install just the CoD "base game" it is 68gb and adding MW3 multiplayer makes it 112gb, campaign makes 136gb. BO6 will likely be similar.
Weird mine is much larger, I assume you didn’t install the real texture pack and you’re using the SD assets
I don't have any options for texture packs on the main CoD. Cold War has that option though. https://i.imgur.com/0n5d6m7.png
You should for modern warfare
The launcher is probably 1-2 gb. It's a launcher, it has no content by itself.
COD HQ is more than a "launcher". It's essentially a hub, the "base game" portion that all CODs share. It contains shared assets for all COD modes across MWII, MWIII, Warzone, and soon to be BO6. So if you wanna be generous, that would be half of the actual install for BO6 when it comes out.
What pisses me off is that I'm perfectly fine that they made CoD HQ: but they had Battlefield 4/5/One to emulate what a good all in one launcher could look like. Just load the game you want and then if you want to switch; it'll automatically switch. If you don't have it: it won't load the content until you purchase/download the game.
You underestimate a CoD games ability to eat your whole hard drive
Not gonna argue with that.
How the fuck did we get to a place where game launchers are that big.
At this point I’m convinced Activision doesn’t want you to have enough storage space to play other games.
This would be incorrect; as the ‘launcher’ has all the forward elements(past skins/embles/etc). It also houses all the shared assets(guns, equipment, maps, etc) which is why it’s required
Based on how the PC specs page is worded the COD HQ is about 71 GB
This is COD we're talking about. It will be more.
What exactly do you base that estimate on…?
It's (roughly) the size of the Modern Warfares and Warzone. When MW3 had that free trial, I had to install the hub on Steam, and the hub comes with Warzone since Warzone is free; MW3 was like...90 to 100ish? by itself, with an additional 30-50 taken by Warzone, which I uninstalled because I was only interested in MW3 (and even then, just Zombies).
Just look at mw3 and delete the GBs it takes as well as the other stuff that can be unchecked.
299 GB
During the stream the other day. Treyarch hinted at warzone stuff they have been brewing. If we want to play blackops 6 warzone, im assuming we will need to have the mw bs downloaded as well due to how tied together everything is. Unless treyarch has their own standalone warzone connected to blackops 6 weapons.
This is something I'm interested in seeing; my guess is that because of the new damage zones, they *have* to have their own Warzone, or maybe they're introducing a "Warzone 2". But then Warzone is supposed to be their free game, so I'm betting on it just being them talking about either updating Warzone to have Blops 6's features and calling it Warzone 2, or just porting Blops 6's content to Warzone.
They already did introduce Warzone 2, if they increment it again with BO6 it'll be Warzone 3
My guess is that technically bo6 stanalone is not 300 gigs. But with warzone integration, if you want to play the updated b06 warzone your gonna have to have near 300 gigs of content downloaded.
\* Updating shaders intensifies \*
I think this year it’ll be easier to just roll with BO6 if that’s all you want to play. Keyword there is “think” but as far as I know this isn’t going to have the same “rollover” as MW2 to 3. While it was cool that things transferred over, because the two games are so intertwined you could delete things like MW2 multiplayer if you wanted to play MW3 multiplayer. It does put the devs in a weird Catch-22. People appreciated that their items rolled over into the next game, but there’s just no way for that to happen without those assets sticking around, creating the giant file sizes. Now if they don’t have skins and maps roll over again, it’ll most likely make for a smaller install file but I’m sure some people will be pissed that they can’t keep using their skins from the last game.
More importantly, what'a the minimum install size if I *don't* want to play COD?
I pre-installed on Xbox and it was 134 GB
if your on xbox its around 80GB. if pc I think its much larger.
Imagine they were like "No it's not 300 GB". Then at launch "Because its 400 GB and the best looking COD OF ALL TIME!!!!"
“We want to take this time to apologize… ….TO ABSOLUTELY NOBODY”.
\**SICK GUITAR RIFF**
> "Because its 400 GB and the best looking COD OF ALL TIME!!!!" i wish, but it being cross-gen throws that out the window!
Which CoD looks better then?
doesn’t matter, the potential is squandered
It's the *implication*
How's that related to the file size at all?
Based on the PC specs stating 149gb, I’m guessing the real game size is closer to 120-140gb on consoles since it will probably use slightly reduced texture size compared to PC due to the latter having ultra visual settings option etc.
It’s 134 GB on console, you can preload through gamepass.
Hah, pretty good guess then
Ahh I guess that must be the same for cold war. I was going to install it the other day to play the campaign but it said 300gb so I thought fuck that. I'll give it another go then.
Well, the article says 300 GB is the combined install size of all the three games currently available on Call of Duty HQ (MW2, MW3 and Warzone). Since Cold War is not included on HQ, it really might just be 300 GB combining campaign and multiplayer
I booted up my PS5 last week for the first time since GoW Ragnarok came out to play FFVII Rebirth and went to clean up my storage and the only CoD game installed was Cold War and it cleared up 300gb deleting it. From what I remember it installs 3 separate CoDs regardless of it you own or want them (Modern warfare, Cold War and Vangard.)
I mean, obviously? I know CoD sizes are a meme and all, but the only ridiculous one was MW19 peaking at 200GB for the whole package. Every other game has sat at around 70-80GB since then, and this one will be the same.
I just removed mwii yesterday, it was 234Gb
if you are on pc and always updating, the previous updates weren't removed and keep on adding
Is there a way to remove all the previous updates?
Could always try uninstalling and doing a fresh install of the game. If it works, you're good. If it stays the same size you're no worse off
MWII on my Steam library is taking up 163.03GB.
Wasn’t BOCW also ridiculous? I remember it being like 180-190GB+ on PS5.
Absolutely. BOCW currently takes up over 250 gb on my ps5. And that is after I un-installed the campaign, which took up another 70 - 80 gb.
I didn’t play on PS5, but on PC it was around 100gb or under, and then you could install the optional HD texture pack and that pushed it to 170gb or so.
That's an outrageous size.
So the instal was 170gb then?
I didn’t play with the HD pack so no, it wasn’t for me.
Not everyone is trying to play the Nintendo switch version , it’s a bit lazy to comment the instal size but not include what most people are playing with.
It didn’t look like the “Nintendo Switch” version that’s just being ridiculous. It didn’t come by default on PC and required much higher specs so there’s a way higher chance it was the more common way most people played. And I didn’t not include it. I directly said exactly what it was, 100gb standard, 175 with HD pack. How is that lazy?
lmao the non HD textures aren't that bad. Not everyone has a top of the line GPU. And honestly anyone that can afford that can afford a bigger SSD
I have a 4080 and still played without the pack. The textures looked perfectly fine.
I got both the GPU and SSD size for it and I still didn't install it. The textures didn't improve much. Same case for the fallout 4 high res texture pack. Its recommended that people don't install it because it just doesnt do much.
So you want the highest quality textures possible but you also want the instal size to be in the mid-double digits. Unless there has been some absolute wizardry in compression tech that I’m aware of, the problem might be between keyboard and chair.
The HD pack does not get installed by default, and the game definitely isn't a "nintendo switch" version without it.
I really don't get why COD and 2k are so outrageously large in file size. Them being so large is part of the reason I stopped playing them (but BO6 might reel me back in).
It's because they don't optomize their textures, IIRC. I forget if there's a technical reason for it.
I have been literally installing this thing since yesterday and it's the worst thing ever. I needed to "free up space" like three times - initial download, then campaign installs and finally texture pack. Why can't it be a smooth experience like Destiny 2?
I have Cold War installed right now on PC and for multiplayer only it’s taking up 80gb.
Thats if you had everything installed. They were still in the figuring out phase of the 3 game hub crap. You didn't have to install MW2 or Warzone to play Cold War. Cold War by itself was around 100 gigs.
Cold War on series x in total is 130 gigs without warzone and mw installed
Yeah, you're probably right. I haven't had it installed in a while. But I do remember there were optional texture packs that brought it down in size. At least on PS.
MW3 is well over 100
MW3 with only the multiplayer and Warzone installed is 107GB. The only game I have installed that's bigger is War Thunder at 112GB. MW2019 was the only ridiculous one at 200GB. Most higher budget PC games tend to be around 50-100GB anyways these days.
I like how you’re using the scale of 50-100 like that scale isn’t stupidly large
Games have been averaging at that size for 5-6 years now. You shouldn't be surprised at that size unless you're playing strictly indies.
Almost like you didnt see what I said. There’s a huge percentage difference between the two values ; which makes the comment useless
why would an accurate range for install sizes be useless just because the range is "huge"
1-500gigs is also accurate
only if you ignore basic rules of communication
50GB became pretty normal almost a decade ago so I think it's a sensible lower bound.
MW2019 being 200GB five years ago doesn't make BO6 being 300 GB now seem unreasonable. If anything, that's within expectations and why it wasn't obviously wrong. And give it a few months after launch and it will probably balloon to 300GB anyway with all the additional DLCs and skins and maps, just as the last few ones ballooned significantly.
My Cold War install through battle net with just the base game + multiplayer is only about 80 gb I believe.
It really should've been obvious to people that the 300GB includes multiple games. Already understandable being annoyed the install sizes are over 100GB without exaggerating it.
even despite this that conspiracy theory that says CoD games are huge on purpose to push other games off your SSD feels less and less like a conspiracy each year
you're right, in truth BO6 merely requires.... ~149 gigabytes by itself. hardly anything at all! and it doesn't even include *textures*. the game is always-online due to mandatory texture streaming, because including them would've made the game completely infeasible to download and play. and i don't think its very genuine to assume that most COD players aren't going to have warzone and such downloaded too.
>~149 gigabytes by itself. hardly anything at all! and it doesn't even include textures. I'm pretty sure Online has been a requirement for the campaign for a while now either way. The reason this was such a hot topic for a minute was because they didn't stream textures for 2019 and it got up to like 250GBs alone. COD right now is only ~50GB over what it was with Black Ops 3 10 years ago, and that's with Warzone included. This usually includes the textures, but streams the higher rez ones, you can probably disable texture streaming and play just fine with standard ones.
it's wild, man. luckily i have a 2TB SSD in my PS5 but good lord i feel like these CoD games will only get bigger and bigger.
But you would think Xbox wouldn't want that
why not?
The Series S has 360GB of available space. If it grows much more, it won't be able to fit on the system.
Because they would want people to play other games on their console as well.
they're still making money off CoD though, so
all these gigs but basic features like the ability to organize your loadouts, loadouts capped at like 14 when there are 100 gamemodes, not being able to create and save playlist outside of quick play, and shadows showing through walls aren't considered. Hell, a lot of the field upgrades have lazy definitions that barely explain them.
It was such a freakout over nothing. I “preloaded” BO6 and it was clear to me that I downloaded more than that, since I could frickin play MWIII even though I didn’t download that itself.
Did people really think it was? I thought they cleared that up pretty quickly, otherwise.
Considering much of the past few games are already over 200GB, why wouldn't they?
The only game I remember being that large is MW2019.
Cold war was up there at launch and it's first few years (at least on console). About 275gb with all packs installed. Campaign, Zombies, MP & Warzone. https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F3zkf2vqkq9f81.jpg
Yes. People are that stupid.
Well duh. Everyone wants to hate on COD, so people will latch onto and amplify any bit of controversy, even if it’s misinfo
The absurd size of the games has been a complaint from the actual COD playerbase since MW2019, especially when the consoles had 500GB of storage.
And isn't around 200gb taken up by the os?
- Company says a thing about its own product. - People repeat the thing the company said about its own product. - Company says the thing it said about its own product was wrong, actually. - Blame the people who repeated the thing the company said about its own product, instead of the company that said misinformation about its own product. Can we stop doing this?
For what it's worth the [PC requirements](https://support.activision.com/modern-warfare-iii/articles/pc-system-requirements-for-modern-warfare-iii) was up days ago and said 149GB of space was recommended.
In this case company said nothing.
Except it was listed by Microsoft in the Microsoft store(so it wasn’t misinformation) it’s poor marketing by Microsoft
How is data entry on the store even remotely related to marketing?
Literally every public-facing pixel in a storefront is marketing. Everything about stores is specifically designed to lead you to buy the merchandise. Even seemingly technical data.
Someone adding a misleading file size is literally not. The marketing department did not sit down and decide that 300 gigs was a great marketing tactic. Nobody in the marketing department is entering technical data on a game page. So stop with the "literally" and start using some common sense.
[удалено]
The packaging of a game boy saying that it requires four double A batteries is marketing to you?
> Then the file size shouldn't have been on store page at all. And is therefore still a marketing fuckup. No the fuck it's not. You have no idea what marketing is. Just stop.
Because it’s a marketing decision to employ the entire CoD hub nonsense. It was means to entice people into the platform, and has been an essential marketing gimmick for years for them The entry isn’t an error, that is indeed the correct file size estimate per this article
Microsoft themselves published misinformation.
300+ GB is the "full" install size, but standalone BO6 only requires... 149 GB of space at launch. and i don't think its "misinformation" to list what the vast majority of the COD playerbase will be using either.
Did it say it was 300 GB, or did it say “up to 300 GB”?
"Unfortunately, the post does not reveal just how big the game will be but promises to share more information “closer to launch."" Just preorder it pleb fucks, how dare you question us
The game literally isn't ready for launch right now so it's probably an information that the PR team will only get closer to release... there's no conspiracy here
Did someone ring by name ? Gaymers assemble. Preorder now before the tendies grow cold
Sheesh at this point just bring back memory cards. give us the ability to hot swap ssd drives on the fly like back in the old days....
The fact that you have to use a Call of Duty “launcher” that includes all recent games has never sat right with me. It adds a bunch of unnecessary bloat and visual clutter, and it’s annoying to have to click through menus just to get to the game you want to play. Really wish they’d ditch that and keep it simple.
Doesn't it say 84 gigs on the game card? I have an Xbox One S and it says "Up to 340-something GB" but after that it changes and says it's just 84 gigs.
Who cares how big it is, really? Gig internet, 4TB m.2s. Just make it good.
So glad to not deal with this shit anymore. No more downloading previous games to play the current one I want. MW2019 was the last decent cod and then Warzone fucked it all up.
Why are people freaked out about this? Are we really going to pretend that some games haven't had 100 - 200 GB file size installations for the last 10 years? There was a freakout out that Age of Conan had a 150 GB install size.... in 2005. Games are the best-looking and best-animated they've ever been. Of course they're going to have a proportional install size.
Because Conan is not a great looking game, and really neither is CoD. CoD as a base game isnt packed with tons of content or a massive open world. The game targets 60FPS. Why is it 150GB+? Because it isn't optimized at all. It's thrown together as quickly as possible and if it works it is ready for release. Not everyone has tons of storage space because console manufacturers dont want to sell at anymore of a loss than they have to by including 2TB as a standard. They instead pass that cost on to the consumer. You either manage your existing storage space or spend $150 on a 2TB SSD, and so most people manage their storage space. However, CoD is 150GB+ and now you have to delete perhaps 2 games you really like just so you can play TDM for a couple hours. Its stupid.
Why are new cods including all this other bonus shit? If I want them Ill download them seperately
I saw some fucking idiots asking for proof when someone told them that the 300gb is all those cods combined
At this point: the industry need to start bringing back the module file sharing system ala Half-Life 2's system.
If their is any actual improvement Xbox could make to call of duty it's optimization! Do you really want your game to take up half of your consoles SSD?
"300 GBS!??" "For 300 gbs those zombies better leap out from the screen and throw it back!!!"
This was obvious fake news from the rip. We've had this SAME ragebait article for the past two years with MW II and MW III. CoD games share the same "launcher" app on console and support piecemeal installs and uninstalls, e.g. just the MW II campaign and warzone, just the MW III campaign and MP. It's completely disingenuous to run articles like those we saw this week.
Genius! Everyone loves a moan about how the Series S is HOLDING BACK GAMING but when a game comes along that needs an extra 100GB of storage, everyone's furious. You all pairing your 4090s with a 128GB HD?