Ghost of Tsushima: Director's Cut Gets Official PC System Requirements

[cvaldes]

And wear out the ssd. Whoa whoa there lol


Just pointing out how big games have gotten. I think Borderlands goty was about 10GB ish?

We know.

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare requires 55GB of disk space. That game launched in 2014. Later CoD games require even more. It's not like stupidly large downloads are a new thing. And if you play any of the live service games (Apex, Overwatch, Valorant, Fortnite, whatever) you're already used to 30GB updates when a new season starts.

MS Flight Simulator 2020 requires 150GB. And Microsoft (and their dev partner) is working on a 2024 release. I'll bet a buffalo nickel that it will take more disk space.

Some games take a lot of space, some games don't. You are free to play games based on how much disk space they take up and nurse your poor delicate SSD from actual usage. When the first game came out on a 2-CD set, I'm sure there were howls of indignation. Same when games moved from floppy disks to those 7 cm mini data CDs.

If you really don't like these huge downloads, just stick with Nintendo Switch and buy physical cartridges. Then you'll only need to suffer the occasional device update and game patch.

Most SSD wear actually comes from writing not reading. Once you've written a game to disk, there's very little further wear just playing it. And if you're going to freak out about SSD wear in general, maybe just stick to HDDs? Just leave your SSDs in their original blister packs and admire them from a distance late at night under very low lighting.

And enjoy bitching and moaning!

 

[mechtech]

We know.

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare requires 55GB of disk space. That game launched in 2014. Later CoD games require even more. It's not like stupidly large downloads are a new thing. And if you play any of the live service games (Apex, Overwatch, Valorant, Fortnite, whatever) you're already used to 30GB updates when a new season starts.

MS Flight Simulator 2020 requires 150GB. And Microsoft (and their dev partner) is working on a 2024 release. I'll bet a buffalo nickel that it will take more disk space.

Some games take a lot of space, some games don't. You are free to play games based on how much disk space they take up and nurse your poor delicate SSD from actual usage. When the first game came out on a 2-CD set, I'm sure there were howls of indignation. Same when games moved from floppy disks to those 7 cm mini data CDs.

If you really don't like these huge downloads, just stick with Nintendo Switch and buy physical cartridges. Then you'll only need to suffer the occasional device update and game patch.

Most SSD wear actually comes from writing not reading. Once you've written a game to disk, there's very little further wear just playing it. And if you're going to freak out about SSD wear in general, maybe just stick to HDDs?

And enjoy bitching and moaning!

I was being sarcastic. Doesn’t matter to me if each game was 1TB. Lots of SSDs on the store shelves . The bit I was being sarcastic about is that the dev says SSD when a hdd would work.

 

[cvaldes]

And why would you think an HDD would be a good storage medium for this game during gameplay? This is a PS5 game which does not have HDDs. The size itself would seem to imply a fair amount of I/O necessary for a satisfactory experience.

I'm sure some people will install and play this game on an HDD; some may grumble about performance.

Anyhow, Internet users are supposed to throw in a smiley or some other indication like /s when they're being sarcastic because not everyone online speaks your language natively or gets sarcasm. Maybe you were too busy complaining about some other game's size when that memo was circulated.

Have a nice day!



P.S., I hope this dev focuses reducing bugs rather than disk space requirements. They can work on that later.

 

[Mazer]

At what resolution? and High as High settings or High as Max settings?
Imo if you own Horizon Forbidden West the performance in Ghost of Tsushima should be around the same (or a tad better).

1080p. I can try it on 1440p probably need to use DLSS or FSR to have over 60fps though like I do in HFW.

 

[jigar2speed]

I swear these developers are getting lazy, i hope AI coding becomes reality so that we can have optimized games.

 

[Vayra86]

And wear out the ssd. Whoa whoa there lol


Just pointing out how big games have gotten. I think Borderlands goty was about 10GB ish?

You manage to wear one out yet? I'm still looking at a Samsung 830 here. Hasn't budged. Good drive health. 2024.

 

[mechtech]

You manage to wear one out yet? I'm still looking at a Samsung 830 here. Hasn't budged. Good drive health. 2024.

Haven’t gave it an honest go. Should last a long long time. If you had a small qlc ssd and were constantly uninstalling and installing new games constantly I could see hitting the TBW mark before the warranty in yrs mark. But even then drive should still be fine.

 

[Vayra86]

Haven’t gave it an honest go. Should last a long long time. If you had a small qlc ssd and were constantly uninstalling and installing new games constantly I could see hitting the TBW mark before the warranty in yrs mark. But even then drive should still be fine.

Agreed... thats why QLC should be dirt cheap or avoided imho. But Im genuinely surprised by SSD endurance. Even the budget BX100 is still going strong.

 

[mechtech]

Agreed... thats why QLC should be dirt cheap or avoided imho. But Im genuinely surprised by SSD endurance. Even the budget BX100 is still going strong.

Tech report did this testing a long, long time ago, was probably all MLC and way larger nm node size. It would be interesting if @W1zzard would run a test/review like this.

The SSD Endurance Experiment: They're all dead

techreport.com

 

[cvaldes]

Agreed... thats why QLC should be dirt cheap or avoided imho. But Im genuinely surprised by SSD endurance. Even the budget BX100 is still going strong.

I'm not. All the hand wringing when SSDs first started getting traction was addressed early on.

As a consumer I haven't seen an SSD get close to being used to exhaustion whether it be various music players, tablets, smartphones, computers, whatever.

The 120GB OCZ SSD (circa) that I stuck in my Mac mini 2010 server (which originally had two 500GB HDDs) still functions. I have a functional iPod shuffle (4th generation) from around 2012-2013 as well although the battery life is worsening. There's an iPod touch (6th gen) from around 2015 that works fine. None of this stuff has been babied or lightly used.

This doesn't include the SSD-equipped work-issued computers that I've used. I used a Dell Optiplex for over seven years which came with a 64GB SSD. About six months before I left the company, the IT manager replaced with a larger 128GB model, mostly because it was getting close to capacity, not because it was "wearing out." It was no longer the fastest desktop system at the company but it still ran fine.

Generally speaking I think a lot of people online freak out too much about the longevity of SSDs.

SSD endurance is more of a concerning if you're an Oracle DBA or data center sysadmin for JPMorganChase. For Joe Consumer, not so much. But I realize a lot of people online in these kind of discussion forums (TPU and elsewhere) enjoy working themselves into a frenzy about this sort of stuff.

 

[W1zzard]

It would be interesting if @W1zzard would run a test/review like this.

The SSD Endurance Experiment: They're all dead

techreport.com

Waste of time, this has been tested over and over again, endurance is irrelevant, and the actual endurance is much higher, and you're not reaching it either way until your warranty is expired, unless you are specifically trying to kill the drive

 

[mechtech]

Waste of time, this has been tested over and over again, endurance is irrelevant, and the actual endurance is much higher, and you're not reaching it either way until your warranty is expired, unless you are specifically trying to kill the drive

One thing that would be nice is.......if manufacturers put an expected life in normal use...............at least you would have an idea of when the drive would probably be on it's last legs and replace it before it dies completely. Then again if that's 15 years maybe most people would forget.

 

[W1zzard]

One thing that would be nice is.......if manufacturers put an expected life in normal use...............at least you would have an idea of when the drive would probably be on it's last legs and replace it before it dies completely. Then again if that's 15 years maybe most people would forget.

I just threw away a bunch of 60 GB class SSDs, so yeah, it's really nothing worth worrying about

 

[chrcoluk]

Well considering what the game ran at on PlayStation hardware I don't think what they're saying is required should be too far off... Trust in Nixxes though as they've proven to be great at porting PlayStation games to PC!
View attachment 344106View attachment 344107

Is 60fps that isnt locked 60fps actually right to call it 60fps?

In my eyes it isnt, one thing I always hated about console performance ratings, "fps target".

Never been able to stand something that cant stick to its frame time target, VRR technology does of course make it bearable now at least as I discovered with FF15. (yep I only just recently played my first game that works with VRR).

I just threw away a bunch of 60 GB class SSDs, so yeah, it's really nothing worth worrying about

I think my original MX500 if used in my PC or especially in my PS4 pro would have hit its rated erase cycles, as its firmware was one of the variants that had a significantly increased write amplification.

But all my drives used in consumer type usage with firmware that behaves properly yeah, my oldest SSDs two Samsung 830s which are of course also small drives meaning faster wear, have erase cycles in the 100s, but they rated for 5000. Aside from the MX500s I dont have any SSDs over 100 cycles, my Samsung 850 pro which has been through a "lot", PS4 Pro use (remember games auto record footage as you play even when you dont tell it to), Main drive on PC and now ZFS virtualisation usage is still less than 60 erase cycles, rated for 5000.

860 evos have crazy efficient write amplification, the erase cycles go up really slow for the usage. Attaching diskinfo for it, check its age and bytes written, and look at the cycles, under 10.

I'm not. All the hand wringing when SSDs first started getting traction was addressed early on.

As a consumer I haven't seen an SSD get close to being used to exhaustion whether it be various music players, tablets, smartphones, computers, whatever.

The 120GB OCZ SSD (circa) that I stuck in my Mac mini 2010 server (which originally had two 500GB HDDs) still functions. I have a functional iPod shuffle (4th generation) from around 2012-2013 as well although the battery life is worsening. There's an iPod touch (6th gen) from around 2015 that works fine. None of this stuff has been babied or lightly used.

This doesn't include the SSD-equipped work-issued computers that I've used. I used a Dell Optiplex for over seven years which came with a 64GB SSD. About six months before I left the company, the IT manager replaced with a larger 128GB model, mostly because it was getting close to capacity, not because it was "wearing out." It was no longer the fastest desktop system at the company but it still ran fine.

Generally speaking I think a lot of people online freak out too much about the longevity of SSDs.

SSD endurance is more of a concerning if you're an Oracle DBA or data center sysadmin for JPMorganChase. For Joe Consumer, not so much. But I realize a lot of people online in these kind of discussion forums (TPU and elsewhere) enjoy working themselves into a frenzy about this sort of stuff.

I think if I remember right OCZ issues (at least some of them) were caused by them enabling experimental features performance ahead of safety, and of course some early generation SSDs didnt properly manage the mapping table cells which would wear out before the data cells, which as I understand it on modern drives are handled much better.