I'm was referring to console titles not so much Steam. Steam is its own monster.

@darji: But the PC still isn't purely digital. I buy most games on Steam but a couple days ago I bought a retail copy of Total War: Shogun 2 Gold at newegg for $13, almost five times less than what I would've paid on Steam. Everyone loves to bring up Steam sales but it's not hard to find retail sales just as often, if not more often.

Steam does the same thing, guys. Because PCs also have 500GB HDDs. You also can't manage the storage of PC because this comparison is fucking stupid and you should feel bad for making it.

I just downloaded Arma 2 complete 20 gigs on steam in about an hour, now I'm ready to play a bunch of the most amazing mods ever know to mankind. Some of you guys that say to like videogames by definition a technology based hobby, seem to be to stuck in past, its just weird to me.

LETS MOVE ON PEOPLE, stuff changes!

Really dumb, click baity title, but MS has stated that this patch is to ready all players for the Operation Broken Eagle add on. If you're gonna buy games that are 30+GB in size and then complain of a 13 GB add on, you gotta think about things in perspective.

Take Borderlands 2. I know the game is about 3.5 GB to install on an Xbox 360, and then the biggest DLC pack was about 1.8 GB. That's all fitting the same ratio we have here. With bigger sized games will come bigger sized add ons, it's as simple as that. If you keep thinking you'd be getting ~1 GB add ons like 360 and PS3 then you're in the wrong generation.

Big patch.

That's all I can say on this topic.

This is a pretty accurate description for what I have been feeling recently about this industry. Micro transaction in full retail games, hostile relationship between gaming press and audience (not to mention the bad blood stem from BOTH side of the fence), once great industry leaders making mobile garbage and online functionality in EVERY damn game, doesn't matter if it makes sense or not. This big patch thing is such a minor issue, even if it is an issue for some people, compare to those things above.

I think the 13 gb is kinda ridiculous. I guess there was a decision being made about the Delta for updating. People who write updates for pre-existing packages know what I mean. At least we know some of that was DLC content. Also, to the people saying it will let other people play dlc in someone else's game. The last dead rising game if I remember correctly didn't allow a user that didn't have the dlc to participate. Anyways, the game was great but the DLC looks like palette swap and collection quest. I'll wait until other people get their hands on it. (Going by the achievement update for Dead Rising 3)

Yes, let's take Borderlands 2 for example. In fact, that's a perfect example. When the biggest DLC pack was released, I had the OPTION of downloading it. If I didn't, I could still play the main game with my friends, and I was never FORCED into downloading massive DLC packs that I didn't want.

If this was optional DLC, I wouldn't have any issue with it.

And this is the best argument I've seen yet.

I'd rather have huge ass patches than for MS or Sony to enforce a size limit. I also don't see how this is MS's fault; Capcom developed the patch and are the ones to blame.

@grantheaslip: I lived in Vancouver for a year, you can get unlimited packages with shaw and as far as I remember they are not that much expensive compared to limited ones.

I know sometimes is a matter of needs and priorities, but having a good internet connection is pretty much the best investment you can make nowadays.

@spaceinsomniac Yes, it's an add-on, but the thing to remember here is that it acts as a compatibility patch. What it sounds like it's doing, by the size of the patch, is actually letting you download the entire add on but limiting your own personal use of it because you haven't paid - this way you're not segregating the people who have paid for the add-on from the people who haven't. In the end that would be the best option, no? Dead Rising 3 is a seamless game with little to no loading times. If you incorporate an add-on into that, maybe a guest user will be able to explore the world of the add-on if he's joined the host who has the add on.

I realize that Borderlands 2 also had compatibility patches, but they didn't include the add-ons, just compatibility for items that people would obtain from add-ons. I believe those packs are between 500-600 MB, still a sizeable amount for a game that is 3.5 GB installed.

I see it more as a pre-load for people who might want to evenually buy the add on, which is coming out tomorrow and which is the first of four. So it's likely that the entire Dead Rising 3 set will come in at over 70GB when all is said and done. And, like another poster said, this isn't Microsoft's fault - they didn't develop the game, and it's not like they'd hinder the game by making it smaller even if they did.

I'm guessing it just includes all the DLC whether you want it or not. Why else would it be that big? That's what the battlefield games on 360 used to do.

"#63 Posted by Andorski (4961 posts) - 1 hour, 20 minutes ago

I'd rather have huge ass patches than for MS or Sony to enforce a size limit. I also don't see how this is MS's fault; Capcom developed the patch and are the ones to blame."

THIS.

This struck me tonight. Put in my Dead Rising 2 disc, haven't played it for a while, thought it would be a good time to finish it. Sweet Jesus. Here in Australia all of our internet is capped. I have a decent plan (200gb/month) which is fairly pricey, especially by overseas standards. My internet speed is decent, only because I literally live across the road from the telephone exchange. However, a patch of that size is somewhat crazy. I buy disc versions mainly because they are still significantly cheaper than the download versions (which makes no damned sense) and am not personally worried about the download size for a whole game. But for a patch to be 13gb is ridiculous. I'm aware that Capcom needed to fix the original game code but hell, that's ridiculous. I agree that there shouldn't be a forced cap on size from Sony or MS but I'm worried that developers will use this as an excuse to force in unwanted DLC or also to 'fix' a game well post release rather than release a finished product.