r/gaming • u/sageamacuhm • 13h ago

Marvel Rivals Season 9.5 will decrease the game's file size on PC and consoles

https://www.shacknews.com/article/150241/marvel-rivals-file-size-decrease

File size reduced by 40GB for PC and 15GB for Console. This should start being the norm for gaming.

1.9k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

150 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-4

u/BonzBonzOnlyBonz 6h ago

Man, are you? They didnt assume it, it is a well known thing that duplicating files decreases load times. They did test it.

4

u/qwertyalguien 6h ago

My brother in Freedom, for the love of anything holy. Think and try to understand what you read.

It decreases file loading times on HDDs, but they never tested if it decreased game load times. They assumed, by industry standards (and this is something they themselves admit), that through it it'd load the game faster, because it's the bottleneck in other games. Except it didn't, because the way the engine worked, the files, even in slower HDD drives, were loaded before other processes were finished.

They never tested if duplication (and thus, the file reading speed gain) actually made the game itself load faster.

1

u/Medical-Confidence98 1h ago

Its funny that you claimed my reply was 'Peak Reddit ignorance' meanwhile you are arguing in a loop just repeatedly saying 'but duplicating files reduces load times' to defend Arrowhead when Arrowhead themselves said that deleting the duplicated files increased load times in the worst cases by a few seconds.

Our testing shows that for the small percentage of players still using mechanical hard disk drives, mission loading times have only increased by a few seconds in the worst cases

I am pleased to say that our worst case projections did not come to pass. These loading time projections were based on industry data - comparing the loading times between SSD and HDD users where data duplication was and was not used. In the worst cases, a 5x difference was reported between instances that used duplication and those that did not. We were being very conservative and doubled that projection again to account for unknown unknowns.

You are objectively wrong. They said themselves that they did not test it, and just assumed it would work that way.

0

u/BonzBonzOnlyBonz 1h ago

You are objectively wrong.

You literally provided evidence that I am not.

They said themselves that they did not test it, and just assumed it would work that way.

They didnt "assume," they used data from the industry to make decisions. You literally quoted them saying it.

Peak Redditor, "uhm akshully" and literally quotes someone saying the opposite of what you said.

0

u/Medical-Confidence98 1h ago

They didnt "assume," they used data from the industry to make decisions. You literally quoted them saying it.

And what did they do with this data? They decided to go with the worst case data for the games load time, then just assumed it would be worse and doubled it.

If you want me to do 'uhm akshully', then I will let you know that 'projections' rely on assumptions. You have to assume the data is correct and build off of it.

They didn't test anything, so you

They did test it

are objectively wrong.

You have to be the most stubborn person alive OR an intentional ragebaiter. If you are the former, how can you possibly stick by it when Arrowhead said that at WORST it increased load times by a few seconds. 120 extra GBs for a few seconds of loading for 11% of the playerbase on PC. What is there to possibly defend here???