Activision addresses Call of Duty: Black Ops 6's listed 309 GB install size

midian182

midian182

Posts: 9,870   +125
Staff member
WTF?! The Call of Duty series has long been infamous for having a massive install size. The next game in the series, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, is listed as taking up a monstrous 309.85 GB. However, Activision has pointed out that this is "not representative of a typical player install experience."

Discovery of the 309.85 GB install size (for the Xbox Series X and S) on the Black Ops 6 store page on Xbox.com led to plenty of outcry from fans of the FPS series. A game of that size is going to take up a massive chunk of space on the consoles. The Xbox Series X has a 1TB SSD (larger sizes are coming) with 802 GB of available user storage, while the Xbox Series S has 346 GB of available user storage.

The Call of Duty team has now issued an update confirming that the listed 309.85 GB does not represent the download size or the disk footprint for Black Ops 6.

Also read: Bigger Than Godzilla: Why Are Games Using So Many Gigabytes?

The only way players would use all that space is if they downloaded the full installations of Modern Warfare II, Modern Warfare III, Warzone, and all relevant content packs, including all localized languages combined.

It's noted that players will be able to download Black Ops 6 at launch without downloading any other Call of Duty titles or all of the language packs.

The actual Black Ops 6 file size will only be revealed closer to its launch date. It might not be over 300 GB, but do expect it to be another 100+ GB game.

The next Call of Duty title arrives on PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Windows, Xbox One, and Xbox Series X/S on October 25, 2024. It will also be available to Game Pass subscribers on release day.

Sunday night's Summer Game Fest slot gave a 40-minute preview of Call of Duty: Black Ops 6. It's set in early 1990s following the fall of the Soviet Union, during the Gulf War and when Bill Clinton took over from George Bush as president.

Permalink to story:

Activision addresses Call of Duty: Black Ops 6's listed 309 GB install size

 
Yeah, HELL NO:
- always online single player
- cash grab (as usual)
- two hours "woke" campaign
- horrible performance
- corridor shooter
- buggy multiplayer
- no private servers, no LAN play (for more than 10 years now)
- online censorship and banning of players for whatever you deem "offensive".
F#ck no.
I have more patience than Microsoft/EA/Ubisoft/Bethesda/whatever-woke-platform-there-is has marketing budgets.
Let's see how this turns out. Last year's was garbage. This one, I guess, will be the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LearneR70, MWR01, Puiu and 4 others
Shaitan said:
Yeah, HELL NO:
- always online single player
- cash grab (as usual)
- two hours "woke" campaign
- horrible performance
- corridor shooter
- buggy multiplayer
- no private servers, no LAN play (for more than 10 years now)
- online censorship and banning of players for whatever you deem "offensive".
F#ck no.
I have more patience than Microsoft/EA/Ubisoft/Bethesda/whatever-woke-platform-there-is has marketing budgets.
Let's see how this turns out. Last year's was garbage. This one, I guess, will be the same.
Click to expand...
that is a pass for me as well then
 
  • Like
Reactions: LearneR70, MWR01 and brunocasarini
100gb games are a medium size today. 200 is a standard large game size. 300gb is not a lot more.
The problem is that even today consoles come with smaller size storage making these new games look like they are too big. over 300gb game size is big but not shockingly.
4k, is not free. And neither are DLCs.
 
Still doesn't stop the fact that this size is very likely them not bothering to optimise because the "high and mighty" at Activision have probably decided that if it doesn't make money, they will use zero time on it, can't wait to discover something stupid like 30GB's of uncompressed audio....
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwigraeme
VariableSpike said:
Still doesn't stop the fact that this size is very likely them not bothering to optimise because the "high and mighty" at Activision have probably decided that if it doesn't make money, they will use zero time on it, can't wait to discover something stupid like 30GB's of uncompressed audio....
Click to expand...

I don't pirate games, but wonder what fitgirl could get it down to.
Actually just realised fitgirl is play on words - it the UK it someone is fit they are good looking, But also works for what she does to make it fit in a smaller space

One of the reasons I hate Apple of many, was - I used to have itunes on guest PCs long ago as backpackers had those apple players they wanted to update , sync whatever. This was during dial up modem times. If Apple just added the Estonian language or fixed one line of code , needed to download whole installer, no installer in place for lazy apple coders. Never used that program, but looked like garbage on the PC . I always thought it this there showoff to non-Mac users then there other software must be lazy encoded junk.
Before Office and all it's shenanigans, couldn't remember people complaining about excel, access etc that much

I remember word processors that were a few thousand bytes on the C64- same as a lame Doc.
now that doesn't say much . Or micro chess programs

Lazy companies kicking the resources on to the end user is far from new. I do wonder how many lost sales from people. Saying I won't buy it , as limits amount of active games on my console.
 
toooooot said:
100gb games are a medium size today. 200 is a standard large game size. 300gb is not a lot more.
The problem is that even today consoles come with smaller size storage making these new games look like they are too big. over 300gb game size is big but not shockingly.
4k, is not free. And neither are DLCs.
Click to expand...
Just because it happens doesn't make it acceptable. Also, has no-one heard of texture compression? Seriously. This is a perfect example of the lack of competence being displayed by devs who are too lazy to implement a quick & easy compression utility to save space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWR01
Arent these GBs a bunch of videos ?! I ve got such a feeling . If games videos were rendered in real time I think the game installation size would be smaller . I could be wrong of course .
 
ZedRM said:
Just because it happens doesn't make it acceptable. Also, has no-one heard of texture compression? Seriously. This is a perfect example of the lack of competence being displayed by devs who are too lazy to implement a quick & easy compression utility to save space.
Click to expand...
Texture compressiion is bad for potato PCs. Better a bigger drive in a potato PC than an upgrade potato PC owner cannot afford.
 
toooooot said:
Texture compressiion is bad for potato PCs.
Click to expand...
Not really. Texture compression take up very little in the area of resources. Besides, we're not talking about PC's, were talking about the XBox version, a system which has plenty of power to handle such a computationally trivial task..
 
ZedRM said:
Not really. Texture compression take up very little in the area of resources. Besides, we're not talking about PC's, were talking about the XBox version, a system which has plenty of power to handle such a computationally trivial task..
Click to expand...
I played EA Ark survival and at the time it was one of the biggest games which only grew with full new maps. When people complained to devs, they said if they compressed data, then a lot of people barely running it would not be able to run the game at all.
 
toooooot said:
I played EA Ark survival and at the time it was one of the biggest games which only grew with full new maps. When people complained to devs, they said if they compressed data, then a lot of people barely running it would not be able to run the game at all.
Click to expand...
I saw there dragons and I started to love the game . Got it for free . Then I realized it s a survival game - collecting branches and stones and etc . , lol. I checked the size - over 300GB so I ve never downloaded it . Though I have plenty of free disk space .
 
toooooot said:
I played EA Ark survival and at the time it was one of the biggest games which only grew with full new maps. When people complained to devs, they said if they compressed data, then a lot of people barely running it would not be able to run the game at all.
Click to expand...
I have that title on Epic and remember those problems. Anyone who would be held back by using compressed textures needed to upgrade their CPU, RAM and GPU.

However, once again, we're not talking about PC's, we're talking about the XBox, a console system that would not be and is not held back in any way by utilizing such a thing.
 
I like foxes said:
I saw there dragons and I started to love the game . Got it for free . Then I realized it s a survival game - collecting branches and stones and etc . , lol. I checked the size - over 300GB so I ve never downloaded it . Though I have plenty of free disk space .
Click to expand...
Back when ssd prices were much more expensive, I had a dedicated ark drive.
It is a survival game, builder sandbox, exploring sandbox.
But what attracted me the most was this beautiful island filled with dinos.
Over the years, they added even more amazing locations. For example ,there is a map that is completely underground with scorching sun if you ever get outside the caves. I still love that world and the ability to dive on drakes deep down to the radiated zone.
The game in immersive, I simply enjoyed its environment. Although I understand that survival alone is a no go for some gamers.
 
I think this is going to be a problem going forward. As SSD storage size grows, the need for developers to optimize storage becomes less of a priority. I wonder how are they going to roll this out for Xbox Series S without optimization.
 
toooooot said:
I played EA Ark survival and at the time it was one of the biggest games which only grew with full new maps. When people complained to devs, they said if they compressed data, then a lot of people barely running it would not be able to run the game at all.
Click to expand...
Isn't one of the "features" in the latest consoles that they have a dedicated hardware acceleration for texture compression/decompression?
 
Puiu said:
Isn't one of the "features" in the latest consoles that they have a dedicated hardware acceleration for texture compression/decompression?
Click to expand...
Not sure.
Besides, who said they did not?
If they do, there is one potential problem with old consoles runnign the same games.
They are not *****s, who would lose millions of customers who have not upgraded to the latest gen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Daniel Sims
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 to launch on Game Pass from day one
Replies
11
Views
143
scavengerspc
scavengerspc
midian182
Activision awarded $14.5 million in lawsuit against Call of Duty cheat maker
Replies
3
Views
83
m3tavision
m3tavision
A
Microsoft plans to make the next Call of Duty a day-one release on Xbox Game Pass
Replies
11
Views
213
scavengerspc
scavengerspc

Latest posts

Back