Of course they didn't. And that's it, they have very limited time. So would you rather them spend time on size optimization, "reusing stuff in clever ways etc" or actually making the game? Because as you said - they no longer have to. Storage is fast and cheap, so why cling to having 20 GB games?
I'm not a professional game developer, but what exactly do you mean by space optimization? You can compress the textures, sure, but you lose some quality. You can put them on some atlases, which I'm sure the devs are already doing. But what more can you do when you have high resolution textures and high poly models?
I don't get why people are so angered by this.
First of all - how many AAA videogames do you need to have installed at once?
And second of all, if for some reason it's around 10, how long do you think it will be a standard to have, say, a 1TB disk in your computer? That's what we put in them ten years back. You can buy an SSD(!) of this size for laughable prices today, so what's the big whoop? Just buy two of them.
If you get a patch this big on day1, that's a pain, because you unexpectedly can't play your game for a few hours depending on your internet speed. But that's not a problem of games being big, that's them being shipped unfinished.
replydetachattach picture