Forspoken Game Dev Says DirectStorage + 20,000 files at 4.5 GB loads in 1.7 seconds
Click here to post a comment for Forspoken Game Dev Says DirectStorage + 20,000 files at 4.5 GB loads in 1.7 seconds on our message forum
TheDeeGee
iI don't mind waiting 10 seconds, but i guess everyone is in a rush these days.
Horus-Anhur
This is great news.
But todays game's biggest problem is the time to connect DRM and/or launcher. And if the game uses two launchers, it's even worse.
Even single player games now require an online connection
Valken
With big asset and huge open world games, this is much needed just to get the initial environment loaded up and to minimize asset popups.
But this boost needs to PROGRAMMED? So it is not a backend system wide service that is utilized transparently like the PS5? Bah...
Dean_Demon
When you've been gaming for years and got used to waiting for 30 minutes for a game to load and then crash, a few seconds is nothing to complain about, kinda love the modern mentaility.
Agonist
Its not about being ij a rush. Its the efficiency of things. Lots of games are huge and open world now.
Streaming assets with direct storage is a huge win.
Silva
I'm not sold on this DirectStorage thing, the difference is not worth it. I'd never go back to HDD for the OS instal and my most played games, I use those for archiving now.
Even a standard SATA SSD is good enough for the majority of people. That said, I paid about the same for a much faster NVMe in comparison to "slow" SSDs at the time.
hamltnblue
We've come a long way since the days of the floppy drive and early hard drives. Seems like yesterday even though it was 30 years ago
A large file would have been 50-100K bytes and would take 30 seconds to load on a floppy. The 10 meg hard drives were much faster. The same file would save in 10 seconds.
Installing windows 95 (25 3.5 inch floppies) on my 486 with 3.5 floppy and 100 meg hard drive took a couple of hours.
Mineria
We have to see about that, so far all what they have shown us are only freaking game loading times, so got some doubts on how much it can do for actual streaming.
Kaarme
Stuff still needs to be loaded in some kind of cells. It can be optimised endlessly, yes, but which studio these days would willingly spend more than barely enough time on that? It's not realism to expect games to be splendidly coded. If there's a single tool that can make it easier, more or less automatically, studios will be very grateful, gamers as well. If there's less work to optimise basic loading, some studios might allow more freedom for the game to adapt to PCs of different performance levels. It should also allow modders to get more crazy, in games allowing extensive mods.
I, for sure, hope this technology will be present in the next Elder Scrolls. Though knowing Bethesda, I won't hold my breath.
AlmondMan
I'm pretty sure it's not a magical thing that happens on the PS5 either.
schmidtbag
The way I see it, this could be a way to help with out-of-VRAM situations. Anything that can reduce the dependency on talking through PCIe is going to help.
Otherwise yeah, shaving a few seconds off load time is not appealing to me if that's all we'd ever get out of this.
Alessio1989
what's the OS environment used for the test and how were the assets stored on the drive? The HDD time loading values look sus
PhazDelta
the biggest problem in PC gaming is stuttering i don't mind waiting 30 seconds i want just preload shader cache and game run super smooth that all i want .
Martin5000
ahh another game for the minority. nice well i wont be buying .. good luck with your sales.
schmidtbag
Steam has an option to download shader cache. That way, you don't get microstutter or have to wait.
PhazDelta
that not working with all games
Mineria
We all hope for that this technology will be used to reduce something like stutter that occurs from streaming, and yes, that does require studios to think smart, a basic loading difference within 1-2 seconds doesn´t really matter for most gamers.
I'm not positive around how much this tech brings though, since in the end it does require to be properly implemented by game studios, besides that we really don' t know how much there can be squeezed out of it, MS doesn't really show us that part, maybe for a reason?
mbk1969
More and more powerful hardware is born, but then programmers write less and less efficient code - why to try if hardware is powerful.
I remember a joke law from Stanislav Lem book:
If we can assume that very complex computer can work without a program, then we can assume that very complex program can work without computer.
schmidtbag
That's one of the reasons why I've been a fan of open-source software: it's usually pretty free from bloat. When it isn't, it often gets bloat removed. It's always nice running an update when I see bug fixes and new features, yet tens or even hundreds of MB are saved.
I've always had a real gripe with people who are fine with bloat "because I have all this RAM and I might as well use it" when the reality is, you shouldn't have needed all that RAM in the first place, let alone to compensate for bloat, memory leaks, or just bad design.
Agonist
Did any of you stop to think about the overhead there is with current loading?
DirectStorage is about more then load times. But lets focus on something console kids would argue about.
