Why is almost every game 50GB+ nowadays?

Why do you care, is the better question? Games keep getting larger, it's normal. In fact, if games were not stunted by Discs on consoles, games would be even larger. How large a game is, should never be complained about. How small they have to make it, should be what is complained about. Large HDDs are cheap, my steam folder is 1.7TB, what is there to complain about? Absolutely nothing.

Don't they compress audio anymore?

...Why the HELL would you want them to compress audio for? Why would you want them to compress ANYTHING? You're basically saying "Hey, you know this amazing quality stuff you made? Please don't give it to me in that amazing quality, i want no way at all to be able to experience that quality, i want it permanently lowered."

Time to buy a 1TB SSD.

You do understand not everything needs an SSDs performance right? I mean sure, battlefield does, and some other games will benefit, this one that we are talking about might even benefit, but not everything needs to be on an SSD. I have a 512gb SSD and currently have 200GB free, as i install what is necessary on there.

RotTR is only 20GB.

You're comparing a linear game...to something like this game, and expecting the size to be similar? ...Ok....? In the end, a game size should be whatever size it is. It shouldn't be smaller, just to meet a "quota", and it shouldn't be larger, just to make people think it might be "The best game ever, as why else would it be so large". It should be whatever size it needs to be, and shouldn't ever be complained about.

Why do you care, is the better question? Games keep getting larger, it's normal. In fact, if games were not stunted by Discs on consoles, games would be even larger. How large a game is, should never be complained about. How small they have to make it, should be what is complained about. Large HDDs are cheap, my steam folder is 1.7TB, what is there to complain about? Absolutely nothing. ...Why the HELL would you want them to compress audio for? Why would you want them to compress ANYTHING? You're basically saying "Hey, you know this amazing quality stuff you made? Please don't give it to me in that amazing quality, i want no way at all to be able to experience that quality, i want it permanently lowered." You do understand not everything needs an SSDs performance right? I mean sure, battlefield does, and some other games will benefit, this one that we are talking about might even benefit, but not everything needs to be on an SSD. I have a 512gb SSD and currently have 200GB free, as i install what is necessary on there. You're comparing a linear game...to something like this game, and expecting the size to be similar? ...Ok....? In the end, a game size should be whatever size it is. It shouldn't be smaller, just to meet a "quota", and it shouldn't be larger, just to make people think it might be "The best game ever, as why else would it be so large". It should be whatever size it needs to be, and shouldn't ever be complained about.

Bigger question is why do you care so much? So lets not get an SSD because you feel not everything needs it. I have 240, 480, and 512 GB SSD in my rig, 1TB, and 2Tb plus a 3TB external. Still not enough. SSD are not just for faster loading times either but games that need to stream data its very nice to have. And disc are not limiting the consoles like you think. Pretty ignorant considering dual layer Blurays are 50GB. Console specs limit the consoles.

What on earth is with these CPU requirements!!!! The minimum cpu spec of i5 2500k is not in anyway equivalent to a FX-8120. Neither is the i7 3770 and FX 8350.

Sorry if anyone takes offence at this

1060 or 480 sounds more reasonable for a recommended.

This, this right here is what I love about forums like this, the guys making the game give us a recommended spec only for the folks who have never played the game, in fact had nothing what so ever to do with the game to turn round and give us what they think the recommended specs should be. What does it matter anyway folks, the guys who sit here with specs way way above whatever they recommend will buy the game and then spend fourty pages of topic picking apart every tiny flaw in the graphics delivery, the guys who sit below or around the specs will hold off for the reviews, patches and maybe an upgrade. Is their anyone like me who will buy the game and then play it at whatever settings are needed to deliver enjoyable gameplay?

1060 or 480 does sound more reasonable but 290X is still up there with them in therm of raw performance while 780 is not and its probably a mistake. GK110 isnt even faster than Tahiti this days.