Yes. High resolution textures take up a lot of space. Have a look at HD texture mods for skyrim for example. 23GB is more in line with a game from a few years ago, so this really is slim for a modern game with modern graphics.

Back in the day:

> 3-D Hardware Accelerator (with 16MB VRAM with full OpenGL® support; Pentium® II 400 Mhz processor or Athlon® processor; English version of Windows® 2000/XP Operating System; 128 MB RAM; 16-bit high color video mode; 800 MB of uncompressed hard disk space for game files (Minimum Install), plus 300 MB for the Windows swap file […]

* https://store.steampowered.com/app/9010/Return_to_Castle_Wol...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_to_Castle_Wolfenstein

Even older games would be even smaller:

* https://www.oldgames.sk/en/game/ultima-vi-the-false-prophet/...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_VI:_The_False_Prophet

In this day and age it's a gift to only be ~23GB.. I'm reminded of the old days when you literally didn't have the space so had to get creative, now any kind of space optimization isn't even considered.

Have you played a big budget video game released in the last 10 years? It’s pretty standard to reach upwards of 60GB.

It can fit on a standard blu ray, so I'm inclined to say so

I do love rich soundtracks with high quality compression, and textures that look crisp on 4k. And also games with 100+ hours of single-player campaign.

I mean yes, it's a very nice looking game with fairly sizeable worlds and lots of different enemies, biomes, etc.

It's currently over 100GB because of duplicated assets, so this is a game-changer (pun intended).

EDIT: Just checked; 157GB on my SSD.

EDIT2: 26GB after updating with a 9.7GB download, 5.18GB of shaders before and after.

[dead]