After checking my library, i so far 'discovered' a couple of titles that exceed the 100+ Gigabit syze.
Be warned! Do not engage if you are not entirely sure about what you exactly are doing! And.... even if you know what you are doing I guess those games can be best handled as a smoke or like alcohol. Somehow this managed to be legal, why we all know how disastrous for your health this can be.

The worst offender seems to be games from Microsoft studio's.

Gears 4 - 130 GB
Gears 5 - 122 GB

Ubi

AC Vikings - 110 GB

Square

Forspoken - 121 GB
FFVII RI - 94 GB

COD infinite warfare - 97 GB
Total War Warhammer 3 - 110 GB

Now, a fair warning. These are not the only 100 GB games out there. I can only judge from my library since there are some games out there that don't communicate their true size. Still, going from multiple reports i believe it can be said that the following titles are also in excess of a 100 GB

Hear - Say

Destiny 2
Baldurs Gate 3

It is applauded to share your own findings too. So we can all build towards a safe and prosperous future.

other shares will be legible for future give-aways

Be Safe

Have you cut & pasted from something on Steam, without even checking if those games are on here?

Is this one of those new-fangled AI generated posts?

FYI, according to its APIs GOG only has 3 such titles:

Middle-earth™: Shadow of War™ : ~114 GB
Cyberpunk 2077 : ~110 GB
Baldur's Gate 3 : ~108 GB

The runner up on the 4th place, namely The Witcher 3, only has a "measly" 81 GB.

Just for the record, you mean Gigabyte, not Gigabit. There are 8 bits in a byte.

So my web connection for instance, is 50 Megabit, which equates to over 5 Megabytes a second ... that roughly being 50 divided by 8, but then also factoring in the usual losses ... so we never actually reach 6.25 Megabytes.

LOL, corrected my little error ... had Gigabit on the brain obviously.

Just for the record, you mean megabit, not Gigabit.

no no no, bit replaced byte because of the ease of something if i'm not mistaken its gamezz, no pun intended. I'm not talking about non pc games of course yes

You are mistaken.

4 bits = 1 nibble
2 nibbles = 1 byte

So a bit is 1/8 of a byte. If it is, the 'AI' producing it isn't very well trained; you might want to try a better one next time.

Anyway, I'm not surprised at the number of 100GB+ games. It's largely textures - you get something like Gears 5 and it'll have 4k and possibly above textures in it. Personally, I'm a fan of these - even at 1080p you can see the difference, especially up close (this is the bit that people often don't realise/appreciate - they tend to think "oh, a 4k texture, you can only see the difference if you're running in 4k", but that's not really true).

There is an argument that for people on metered connections, for client users, you could add an "advanced installation" option to only download a single language and low definition textures, or you could make the offline installers more modular.

Honestly, developers should fucking optimize their games, engines, assets, and middle managers down to a 7 kb tar.gz file.

yikes!! mybad

i meant of course, games exceeding the 12,5 Gigabyte mark :)

I was surprised by Infinity War to be honest. A single player campaign that last literally minutes, like 600 of them. Then the realization dawned... must be all those multiplayer additions that series is 'lauded' for
that's whot i've been saying...... Microsoft!!!

Is it bit or byte?? do you have actual numbers? prove from your disk manager?

I have no idea what the OP's point of this thread is supposed to be.

What is he saying, that games should never increase in size as technology advances?

Sure they should.

And games have been over 100 GB for many years already. This is nothing "new."

That's always been how games work, as time advances, so does the necessary storage size because games became bigger and with better graphics.

Nothing is wrong with that.

What's the alternative that the OP is suggesting? For graphics in video games permanently to stagnate and never improve? Because that's exactly what would happen if game size could never increase over time. And it wouldn't be worth it to impose such a size limitation.

Drugs are bad, 'mkay?

It would be more interesting to know what parts of the assets take the most space in those gigantic games. Ultra-high res textures? Voice acting? At least it shouldn't be the FMV parts as most games nowadays use the game engine for the non-interactive parts, right?

As games just seem to be getting bigger and bigger, does it mean each year they will have even higher res textures and more hours of voice acting, or where does the continuously increasing size come from?

Hopefully AI generated life-like speech will lessen the need to record samples of hours of voice acting, it should be much cheaper too then for the developers.

It's mostly down to textures. After that it's probably models (which are getting more and more detailed - I'm not sure if you're in to flight simming, but this is an interesting mod for FSX:

https://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/files/24690/fsx-freemeshx-global-terrain-mesh-scenery-20/

Note that FSX originally shipped on two DVDs. Upping the mesh resolution of the (land only) world (apart from Antarctica, Greenland and Russia) to LOD10 (which I understand is a data point on the mesh every 38 metres) adds a whopping 45GB to the install size.

Now, if we look at a game like Forza Horizon 5, that has a highly detailed 41 square mile map, uses very high quality textures, has over 700 cars with realistic engine samples based on the vehicle, each of which has a high quality mesh and in some cases unique texture maps to wrap around the car.