Guys we’re working with ssds so stuff gets a lot faster.
Except that every time i need to update i need to move and/or delete files to make room for UE projects.
Not to mention that a single project with just a big room that weights like 10 megs in obj format becomes a 1 gig project very fast.
Right now i’m saving the single projects in a different drive (1tb, less of a concern here) but it kind of ****** me off when the launcher has the nerve to ask for 11Gb of free space to update from 4.5 to 4.5.1
I mean, 11Gb? really? for a single update? I’m forced to keep just one version of the engine at any time on this PC.
It’s not unworkable and disk space on ssds is getting cheaper by the day, but i feel the problem is more of a design decision than a real requirement.
I get the same issue, not that i use a ssd hard drive but the famous 11gb you need to make an update, i had to remove more a more than just this specific 11gb of space.
i had to uninstall many games from my steam library at many attempt along the update process.
at the end of the update i recover a lot of disk space, but i had to reinstall some of my games
So it seem it happen like that
click on update , it check if you got enough disk space
the time the update is downloading, the disk space on my drive differ, and a message append and tell me to release more disk space.
but initially before i click on update, the 11.gb was available on my hard drive.
Note : it happened when i had updated from 4.5 preview to 4.5 official.
You can buy a 4 TB USB-3 hard drive these days for $150, less if you watch for sales. If you really don’t have any excess cruft on your drives you can archive or delete to make space, consider investing in an external drive or two and archive off items that don’t benefit from being on SSD.
Really, 11 GB isn’t any larger than many game installs these days. UE4 is a professional tool. Just because it’s offered to us at consumer prices doesn’t change that fact. Expecting it to run without any issues on consumer hardware may just not be realistic.
I get that it’s frustrating, but is this what you want Epic engineers spending their time on? Because I don’t. Engineering time is a finite resource and drive space is cheap. I don’t think these kinds of optimizations would be a great use of Epic’s engineering talent.
As I was mentioning in the first post the issue is not a deal breaker.
I had problems with projects tho, when a single environment with just a lowpoly car (50Mb fbx file) and a lowpoly environment (a single hangar scene, 100Mb with textures) went from 3Gb (with only win build, no android and so on) to a whopping 28Gb.
I narrowed it down to save states and internal backups, but having to manually manage files to keep storage in check is something i’d rather not do.
Also this machine is the one that I use at work, mainly used for tests and stuff like that. I’d rather not move stuff back and forth with USB drives, as they tend to disappear often (somehow personal property get treated as studio property the moment it enters the main door)
We use a lot of storage for vfx, so that’s why it’s always full. I have 3Tb on this machine, usually 10-20 Gb free shared between system and data drives. The shared studio storage is well… always full!
And in the end a professional tool should definitely spend resources in workflow and pipeline integration, not only in features. Most of the stuff you can do in any case if you are in a team even if the feature is not built in.
Take Maya for instance. It fits nicely in the pipeline(not every time, mind me), it’s extensible using its python api, and you can actually live connect it if you have either specialty plugins or dev to program c++ extensions on it. I don’t have a wood splinter breaking plugin? getting some guys to develop it for the team it’s not impossible, changing how the core program behaves on projects is more difficult.
This is just on a large scale, where pipeline is always the bottleneck! At home I can buy a room full of damned drives so i don’t have to worry about that