• addie@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      With reading the article:

      • console discs have 60 GB of space, might as well export your assets at a quality which fills it

      Your sight-unseen summary is far too detailed in comparison.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plus downloadability. If you don’t plan to play a game for a while, you can delete it and free up space, and have the ability to download it later.

        Plus, expandable storage. If a player wants more space, I think that everything out there today is expandable, even consoles, without replacing existing storage. If, say, 10% of the player base wants to keep a larger library downloaded than their console’s internal storage can handle, and the base console doesn’t have enough space, they can just throw another USB drive on the system.

        I guess maybe for portable devices, it could be obnoxious to carry the storage around.

          • ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            If by nuts you mean, a very modest low single digit terabyte range. Which, according to the game sizes cited in the article could only hold around 6-10 games per terabyte. Given the way games tend to disappear from online sources over time, that doesn’t seem like enough space to me to really keep all those digital purchases. I guess if most of them will become abandonware eventually anyway when the companies shut down their servers, it hardly matters.

            • Doug [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, that’s nuts. I used to be very happy to have less than one and a half megs on something wider than a deck of cards. Now you’re talking about terabytes on something the size of a pinky fingernail. I could store a half dozen in a pocket in my wallet without noticing them. That’s a lot of storage.

              For the record, only 6-10 games is also about 5-10 games more than I could store on one of those floppies, and if it was one it was an old game. It’d be akin to putting Halo: CE (not remastered or anything, original) on a micro SD.

              So, yeah, storage is plentiful and readily available.

              • ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah, I remember. My favorite DOS game was Scorched Earth, which fit on a high density 1.44MB floppy disk. But that was the point of the article. Space used to be at a premium and a terabyte used to feel like more space than I’d ever need. Now a terabyte is only just enough for portable devices because the cost of extra capacity was increasing so fast and development of space saving tech seemed like a waste of time, but that trend of increasing capacity and decreasing cost has significantly plateaued (as shown by the graph in the article).

    • PepeLivesMatter@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Gamers: “we want photorealistic 3D graphics in 4K resolution!”

      Also gamers: “why do games take up so much space these days?”