5 ms·

The better question you should be asking is why does everyone else need 300GB of disk space that transfers at over 7GB/s, 32 CPU cores at 6GHz, a video card wor

The better question you should be asking is why does everyone else need 300GB of disk space that transfers at over 7GB/s, 32 CPU cores at 6GHz, a video card worth $3000 dollars, and RAM sizes measured in gigabytes with 3 digits just for a fucking game? At some point I have to wonder if the reason we have so much computing power is so we can use that computing power.

meheleventyone 4y ago
Gaming has been a massive driver of hardware for a very long time in a way that can always be looked at as unneeded. We surpassed more compute for the sake of compute a while ago. The neat thing is that there are still new things to do with it. Real-time path tracing will be the next thing as well as moving more compute over to the GPU. We don’t need it but it will open new possibilities. And it seems less wasteful than running ten copies of Chrome to support a few desktop apps. The new Zelda demonstrates something that’s been true of every console generation. They are a fixed platform and the later games are always considerably better at utilising the hardware.
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
  Yeah, just look at FromSoft's output for the PS4 for example. Bloodborne came out very early, and while it looks great, it doesn't hold a candle to Elden Ring. Though gameplay wise I have to say I prefer it. Elden Ring has too much stuff in it(crafting, gathering, tons of cookie cutter dungeons, and too many easy boss fights) for me. Bloodborne is very stripped down and devoid of fluff. I can sort of keep the whole game in my head and I love that about a game.
shapefrog 4y ago
Furthermore, why does a 2023 released game, in development since 2018, run like utter garbage on said spec hardware that is orders of magnitude more performant than last years specs ...
GaelFG 4y ago
If you are serious (I do game development for a living and work on graphical assets daily so that seems evident for me, but I totally understand it can be arcane stuff) it's simply that they choose a stylized graphical style avoiding a lot of costly details you generaly find in hight end games. They use low poly models, as far as I know there is no baked lightmap (these are pretty expensives but are mandatory in a lot of engine if you want realistic shadows on higtly detailled environment) and their shader materials probably use very simple and low resolution maps. All these thing decrease the asset footprint by orders of magnitude. If you want to look in more detail in can look and compare a similar rendering in unity. Taking two unity exemple you can compare : - 'chop chop' a game using a similar rendering style : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTTHOpUQDE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTTHOpUQDE, if you take the pig and its environment showed in the video and go in the github repository you can see they only use one texture map : an albedo one. All the models (pig + environment) weight about 6mB of textures and 350kB of models. and are sufficient to have the full main character and an environment. - a 'realistic PBR workflow gun asset' on asset store (choose randomly but seems nice, realistic and containing only the gun so we can see download size) : https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/props/guns/free-fps-weapon-akm-180663#content https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/props/guns/free-fps.... The workflow need 6 maps (there are 7 here but you generaly only use either a normal map or a heightmap) The pack weight 35MB. It's only the gun, you lack a full character handling it and the environment. While I really like zelda, even with stylized graphics the game look a bit outdated for me. The cellshaded characters are fluid and pretty but the 'low resolution texture and low poly models' bother me a bit especially on environments. The artistic direction is really good but technically I can only think they are held back by the hardware. As a game developer, I totally want to use all the resources i know i can find on the target hardware. Trust me even today they are lots of features game designer dream to put in game and cant because computing resources are still limited ^^. Do game NEEDS them to be fun ? Of course not, but COULD they be fun experiences ? I think yes :)
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  >If you are serious I absolutely am serious; a lot of games and software in general today demand far more system resources than they have any reasonable right to. Don't give me "but the textures!" and the like either, optimize that stuff better instead. Whether it's Windows 10/11 or Call of Duty or Elite: Dangerous or Chrome or whatever strikes your fancy, software today has no business demanding the resources they do. Lest we forget, the hardware we can buy today would have been considered supercomputers just a few years ago. You want to tell me that will choke and croak just doing mundane stuff like playing games or browsing the internet?
m_rpn 4y ago
We need this power because companies need to keep selling us new stuff and also because developers nowadays can't optimize their games too much since their managers make them do ten times the work, in half the time, and for one third of the pay they had on the 1990s.
- gowld 4y ago
  Definitely written by someone who wasn't alive in the 1990s.
  - m_rpn 3y ago
    I actually was.
PurpleRamen 4y ago
Because this hardware is for a different experience. Zelda is nice, but the style has its limits. It's kinda like asking why Disney invests hundreds of millions of Dollar into Marvel and Star Wars-Movies, when you can also make a cheaper but polished animation-movie with a fraction of that price. It's simply not the same.
CyberDildonics 4y ago
I doubt anyone is asking that question since none of what you said is true. This just seems like rant of someone wanting to play recent games and not wanting to upgrade their computer. If that's the case, just say that instead of whining about a trend that's been going on for 40 years.
- gowld 4y ago
  Not even that. The games are playable on low end computers, with lower details. It's just content-free ranting.

meheleventyone 4y ago

Gaming has been a massive driver of hardware for a very long time in a way that can always be looked at as unneeded. We surpassed more compute for the sake of compute a while ago. The neat thing is that there are still new things to do with it. Real-time path tracing will be the next thing as well as moving more compute over to the GPU. We don’t need it but it will open new possibilities. And it seems less wasteful than running ten copies of Chrome to support a few desktop apps. The new Zelda demonstrates something that’s been true of every console generation. They are a fixed platform and the later games are always considerably better at utilising the hardware.

mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
Yeah, just look at FromSoft's output for the PS4 for example. Bloodborne came out very early, and while it looks great, it doesn't hold a candle to Elden Ring. Though gameplay wise I have to say I prefer it. Elden Ring has too much stuff in it(crafting, gathering, tons of cookie cutter dungeons, and too many easy boss fights) for me. Bloodborne is very stripped down and devoid of fluff. I can sort of keep the whole game in my head and I love that about a game.

shapefrog 4y ago

Furthermore, why does a 2023 released game, in development since 2018, run like utter garbage on said spec hardware that is orders of magnitude more performant than last years specs ...

GaelFG 4y ago

If you are serious (I do game development for a living and work on graphical assets daily so that seems evident for me, but I totally understand it can be arcane stuff) it's simply that they choose a stylized graphical style avoiding a lot of costly details you generaly find in hight end games. They use low poly models, as far as I know there is no baked lightmap (these are pretty expensives but are mandatory in a lot of engine if you want realistic shadows on higtly detailled environment) and their shader materials probably use very simple and low resolution maps. All these thing decrease the asset footprint by orders of magnitude. If you want to look in more detail in can look and compare a similar rendering in unity. Taking two unity exemple you can compare : - 'chop chop' a game using a similar rendering style : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTTHOpUQDE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTTHOpUQDE, if you take the pig and its environment showed in the video and go in the github repository you can see they only use one texture map : an albedo one. All the models (pig + environment) weight about 6mB of textures and 350kB of models. and are sufficient to have the full main character and an environment. - a 'realistic PBR workflow gun asset' on asset store (choose randomly but seems nice, realistic and containing only the gun so we can see download size) : https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/props/guns/free-fps-weapon-akm-180663#content https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/props/guns/free-fps.... The workflow need 6 maps (there are 7 here but you generaly only use either a normal map or a heightmap) The pack weight 35MB. It's only the gun, you lack a full character handling it and the environment. While I really like zelda, even with stylized graphics the game look a bit outdated for me. The cellshaded characters are fluid and pretty but the 'low resolution texture and low poly models' bother me a bit especially on environments. The artistic direction is really good but technically I can only think they are held back by the hardware. As a game developer, I totally want to use all the resources i know i can find on the target hardware. Trust me even today they are lots of features game designer dream to put in game and cant because computing resources are still limited ^^. Do game NEEDS them to be fun ? Of course not, but COULD they be fun experiences ? I think yes :)

Dalewyn 4y ago
>If you are serious I absolutely am serious; a lot of games and software in general today demand far more system resources than they have any reasonable right to. Don't give me "but the textures!" and the like either, optimize that stuff better instead. Whether it's Windows 10/11 or Call of Duty or Elite: Dangerous or Chrome or whatever strikes your fancy, software today has no business demanding the resources they do. Lest we forget, the hardware we can buy today would have been considered supercomputers just a few years ago. You want to tell me that will choke and croak just doing mundane stuff like playing games or browsing the internet?

m_rpn 4y ago

We need this power because companies need to keep selling us new stuff and also because developers nowadays can't optimize their games too much since their managers make them do ten times the work, in half the time, and for one third of the pay they had on the 1990s.

gowld 4y ago
Definitely written by someone who wasn't alive in the 1990s.
- m_rpn 3y ago
  I actually was.

PurpleRamen 4y ago

Because this hardware is for a different experience. Zelda is nice, but the style has its limits. It's kinda like asking why Disney invests hundreds of millions of Dollar into Marvel and Star Wars-Movies, when you can also make a cheaper but polished animation-movie with a fraction of that price. It's simply not the same.

CyberDildonics 4y ago

I doubt anyone is asking that question since none of what you said is true. This just seems like rant of someone wanting to play recent games and not wanting to upgrade their computer. If that's the case, just say that instead of whining about a trend that's been going on for 40 years.

gowld 4y ago
Not even that. The games are playable on low end computers, with lower details. It's just content-free ranting.