It seems like forever since we did this last. Get a free game on
Thursday, I mean. Oh sure, we got one LAST Thursday, but that was part
of the one-a-day-Christmas-give-away thing Epic had going on. This...
this is us going back to the regular schedule... which paradoxically
feels special.

Anyway, today we get:

* Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy
https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/marvels-guardians-of-the-galaxy
Wait... wasn't this the game that got shut down last year
(no, that was Marvel Avengers). Oh, then this was that
Marvel game Epic gave away a while back? (No, there was
no such game). So which one was this? I honestly can't
remember. But I like the franchise, and reviews are
generally good (also, free!) so, sure, 'add to library'.
I'm sure I'll get around to playing it...eventually.

It seems the once-a-day thing is over, since this give-away lasts a
whole week, and Epic is already advertising NEXT week's game. Can't
say I'm upset at that; making an announcement every day was
exhausting! ;-)

On 1/4/2024 5:58 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
> It seems like forever since we did this last. Get a free game on
> Thursday, I mean. Oh sure, we got one LAST Thursday, but that was part
> of the one-a-day-Christmas-give-away thing Epic had going on. This...
> this is us going back to the regular schedule... which paradoxically
> feels special.
>
> Anyway, today we get:
>
>
> * Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy
> https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/marvels-guardians-of-the-galaxy
> Wait... wasn't this the game that got shut down last year
> (no, that was Marvel Avengers). Oh, then this was that
> Marvel game Epic gave away a while back? (No, there was
> no such game). So which one was this? I honestly can't
> remember. But I like the franchise, and reviews are
> generally good (also, free!) so, sure, 'add to library'.
> I'm sure I'll get around to playing it...eventually.
>
>
>
> It seems the once-a-day thing is over, since this give-away lasts a
> whole week, and Epic is already advertising NEXT week's game. Can't
> say I'm upset at that; making an announcement every day was
> exhausting! ;-)

ohhh, that's not what they wrote before. Scandalous indeed.

Also scandalous: what exactly does this game need 80gb for? I know it's
getting to be the normal size lately, but I still don't really see
enough difference in the games to justify that.
Maybe I just need new glasses. Or at one point it just becomes a futile
exercise mostly designed to drive new HD sales.
Who knows?

Thanks. :)

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

> It seems like forever since we did this last. Get a free game on
> Thursday, I mean. Oh sure, we got one LAST Thursday, but that was part
> of the one-a-day-Christmas-give-away thing Epic had going on. This...
> this is us going back to the regular schedule... which paradoxically
> feels special.

> Anyway, today we get:

> * Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy
> https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/marvels-guardians-of-the-galaxy
> Wait... wasn't this the game that got shut down last year
> (no, that was Marvel Avengers). Oh, then this was that
> Marvel game Epic gave away a while back? (No, there was
> no such game). So which one was this? I honestly can't
> remember. But I like the franchise, and reviews are
> generally good (also, free!) so, sure, 'add to library'.
> I'm sure I'll get around to playing it...eventually.

> It seems the once-a-day thing is over, since this give-away lasts a
> whole week, and Epic is already advertising NEXT week's game. Can't
> say I'm upset at that; making an announcement every day was
> exhausting! ;-)

--
"In all my prayers for all of you, I always pray with joy because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now..." ???Philippians 1:4-5. >8 hrs. of Z with 1 pee brk.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:57:54 +0100, kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 1/4/2024 5:58 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>
>> It seems like forever since we did this last. Get a free game on
>> Thursday, I mean. Oh sure, we got one LAST Thursday, but that was part
>> of the one-a-day-Christmas-give-away thing Epic had going on. This...
>> this is us going back to the regular schedule... which paradoxically
>> feels special.
>>
>> Anyway, today we get:
>>
>>
>> * Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy
>> https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/marvels-guardians-of-the-galaxy
>> Wait... wasn't this the game that got shut down last year
>> (no, that was Marvel Avengers). Oh, then this was that
>> Marvel game Epic gave away a while back? (No, there was
>> no such game). So which one was this? I honestly can't
>> remember. But I like the franchise, and reviews are
>> generally good (also, free!) so, sure, 'add to library'.
>> I'm sure I'll get around to playing it...eventually.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems the once-a-day thing is over, since this give-away lasts a
>> whole week, and Epic is already advertising NEXT week's game. Can't
>> say I'm upset at that; making an announcement every day was
>> exhausting! ;-)
>
>ohhh, that's not what they wrote before. Scandalous indeed.
>
>Also scandalous: what exactly does this game need 80gb for? I know it's
>getting to be the normal size lately, but I still don't really see
>enough difference in the games to justify that.
>Maybe I just need new glasses. Or at one point it just becomes a futile
>exercise mostly designed to drive new HD sales.
>Who knows?

I can't speak for this game in particular, but the biggest consumers
of disk space in video games are a) video/movies, b) sounds, and c)
textures.

But - as more and more games move to in-game cutscenes, videos
actually use a lot less space these days than they used to. On the
other hand, as games not only are fully voiced, but use more speech,
disk space consumption for audio is increasing. A lot of games are
also very careless with what they install, and you'll often find
multiple versions of the same speech but in different languages on the
hard-drive. This is done so you can swap languages 'on the fly'
(without necessitating a lengthy download first) but it would be nice
if this were an option for those who are strapped for disk space.

As we demand sharper textures and higher-fidelity visuals, disk space
allocated to textures is increasing too. I'm not too upset about this
one. Ten years ago, an inconsequential note pinned to the wall would
be a blurry mess of pixels; nowadays, you can actually read it. It
really helps with the immersion. But all that detail requires a lot of
space. Modern games also have a lot more variety in their textures,
rather than re-using the same small handful on map after map.

TL;DR: games take a lot more disk space because we demand more of them
in terms of audio and visual quality. You can still get a game to fit
into a few gigabytes (or even a few megabytes) but it's not going to
look or sound as good.

On 1/5/2024 7:44 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:57:54 +0100, kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 1/4/2024 5:58 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>
>>> It seems like forever since we did this last. Get a free game on
>>> Thursday, I mean. Oh sure, we got one LAST Thursday, but that was part
>>> of the one-a-day-Christmas-give-away thing Epic had going on. This...
>>> this is us going back to the regular schedule... which paradoxically
>>> feels special.
>>>
>>> Anyway, today we get:
>>>
>>>
>>> * Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy
>>> https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/marvels-guardians-of-the-galaxy
>>> Wait... wasn't this the game that got shut down last year
>>> (no, that was Marvel Avengers). Oh, then this was that
>>> Marvel game Epic gave away a while back? (No, there was
>>> no such game). So which one was this? I honestly can't
>>> remember. But I like the franchise, and reviews are
>>> generally good (also, free!) so, sure, 'add to library'.
>>> I'm sure I'll get around to playing it...eventually.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems the once-a-day thing is over, since this give-away lasts a
>>> whole week, and Epic is already advertising NEXT week's game. Can't
>>> say I'm upset at that; making an announcement every day was
>>> exhausting! ;-)
>>
>> ohhh, that's not what they wrote before. Scandalous indeed.
>>
>> Also scandalous: what exactly does this game need 80gb for? I know it's
>> getting to be the normal size lately, but I still don't really see
>> enough difference in the games to justify that.
>> Maybe I just need new glasses. Or at one point it just becomes a futile
>> exercise mostly designed to drive new HD sales.
>> Who knows?
>
> I can't speak for this game in particular, but the biggest consumers
> of disk space in video games are a) video/movies, b) sounds, and c)
> textures.
>
> But - as more and more games move to in-game cutscenes, videos
> actually use a lot less space these days than they used to. On the
> other hand, as games not only are fully voiced, but use more speech,
> disk space consumption for audio is increasing. A lot of games are
> also very careless with what they install, and you'll often find
> multiple versions of the same speech but in different languages on the
> hard-drive. This is done so you can swap languages 'on the fly'
> (without necessitating a lengthy download first) but it would be nice
> if this were an option for those who are strapped for disk space.
>
> As we demand sharper textures and higher-fidelity visuals, disk space
> allocated to textures is increasing too. I'm not too upset about this
> one. Ten years ago, an inconsequential note pinned to the wall would
> be a blurry mess of pixels; nowadays, you can actually read it. It
> really helps with the immersion. But all that detail requires a lot of
> space. Modern games also have a lot more variety in their textures,
> rather than re-using the same small handful on map after map.
>
>
> TL;DR: games take a lot more disk space because we demand more of them
> in terms of audio and visual quality. You can still get a game to fit
> into a few gigabytes (or even a few megabytes) but it's not going to
> look or sound as good.

Oft times they could be significantly reduced in size, increased in
fidelity, and performance as evidenced by a myriad of games with texture
mods that do all that. It's just lazy bloat all around.

- Justisaur

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

On 1/5/24 10:22, Justisaur wrote:
> On 1/5/2024 7:44 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:57:54 +0100, kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/4/2024 5:58 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It seems like forever since we did this last. Get a free game on
>>>> Thursday, I mean. Oh sure, we got one LAST Thursday, but that was part
>>>> of the one-a-day-Christmas-give-away thing Epic had going on. This...
>>>> this is us going back to the regular schedule... which paradoxically
>>>> feels special.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, today we get:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy
>>>> https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/marvels-guardians-of-the-galaxy
>>>>      Wait... wasn't this the game that got shut down last year
>>>>      (no, that was Marvel Avengers). Oh, then this was that
>>>>      Marvel game Epic gave away a while back? (No, there was
>>>>      no such game). So which one was this? I honestly can't
>>>>      remember. But I like the franchise, and reviews are
>>>>      generally good (also, free!) so, sure, 'add to library'.
>>>>      I'm sure I'll get around to playing it...eventually.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems the once-a-day thing is over, since this give-away lasts a
>>>> whole week, and Epic is already advertising NEXT week's game. Can't
>>>> say I'm upset at that; making an announcement every day was
>>>> exhausting! ;-)
>>>
>>> ohhh, that's not what they wrote before. Scandalous indeed.
>>>
>>> Also scandalous: what exactly does this game need 80gb for? I know it's
>>> getting to be the normal size lately, but I still don't really see
>>> enough difference in the games to justify that.
>>> Maybe I just need new glasses. Or at one point it just becomes a futile
>>> exercise mostly designed to drive new HD sales.
>>> Who knows?
>>
>> I can't speak for this game in particular, but the biggest consumers
>> of disk space in video games are a) video/movies, b) sounds, and c)
>> textures.
>>
>> But - as more and more games move to in-game cutscenes, videos
>> actually use a lot less space these days than they used to. On the
>> other hand, as games not only are fully voiced, but use more speech,
>> disk space consumption for audio is increasing. A lot of games are
>> also very careless with what they install, and you'll often find
>> multiple versions of the same speech but in different languages on the
>> hard-drive. This is done so you can swap languages 'on the fly'
>> (without necessitating a lengthy download first) but it would be nice
>> if this were an option for those who are strapped for disk space.
>>
>> As we demand sharper textures and higher-fidelity visuals, disk space
>> allocated to textures is increasing too. I'm not too upset about this
>> one. Ten years ago, an inconsequential note pinned to the wall would
>> be a blurry mess of pixels; nowadays, you can actually read it. It
>> really helps with the immersion. But all that detail requires a lot of
>> space. Modern games also have a lot more variety in their textures,
>> rather than re-using the same small handful on map after map.
>>
>>
>> TL;DR: games take a lot more disk space because we demand more of them
>> in terms of audio and visual quality. You can still get a game to fit
>> into a few gigabytes (or even a few megabytes) but it's not going to
>> look or sound as good.
>
> Oft times they could be significantly reduced in size, increased in
> fidelity, and performance as evidenced by a myriad of games with texture
> mods that do all that.  It's just lazy bloat all around.
>
> - Justisaur

It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
candycanearter07 wrote:

>It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
>on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.

Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!

Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

>* Marvel: Guardians of the Galaxy

Yay! grabbed it

rms

Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> candycanearter07 wrote:

> >It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
> >program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
> >on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.

> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!

> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom

Just like the old days like Origin. :P
--
"In all my prayers for all of you, I always pray with joy because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now..." ???Philippians 1:4-5. >8 hrs. of Z with 1 pee brk. 2 cold! 2024 isn't any betta.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:

> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> >It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>> >program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
>> >on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.
>
>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>
>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>
> Just like the old days like Origin. :P

Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to upgrade
the hardware.

--
Clotho, Lachesis, Atropos -- the only sysadmins that matter

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Mark P. Nelson wrote:

>ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>
>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>
>>> >It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>> >program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
>>> >on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.
>>
>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>
>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>
>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>
>Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to upgrade
>the hardware.

Yeah. The order now is: 1. upgrade hardware 2. developers hear about it
and cripple all old machines in favor of slowing down your current one.

Before it was: 1. Game comes out, with ridiculous requirements, 2. Time
to upgrade your hardware. Like when Quake was released. You either had
Pentium, or you were going to buy Pentium. Or "Hello Mr. Turtle!" with
your 486 DX100. Rebel Assault was called Rebel Insult by my 386 friends.

Honestly, older sequence is better. You knew you were getting something
for your money, and the performance couldn't be taken away.

Nowadays, it just seems like they're doing it to spite us, and the
performance improvement lasts for as long as they will suffer it.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

On 1/6/24 13:00, Zaghadka wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> Mark P. Nelson wrote:
>
>> ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>> news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>
>>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>>>> program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
>>>>> on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.
>>>
>>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>>
>>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>>
>>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>>
>> Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to upgrade
>> the hardware.
>
> Yeah. The order now is: 1. upgrade hardware 2. developers hear about it
> and cripple all old machines in favor of slowing down your current one.
>
> Before it was: 1. Game comes out, with ridiculous requirements, 2. Time
> to upgrade your hardware. Like when Quake was released. You either had
> Pentium, or you were going to buy Pentium. Or "Hello Mr. Turtle!" with
> your 486 DX100. Rebel Assault was called Rebel Insult by my 386 friends.
>
> Honestly, older sequence is better. You knew you were getting something
> for your money, and the performance couldn't be taken away.
>
> Nowadays, it just seems like they're doing it to spite us, and the
> performance improvement lasts for as long as they will suffer it.

Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
systems and use style to make up for it.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 1/6/2024 11:54 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> On 1/6/24 13:00, Zaghadka wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>> Mark P. Nelson wrote:
>>
>>> ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>>> news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>
>>>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>>>>> program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and
>>>>>> rely
>>>>>> on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way
>>>>>> less.
>>>>
>>>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>>>
>>>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>>>
>>>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>>>
>>> Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to
>>> upgrade
>>> the hardware.
>>
>> Yeah. The order now is: 1. upgrade hardware 2. developers hear about it
>> and cripple all old machines in favor of slowing down your current one.
>>
>> Before it was: 1. Game comes out, with ridiculous requirements, 2. Time
>> to upgrade your hardware. Like when Quake was released. You either had
>> Pentium, or you were going to buy Pentium. Or "Hello Mr. Turtle!" with
>> your 486 DX100. Rebel Assault was called Rebel Insult by my 386 friends.
>>
>> Honestly, older sequence is better. You knew you were getting something
>> for your money, and the performance couldn't be taken away.
>>
>> Nowadays, it just seems like they're doing it to spite us, and the
>> performance improvement lasts for as long as they will suffer it.
>
> Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
> systems and use style to make up for it.

Or just plain programming competence.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), "Mark P. Nelson"
<markpnelson@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>
>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>
>>> >It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>> >program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and rely
>>> >on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way less.
>>
>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>
>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>
>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>
>Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to upgrade
>the hardware.

I dunno, I found the Wing Commander upgrade path to be gradual enough
that I never had to upgrade specifically for those games:

WC 1 (1990) - make sure your PC has a 386 and 2MB EMS RAM
WC 2 (1992) - get a sound-card (and maybe a 486)
WC Academy (1993) - no upgrade needed
WC Privateer (1993) - 4MB RAM highly recommended
WC Armada (1994) - have you heard about network cards?
WC 3 (1994) - 8MB RAM, CD-ROM drive, & (preferably) a fast 486
WC IV (1996) - no upgrade needed
WC Privateer II (1997) - Pentiums are nice
WC Prophecy (1998) - you have a 3D accelerator, right?
WC Arena (2007) - why are you making me play on an XBox?

But Origin games in general pushed the hardware hard. I had to upgrade
to PC just to play "Ultima VI", and "Ultima VII" demanded a whopping
20MB disk space all on its own. "Strike Commander" - released in 1993
- demanded 1995-era hardware to run semi-smoothly ("Ultima VIII" was
similar; released in 1994, its engine was too demanding for the
typical hardware of the day. By the time "Crusader" - which used the
same engine - came out in two years later, hardware had caught up.

But the 90s were truly transformational for PC gaming. At the start of
the decade, some developers were still releasing CGA games that used
the PC speaker. By the end, games used millions of colors, had 16-bit
sound, full speech and video, and with fourth-generation 3D
accelerators. Moore's law was in full effect, and developers took full
advantage of all this new processing power. They had to; a developer
that released a game that would have been perfectly acceptable a year
ago would have been seen as desperately behind the times and the game
wouldn't sell.

But because of this it was really easy for consumers to fall behind
the curve of technology. Your 1990 PC probably couldn't play 1995
games, much less games from 1999.

Meanwhile, today, you can still get a pretty good gaming experience on
ten-year old hardware. Sure, you won't be able to turn on all the
bells-n-whistles, but you won't be forced into potato-mode just to
play.

It's sort of amazing, if you think of it that way.

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 14:29:13 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Dimensional Traveler wrote:

>On 1/6/2024 11:54 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> On 1/6/24 13:00, Zaghadka wrote:
>>> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>> Mark P. Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>>> ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>>>> news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>>>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>>>>>> program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and
>>>>>>> rely
>>>>>>> on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way
>>>>>>> less.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>>>>
>>>>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>>>>
>>>>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to
>>>> upgrade
>>>> the hardware.
>>>
>>> Yeah. The order now is: 1. upgrade hardware 2. developers hear about it
>>> and cripple all old machines in favor of slowing down your current one.
>>>
>>> Before it was: 1. Game comes out, with ridiculous requirements, 2. Time
>>> to upgrade your hardware. Like when Quake was released. You either had
>>> Pentium, or you were going to buy Pentium. Or "Hello Mr. Turtle!" with
>>> your 486 DX100. Rebel Assault was called Rebel Insult by my 386 friends.
>>>
>>> Honestly, older sequence is better. You knew you were getting something
>>> for your money, and the performance couldn't be taken away.
>>>
>>> Nowadays, it just seems like they're doing it to spite us, and the
>>> performance improvement lasts for as long as they will suffer it.
>>
>> Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
>> systems and use style to make up for it.
>
>Or just plain programming competence.

+1

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

On 1/6/2024 11:54 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> On 1/6/24 13:00, Zaghadka wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>> Mark P. Nelson wrote:
>>
>>> ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>>> news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>
>>>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>>>>> program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy and
>>>>>> rely
>>>>>> on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way
>>>>>> less.
>>>>
>>>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>>>
>>>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>>>
>>>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>>>
>>> Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to
>>> upgrade
>>> the hardware.
>>
>> Yeah. The order now is: 1. upgrade hardware 2. developers hear about it
>> and cripple all old machines in favor of slowing down your current one.
>>
>> Before it was: 1. Game comes out, with ridiculous requirements, 2. Time
>> to upgrade your hardware. Like when Quake was released. You either had
>> Pentium, or you were going to buy Pentium. Or "Hello Mr. Turtle!" with
>> your 486 DX100. Rebel Assault was called Rebel Insult by my 386 friends.
>>
>> Honestly, older sequence is better. You knew you were getting something
>> for your money, and the performance couldn't be taken away.
>>
>> Nowadays, it just seems like they're doing it to spite us, and the
>> performance improvement lasts for as long as they will suffer it.
>
> Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
> systems and use style to make up for it.

Some indie games. BG3 is a real hog for instance.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

On 1/8/2024 9:08 PM, Justisaur wrote:
> On 1/6/2024 11:54 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> On 1/6/24 13:00, Zaghadka wrote:
>>> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 18:54:10 -0000 (UTC), in
>>> comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>> Mark P. Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>>> ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote in
>>>> news:cuKcncvHj9yTPgX4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:05:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>>>>> candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It feels like the same thing is happening here that happened with
>>>>>>> program optimization.. Improving tech lets programmers be lazy
>>>>>>> and rely
>>>>>>> on high-end systems when it could easily be optimized to use way
>>>>>>> less.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Me: I just significantly upgraded my hardware!
>>>>>
>>>>>> Developers: Om nom nom nom nom nom nom
>>>>>
>>>>> Just like the old days like Origin. :P
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, every time a new Wing Commander game came out, it was time to
>>>> upgrade
>>>> the hardware.
>>>
>>> Yeah. The order now is: 1. upgrade hardware 2. developers hear about it
>>> and cripple all old machines in favor of slowing down your current one.
>>>
>>> Before it was: 1. Game comes out, with ridiculous requirements, 2. Time
>>> to upgrade your hardware. Like when Quake was released. You either had
>>> Pentium, or you were going to buy Pentium. Or "Hello Mr. Turtle!" with
>>> your 486 DX100. Rebel Assault was called Rebel Insult by my 386 friends.
>>>
>>> Honestly, older sequence is better. You knew you were getting something
>>> for your money, and the performance couldn't be taken away.
>>>
>>> Nowadays, it just seems like they're doing it to spite us, and the
>>> performance improvement lasts for as long as they will suffer it.
>>
>> Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
>> systems and use style to make up for it.
>
> Some indie games.  BG3 is a real hog for instance.
>

is BG3 really an indie?

On 07/01/2024 15:57, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> But because of this it was really easy for consumers to fall behind
> the curve of technology. Your 1990 PC probably couldn't play 1995
> games, much less games from 1999.
>
> Meanwhile, today, you can still get a pretty good gaming experience on
> ten-year old hardware. Sure, you won't be able to turn on all the
> bells-n-whistles, but you won't be forced into potato-mode just to
> play.
>
> It's sort of amazing, if you think of it that way.

I tend to agree. I upgraded my last system as I thought the GPU was
failing (turned out to be the PSU even though it passed the paper clip
test) just because I thought there where a few games that it struggled
with so why not. Even then upgrade was done on the cheap as for once I
said to myself why spend all that extra money on being able to run games
at high settings that I don't even want to play.

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 21:11:43 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
kyonshi wrote*:

[snip]

>On 1/8/2024 9:08 PM, Justisaur wrote:
>> On 1/6/2024 11:54 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
>>> systems and use style to make up for it.
>>
>> Some indie games.  BG3 is a real hog for instance.
>>
>
>is BG3 really an indie?

AFAIC, it's a AAA game. Larian isn't a major... yet, but they produce AAA
quality games. D:OS and D:OS2 for instance.

https://www.mobygames.com/company/3377/larian-studios-nv/

They were an indy back in the Divine Divinity days. IMHO, they're a good
deal more now. I expect great things from them, but I hope and pray they
don't launch their own %$*&&! store.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

* You guys really need to learn how to snip.

On 1/9/2024 8:19 AM, Zaghadka wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 21:11:43 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> kyonshi wrote*:
>
> [snip]
>
>> On 1/8/2024 9:08 PM, Justisaur wrote:
>>> On 1/6/2024 11:54 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> Yeah. At least indie games and Nintendo still target less powerful
>>>> systems and use style to make up for it.
>>>
>>> Some indie games.  BG3 is a real hog for instance.
>>>
>>
>> is BG3 really an indie?
>
> AFAIC, it's a AAA game. Larian isn't a major... yet, but they produce AAA
> quality games. D:OS and D:OS2 for instance.
>
> https://www.mobygames.com/company/3377/larian-studios-nv/
>
> They were an indy back in the Divine Divinity days. IMHO, they're a good
> deal more now. I expect great things from them, but I hope and pray they
> don't launch their own %$*&&! store.
>

BG3 had $100M budget, so I guess it is AAA. I'd just never heard of
Larian before it. I had heard of their games, but never tried them as I
thought they were just another also-ran turn based rpg throwback. I
also got them confused with the other turn based rpg game I tried that
had divine in it that I did try and didn't care for.

> * You guys really need to learn how to snip.

I used to. I've gotten lazy as no one else seems to do it anymore.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

On 1/9/24 13:54, Justisaur wrote:
> On 1/9/2024 8:19 AM, Zaghadka wrote:
>> * You guys really need to learn how to snip.
>
> I used to. I've gotten lazy as no one else seems to do it anymore.

I try to usually.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom