Games just keep getting larger and larger and larger...

Post by **Trey** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:23 am

I was thinking as I began to download HL2:Eps.2 (which is an 8+Gb ISO, which will take around 150-160 hours to download

), we're already seeing an average game sizes of 4 or 8Gb (or 2x4Gbs). Where the hell are people going to host things of that size? 4share is just not going to cut it, you'd have files with 200 parts, not to mention it's larger than the 5Gbs 4share alots. Of course it's not a problem right now.

Post by **zobraks** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:46 am

I don't have that problem. There are (literally) hundreds of great games from the nineties that I haven't played, and they rarely take more than one or two CDs. Moreover, you don't need a beast of a computer to get them going nicely.

Why do people have to play all the latest games (if they haven't played the great oldies) remains the mystery to me.

NE0 · Post by **NE0** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:00 pm

Who needs new superficial games when we got loads of oldies but goldies....

Post by **Trey** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:01 pm

NeoRAGERx wrote:Who needs new superficial games when we got loads of oldies but goldies....

I kind of figure the current trend will continue, meaning that there will be a ton of overlooked games in the future too. But even those games will be huge, in size anyway.

Post by **Tadrio** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:26 am

Yeah, let's hope the evolution of harddisks, backup storage, and bandwith will be able to keep up

The difference is that while formerly, developers tried to get the games as small as possible, they do the exact opposite today. If your game is finished and it only is 1.5 GB, then you blow it up. Maybe store music uncompressed or use a less efficient FMV codec, until the thing uses the DL-DVD's whole 9 gigs, to scare people away from downloading it.

It doesn't really keep anyone from downloading popular huge games I guess, with comfortable Torrenting and all, but it's bad for the underdogs...

Post by **Mister_Headcrab** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:15 am

The folks that developed "kkrieger" should share their "secret" with other game developers.

freakboy · Post by **freakboy** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:55 pm

Mister_Headcrab wrote:The folks that developed "kkrieger" should share their "secret" with other game developers.

Their secret is nontexture tiled corridoors with no real game content. Thats why their game is so small. Its almost like those demoscene apps. Just a flythrough - no wav sounds, no physics, no textures just formulas. Also Krieger also has high hardware requirements.

Post by **hurenBock** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:58 pm

sure they get.......

graphics i.e textures are getting bigger and better like videos and and and

Post by **nanette** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 3:39 pm

LOL, I'm new here and first of course checked out the games list.
Found that the full ISO of Lost Files of Sherlock Holmes (1992) upped by Hfric was only 16 MB and thought that this couldn't be right.
I've got the original in a whopping great cardboard box with CD+manual+whatnot. And guess what, the CD is indeed only 16 MB....and kept me very pleasantly occupied for at least a week.
Unheard of these days!

Post by **Scaryfun** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 2:51 am

Gameplay over graphics... developers need to remember this.

Post by **Trey** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 3:04 am

Scaryfun wrote:Gameplay over graphics... developers need to remember this.

They won't.

Post by **Virgil** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 8:29 am

Developers will, and probably still remember, but marketers won't.

Post by **zobraks** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 8:41 am

Trey wrote:
Scaryfun wrote:Gameplay over graphics... developers need to remember this.
They won't.

And why would they, when the consumers (gamers) are ready to swallow any piece of empty cr(beep!)p if it's over-hyped enough?

In the eighties or nineties the computer games public was much more technically (and intelectually) savvy, and you had to think of something original and clever to make a good game that sells. Nowadays, all you have to do is to make a decent game and start the endless line of sequels (which are the same thing, in a more colorful package), the gigantic marketing machines - mainly by persuading the (uncritical) majority of gamers that that's exactly what they need - do the rest.

My (poor) English doesn't allow me to explain the whole scam better but I hope you got the picture.

Doomed_Space_Marine · Post by **Doomed_Space_Marine** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:14 am

The old graphics over game-play debacles have been going on forever. Nothing has changed.

Most developers are afraid to take risks, as the bottom-line will always be the sale figures, not how awesomely innovative & original the game is. There is a chance the public won’t warm to what you are putting out. A good example is the contrast of System Shock sales against that of Doom 2.

Developers seem content to churn out completely average run-of-the-mill shooters, as long as it is utilizing the latest pixel shading tech and gigs of high res’ textures. Obviously some people are buying these things, as the software companies keep putting more of it out. I don’t see things changing in the foreseeable future.

Post by **Trey** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:26 am

Right now it seems to be all about 'eye-candy', actual story and gameplay usually take a backseat. It's all about who's pushing the envelope graphically, not much attention is spent on innovative gameplay. The only game I can think of recently that totally broke the mold was 'Portal'.