wouldn't focusing on procedural generation and other techniques like that *increase* the cost per MB? Smaller amounts of data needed to create larger amounts of content at runtime?
-
-
-
for the record I'm only saying I don't think cost-per-mb is a good way to measure what hes talking about here
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
IMO the variance in those (log-scale!) graphs is way too high to draw conclusions like 'it's plateaued'. I'm also uncertain about his system-driven vs. content-driven comment: which byte is more expensive, the program's, a level design's, character model's, or terrain texture's?
-
I suppose the fact that procedural generation is a big aspect of the business strategy of some publishers sorts of answer your question.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Hmm, dunno, my theory would be that people might have reached a point of diminishing returns in terms of improvement to the experience per extra data added, no? At least, in audio (my field), the low hanging fruits such as replacing 8khz waves with 44khz waves are long gone.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I suspect people underestimate the value of custom-fit engines, and over-estimate the cost. If your game is about sausages, you can make a lot of very specific sausage stuff to speed up development, rather than have to express the same via "Actors" or other generic systems.
-
With just two engines, all games have the approximately same iteration cost, and none of them get to fully exploit the specifics of their use case.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
2005 was also the time of ps3/spus and everyone scrambling to graft multithreading onto their engines.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.