I've got mw and mw2 for pc and love the playability. I haven't noticed any bugs in them. I really want to get the pc version of black ops but am very worried since it's such a fast port. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
none other than that fact that it refuses to start on single core computers (probably got good money from intel and amd)
and dont even start with that "who has single core anyway ?"
same game engine as mw2 and mw2 ran on max detail on a 2000mhz amd , also both games look like puke in todays standards
they shall burn in hell for this
Zombie mod is still pretty buggy because it uses the crappy match making system from MW2 but the muliplayer seems to use cod4's server browser. Overall there are some bugs in it. I paid full price and wish i hadn't it's not worth it. it's not even worth paying the standard PC game price of £30. Wait till it hits half price before you buy it by then all the problems with performance, crashing, poor match making etc should be fixed.
P.S i have owned all of the COD games at one point or another. I'm a massive gamer and have been since my teens. It's just a shame activision like money, stock prices and screwing people becuase if they had left IW to do their thing MW2 and BO would have been way more enjoyable.
p.p.s on second thought you'd be better off getting MOH and then waiting for crysis 2
Oooooooooooh man I love the Crysis series, although I expected more out of Warhead. Have you played any of the Splinter Cells? I haven't played the recent one.
I noticed Infinity Ward didn't do black ops. Why did they get dropped?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
souljaboy said:
none other than that fact that it refuses to start on single core computers (probably got good money from intel and amd)
and dont even start with that "who has single core anyway ?"
same game engine as mw2 and mw2 ran on max detail on a 2000mhz amd , also both games look like puke in todays standards
they shall burn in hell for this
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wrong wrONG WRONG.
MW2 and BO are two diff studios producing the games, therefor CANNOT be based off of the same engine (Treyarch VS IW). If you are trying to game on a single core computer, GTFO the gaming community and go back under that rock you have been hiding under for the last 5 years. Both games look great pent up against todays current standards for online FPS games. MAX detail && MAX AA/AF @ 1920x1080 and the game looks great.
befor you go flaming a game because you cant afford a computer good enough to play it.. might wanna do some research, or actually play the game. KTHXBAI
ArabianRATA said:
I've got mw and mw2 for pc and love the playability. I haven't noticed any bugs in them. I really want to get the pc version of black ops but am very worried since it's such a fast port. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are still alot of bugs in the game. One of the few ive noticed is random client crashes/freezes... This happens on both my system and my roommates system. Both of our computers are mid/high end gaming machines and are pretty closely spec'd with a few brand differences. Another is some server side issues with random crashes/server reboots. Ive owned a BO server for almost 2 months now and its a knows issue that Treyarch/Gameservers.com are trying to work out(this happens on both gameservers.com servers and official treyarch servers).
Another bug. Say you purchase the Aug + 4 attachments. $2000(for aug) $7000(for attachments). When you prestige, the game will charge you $9000 for the aug and make you purchase the attachments all over again. IDK if this is a wide spread problem, but thats how it is for me... of course i dont mine, i play alot of wager matches or clan matches and have over $100k credits.
ArabianRATA said:
Oooooooooooh man I love the Crysis series, although I expected more out of Warhead. Have you played any of the Splinter Cells? I haven't played the recent one.
I noticed Infinity Ward didn't do black ops. Why did they get dropped?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Infinity Ward didnt make BO because they were promised alot as a studio for MW2 but Activision didnt follow through with the promises. IW refused to make BO. Rumor has it that they are working on a title all on their own thats supposed to give the CoD series a run for its money.
Hope this information helps.
jeallen0 said:
Infinity Ward didnt make BO because they were promised alot as a studio for MW2 but Activision didnt follow through with the promises. IW refused to make BO. Rumor has it that they are working on a title all on their own thats supposed to give the CoD series a run for its money.
Hope this information helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well my information is pretty much that except for a couple of differences. My understanding is that the 2 founders of infinity ward now have a new studio that works with EA and that half of the original IW staff quit or were fired when activision fired West and Zampella. IW didn't refuse to work with treyarch, they can't because IW is owned by activision and has been for a while. The refusal came from the founders who still own the rights to the COD brand and a few of the underlying technologies. Unfortunately this doesn't include the engines. BO does use the MW2 engine for the single player. Infact the MW2 engine is almost identical to the engine used in COD4 with the only major difference being in the multiplayer anti cheat change to VAC and the matchmaking.
In BO's multiplayer this is evident if you compare the server browser to the the one included in COD4. It has pretty much the same look and feel and the big give away is the bug that prevents you clicking on a listed entry until about 10 seconds after a refresh start. That bug is present in COD4.
Games from different developers can use the same engine. For example, the MOH single player uses the Unreal engine iirc (the multiplayer was made by Dice and so frostbite and that's also why the multiplayer looks a lot better than the campaign) and i've lost count of the amount of games that used the various quake engines. It's all a matter of licencing
M3PH said:
Games from different developers can use the same engine. For example, the MOH single player uses the Unreal engine iirc (the multiplayer was made by Dice and so frostbite and that's also why the multiplayer looks a lot better than the campaign) and i've lost count of the amount of games that used the various quake engines. It's all a matter of licencing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true for the most part. BO is using a deviation of the engine used in WaW. its pretty obvious in gameplay. if you look at the code for the COD4 and MW2 engine, they are basically the same thing(with a few tweaks in gameplay and physics), but the engine running WaW and BO are pretty different(but similar to eachother in code style).
jeallen0 said:
This is true for the most part. BO is using a deviation of the engine used in WaW. its pretty obvious in gameplay. if you look at the code for the COD4 and MW2 engine, they are basically the same thing(with a few tweaks in gameplay and physics), but the engine running WaW and BO are pretty different(but similar to each other in code style).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The engine in WaW is as little as makes no difference identical to the COD4 engine. There has been very little evolution on it. Please bear in mind that between cod2 and cod4 (cod3 was another treyarch game and didn't feature on the PC) there was something like a 4 year gap. That gap was because IW were building the COD4 engine from the ground up. The only reason we have had a cod game every year since is that Activision (who own both treyarch and IW) are more focused on making money and not innovation. Hence no really engine improvements.
Hell, i just read an article that suggests that the real reason west and zampella were fired wasn't over bonus' but over the proposal from activision to charge a monthly subscription for the MP. It also says that Activision have brought in a third studio to help develop future releases. This only means one thing. More releases per year = more money.
Personally, after playing all (except cod3 coz I'm a PC gamer) of the cod games and then seeing the lacklustre attempt that is black ops I'm done with cod. It's been turned from a ground breaking and enthralling first person shooter into a way of conning uneducated teenagers out of their parents money.
It's too bad.. I really enjoyed WaW and COD MW2
Now I'm getting Black Ops and your all saying it's junk. At least I got it used for $35.00 bones.
And I've moved to console as it seems a lil' bit slower paced then the PC Based version.
Infinity Ward didnt make BO because they were promised alot as a studio for MW2 but Activision didnt follow through with the promises. IW refused to make BO. Rumor has it that they are working on a title all on their own thats supposed to give the CoD series a run for its money.
Hope this information helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks to all, very informative! I hate to hear all the negativity surrounding black ops. I'm a console gamer to an extent but I enjoy pc gaming alot more. I guess I will wait till it drops in price before
I jump on it.
I never played multiplayer on the pc versions, I will have to check it out.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
avgjoegeek said:
It's too bad.. I really enjoyed WaW and COD MW2
Now I'm getting Black Ops and your all saying it's junk. At least I got it used for $35.00 bones.
And I've moved to console as it seems a lil' bit slower paced then the PC Based version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol, its not ALL junk, imho i like the subtle improvements over MW2... RCXD is fun, and the wager matches are EPIC. SAS and SHP are my fav wager types. console is a bit slower paced but thats because its been dumbed down for controller use rather than a mouse and keyboard. imho its just not the same on console.
jeallen0 said:
befor you go flaming a game because you cant afford a computer good enough to play it.. might wanna do some research, or actually play the game. KTHXBAI
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
noob my comp would prolly **** on urs , game requrements are one thing and making code to force users to buy new stuff even if the game would run without is called fraud and ripoff , glad i pirated this pos game
souljaboy said:
noob my comp would prolly **** on urs , game requrements are one thing and making code to force users to buy new stuff even if the game would run without is called fraud and ripoff , glad i pirated this pos game
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ohh i scurred, whats your specs mr big****?
You do realize that if they coded it to run on a single core pos machine that the game would look like ****, right?
yea sure , a 1.6ghz hyperthreaded atom is much faster than a 3.4ghz single isnt it , too bad cod will load up on the atom and not the other one that could play it ... but why am i wasting my words ...
Children, children, children! can we please stop the bickering and trolling and get back on topic?
The reason there is a core number restriction isn't because they are trying to rip you off its because the game engine needs the processing power. The MW engine doesn't rely entirely on the graphics card to run the math calculations required to draw the physics objects. If it did everyone would need sli or crossfire setups with 3 or 4 cards. So the restriction is actually doing us a favour because dual core cpu's are cheaper than 4 gtx580's hell a dual core cpu is cheaper than just one gtx580.
End of the day writing code to stop you playing a game when your pc doesn't meet the minimum specs is a good thing. It's telling you to actually spend some money and get a new pc coz the one you have is about to become a grandad
souljaboy said:
yea sure , a 1.6ghz hyperthreaded atom is much faster than a 3.4ghz single isnt it , too bad cod will load up on the atom and not the other one that could play it ... but why am i wasting my words ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that a question or a joke?
If it's a question then errr no not really. if anything the single core would out perform the atom.
If it was a joke then your not funny
M3PH said:
Is that a question or a joke?
If it's a question then errr no not really. if anything the single core would out perform the atom.
If it was a joke then your not funny
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if u know what ht is , it causes the os to see 2 different cores , hence , games that are hardcoded to run on 2 cores will run , on the single core , they wont .
my point is , its a silly limitation and is only to make money for cpu vendors
M3PH said:
End of the day writing code to stop you playing a game when your pc doesn't meet the minimum specs is a good thing. It's telling you to actually spend some money and get a new pc coz the one you have is about to become a grandad
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
End of the day writing code to tell you dont get coverage in health insurance when your body doesn't meet the minimum health conditions is a good thing. It's telling you to die or get a new life coz the one you have is about to become a corpse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do you see urself in Saw now ? telling the old guy what he should do ? is it still a good thing ?
i dont need anyone telling me when i should , if it would require a sse4 (and utilized it) its fine , if it require dx11 gpu (and utilized it) , its fine , but pulling the carpet from single cores when it has the same engine as "world at war" which will max out on a single , gimme a break
souljaboy said:
do you see urself in Saw now ? telling the old guy what he should do ? is it still a good thing ?
i dont need anyone telling me when i should , if it would require a sse4 (and utilized it) its fine , if it require dx11 gpu (and utilized it) , its fine , but pulling the carpet from single cores when it has the same engine as "world at war" which will max out on a single , gimme a break
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
obviously trying to discuss something with you is like trying to discuss something with a pre-teen just getting her rag... you will never get the point or the big picture. end of discussion.
BACK ON TOPIC.
as i said earlier, a few random client freezes, a few random server crashes, and a bug with prestiege and purchasing weapons after... but then again, what game has been perfect on launch? treyarch is working on it, and quite diligently i might add, so i give them props there.
MW2 < BO < COD4 IMHO.
Related
50 of the best Android games so far.. Ready, set, go!
Well I thought you had me fooled but I guess there are actually 50 decent games for Android out there. haha
ha nice vid
btw I lke how you have the "smackdown" between the two devs haha. I was reading that as it was going on haha nice!
Too much focus on mediocre 3d games.
nick_karstedt said:
Too much focus on mediocre 3d games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you joking? Only about half of them were "3D". Most of them were even decent. Sure they aren't Modern Warfare 2 or whatever is popular these days, but IT'S ON A CELL PHONE.
Nice vid, gave me some more games to buy.
I wish Android would crank out some awesome RPG/2d platform games and make retro gaming huge again.
I emailed Hexage and they said they're looking into making a new game like that BUT NO OFFICIAL WORD YET
so Don't go off sayin' and spreadin'
RPG for Android
Baldur's Gate or any BioWare Infinity Engine games would be awesome. Or a remake of Fallout 1 or 2. Both projects have a open source following, aka Pocket Fallout and GemRB but none have pushed anything into the Android market.
great list, might just want to downgrade from my 10mb ram hack to play some of these 3d games =)
thanks you! i didnt know half of these games existed.
where I can find these games for free?
I get the need for speed and put this on app ...but I can run it
Great video!
like those are the best games..
RPG vs Runner games
Since most of users of this forums are development related people, and are at least a bit nerdy, no wonder that they would like some more RPG games, but real money are made not on guys like me and you but on housewifes, which want easy games with cute graphics like.
http://mobile.engadget.com/2010/12/...eon-defenders-first-wave-now-available-for-a/
I purchased this game for $3, but make sure you have wifi connection prior to play game first time (it has to download 700MB of data).
Is it really worth it?
I woukd also like to know.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
I hear mixed things about how it runs on other devices, care to elaborate on your experience with the NS
Makes me want to return my Nexus S and wait for Tegra devices.
DarkAgent said:
Makes me want to return my Nexus S and wait for Tegra devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im honestly thinking this whole dual core thing is a gimic, one only needs sooo much power in a cell phone
slowz3r said:
Im honestly thinking this whole dual core thing is a gimic, one only needs sooo much power in a cell phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care about the dual-core. I am talking about more powerful GPU.
DarkAgent said:
I don't care about the dual-core. I am talking about more powerful GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hopefully they push out higher rez screens along with that GPU
but back on topic, it really worth 3 bucks?....they really should let the dev choose the return window
slowz3r said:
hopefully they push out higher rez screens along with that GPU
but back on topic, it really worth 3 bucks?....they really should let the dev choose the return window
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its not bad - not the greatest game but not bad. Also it will lag up a little from time to time but looks great and its fun so I would say as a first Unreal Engine game thats not bad and can be enjoyable yeah I dont mind paying 3$
ranxoren said:
its not bad - not the greatest game but not bad. Also it will lag up a little from time to time but looks great and its fun so I would say as a first Unreal Engine game thats not bad and can be enjoyable yeah I dont mind paying 3$
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmmm im on the edge, im all for paying money for games when its due but iono, for a game im unsure if ill like or play, hard to judge
On a whim, I purchased the game. Pretty solid game with some moderate camera quirks. Soundtrack is nice and I experienced no lag. For $3, I say it's a deal.
I want to get it but idk
One thing I really liked about Windows Phone 7 games, it requires a free demo version in order to be an "Xbox Live" title. Android should have the same requirements if it wants to compete with WP7's gaming prowess, which imo, is the best mobile gaming you can get.
Does any1 know how good the game performs on a HTC desire ?
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
mingkee said:
http://mobile.engadget.com/2010/12/...eon-defenders-first-wave-now-available-for-a/
I purchased this game for $3, but make sure you have wifi connection prior to play game first time (it has to download 700MB of data).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is $2.99 the regular price, or was it higher?
seems like a good quality game to keep in the phone... but wasting 700 MB on this, and not having an External microSD is a big decision to make
AllGamer said:
is $2.99 the regular price, or was it higher?
seems like a good quality game to keep in the phone... but wasting 700 MB on this, and not having an External microSD is a big decision to make
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I purchased it after introduction from engadget, so I don't know.
Finally an unreal engine 3 game on android ...downloading now
I have been playing it for a while and I have to say it is one of the best games on android.
very good game and well worth $3. Playing on NS and the only problem I have is some of the screens seem to not fit properly. Almost like the resolution of the screen isn't high enough to support all the menus in their native size.
Dual core processors are going to be more for efficiency than power. Better battery management and faster processing will in theory reduce battery consumption. None the less, you can count on me buying one
Hi guys,
In case you don't already know this superb racing game with unmatched graphics and gameplay you really must check it out.
http://youtu.be/TOfG1zJbKbQ
The game features licensed cars and 15 player multyplayer mode.
Please help drawing the developer's attention to port this game in android market and leave your thoughts here: getsatisfaction.com/firemint/topics/will_real_racing_2_get_in_the_android_store
Sorry but i think this ain't gonna happen. This is a real console quality game, they spent a lot of money to develop it and optimize it to make it work perfectly for the a5 soc: porting it to Android will lead to insane costs in order to make it suitable for a hundred different pieces of hardware.
Nowadays Apple's app store sells 85% of all the mobile apps in the world, a serious game developer with working brain cells will never spend millions just in order to get to that additional 15% of the market that we represent. Also i'm pretty sure that even the most powerful hardware we have now on this platform would be unable to run this game properly: the gpu in the a5 soc is twice as powerful as the mali-400 in the GS2...
vnvman said:
Apple's app store sells 85% of all the mobile apps in the world
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
just wow, wasn't aware of this fact
vnvman said:
the gpu in the a5 soc is twice as powerful as the mali-400 in the GS2...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i'm just stunned, in every video comparasson of 4s and sgs2 the iphone gets bashed... come to think of it nobody mentioned in any comparassion (and i watch a lot) about the gpu/chipset diferrences... i guess it's never gonna be a fair "trail" between them and everybody is more or less a "fanboy" of either two..
L.E. after your post did some research and found this http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111026235448AArPNUy , it explains everything.
Thanks and ppl might as well leave this topic to "die"...
Well actually when i say that the gpu of the iPhone is faster i mean it really is faster, even on paper: it's not a matter of software. I read it here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
When i got this phone i knew that the iPhone4s (or even the iPhone4) would have been better for games, but all in all despite the fact that mobile games can be fun at times mobile gaming in general kinda sucks in my opinion: sure you can have the best graphics in the world and whatnot, but the only games you can really play on a small touchscreen panel without going nuts are puzzle games (which look great on the huge Samoled+ of this phone), and those ones run on pretty much every piece of junk. At the end of the day those are the games you play the most when you're on the go, while instead those haeavy 3d games are mostly useless because of their complexity (not to mention the amount of battery they drain), so you end up playing them when you are at home on the coach. This sounds pointless to me because if i'm at home i'd rather like to play Battlefield 3 on my gaming rig: now this makes sense, don't you think?
Real Racing 2 was released yesterday...just saying...
What the.. EA? The original maker is Firemint?
Either way, here's the link. Only compatible with my Desire HD, and not the Galaxy Note? What the...
https://market.android.com/details?...yLDEsImNvbS5lYS5nYW1lLnJlYWxyYWNpbmcyX3JvdyJd
Article:
http://phandroid.com/2011/12/22/rea...the-android-market-leaves-part-1-in-the-dust/
LordManhattan said:
Only compatible with my Desire HD, and not the Galaxy Note? What the...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could test this version for your Note: https://market.android.com/details?id=com.ea.game.realracing2_na (not sure if it's compatible though).
Thanks, but it's a no go Just have to wait i guess.
very little.
I was making some wallpapers from some pics that caught my eye and a lot of them happened to be from classic video games: Mario, Zelda, etc. I just got to thinking that while a lot of today's games are widely-played, they just don't have that lasting value that the games of the past had, the games that appealed to everyone.
I know there are a few like Little Big Planet and what-not that still do something for everyone, but it's titles like Dead Space and Mass Effect are what move units now. In the "What are you playing thread" Skyrim and BF3 are tops. Halo inspired some cool things like Red vs Blue, but are any of us going to look back a in years to come and really feel like any of today's games are anything more than hours of well-designed time killing? Even one of my favorites in Ninja Gaiden Sigma makes me wonder if I'll see it as great down the road. I don't think Ocarina of Time will ever be a let down, or Mario Kart, or the old Metroid games.
I know this is a little disjointed but I just wanted to get it out. What do you guys think?
I see a field of fps & mmorpg. Not any that draw you into them. None like the classics. You're right.
Casual gamers are into graphics, real gamers play Gran turismo 1 into the night
Sent from my Nexus S using xda premium
now day offline game= fast finish
online competitve game= many noob, stat farmer, leaver etc
mmorpg= need $$$$$$ to fun.
There'll never be another Road Rash 2....
Or Harrier Strike, remember that beauty?
Sent From My Fingers To Your Face.....
Manic Miner had me occupied for probably a couple of years.
Ooooh... BoulderDash and Head Over Heels....
Nothing quite like trying to reunite two lovestruck puppies with ridiculously large heads whilst avoiding all manner of fiendish traps...
Sent From My Fingers To Your Face.....
Bugaboo the flea really did it for me too. I lost many nights' sleep over that game.
Also, pretty much anything by Ultimate - Jet Pac, Trans Am, Cookie etc.. They were all classics.
Most games today get played till completed then put back in the box until they're sold a year later. I do revisit portal and the most recent Assassin's Creed that I have at the time. Some modern games still have plenty of staying power, but I don't know if they'll be remembered in 30 years.
Yeah...definitely true OP. It seems as technology gets better, we only get better with eye candy (with some exceptions of course) But now a days kids think a game is good because it looks good.
I mean, i get it. I get caught in the whole graphics as well, but the content needs to be there also.
That or maybe i'm just getting older and thinking back on simpler times just seems like it's more fun.
-D
chbea said:
now day offline game= fast finish
online competitve game= many noob, stat farmer, leaver etc
mmorpg= need $$$$$$ to fun.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Precisely, I don't like playing online with a bunch of people, just give me a good game I play at my leisure and have fun.
Excitebike, R.C. Pro Am, Maniac Mansion. So simple yet they felt worth the time.
Contra III, Golden Eye, the good old days.
The best games are always going to be the ones you played when you were around 10.
Twenty years from now there will be a holographic thread about how awesome Cut the Rope was, and BF25 is nothing in comparison.
It's not age, it's content. Maybe the whole thing with the games that feel that way is that they "take you somewhere else." It's fun to play BF3, but when you play Mario 64, or the Final Fantasy series they are their own experiences. Maybe it's just that I feel like I get enough death and mayhem on the news and I feel better when playing games that are just games, nothing too heavy.
MissionImprobable said:
It's not age, it's content. Maybe the whole thing with the games that feel that way is that they "take you somewhere else." It's fun to play BF3, but when you play Mario 64, or the Final Fantasy series they are their own experiences. Maybe it's just that I feel like I get enough death and mayhem on the news and I feel better when playing games that are just games, nothing too heavy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, I remember some of the old 007 fps games and they had killing, but they were great because of the stories or multiplayer action, in your home.
boborone said:
Dude, I remember some of the old 007 fps games and they had killing, but they were great because of the stories or multiplayer action, in your home.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
007 in it's early days re-invented FPS
Sent from my Nexus S using xda premium
I do have to say I think I will always remember the Metal Gear Solid series favorably.
missing the "epicness" in today`s games. baldur´s gate 1 & 2 for example was sooo awesome. with more than 120hrs of epic rpg experience (if u fance the genre of course), proper characters and brilliant dialogue wrapped in beautiful visual art. imho there are but a few games on the market nowadays to rival games from the 90´s, such as bg1&2, where more quality games have been produced.
just my 2 cents
Bomberman :3
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Anybody know a good offline rpg for the pc?
Diablo lll will soon make the world a better place.
Sent from my HTC_Flyer_P512_NA using xda premium
Hear me out for a few minutes guys.
Programmers now days are great...right? No... they really are not. Because programmers are making programs/games on extremely powerful machines (if you think about it) and have zero concept of "limits". A game for example, Titan Fall on PC is 50GB's. Why... for the love of all that is good, is this game 50GB's? Why? Because the programmers that made it suck. There are so many games that take up WAY too much space and take WAY too much power to run...
BUT
But this is NOT the programmers fault... They were not trained correctly. Hence my topic point.
Limitations Make you a Better Dev.
What is a limitation? It's something that limits you, like a gallon container can... only hold a gallon. Makes sense right? Well, let's move on the programming. Most programmers now days are making games/programs in what I like to refer to as "Creative Sandbox Mode". They don't really have limitations. They can almost do anything! But this is a problem... let's see an example to illustrate the reason why.
We will use the game "Kerbal Space Program" as our example for this topic. (Fantastic Game BTW) For those who have not seen/heard about it. It is a game where you build space rockets in, for the most part, a very well simulated Solar System. You start from a planet similar to earth. The only difference is the size of everything is scaled down. But just keep in your mind, "You build rockets to go to space".
Now, moving on...
When this game came out at first as early access. It was basically a sandbox, while you had no "God mode", you had access to all the rocket ship parts and they had zero costs. You could build anything, and people made all kinds of nonsense, went to the Mun (Game's name for the planet's moon) and beyond to other planets.
Sounds great right? It was... but then something changed a few years later.
Career and Science Sandbox were added. What is this? Well it's a mode with progression in mind, Career has you earning money through space missions and contracts, and Science Sandbox requires no money... but requires "science" points to acquire new parts.
You start out now...with very limited parts, and the things you are asked to do in the missions seem "impossible" at first.
"You mean I have to get to orbit with ONLY these parts? WHAT? THERE IS NO WAY!..."
Except...it was possible. Suddenly people, while under a great limitation, began to progress. They learned new and better ways and deigns to make more efficient rockets. You advance, and learn and become better. You progress, slowly unlocking more parts...but always being under this limitation wall, it forces you to grow and learn even more.
Now...end game. You've unlocked all the parts. You build the "best rocket" you can muster. Compare it to your "best rocket" while you played in Free Sandbox mode... It's a 1000x better. It can go much further on less fuel, it's less heavy, and it has far more research and science ability that ever before. Smaller rockets can now go beyond the moon and back, where as before, huge ones barely made it into orbit...
What does this mean? Now...with your super efficient skills, you can go EVEN further than ever before, you're able to truly maximize the potential of the parts given to you.
You've become efficient . You've become a better player.
But the KEY here for relation to my topic is... "truly maximized potential"
Now, let's get back to programming. Now that we have an understanding of what my point is. Back in the day, game developers had extreme limits. Hyper tiny storage sizes, extremely low amounts of ram and processing power. You couldn't just do whatever you wanted. The PC wouldn't even run.
Look at games like Super Mario Bros, a classic simple game... But, fast forward to later in the NES's lifespan, look at Megaman. The difference in total quality, and game play, it's a night and day difference. You go from a super basic, jump on enemies, beat the same boss over and over, running through basic one color levels... to a game that has a "level select" and unique and difference bosses, and... TONS of different enemies. You see levels with lots of animations and color! Holy crap! This is amazing! AND WHAT!? YOU GET WEAPONS THAT DO DIFFERENT THINGS!? *mind explodes*
See what happen? NES programmers got better over time, they learned to maximize what the NES could do despite its limits. Games that at the start of its' life that would have been thought impossible... were suddenly happening.
So let's fast forward to today... what do we have? For the most part... our computers today have near limitless abilities. Most computers have over a 1000GB's of storage, over 4GB's of ram (if not over 8GB), and processors that can do millions, if not nearly billions of calculations per second... Vs computers with 32KB's of Ram, 1 MB of storage, and a 10 mhz processor.
So we should be seeing games with extremely outrageous levels of ability and graphics right...? No... we don't. Well, we have a few. And I think the reason is older devs who were used to coding efficiently. They suddenly become god like. But new programmers? They don't understand limitations like older ones do... so they code poorly without knowing it. This is why you have games like Dark Souls 2, which on PC runs at 60fps at 1440p without the SLIGHTEST hint of issues. (Seriously, it's the smoothest PC game I've ever seen). But then games like Arkham Knight, just barely run at all. (if it even starts...) Also... the version of the Dark Souls 2 that contains all the DLC and improvements to the game (SotFs), weighs in at 23 GB's. Whoa... that's so much! ... Well, it's an extremely huge game, most playthroughs will last you at least 50 to 70 hours. There is so much to see in the game, and it's intense. And...then you have Titan Fall. A multiplayer game with a few maps, no singleplayer (at least when I played it), and it's 50GB's? What? Why? Even GTA 5 is 55GB's (ish) and it's an absolutely MASSIVE map, with detail unlike any seen before. And they crammed it into 50GB's? Wow. While Rockstar and From Software have had a few bad ones *cough* GTA IV and Dark Souls 1 on PC *cough*. They still proved in the end, they knew how to properly make a PC game.
Also, for an example of "getting a ton" from very little processing power. Look at the gameboy advance. It had a 16.78 MHz processor... yet look at the outrageous abilities it had. Look at the games, compare them to mobile "games" (Mobile games are trash). Could you honestly recreate The Legend of Zelda: A link to the past run with just 16mhz of power? If someone didn't tell you it was possible, you'd most likely say, "You cannot do that...". But you can, they did. This is highly efficient coding.
Another example is Roller Coaster Tycoon 1 and 2. If you've not played this game series, I advise you ALL to look it up. This game, released in 1999, was coded by one man. And in 1999 (where the average CPU was Pentium 3) this game let's you build Parks, like with roller coasters and rides. This game could have THOUSANDS of guests (People in your park, 1000 to 4000+) , all with different likes and needs (ride types, needs like food or the restroom), with dozens, if not 50 to 100+ rides going on at the same time... and it ran perfectly fine. In fact, when I played it, I never remember it ever slowing down or crashing, not once. Could you build an entire game with 100s of rides and 1000s+ of guests each with their own unique needs, and plus all the other things going on, on a Pentium 3? With ZERO lag and near instant startup?
This is just one of my issues with devs/programmers today. It's not just about games, or graphics in games mind you. It's about programs, applications, media, just everything. Devs today, learn in a near unlimited environment. They don't learn tricks, they don't learn workarounds, they don't learn how to truly maximize what they have because nothing forces them too.
Now, as a big note... I don't want to sit here and sound like I'm saying any devs are dumb, or don't work hard. I don't mean that at all, because it truly isn't their fault. Schools and such today don't teach with limitations, in computer science and in everything else (that's another topic).
They don't force you to make a massive game that fits in a CD (700MB) that runs well, they don't teach you how to truly optimize, they don't teach you how to overcome limitations because they don't challenge you with limitations.
Limitations, force you to get better. I ask that all new and aspiring devs now days, to try to limit yourself... because in the end... you'll become a far better programmer than you thought possible! You created an android app that runs fine on a snapdragon 810? Alright, how about you make that same app run just as well on a phone with a dual core processor and half a GB of ram from 2010. Start with limitations, you'll think... "This is not possible" , but image to yourself that it is the only way... you soon start finding tricks and learn how to overcome the limitations and create an app that works fantastically with very minimal power and resources. Then, with your new found efficiency skills, you'll see a whole new world of possibilities on more powerful chipsets. Just like in the space game, when you are forced to do more with less, you soon found yourself able to go much further than before when you did have more.
Limitation Forced Growth increases your efficiency. This can allow you to make night and day more powerful applications that run with far less power.
Discuss.