Platforms are an obstacle to customers, from the developer’s point of view. This has been obvious since the PS2-PS3 transition - and it’s why Sony is freaking out about PSN accounts. They don’t give a shit about your data. They desperately want to go back to when every game was made for one system and maybe got a conversion or two. The closest they can get is roping people into their ecosystem to justify the continued existence of their deliberately0incompatible AMD laptop opposite Microsoft’s deliberately-incompatible AMD laptop.
Same deal with Epic refusing to make Fortnite work on Steam Deck. It’s not a technical issue. They’re just having a slapfight with Valve. They want their store to stand up against (let’s face it) the de-facto monopoly source for major PC games, and the market says no.
Where this ends is the death of consoles.
There is no reason to release a game three or four separate times, with a private screening process for two or three of them, even if each release is goddamn near identical. All that’s really different is which middleman slices off an entire third of the publisher’s revenue. There are no technical reasons three of these platforms couldn’t just run the same executable with the same data. There’s differences - but not important differences. And even the ARM version could be served if games were published in .NET or SPIR-V or whatever. Slow startup time? Yeah, once, but games already take their sweet time installing. Even shaders need to compile and cache. That nonsense would be a lot more sensible if it let you buy whichever hardware was best from whoever the hell was selling it.
So really, where this ends is the death of platforms.
In the past there were games where you were given the option to install an optional HD texture pack. Can they simply do this here, too? Yes, they can. But no, gotta waste bandwidth…
so, you have gigabytesper second of disk io, and the game relies on the couple of megaBITS of internet bandwidth most people have to stream textures? As opposed to downloading and installing them once as an update…
Pretty sure basically all PC games in the last 20 years are candidates, it’s just a matter of time. I was surprised how many big titles from the mid 2000s are no longer playable, and you know DRM hasn’t gotten less dependent on remote servers since then.
It’s really the only argument for buying physical console games, but even then you’re rarely intended to play the version of the game that ships on the disk/cart.
How fast do they think internet connections are? If the higher quality assets were that big compared to the 300 GB install no way they’re going to finish loading or fit in the memory while you’re playing the game
The paper trail of purchasing from a reputable company seems too risky for laundering. The Dev gets a cut if each store transaction, so maybe that’s the plan?
eurogamer.net
Aktywne