Apples and oranges. GTA V has a small, entirely hand-built world. It’s just 80 square kilometers and was meant to fit onto two DVDs / one Blu Ray Disk. Real-world Los Angeles, which this is based on, is 1,210 square kilometers.
This Flight Simulator on the other hand covers the entire planet. If we are just going by land area, that’s 510.1 million square kilometers. It’s using a combination of satellite and aerial photography, radar maps, photogrammetry (reconstructing 3D objects - buildings and terrain in this case - from photos), Open Street Map and Bing Maps data, as well as hand-built and procedurally generated detail. There’s also information on the climate, live weather data, animal habitats (to spawn the right creatures in each part of the world), etc. pp. We are about two petabytes of data, which is an unfathomable amount outside of a data center.
You can not optimize your way out of this. The developers have the ambition to create the most detailed 1:1 virtual facsimile of this planet. There is no other way of achieving this goal. You can not store two petabytes of data on a consumer PC at the moment, you can not compress two petabytes of data to the point that they are being reduced to a couple hundred gigabytes and if your goal is accuracy, you cannot just reuse textures and objects from one city for another. That’s what every prior version of this flight simulator did, but if you remember those, the results were extremely disappointing, even for the time.
By the way, if you don’t have an active Internet connection, Flight Simulator 2020 (and 2024, if I’m not mistaken) will still work. They’ll just do what you’re suggesting, spawn generic procedurally generated buildings and other detail instead (in between a handful of high detail “hero” buildings in major cities), based on low-res satellite photography and OSM data, which is relatively small in size even for the whole planet and tells the program where a building and what its rough outline and height might be - but not what it actually looks like. Here’s a video from an earlier version of FS 2020 that shows the drastic difference: youtu.be/Z0T-7ggr8Tw
It is worth stressing that you will see this kind of relatively low detail geometry even with an Internet connection any time you’re flying in places where the kind of high quality aerial photography required for photogrammetry isn’t available of yet. FS 2020 has seen continuous content updates however, with entire regions being updated with higher quality photogrammetry and manually created detail every couple of months - and FS 2024 will receive the same treatment. I am generally not a fan of live-service games, but this is an exception. It makes the most sense here.
The one major downside is that eventually, the servers will be shut down. However, since you can choose to - in theory - cache all of the map data locally, if you have the amount of storage required, it is actually possible to preserve this data. It’s far out of reach for most people (we are talking low six figures in terms of cost), but in a few decades, ordinary consumer hardware is likely going to be able to store this amount of data locally. The moment Microsoft announces the shutdown of this service, people with the means will rush to preserve the data. Imagine what kind of amazing treasure this could be for future generations: A snapshot of our planet, of our civilization, with hundreds of cities captured with enough detail to identify individual buildings.
Gotta finally make it through The Witcher 1 first and then play The Witcher 2. The first game in the series is so rough around the edges (even after many patches) that this is easier said than done. I hate jumping into the middle of a game series due to the fear of missing out on references and character backstories, which is why I’m torturing myself like this.
Were you still playing Starfield when the DLC came out or did you continue your old save game? I’m asking, because while I enjoyed the main game when it released (got something like 110 hours out of it), I haven’t touched it since and I wonder how easy it is to get back into.
Test Drive Unlimited 1 (2006) - but not the flashy “next-gen” version for PS3, Xbox 360 or PC. Instead, I’m replaying the somewhat obscure PS2 port, using an emulator this time around. TDU was a remarkable achievement at the time, having a full-scale recreation of the entire island of Oahu, with the entire real-world road network to be explored online with other players at the time. There’s nothing scaled down here, unlike in most videogames, which means you get about 1600 km or 1000 miles of roads, from city streets over coastal straights to twisty mountain roads. It’s not just the quantity that is amazing, but also the quality, with tons of elevation changes keeping these roads interesting. Buildings and other track-side detail are less close to the real world, but since I’m here for racing, not sightseeing, this isn’t bothering me too much.
You would think that having such an enormous world world would make this exclusive to the then most powerful systems at the time, but they actually managed to port all of Oahu, with no reduction in size, to both PS2 and PSP. Sacrifices had to be made, for obvious reasons. Visuals suffered the most, but you still get an enormous draw distance, far beyond what would have been necessary at the original resolution, cars with 3D interiors (not on PSP), tons of geometric detail and realistic reflections that look better than in most other PS2 games. The landscape is very sparse though, especially in terms of geometric and texture detail (and on top of that, most non-car textures aren’t just low-res, but also terrible from an artistic standpoint), but the game still throws just enough detail at the player that it looks remarkably close to the big version, especially when you’re racing past things at high speed. There are other cuts that were likely made due to a lack of time instead of hardware restrictions, like a few missing cars here and there, all motorcycles, some minor event types, walking around interiors and all character customization, most of which is fairly inconsequential however. Really the biggest issue this version has is that the GPS is persistently trying to send you into oncoming traffic during free-roam due to it not taking one-way streets into account, which can lead to both frustration and fun, depending on your mindset.
If you’re still reading, you might be asking yourself why I would torture myself with PS2-era visuals when I could instead play the much prettier PC version that also runs at more than 30 fps without hacks and has more content and immersion. The reason is simple and it’s not nostalgia (since my first contact with this game back in 2008 was with the PC version): For some reason (likely because they are running on entirely different engines), the handling model is completely different and actually better on PS2 and PSP. It’s a bouncy, yet believable simcade model that feels remarkably close to Gran Turismo 2 (if not quite as good - it’s 90% there). Since that game is still the pinnacle of simcade handling in my opinion, this is just about the highest praise I can think of for a racing game. The way cars grip the road, how vastly different front and mid-engine cars behave and the way vehicles react to sudden changes in elevation in particular is night and day between the two. The big version’s most glaring issue in my opinion and one that carried over to the fascinatingly flawed sequel is that its handling never achieved a similarly comfortable compromise between simulation and arcade as the otherwise downgraded ports.
TDU 1 PS2, even with its remarkable online features long gone, remains a fun, accessible racing game with lots of meaningful content in short, accessible bursts, with the majority of races are less than five minutes long. Fun driving, fast and logical progression (unlike whatever the hell Solar Crown is torturing players with) and a neat variety of licensed vehicles in a believable real-world location keep it relevant even today. I can’t recommend it enough. If the main appeal of TDU is the fantasy of owning cars and houses all over Hawaii though, I would recommend playing the big version instead (and the sequel), since they are simply more immersive in this regard. They almost feel like games that in this day and age would be perfect for VR.
I don’t disagree. I used to remove the DRM of games I bought on disc way back when, just so that I didn’t have to insert those discs into my PC any time I wanted to play.
You should though. This is still one of the best open world games of all time. It’s about as close to flawless as a game this old can be and it holds up incredibly well.
Edit: It’s also far, far less cluttered than modern open world games, which means that the content there is has far more meaning and impact due to fewer shiny trinkets and pointless map markers distracting the player every ten meters.
Development of this game was highly troubled, to the point that the relatives of the developers working on it held a rally in protest in front of Rockstar San Diego’s office to decry the abysmal working conditions taking a toll on their families. I’ve heard one developer describing RDR’s code base as “spaghetti code” and a miracle that it works at all, which is likely what prevented it from being ported to other platforms for so long.
It’s very impressive how well the assets hold up at higher resolutions. You can’t say this about many games from that generation. Landscape rendering and design in particular was a whole generation ahead of the competition.
The troubles I went through to play this game with keyboard and mouse in the past. My first attempt involved an Xbox One X hooked up to the same monitor as my PC, streaming the game to the PC over local network, only to then use a specialized piece of incredibly janky software for just this game that would translate keyboard and mouse input into Xbox controller commands. Start everything up, switch the screen over to the Xbox (so that I would have full image quality) and I had a somewhat tolerable experience. I kept auto-aim enabled though.
It was about equivalent to, although more stable and performant, than running emulators and remapping the controls of those, which also required special tools.