I think it's pretty obvious. The programmer could write extremely optimized code but if it ends up being packaged with unoptimized assets - a decision they may have no control over - the end result is still going to be a massive size for the game as a whole. It's not like the code itself takes up much storage.
I take it that all games that are 150 gigs are excellent examples of programming then?
Those 150 gigs have nothing to do with "programming,"
A few seconds of video will take up more disk space than the entire game engine. A few detailed, textured 3d models will take up more disk space than the entire game engine. The size of the code has very little to do with the size of today's game.
My current project deals with gigabytes of data at a time yet the engine is only about 5-10 megabytes.
A few seconds of video will take up more disk space than the entire game engine. A few detailed, textured 3d models will take up more disk space than the entire game engine.
Because, if so then no. I clearly have no idea what programming is but plenty of modern games developers (Like Giant Space Kat) seem to.
I'm happy for people to be comfortable with walking simulators and things like Star Wars Jedi: Survivor but using an engine is not programming. More practical levels of understanding how to deliver something worthwhile, on time and without wasting resources has been something around as mankind has.
Experience something like Ahree Lee’s "Pattern : Code" to understand that it's not just dumping assets into a preformatted environment and proclaiming to be a genius because of it. If it is, I don't see why Third World "Developers" or even A.I. can't do that already for less money and quicker results.
Genuinely creating (Or breaking) something is a gift, and it's not limited to zip codes or political alignments. As people wanting a return on their money are noticing and those in the industry had the hubris to not see coming.
Those 150 gigs have nothing to do with "programming," and only someone who knows nothing about programming would suggest that it does.
I take it that all games that are 150 gigs are excellent examples of programming then?
I'm not sure what your argument is here?
I think it's pretty obvious. The programmer could write extremely optimized code but if it ends up being packaged with unoptimized assets - a decision they may have no control over - the end result is still going to be a massive size for the game as a whole. It's not like the code itself takes up much storage.
Those 150 gigs have nothing to do with "programming,"
Are you arguing in good faith?
No, he's just fucking retarded and should be mocked as such.
A few seconds of video will take up more disk space than the entire game engine. A few detailed, textured 3d models will take up more disk space than the entire game engine. The size of the code has very little to do with the size of today's game.
My current project deals with gigabytes of data at a time yet the engine is only about 5-10 megabytes.
Do you know what "programming" is?
Is it this?
Because, if so then no. I clearly have no idea what programming is but plenty of modern games developers (Like Giant Space Kat) seem to.
I'm happy for people to be comfortable with walking simulators and things like Star Wars Jedi: Survivor but using an engine is not programming. More practical levels of understanding how to deliver something worthwhile, on time and without wasting resources has been something around as mankind has.
Experience something like Ahree Lee’s "Pattern : Code" to understand that it's not just dumping assets into a preformatted environment and proclaiming to be a genius because of it. If it is, I don't see why Third World "Developers" or even A.I. can't do that already for less money and quicker results.
Genuinely creating (Or breaking) something is a gift, and it's not limited to zip codes or political alignments. As people wanting a return on their money are noticing and those in the industry had the hubris to not see coming.