this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
158 points (99.4% liked)
PC Gaming
8597 readers
825 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That is so fucking stupid it boggles the mind.
It's not "stupid" if you think that you'd need several terabytes of free space to have the whole world available offline for your game (total land area is roughly 149,4 million square kilometers - assuming 1GB per 100km², you'd need 1,495 terabytes of storage). Of course, M$ knows they could've allowed a super lower-res version of the tiles to be installed locally (like 1MB per 100km², though that'd still require 1.5tb of storage), but why if they can force everyone to be always online?
I haven't played these games but the way I see it, if 2020 was playable offline this really should have been too. I doubt whatever graphical bump they managed between then and now was worth this kind of insane trade off
But then again idk, maybe it was
Oh no I guess this is where you’re a bit mistaken because 2020 was the same garbage. I bought 2020 4 months ago and I had the exact problems people today are having with 2024. The technology behind how they handle scenery is the exact same unfortunately. Hence why I refunded it before my 2 hour refund window.