o_O.Q on 22 February 2013
| rubido said: If I was a developer and had 4GB to work with and someone said I now had 8, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more. If I was a developer and had 8GB to work with and someone said I now had 16, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more. If I was a developer and had 16GB to work with and someone said I now had 32, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more. If I was a developer and had 32GB to work with and someone said I now had 64, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more. The less a developer has to worry about anything makes it better for him. If Sony actually increased those 8 to 16, you probably will not see any developer complaining. But it will be terrible for Sony as the cost will go up and the results developers will get from the extra RAM will hardly be noticeable. I bought my PC with 8GB of RAM. For a PC, that is currently a sweet spot. If I increase it to 16GB, for the stuff I do on it, I will see no increase in performance or quality of my games. I will get absolutely nothing out of it as I use at most 4GB of RAM. If I paid for more ram, I would get absolutely nothing out of it. Should I buy it then? Of course not. The real question is if it's better for Sony. BTW, this is diminishing returns: http://i.imgur.com/ChsSwUE.png |
...now you're comparing arbitrary amounts of RAM to what devs requested
and yes i already knew what diminishing returns is but obviously i can concede that devs know far better than i do about whether their games have reached that point or not
