haxxiy said:
That's not true. The PS3 OS takes up the same RAM as the X360 OS, around 20-50 MB in the background. However, it has a split architecture where half the total RAM was VRAM and couldn't be directly accessed by the CPU. So the PS3 had to juggle the OS and the rest of the game in 256 MB while the X360 could split graphics, game, and OS between 512 MB as needed. It wasn't the (modest to present-day standards) savefile size that caused the lag issues, contrary to popular belief, since most of it doesn't even load at once. It's just people playing the game that eventually led to the game fetching enough data when first loading to overflow an already-filled bucket. The real question one should ask is: why are TOTK savefiles limited to just around 3 MB when, for instance, Minecraft can create a 2 GB save file on Switch? I'd argue that it *is* indeed because of a technical limitation, to prevent users from building complex machines and overloading the physics engine (which coincidentally is Havok, the very same used in Skyrim and Fallout 4). If the CPU had been able to handle more complex interactions (whether or not that would've been technically possible for the Switch to have such a CPU is another matter), it's quite likely that build permanence would have been a thing in the game, at least to an extent. |
It's not true but then you proceed to say it's an architecture problem which is what I said? Okay...
You don't seem to follow what's being said it's not about save file size it's about the actual saved playthrough itself becoming unplayable because it eats up too many resources because of permanent changes it has to track. So again the is no hardware that will ever deliver this in a seamless huge open world like TOTK because this concept has a dead end flaw that the is no way around the can only ever really be limited or partial permanence.
Go watch TOTK videos before you claim you can't build complex machines I've linked one recently in the Zelda thread.







