It's just the natural advancement of tech over time. It wasn't really all that long ago that most people didn't even think of storage in terms of terabytes. It also wasn't that long ago that we thought of internet speeds in kps.

I don't think games need to be that big. Great games can be made on a smaller size, but from the looks of things, western AAA devs just keep on making them bigger.

I don't know, more power doesn't stop smaller games from being made and more power means less restrictions on developers. So if I developer wants to make a huge sprawling game I take no issue with that.

Yeah, MegaTexture can be great or terrible depending on the developer. It makes the usual texturing tricks really cheap, if that's what the dev wants. If you're interested in the technical specifics, I could explain it to you as best I can. I'm kicking around the idea to do a video or something on the mathematical principles of computer graphics. It's really interesting stuff. We stand on the backs of giants like Newton, Leibniz, Gauss and Chinese mathematicians ca 10 BCE. What drove me to think about that is DocTre's 1440p is upscaled comments about 3 years ago. Back on topic, brute force compression is a no-go this gen because of the relatively weak CPUs found in all the major consoles (XB1, PS4, Switch). Respawn actually made Titanfall 1 on PC bigger than on XB1 by decompressing audio so the game would work on weak-sauce dual cores. If they ported to Switch, they may have to make a similar decision. Probably the first thing to go would be textures, because they chew up a significant amount of disk space.

I guess I stand on the other side where a game doesn't need to be as big as it can to be the best, and also if it can fit into into a CD or card without needing extra space to fit the whole game.

I guess I stand on the other side where a game doesn't need to be as big as it can to be the best, and also if it can fit into into a CD or card without needing extra space to fit the whole game.