If the ps3 had 2 x 512MB split memory instead of 2 x 256MB it would not have been a problem. Therefore a hardware limitation. Arguing about architecture is irrelevant as that's part of the hardware design.

And Skyrim became unplayable on ps3 because it had to track too many changes, the change log in memory got too big. Plus an ancient engine with lousy garbage cleanup. The game did remain playable, but only after turning off all auto save features and restarting the game every 15 minutes. Either some memory leak or broken garbage cleanup routines, as load the same save file from a fresh start and it worked again (for a while) FS2020 had the same problem initially, the clean-up routines to store cache lagged behind the fetch routines causing the game to use more and more memory. I clocked it at using 51GB ram before it finally crashed, already running horribly maxing out the page file.

You can throw more RAM at it, or optimize the engine. But first you need enough RAM and storage to actually keep track of everything. With enough storage you can track everything in a huge seamless open world. Either in the cloud, in ram or on disk. I've worked on that myself in GPS navigation with maps of entire Europe and US with user changes and updates anywhere, share-able online. Basically a dynamic map stored as a multi level quad tree with bit flags to indicate where changes are, with a hash table to lookup the actual changes in an efficient way. You can build onto it yourself (but mostly used for temporary closures, direction changes, speed traps, traffic jams etc etc) And that ran on piss poor hardware nearly 20 years ago with little ram. Streaming data back and forth to disk, fetching what's relevant. Surely a game can do that as well...

Dynamic machines, sure, they will only be active in a bubble around the player, just like any other moving parts like NPCs. The enemies don't patrol on the other side of the map either. That's the whole point of storage, go out of range, freeze and store until back in range. Minecraft does that as well. I don't expect to make a harvester that keeps running on the other side of the map. That's left to MMO style games that run in the cloud. (Although there are plenty ways to simplify stuff in case of harvesters or machines that appear to keep on going by logging the output. Games are deterministic by nature, everything can be turned back into an equation when the user is absent)

More than anything, this whole discourse reminds me that gaming culture has become too negative.

Here we have a game that's blowing away people who've worked in the industry for decades with its craftmanship, complexity, and stability, and some folks are getting hung up on whether enemies still patrol when you're on the other side of the map or how Link's hair is rendered. Let's be honest, are things like this really worth getting worked up about? Or are we just sabotaging our own enjoyment? 

I feel like enthusiast gamers as a community have become so conditioned to find fault with everything, to obsess over the tiniest imperfection, that we're forgetting how to just relax and enjoy games instead of picking them apart.

Most of those guys  were just writers and not even coders so how would they even know what breaks a game. you also had GOW creator playing the game and saying its ugly. no game is perfect, nothing wrong with criticism. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-26/-the-legend-of-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-dazzles-game-developers

One of those cited is an engineer of twenty years industry experience, calling an example of its physics as “the game programming flex of all time", pretty sure he'd know what he's talking about.

Ultimately, is it really worth letting something like a character's hair hinder one's enjoyment of a game? Does this really benefit us, or anyone?

This is a problem with modern gaming; console wars have created a culture of obsessing over any perceived imperfection, and spending all our time and energy on negativity instead actually enjoying video games.

I agree and this is impressive praise from that developer that actually knows what he's talking about. notice the developer that  calls it  impressive and something you don't often see. not like the writers calling it a miracle and that it should not be running on switch hardware.

I'm on the other message boards  and people are taking a dump on spiderman 2 graphics lol, saying its disappointing and looks like a ps4 game or worse. i honestly don't care anymore i just want 60fps/1080p thats my standards now and good art design. The most important thing is for is challenge, combat, then exploring.

Except we know the hardware was fine because the specs were the same as the 360 the problem was the architecture which only allowed half to be utilised it isn't anyone else's problem if you don't understand the relationship between architecture and hardware. Architecture is why a platform like Switch can run games like the Witcher 3 and Doom with the specs it has even though the numbers on paper don't look possible.

Having the hardware is only one part of the equation architecture breaks down how each component functions in unison and in the PS3s case the Ram was divided. The whole throw more numbers argument is flawed because you can never have enough memory to do what you ask as even the so called data that you say should freeze when you are out of range is taking up space and it will only build up which is why you're being unrealistic. What you're complaining about will always be there no matter what the hardware and architecture because that is the developers working smart.

To highlight the flaw in what you are saying it is essentially telling someone that if you leave a tap on the bathtub will eventually overflow so you need an overflow pipe installed as well as drainage. Your answer of more Ram is effectively like saying well just get a bigger bathtub, it doesn't remove the core issue and the need for the measures to deal with it. 

The thing i find suspect with all these nintendo magic physics stuff and how they got it running is nintendo has hardly pushed graphics the whole generation of the switch's life.  maybe they just physics gods, and don't care for graphics much but who knows.

Loving the game, it feel s and look like a switch game, better than than the original and potentially the best game I have ever played! I will put hundreds and hundreds of hours into this one and love every second. But yes Curl-6 in my opinion we have become a pessimistic, negative society, where everyone is pretty much bored of their own existence anything hardly gets praise for what it is, we are too many and we all have a voice or a way of expressing it now. Like everything in life and society now (not saying it is the case just in this case) if someone loves it, others will have to hate it or their own sense of fulfilment will be lesser. We can ask each one of the users who comments in here what is their favourite game and after that open a thread for each single answer to discuss why that specific game is actually, dated or old, or rubbish, or not good at all.

Nah you are wrong here. It’s not gaming ”culture” it’s a few keyboard warriors. Look in this thread there are 2-3 people throwing negativity around and a few swallowing the bait.

It doesn’t matter if these 2-3 people are sincere in their opinions it’s just trolling at this point in this thread.

We don’t care of your opinion. Please stop spamming the board with nonsense.