[fg137]

If the author ever talked to a gamer, they would have learned how ignorant they are.

edit: in case it's not clear, when every other new game from major publisher starts at 50GB or 100GB and can sometimes be 300+GB, waiting 2hrs to download it is terrible and horrible for energy use.

[scoot]

Edit to recognise your edit, as you’ve clarified that were talking about downloads - a once a month experience.

That sounds more like a time management problem - buy your game, go to bed, and it’ll be there when you wake at 2:30 for your next gaming session. ;)

~You appear to be confusing latency and bandwidth. While they are to an extent two dimensions of the same problem, it’s latency that affects gaming regardless of bandwidth.

More bandwidth will not reduce latency, and gaming intentionally only uses limited bandwidth (notwithstanding streamed rendering, but that’s a minuscule minority).

You cannot defy the laws of physics.~

[hnlmorg]

The time management problem is having a job, family, and other commitments. Some of us only get a couple of hours a week to play games. Your solution would mean we’d have to wait a whole week after buying a game before we can play it. And I’m sure you can appreciate that’s not a particularly constructive recommendation.

And that’s before you take into account how large some updates are. Fortnight updates, for example, are large enough to be entirely new games in their own right.

[fg137]

This.

Lots of people here doesn't understand other people's life constraints and refuse to acknowledge that different lifestyle exist.

[washadjeffmad]

Console games today are routinely >50GB, and more frequently >100GB for the most popular titles. On common residential plans, it can take upwards of an hour before installation even begins.

I'm not a gamer, but I hear with how often there are required updates before playing, slower internet is pretty disruptive to quick drop-in multiplayer sessions with friends.

[fg137]

> once a month experience

Incorrect assumption. Not every buys/downloads/plays games the same way you do.

Even more incorrect considering how often games are updated and how large those updates can be, especially for a new game.

[edent]

The author (me) does play games. I'm on PC, Oculus, and console. The console downloads are limited by the upstream. The VR games are limited by WiFi. I've never noticed the PC games getting close to the max download speed I have.

But, to go to your edit. Is there a significant difference between waiting 90 minutes and 45 minutes? Either way, you set the download going, grab some food, have a bath, whatever, right?

[fg137]

Not everyone plays the same games, play games in the same way, or has the same lifestyle as yous.

Just one example: If I find two hours on a weekday evening to play games (when I am often occupied by other things on other days) and I want to play the latest games, I don't want to spend 90 minutes waiting. If that window is gone, I need to move on.

(You could argue I could plan ahead, look up how large the game is, download it a day before blahblah. You'll be absolutely correct, but I can also assure you almost nobody does that. Network speed can be also very unstable/unpredictable.)

And I'm sure people who are on Game Pass would like a word with you.

Never generalize your own experience.

[matja]

Please can you enlighten the ignorant that are also gamers? :)

[bwat49]

downloading a game on steam can fully utilize gigabit speeds, and modern games can be 100+gb

[matja]

I play games but I suppose I don't download a 100GB game frequently enough for it to matter to myself.