[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.