Submitted 20 hours ago by tal@lemmy.today to games@lemmy.world
https://www.polygon.com/ram-crisis-gdc-2026-analysis/
Optimization was a major topic at the show, with several panels dedicated to how creators can make games more efficiently.
This is long overdue.
Game optimization is not a lost art. It’s time studios (and publishers) returned to prioritizing it during development.
The media has taught me to hate the words could, should, and would when used in headlines but this is probably true for once.
Indie games are more important than ever.
You mean because indie games tend not to have high minimum memory requirements, like?
For the most part they don’t. And it is only one reason why Indie games are important. The other is that the games often tend to be cheaper, sometimes more innovative, doesn’t try to put micrtransactions in everything and so on.
This article is sensationalizing a non-issue. It reads like the author went to the convention with the story already written and then tried (and failed) to find people that supported the premise.
As someone who attended GDC for the full week this year, I can tell you that not a single conversation I had or panel I attended discussed the RAM shortage. I’m sure this topic arose in some circles, especially anything related to the timing or cost of next gen hardware. As a professional AAA game designer of 25 years and an occasional game director, this does not affect the way that the games themselves are made. Games on consoles already have their limitations, games on PC should always be (but not always are) optimized to work across a broad spectrum of hardware configurations, with the minimum spec being the lowest system possible without sacrificing playability.
Even people interviewed in the article are saying the same thing:
“Does this affect us? No,” Subotnick said. “We’re making games on as many platforms as we can to delight consumers. Could it impact us? Sure. If there’s less devices for people to get their hands on, then we potentially have less consumers to sell to. But right now, I’d argue that there are plenty of consumers with plenty of devices for us to sell these games to. Where it could impact us is, sure, we will have to make decisions around next-gen platforms when they tell us that it’s time to bring content to them. And if they are threatened to have a total addressable market that is viable from a business standpoint, sure that’s a business challenge. But right now all I’d be doing is speculating on a bunch of hypotheticals.”
So journalism per usual nowadays? Can’t tell you the last mainstream article I’ve read that didn’t read like they had a very preconceived notion they wanted to convey
As a professional AAA game designer of 25 years and an occasional game director
What games have you worked on?
Could? Should. This is obvious. Only AAA execs don‘t realize it yet because they think cloud gaming will come to the rescue and be adapted on a major scale any minute. I am less optimistic. For AAA that is. This is the year of indie games… again.
The title is a little more dramatic than the body — in fact, the article is mostly more of a “yeah, this is something that we’ve seen before, more-or-less” take — but it is interesting to get some actual perspectives on impact from the developer side on what the likely changes are. It does also confirm that some studios are working on reducing the memory requirements for their upcoming games.
Might just be a good thing. Because optimizing is what people have been demanding a lot of out of developers for a long time now.
So something good might come from all this potentially?
Because of some comments, I’d like to add:
“Optimization” isn’t the same as “high fps”. Optimization is a game of priorities. Take the demo scene: these programs may be 64KB in size (on disk) but are capable of choking a 5090 to death.
This may just mean we get even worse performing titles, because the “quadruple-A” guys don’t give a fuck.
There’s some optimization I’d like to see on both the project planning level, and the game visuals level. Planning level, because paying 10 level designers to put together interesting ideas for a year might be a better use of $1mil than enlisting a celebrity to voice one character in your game. On the visuals level, making a game with an eye-catching, unique art style that serves the style of gameplay might work better than developing a game that makes nice screenshots but can only run on a 5090 and requires highlighting to point players to obvious gameplay elements because of all the detailed objects. (There’s a reason Doom and Quake have fans even in 2026)
If you target for the Steam Deck you will do just fine.
I think that you have two factors here. GDC isn’t specific to PC gaming, and a lot of titles will see both PC and console releases.
For a game that is intended to see only a PC release, my guess is that that that might affect system requirements of the game, whereas for games that see console releases, things like “is the Playstation 6 going to be postponed” is a big deal if you were going to release a game for that hardware.
All video games in the future will be PINBALL. Pure mechanical games that don’t need memory beyond keeping a single number (the score). 😤
BiomedOtaku@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 hours ago
Good. Fuck off with high end graphics that need a new graphics card every fucking two months. Give me a good story and gameplay.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
I’ve been rocking the same graphics card since 2021, and it still plays every new game on high settings. There are very few games that can even afford the production budget that would push a card like that or even a PS5 to its limits anyway. My most-played game is a 2D game from 2012 that can run on a cheap laptop, and the market at large is most focused on games that are so low spec that they can run on phones too.
Hubi@feddit.org 19 hours ago
And even if you’re playing a lot of modern AAA games, the settings beyond medium are often just offering diminishing returns. I can barely tell the difference in most cases and it will still tank the FPS down by half. It’s just not worth it.
BiomedOtaku@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 hours ago
Which graphics card are you running ? I have a 4060 personally.
Quazatron@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Seconded. This is what I value in a game. You can do great storytelling and/or addictive gameplay with low poly, low res, low color palette.
In fact, I’d argue that hardware limitations sharpen creativity.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 18 hours ago
That is not really true. I use same graphics card and upgrade it with new console cycle. Or maybe once in between.
BiomedOtaku@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 hours ago
I made that comment in regards to a lot of triple a publishers wanting to push out high graphics to a point where eventually you’ll need to upgrade your card to handle the latest and greatest. I much rather decent graphics but a killer story line with good gameplay mechanics.
Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 18 hours ago
What in the world are you talking about…? I was using my GTX 970 for five years before I got a used RTX 2060, which I sold to my brother after two years. I’m nor running an RX 9070 XT and it looks like it’ll do its job for at least 5 years.