>It isn't a different argument.
It's not something either of them brought up, so it is a different argument.
> If you fill up a harddrive with 1TB of soyjaks
If that's what you wanted then that's useful to you, the discussion of whether or not is worth it to have 1TB of soyjacks is different than the discussion regarding if those soyjacks need to be 1TB, my point is that it makes sense they're that heavy because they're many or something, it doesn't really matter
if you reply telling me that it is not worth it to have 1TB of soyjacks in the first place then that's a different matter.
>Are you autistic?
I'm the one that should ask that question
>Why? What is your definition of "data"?
The binary data that compromises the game, more is needed in general to account for all the extra stuff that games have nowadays, whether or not that stuff is worth it is a different matter, see the above reply.
>Why else would we complain about the size?
That's what i'm curious about
>but technology hasn't advanced that much to warrant that bulk
Probably, but i'm not entirely sure, your head math makes sense, but it needs real data not just your guesses,
Imagine we're talking video, the jump in size from 720p to 1080p to 4k to 8k is pretty significant, if you're used to 720 file sizes you'd be pretty annoyed at having to store videos with higher resolutions, while understandable there's no doubt the 4k video will need more data and therefore a bigger file size
than the 720 video, whether or not the jump from 720 to 4k is worth the extra size to you is a different matter to whether or not that 4k file should be that heavy. Compression and such helps no doubt, but it can only get you so far and considering you can easily get more storage then the raw size is not that big an issue, unless of course you just want to complain about something to virtue signal how much of a normalfag you are not.
On the matter of "is that size worth it?" i'm very much in agreement with you, it often isn't at all.