Nah. Fortnite is able to play same account on Switch/PS/Xbox/PC/MAC, and there are others too. So it is possible.
I think issues would be:
1. Players using Mods or people modifying saves would have to to choose local save only.
2. Players who want to Sync have to give up Modding, and in some fashion "Acknowledge" their save can only be played on systems using the same version of the game.
Their are plenty of games that let uses pick Local Save or Cloud Save.
I am not saying it is "Easy"... I am just saying it is possible.
Hence why I said "(not) feasible", not "impossible"
. You're talking about developing and deploying servers to handle lots and lots of save files, across multiple APIs, and multiple structures. Let alone the client side of it all. You probably already noticed, but the example you use does not allow save files to even be on the player's PC. And you're right, if that was feasible it would be possible. But that is a massive amount of work and cost.
Yeah, i just picked up on that last night. The reason is because when you go into stardew valley's files, you pick up on a lot of common formats like ".xnb" and you'll see alot of the same DLL files that you also see with unity games. Unity likes to hide this stuff with "assets" files.
Uhh? I don't think XNB file format is all that common. I don't ever recall Unity having any form of ".xnb".
Usually when i go look at a game, i just do a quick check to see if it's "managed" or not, then usually assume unity or gamemaker since most people don't make engines anymore. That said, the same thing applies again: except XNA game studio, instead of unity, 'cause the code's still managed (which is how C# works, which is also why Unity uses C#), that is to say, it runs in a virtual machine, not directly on the machine (though most code gets translated on startup in managed languages to the machine they're running on).
XNA / MonoGame isn't a game engine (this was not stated by you directly but it seems implied) as it cannot run out of the box knowing how to handle physics, particles, all the fun bits. So in a sense you write your own engine, just with the benefits of having the garbage collector and auto memory management of C#, and leaving the critical parts in C/C++ (Looking at you audio).
Most devs use game-maker studio or unity to avoid learning coding, and those who don't will often prefer C# so that programs don't have to worry about machine specific things like C and C++ do.
I'd say you're making a bad assumption here. You still have to know how to code at some degree even with these engines (Especially with Unity, as the implementation of C# differs). Otherwise you'll be duck taping pieces together and will cause a
void* array of issues. Most people use Unity as it's quite expensive to write your own engine. If not in paying for software engineers, it'll cost in time. Lots of time. The benefit of writing your own engine is you have complete control and you can have scaleability in your game (Unity lacks this) if you plan on making something to continuously expand.
(which is weird, 'cause people always use that as an argument on why to use C and C++ and never learn assembly, and even Java has trouble with maintaining cross platform support)
Wut? This is all over the place.
