How comes version 0.8.2 (2.24GB) is so small in size compared to 0.8 (4.24GB)? Did the developer cut out material (or reduce the resolution quality) or is 0.8.2 only a patch and we need it along 0.8,... or should it be really a (much much) better algorithm/filetype efficiency?
Does anyone know something about this?
Thanks you for your fast response. Would be cool if the new size has the same quality, but honestly I doubt it. If you didn't use completely uncompressed bmps or pngs before and now changed that there is no chance pictures can be reduced in size that much without quality loss.
But on way or another: I am interested to hear the result of your inspection.
