because every bloated 100gb game is a mix of a thousand different assets/executables/libraries

Also needlessly uncompressed audio or poorly compressed video (that likely could instead be in-engine) particularly when multiple resolutions are needed. Sometimes one of these might be the bigger issue, particularly with remasters.

@Gladaed I have less-than-stellar internet* (~6mb/s, shared with others), 20GB is definitely not a reasonable size for me. 100MiB is fine, but not negligible. Consider also storage space, particularly because users will run games from slower(->cheaper) drives when they deem games too big (which for me is already at 1GiB+, at least in terms of having a library because that adds up).

* and I live in the US, not even in the woods! The price isn't even great, either.

As I see it, data size is an inverse multiplier for viability. The smaller a download is the more likely that users will be able to get and store it (long-term even) without issue. The difference between a day and an hour is huge, the difference between an hour and 5 minutes is still worthwhile (especially if this impacts household internet speed). Less than that (nearing instant download) is peak.

Updates also make this difference larger.

EDIT: A better way to say this is that this probably makes a lot of sense for small developers to do in stable releases at-very-least. Even then I could see picking-and-choosing for all sorts of different reasons. If this is part of an export script I could see it being practically free minus a slightly longer build time that is probably still in an acceptable range.