| VanceIX said: You seem to be assuming that console and PC architecture are plug-and-play, which they aren't. If the architecture was 100% identical you would have a point, but it's not. I would encourage you to link me a source if you think otherwise. And for all the other points, I'm done arguing. I made a thread about the cost effectiveness of PCs, if you want to talk about it talk about it there. |
Obviously you are not reading what I have said nor did you go to th elink I referred to. And You are the one that broought up the cost effectiveness of PCs or value of PCs into all this. All cause I tried to point out that for every ounce of PC performance you get over consoles you pay for it and devs know that a lot of people aren't willing to pay that much. So the design theri games to run at what they believe the majority of gamers would have.
I don't even know what you mean by me assuming that consoles and PCs architecture are identical. If anything everything I have been saying says other wise. But code is code. an engine is an engine and memory is memory. What language governs these things are irrelevant as long as they ultimately do the same things.
You also fail to see that the differences in architecture between consoles and PCs actually play to consoles favor as opposed to a PC. Have any idea how much of a nightmare it is optimizing code to run on PCs? Hell.... code optimization is a nightmare between GPUs from the same manufacturer in PCs for crying out loud.
But you know what, I think this discussion is going nowhere, so lets just agree to disagree. Cause the more we talk about it the more it changes, and that is usualy a sign that at least one of us is making this or tunring it into something it orginally wasn't as opposed to just conceding defeat. So lets leave it alone.
