| fatslob-:O said: Performance wise ? Only a programmer with access to the source code would know ... Talking of issues with the effects and the resources they take and how they impact the game, not coding issues that only a programmer would actually be able to know. The GTX 980 is high end but it's already 1 & 1/2 year old, just don't expect to always get 1080p60fps down the road or even some games before it like Crysis 3. Almost everyone I know buys videocards for how well they perform at LAUNCH, not how well they will age ... Well you and I know different sets of people then. Whether the "difference" was worth it or not comes down to each person, personally speaking if I thought like that I wouldn't have built my new PC ... So basically it has to be worth it in your eyes for everyone else then or just don't build a PC if I'm correct?. Cripple how exactly ? With the demanding effects ? Then just turn it off, lord knows I hate PCSS cause I think it makes shadows look worse but I just turn it off and move on ... I do turn them off but having to turn them off clearly shows that what they are doing just isn't worth it, the epformance cost is definitely not worth it, not from the benches I'm seeing and the folk going "you don't need this, turn it off", if it actually gave huge gains then we'd be seeing tons more of "you cannot live without this, keep it turned on, it;s always well more than worth it". Nvidia aren't godlike perfect either and not everything is demanding by default, you can make a game demanding that doesn't give you much if any gains at all and you can make something demanding that actually gives you a lot more than you bargained for. So your definition of best is "optimized" console ports without the GameWorks ? Ok fair enough but I think having highest quality visuals is what constitutes the best in terms of technicals ... You can still optimize for higher end GPU's without crippling them deliberately to force people to get the enxt best card that just so happens to be coming out enxt month and then the following year after, I have actually seen great ports and great games that make good use of high end hardware that don't absolutely melt the machine to a point where that machine is shit and then the next built rig being good for about 1 month. They can totally keep GW, just give us actual massive night and day gains that don't absolutely melt shit into the ground on purpose to sell us a new card because lord knows that strat totally hasn't ever been used in the history of mankind's product/marketing history, makes perfect sense to me in business sense to do that and bring out a new card every now and then with tiny gains while forcing effects that cripple each new "high end" card to it's knees, that idea gets you a shit ton of money and marketshare and look where it's landed Nvidia, 70%. I'm justified in my view and similarily the same goes to you but in the end it's a choice that the developers pit against gamers ... Yeah you totally are but I just don't agree with how this is gone about because my money isn't worth a damn if I'm not getting what I want, I want what I pay for, not "oh I see you paid 1 and a half grand for your PC, tisk, should have spend another 2k to get a better experience", it's like being told by the very company you buy from that you'll get the best possible experience but find out each time that you never will unless you jump through their yearly card releases each month or two, spending thousands upon thousands because they cba to actually allow for your card to breathe and actually perform. |
Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.
Essay Pro