walsufnir said:
Well, first of all, Xboxes always had a *variant* of DX - it always was in large compatible but in crucial parts gave more power to the devs while not breaking the usual and well-known development environment. Second, think for a bit: If it was true that you can't optimize on Xbox, what does that tell you about untapped power on the 360? The system would've been even more powerful than it ever was, only crippled by an API and still managed to outdo the PS3 on numerous games. Do you actually believe that? PC optimization is a different thing of course but DX12 gives developers way more control than they ever had before, just like Vulkan now also does. Do you think that MS and the OpenGL group invent new APIs just for marketing reasons? And the question why console if PC can also optimize: Do you think the only reason why consoles exist is because PC games are not optimized because of their "not to metal"-APIs? |
Wasulfunir you realize it's uncompatible to say something like a middleware is easier to use and close to metal right? The abstraction from DirectX already puts one layer and make it a little less efficient than not having DX
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
