Originally posted by NickSpolec
Hmm.. Ok, you can only list 2 games (unless you can tell me what Quake actually had an optimized code path for... Wait.. That was only 3DFX.. proves my point further) that are actually out, and 2 games that are still being developed..
Out of the HUNDREDS of PC games that have come out since the time when optimized code paths became an option, you can name 3 that are out?
My point exactly.
If games do include optimized code paths, it's never always fair.. They usually only take the time to do one optimized code path (if they take the time to include any at all) for a single hardware set.
Just because GFFX is a horrid card at general DX9 operations doesn't mean the entire industry needs to go out of their way to make optimized code paths for Nvidia, while neglecting other hardware GPUs. Nvidia should make their cards as strong at general DX9 operations as they can, instead of just saying "F*ck it" and expect developers to cator to them.
2 games? i listed dozens, and they all happen to be the best selling games of all time also, STRANGE eh?
Quake had alot of diffrent paths, back in the day, there wasent just Nvidia/ATi/3dfx, there was alot of diffrent cards out there, there was paths for a whole bunch of cards that i dont rember the name of.
Unreal Torunament optmized for the Savage 3, problaly others.
You ask the question why do they make diffrent paths?
id dosent just sell the first game they name the engine after. They sell the engine to companys and they pump out dozens and dozens of games.
You cannot market an engine saying "this game only dose well on the Radeon platform" game developers will laugh at you. If you say "my new engine runs well on all video cards, hell, you can use a Voodoo1 on it" they will say "omg, lets use thsi engine"
Undead, Star Trek: Elite force, Solder of Forune, SoF2, Medal of Honor, Heavy Metal: FAKK2, Alice, Gunman..... my god, there are more out there.