View Single Post
Old 04-06-10, 12:07 PM   #73
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by XMAN52373 View Post
Completely disagree. Fergot about OpenGL that is totaly OS independant and had those behind its development had been vigorous about keeping it up todate and current. It would still be a vary viable option for Devs today.

I did mention OpenGL,but the main focus for that API is professional graphics environments first and foremost....Some early developers supported OpenGL in their first games for it's multiplatform potential(Mac's,linux),and also because way back then,direct X sucked hard,as even direct X5 didn't even support multitexturing in a single pass....We had to wait for Direct X6 for that one.


Today though,it's actually the direct X11 standard that's in the lead for graphics features support compared to the OpenGL standard,so the latter really has it's multiplatform advantage as it's selling point and still allows the use of custom graphics features using custom OpenGL driver extensions,something that Direct X stopped once DX10 rolled in.


Quote:
Sadly, CUDA isn't really much for games but has been made recently so, really dont know why Nvidia went on that marketing fix with that one game stupid. You also fergot Nvidia 3D surround and Nvision. Nvision being Nvidias answer to Eyefinity and ATI working with 3rd parties to compete with 3d Vision.

The examples i quoted were relating to features that's not part of the direct X standards in the first place,and it's where the emphasis is being placed by both companies to make their hardware look special in end users eyes.....The graphics effects capabilities are the same for both,as they have follow the DX11 specification to the letter there,so there's no way to make either card look "special" in that area.


That's my main point.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote