» Fri Jun 03, 2011 3:20 am http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1
Summary:
Why the seemingly not so great difference between consoles vs. PC, even though PC hardware's computing power is that much more?
It has to do with developing for hardware compatibility. For consoles, Dev's can develop for ONE specific set of hardware, so they can go deep and make it super optimized for that particular hardware. Consoles all have the same hardware, so this becomes very viable for them to put the time into it since the developments apply to potentially larger numbers (ALL the console owners). A lot more cost effective.
Also, on consoles, Dev's can actually access the hardware directly and code for it.
For PC, they actually cannot do that at the moment I think, based on the article. They have to get through DirectX, so they are unable to optimize for how each series/model of cards or processors handles things.
Even if they could, the differences in how each graphic card model/architecture handles it possibly makes it less cost/time effective to put the time in for the smaller groups of people who own those sets of cards. But maybe it's actually a good number of people and they would do it if they could. But now, they cannot even if they wanted to.
DirectX is there so can they do it once for ALL the graphics cards, and it seems it was a decision by microsoft with one of the reasons being compatibility.
On the developers...
The devs love what they do as you can see from the insane visual of a PC game Crysis was when it came out, and I'm sure they want to push it even farther for PC if they could, but know this: they are given this opportunity to do what they love because they have this opportunity to contribute something to the world doing what they love, which is creating an experience for people.
I think it's good, maybe even crucial, that they do all this for consoles so that they get enough of a buffer for future projects where they can put more into pushing the boundaries even when returns are less, because they have that buffer. But pushing the boundaries for consoles is something they might love too, and that's awesome! haha creating an experience that reaches even more people.
I'm not sure how the first Crysis did, but this possibly helps to make up for the less return they had there, and allow them to possibly do more of what they did with the first Crysis to push it for PC even more, or even ALL of both PC and Consoles. So, what they are doing with Crysis 2 is great!
...but I think you can see how much they really love to push the boundaries from the last Crysis, and I'm sure if the same people are there, if they could, they would. PC would be the choice because of it's power, not because "it's PC". It's about pushing the boundaries, which they've done for consoles this time, possibly in the awe of people who play on console as was the people who played on PC when the first Crysis came out.
I think what they did for consoles this time is as commendable, if not more commendable than what they did in the first Crysis for the PC.
Hopefully, with what Crysis 2 brings for them, they can push the boundaries of graphics even more of where there would be Maximum Hardware (tm), just as much, if not more than where hardware is limited as in consoles.
Studios like Crytek are the ones we want around, and it's good that they've been getting great reception, especially from the console side.
It's good that Crytek is around to even bring us Crysis 2, something I think is still leading in it's ways, and CryEngine 3 is something that may grow into so much more, or bring Crytek into doing and bringing more to everyone.
B.
