Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom
I'm afraid you're the one entirely missing the mark here. The vast majority of CPU power is spent on rendering, and the small remaining fraction is then distributed between all the other aspects of the game. If they would make a game 10% uglier, enough CPU power would become available to do pretty much anything you would want.
Listen to Deano's words. He's right, you're wrong.
|
Haha, this is just unbeleivable... OK so lets do some deduction from your logic:
"
If they would make a game 10% uglier, enough CPU power would become available to do pretty much anything you would want." - Ok so any CPU can do anything as long as its not "rendering"? Awesome, i must alert IBM and tell them to stop wasting their time making supercomputers for NASA etc, apparently a 286 would be able to power all of their software, they can save millions! As for sony.. they might aswell used the CPU from the PS1! those silly geese! Who needs to render good graphics anyway? gears of war would be just as good with no texture mapping on the textures so you couldnt see any detail, its all about gameplay! graphics add absolutely nothing to a game... creating an immersing realistic world is such a waste of time.
Now im off to find my 286 and install Ghost recon, apparently i dont need a fast CPU or one of those AGEIA physics cards the released as specific hardware purely for handling the physics calculations, as long as i turn the "rendering" down is should have easily enough power
