|
|
 |
| [Jan 05, 2004, 10:52 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 8. |
Re: Stalker benchmarks |
Jan 5, 2004, 11:35 |
John Nelson |
|
|
So, to clarify:
1. XBitslabs posts an article claiming to benchmark DX9 Stalker.
2. A Stalker fansite (official?) contacts them and says they couldn't have since the game isn't even in beta.
3. Xbitslabs say they never said it was Stalker, just another DX9 game they were benchmarking. (hey, maybe it was DX:IW - that's the kind of framerates you're getting, right? Huh? Hah.)
4. People on the Bluesnews thread accuse GSC (the developer) of a cover-up because they're sponsored by Nvidia.
If we were to join the dots of this little story, how many lines would connect to GSC?
I think the point is: the fansite is worried that when the game is released people are going to expect an all-singing DirectX 9 game running at the framerates shown on the X-bitslabs website. The actuality will probably be something similar to what's happened with Half Life 2 and the Nvidia cards will show a greater framerate deficit under full DX9. And in fact it's unlikely anyone is going to see anything like the posted framerates for their video card of choice. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.