The reality of the situation is that they don't come. One shining example of this is the Quake ports to Linux.
A while ago me and a friend looked into the feasibility of possibly starting a non Windows game company where our focus would be on Linux and Mac products. It only took us about a day of research to decide this was a bad idea. One of the main factors actually was a Carmack post in a Slashdot thread where he mentioned that the Quake III Linux port only made enough to cover the port costs. I'm not Carmack, and only in my wildest dreams would I ever make a game that sells as well as one of his. If they can't do it, I think you'd be hard pressed to find some one who can.
Another factor was a discussion I had with member of a local studio about thier ports to Linux via Loki ( I am going to avoid naming the entities involved, sorry ). This game made them a ton of money on the windows and even mac versions, as well as got them some game of the year awards for a strategy game. When asked specifically about thier linux port I was told "It tanked horribly. We'll never make that mistake again." And the interesting thing is that the Mac version made money, but Macs don't have a whole lot more market share.
Maybe in the future we'll be able to try and look into it again. But right now it isn't a possibility.
All the 'C' at the beginning of CISC does is refer to how the processor handles instructions sent to it.
You've probably heard Mac fanatics saying that one cannot compare Pentium Mhz to PPC Mhz, and thier are mostly right.
When chip designers were making thier instructions it was realized that certain things would be done alot, so they packed it into one instruction for the processor. Its kinda like a function call in C. But like the function call in C, you also don't really know what it does once it gets used. When the instruction get to the processor it gets decoded into a bunch of smaller calls which get excecuted.
In this way, the CISC processor is only really using a small number of instructions but exposes a much larger set to the user to make it easier to write stuff. ( compilers.. ) While it is easier to write the code, you pay in the end because you have to spend cycles decoding the stuff. I think i read some where that a Pentium going head to head with a same Mhz Mac is something like %33 slower in terms of straight number crunching power, but don't qoute me on it.
A RISC processor doesn't use complex instructions, all operations must be reduced to thier base instructions.
The amount of instructions doesn't define a processor as RISC or CISC, its how they are handled by the processor when they get there.
theres some good info at
http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc- 1.html
UFC Tapout isn't even out yet.. how do you know it doesn't work?
The XBox runs on an Pentium! Why does using one break it?
The XBox also uses a form of Direct3D, not OpenGL so what is this about support for it? Also I hear the D3D it uses was modified to work better with special hardware features in the video card, ones not in the GF3 or even the soon to be released this year sometime GF4.
clear these things up for me.. i'm confused.
I'm confused.
If XBox games suck so bad, then why is the game to console attach rate 3 games per box? It is the highest attach rate in history for a console this early after ship.
Slashdot Mirror
The reality of the situation is that they don't come. One shining example of this is the Quake ports to Linux.
A while ago me and a friend looked into the feasibility of possibly starting a non Windows game company where our focus would be on Linux and Mac products. It only took us about a day of research to decide this was a bad idea. One of the main factors actually was a Carmack post in a Slashdot thread where he mentioned that the Quake III Linux port only made enough to cover the port costs. I'm not Carmack, and only in my wildest dreams would I ever make a game that sells as well as one of his. If they can't do it, I think you'd be hard pressed to find some one who can.
Another factor was a discussion I had with member of a local studio about thier ports to Linux via Loki ( I am going to avoid naming the entities involved, sorry ). This game made them a ton of money on the windows and even mac versions, as well as got them some game of the year awards for a strategy game. When asked specifically about thier linux port I was told "It tanked horribly. We'll never make that mistake again." And the interesting thing is that the Mac version made money, but Macs don't have a whole lot more market share.
Maybe in the future we'll be able to try and look into it again. But right now it isn't a possibility.
Well, everyone knows if you go and ask for help in the real world at a real job, you'd get fired..
All the 'C' at the beginning of CISC does is refer to how the processor handles instructions sent to it.
- 1.html
You've probably heard Mac fanatics saying that one cannot compare Pentium Mhz to PPC Mhz, and thier are mostly right.
When chip designers were making thier instructions it was realized that certain things would be done alot, so they packed it into one instruction for the processor. Its kinda like a function call in C. But like the function call in C, you also don't really know what it does once it gets used. When the instruction get to the processor it gets decoded into a bunch of smaller calls which get excecuted.
In this way, the CISC processor is only really using a small number of instructions but exposes a much larger set to the user to make it easier to write stuff. ( compilers.. ) While it is easier to write the code, you pay in the end because you have to spend cycles decoding the stuff. I think i read some where that a Pentium going head to head with a same Mhz Mac is something like %33 slower in terms of straight number crunching power, but don't qoute me on it.
A RISC processor doesn't use complex instructions, all operations must be reduced to thier base instructions.
The amount of instructions doesn't define a processor as RISC or CISC, its how they are handled by the processor when they get there.
theres some good info at
http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc
UFC Tapout isn't even out yet.. how do you know it doesn't work? The XBox runs on an Pentium! Why does using one break it? The XBox also uses a form of Direct3D, not OpenGL so what is this about support for it? Also I hear the D3D it uses was modified to work better with special hardware features in the video card, ones not in the GF3 or even the soon to be released this year sometime GF4. clear these things up for me.. i'm confused.
I'm confused. If XBox games suck so bad, then why is the game to console attach rate 3 games per box? It is the highest attach rate in history for a console this early after ship.