Okay Joe, here it comes...
[It has been said that I may come across somewhat...costic?...don't take it personally, it's just my way of debate.]
If there was no threat to 3dfx, this stock would be much higher.
Such a causal relation doesn't exist and I think you know better. Conversely, is Amazon at its current level because there is no threat to their market share?
The "secret" nextGen chip from 3DFX (beyond V3) should be designed for DX not GLIDE !
Actually, the chip should be designed to give the user the best gaming experience. Glide is written as an interface for the chip, not the other way around. The reality is, probably even DX7 won't support what Rampage will offer.
It would make the developers alot happier to "CODE" only one version of the game, namely in DX.. WHY?
Actually, the developers would rather use Glide as it is easy to program with and they only have to support one platform. The only reason DX6 is used is to open the customer base a little wider. If 3dfx gets enough market penetration (60%-75%) we could see a mass exodus from DX6 to Glide. Of course that kind of penetration will only happen in 3dfx's wildest dreams.
IF 3dfx doesn't want to support DX and insists in using GLIDE
What? 3dfx has the fastest DX implementation on the planet...V2 SLI. Your insistence on comparing the two as mutually exclusive competitors doesn't make any sense. The two API's have totally different uses and nothing is to say a game can't support both API's:
Glide: Used to get the best performance out of the game. Can take advantage of new features in hardware (aka Rampage) instead of waiting on microsoft to support the hardware. Could be used to get the quickest development time for a 3d game and follow up with DX or OpenGL patches after the release like Unreal. (3dfx has the largest single 3d marketshare.) Limits having to support multiple feature sets.
DX6: Used to get the broadest customer base. More possible customers equals more possible dollars. 3d features aren't pushed to the max.
Pat |
