Quite a lot of us here are enthusiasts, we quite often perhaps know less than we think we do, no doubt, but we are also not complete normies.
This whole thing started as someone, in the other thread, pointed out the high load Spiderman was putting on the CPU, quite good CPU's like the 9900K and even the 10900K, the latter is a pretty serious CPU by right here and now standards.
I made the point that its probably due to the game streaming data in and out constantly on the fly, that this is a new direction for the development of game worlds, new as in not original but different to the norm, i pointed out the benefits of this new way is larger and more complex game worlds than we have been, up to now, used to.
I made the point that its greatly improving hardware that's these things possible, its progress and its a rather good thing.
As a game developer you will know exactly what i'm talking about when i make the point that due to fixed hardware games can be better optimised on consoles than they can on PC, a PC runs through middleware to make it run smoothly on the infinite number of hardware configurations the home PC has, that has a cost.
To give you one example: Nvidia use software based thread scheduling, its using CPU cycles just to run the driver, up to about 30%, that is up to 30% of CPU cycles the game does not have available to it and its putting that much more load on it.
The consoles don't have that problem, not least because they run AMD hardware which has dedicated thread scheduling hardware on the GPU.
That's possibly one reason, among many others, for the high CPU load on the PC version of Spiderman.
So, i used Star Citizen as a prime example of what's possible in terms of scale and complexity with this type of game development technology, you may disagree, as you do given the point of contention here is your blanket dismissal of that argument, but there is nothing, literally nothing that comes close to Star Citizen in scale and complexity.
This game is a controversial subject, a small number of people very loudly have an irrational hate of it, they are recognised as such by the way they make broad sweeping statements without ever explaining their reasoning, this is the impression we all get from your postings here.
If you actually want to engage in an interesting and meaningful debate, please do so, you may have to come down a bit to our level, but as i said, we aren't completely clueless on this stuff.
