It is also part of the benchmarks game they play against each other.
Quake was also the standard for a game that was willing to fully exploit the hardware of the time.
But in 2001 ATI was caught applying optimizations to Quake 3 when someone realized if you renamed the executable from “quake” to “quack” the score dropped a ton. It was a big scandal.
I know that’s common now but that wasn’t a thing that was done at the time.
A frequent example I’ve encountered is web frameworks that have to keep checking for escaped text because they didn’t write it in horizontal layers where you know for sure that all inputs have been scrubbed when they reach this function but not that one. So the same functions get called with data that comes from your team and from customers. Reuse is tricky.
- Unescape, sanitize or validate at all entry points.
- Escape all outputs (this includes the database queries).
If you follow those simple rules, you never have to check once you are past a controller. And you should fuzz your controllers to make sure no unexpected data makes it past there.
Everyone has clever answers for greenfield projects and empty rhetoric for brown.
The driver looks to see if a known old game is calling it, and if it's one known to crash, it returns no more than 256 characters, and likely also puts all the _old_ extensions that the game is likely to know and react to in the string.
There are also all sorts of games that called APIs in a particular order or set particular options, because they represented a "fast path" at the time, and now they don't, but if you're that program, then yes they do.
Ultimately, this clutter is what let do the development of the Vulcan API, to stop games second-guessing graphics APIs which themselves second-guess the games.
Funny quirk, though: that particular window wouldn't show files named firefox.exe. It would accept that as typed input, if you were at the correct folder, but the file listing omitted that particular file.
Maybe it was mozilla.exe; it was a long time ago. But that was the discovery that pushed me off IE forever.
You saw that again in more modern times when Microsoft removed support for the APIs they provided to set browser defaults, forcing browser makers to write step by step instructions on what to click to set the default browser.
I believe they walked that back, but it left such a bad taste that I switched my installation of Windows from default mode to EU mode in order to avoid it. And come to think of it, I haven’t used my windows machine for much outside of AI in about 6 months.
But Microsoft is not alone in these sort of defaults games - every OS or browser maker, Apple, Google, Firefox, wants to create moats so they can more easily monetize your usage of a product. I never thought I’d prefer the business model of free to play games, where they just outright ask you for money and have to keep finding new ways to entertain instead of relying on hard to change defaults and selling your data.
1. AAAA Game Studio shits out another unoptimized clunker
2. nvidia considers it a reputational risk if games run at 30 FPS on a 5090
3. They go in, look at the perverse ways the game misuses rendering primitives, and then hacks shit in to make whatever bad things they're doing less bad.
As a gamer, this seems fine to me and i generally blame the AAAA devs for being bad at their jobs or AAAA studio leads for being ok shipping unoptimized messes.
As a software developer, it almost certainly has a bad effect on the ecosystem long term. "Hacks shit in" is the very definition of technical debt, and that has a cost that someone, somewhere is going to have to pay in some form.
> You’re looking as a dev, but the reality is that a consumer cannot see technical debt.
The consumer can't _see_ technical debt, but they sure as heck can be impacted by it.
- Technical debt means the code base is harder to work with later. So fixes/enhancements take longer to make it into the code (and sometimes never can)
- This particular type of technical debt means the code by the game developers sets precedent, and the next developer may us it as an example. So the amount of code incorrectly using the api grows faster over time
You can click the timestamp ("X minutes ago") to view the comment without context, and reply from there.
These hacks are game specific, so another developer wouldn't get them.
There is no reason anyone has to pay each and every iota of technical debt. Plenty of things with technical debt hit end of life and no one ever looks in that code again. I suspect most technical debt goes this way - in program, program never updates (or minor updates), then dies.
Your claim would require every piece of technical debt in anything ever (code, buildings, cars, anywhere) has to be removed before the thing goes end of life or goes into a mode where it never is changed. That seems ludicrous to me.
“AAAA Game Studio shits out another unoptimized clunker” seems a paradoxical statement to me. I would have thought “AAAA” meant “highly resourced” game company. Does it just mean high revenue? Lots of players?
Yes. My understanding was it was optimized by reducing precision or something to a visibly apparent degree.
It's different if the driver changes things in ways such that rendered output is the same or at least imperceptibly different. I think there's also a lot more communication between gpu makers and game/engine developers these days; plus a lot more frequent updates.
If only we had that sort of a control over rendering for every game ourselves - since projects like OptiScaler at least let us claw back control over sometimes proprietary upscaling and even framegen, but it's not quite enough: https://github.com/optiscaler/OptiScaler
I'd also mention Lossless Scaling here, though it still only works on upscaling and framegen and with worse methods, but at least works for most games out there: https://store.steampowered.com/app/993090/Lossless_Scaling/
I want to be able to freely toggle between different types of AA and SSAO and reflections and lighting and LOD systems and various shader effects (especially things like chromatic aberration or motion blur) and ray tracing and all that, instead of having to hope that the console port that's offered to me has those abilities in the graphics menu and that whoever is making the decisions hasn't decided that actually "low" graphics (that would at least run smoothly) would look too bad for the game's brand image or something.
Like board manufacturers, the game developers also need to please the drivers and do the way driver silently dictates to them (regardless of what DirectX, OpenGL or Vulkan says), otherwise all bets are off.
https://docs.nvidia.com/cutlass/index.html
it presumably makes various assumptions and speedups for NVIDIA's matrix multiplication library... called cutlass