|
|
|
|
|
by GamerUncle
1294 days ago
|
|
saying "Windows does not officially support Vulkan" is a completely blatant cope by maclovers, nvidia and amd, the people that make the cards support it, and windows "supports" their cards, so let's stop being dishonest. "Vulkan is not an industry standard" I mean yeah, in the same way Microsoft word is not an standard. "except Switch, but it is so slow" again that seems to be a lie, doom eternal orks way, way better on it than it would be on similar software on a different API. |
|
It is completely honest. On a fresh install of Windows, if you don't have graphics drivers, you can't run Vulkan or OpenGL. Windows washes their hands of any responsibility. You can at least run DirectX with software rendering regardless of hardware support. It is also for this reason that the locked-down Xbox where Microsoft can assert more control has zero tolerance for OpenGL or Vulkan.
> "Vulkan is not an industry standard" I mean yeah, in the same way Microsoft word is not an standard.
Microsoft Word, and the DOCX format by extension, has >90% market share. Vulkan has almost no presence on consoles, presence on less than half of smartphones in use, and mixed presence on Desktop because MacOS doesn't have it. Word is more of a standard than Vulkan.
> "except Switch, but it is so slow" again that seems to be a lie, doom eternal orks way, way better on it than it would be on similar software on a different API.
DOOM Eternal is one of the few games that uses Vulkan. >90% of Switch games do not use Vulkan, and found it preferable to use the proprietary API. That developers would overwhelmingly opt not to use Vulkan on Switch tells you all you need to know about the state of it. If adding another graphics API (such as Metal) was such a big deal, why in the world would they do it if Vulkan was cross-platform and worked fine? It doesn't work as well as it needs to - and adding another graphics API isn't as much of a blocker as we like to think.