Oh and one more thing, you may want to look for some FACTUAL evidence of just how many developers actually used software based tilable textures last generation. Come back to me, when you figure this one out and have some proof.
I'm not your monkey. When you baldly assert that you are going to declare that you will consider yourself correct unless I prove to you otherwise, it changes nothing for anyone but you. I am neither required nor enticed to act. If you want to educate yourself so as to improve your knowledge or to improve the impression you leave upon others it is up to you to do it.
I don't even know what you people are talking about, but this sentiment really hit me. "I will assert this as fact based upon nothing and it's your fucking job to prove me wrong!" So typical internet douchebaggery.
His crying is actually quite ironic considering he came into this thread downplaying the technology, introducing 3 irrelevant terms which he didn't define or explain at the time that he used them(I had to explain them) making the insane claim that good developers who are proficient in tesselation, mipmapping and level design would not see any benefits other developers would from partial resident resources moving to hardware. Then failed to provide any proof or sources to back this claim with anything other than his own logic based on poorly drawn assumptions that just don't factually hold water.
And the only proof he has shown so far in this thread is a link to a wikipedia article that he didn't take the time to actually read all the way to realize my explanation was perfectly acceptable.
I agree though, it's its douchebaggery, but in this case it becomes ironic when he's crying about being asked to prove himself considering I don't think anyone here would disagree I have been providing secondary sources to back up just about everything I have been explaining beginning with the opening post.
But I will get to him in a minute when I have a bit more time.