>>506173>Not yet, but I hear quad meshing is coming soon. >That'll change a lot.
No anon, it won't. Quads don't even exist in your DCC packages, they only LOOK like quads because our software hides the edge that normally splits up the quad into to triangles. This edge's orientation changes depending on how the 4 corners of the quad are oriented and is automatically split to two triangles when sent to our GPUs.
Look at this image. All 3 are quads. The two on the right have nearly the same vertex position, yet one is convex and one is concave, even though I have no defined an edge in the middle to determine that. The software is simply guessing which way is best to split the quad for you unless you explicitly define it. And since we don't explicitly define it, we're able to use tools that can follow edge-flows because they can simple be told to ignore this part of the process.
Triangles are the fastest way to do math on a complex surface, because we know that a triangle will always be perfectly flat and we can also use the tricks of trigonometry.
Having to compute that internal edge on every single quad in your game-scene would induce a MASSIVE performance overhead.