Battlefield 3 = no dx9

silversurfer said:
dx10 isnt just graphics. dx10 and 11 introduce efficiency savings elsewhere as well. If they are able to just assume everyone has access to those it should yield something new and/or uncap the extremes in the game maybe including player numbers

Ive yet to see a dx10 game which did that though, long time waiting for nothing much so far thanks to consoles but mainly the failure of vista adoption pretty much, this rumour is possibly true just maybe because win7 isnt crap and has sold and is selling far more widely
Click to expand...

crysis 2 developers claim that with these optimisations they can get twice the fps compared to crysis with the same graphics quality. lets wait and see
 
DX9 was probably just dropped from frostbite 2 because it meant the devs didn't have to bother creating a DX9 code path for the engine.

IIRC the PS3 and 360 GPUs are DX9 compatible (which only means they support a list of features required by the DX9 standard) but they don't use directx as an api (the PS3 certainly won't), so DX9 not being supported on the PC version is pretty irrelevant to the console version.
 
Just cause 2 doesn't support XP/DX9. I found the PS3 demo more enjoyable than on my old GTX 260. Pretty bad when you consider the performance difference. I'd love it if some PC-only games started to appear that really used to the modern graphics capabilities of PCs *. Sadly, I don't think it will happen. Give me HL3 - DX11 and I would buy it on release day and probably buy whatever hardware I needed but I think those days have passed.

* not interested in RTS games that just aren't popular enough for console release so everyone says that they are PC exclusive.
 
Last edited:
Good XP and DX9 are hanging around like a bad smell time to move on, I mean what's the point creating new stuff if it doesn't get used half the time, all devs need to follow.
 
mame said:
Just cause 2 doesn't support XP/DX9. I found the PS3 demo more enjoyable than on my old GTX 260. Pretty bad when you consider then performance difference. I'd love it if some PC-only games started to appear that really used to the modern graphics capabilities of PCs *. Sadly, I don't think it will happen. Give me HL3 - DX11 and I would buy it on release day and probably buy whatever hardware I needed but I think those days have passed.

* not interested in RTS games that just aren't popular enough for console release so everyone says that they are PC exclusive.
Click to expand...

how come you found the ps3 demo more enjoyable? doesnt make any sense to me
 
NZXT30 said:
how come you found the ps3 demo more enjoyable? doesnt make any sense to me
Click to expand...

I wasn't very clear. It just ran pretty bad on my old GTX 260. When I played the PS3 demo, it didn't look much different but ran fine. I could have turned down some of the PC settings (I only used 2xAA) but if it was made to use the extra power of the PC then you shouldn't have to. Also, if I had to do that, what's the point when I have the 'original' console (demo) version
My point is that a game that doesn't support DX9 might not offer anything new to PC gamers.
 
Last edited:
Having only just upgraded to a GTX460 and having seen how smooth it runs in DX11 with everything up (inc 8xCSAA, 16xAF) in DX11 I fully back anything that could possibly forward the motion of the Op!

Heck even the £150 GTX350 would run DX11 perfectly :)
 
Evilsod said:
Why is everyone getting there hopes up over scrapping DX9? Last time i checked graphics were not the hallmark of gaming and the mechanics of the game will not be affected. Just because it might look prettier won't make it any better or worse of a game.
Click to expand...

Well put.
 
jimbob27 said:
They did exactly the same thing last time with battlefield 2. They decided not to support geforce4 cards because their pixel shader was too basic. People were forced to upgrade, and seeing as the game was so good, on the whole they were happy to do it.
Click to expand...

And I then purchased my first piece of hardware (ati 9600 pro) because of this, became interested in PC's, and the rest as they say is history :)

Like people have said, graphics aren't everything, but dx10 and 11 is also about doing stuff that can be done in 9 quicker and more efficiently. Best case scenario the beta will be probably summer next year (just guessing) so we're looking at a release somewhen around this time next year. That's another year for people to upgrade. a lot can change in 12 months!
 
Sin_Chase said:
At what point is a console just a purpose built PC with games that offer input peripherals such as wheels, pads that consoles are traditionally shipped and used with and a streamlines operating system.

I mean, why even have a platform distinction these days...it's going to get to a point where the console developers just say "This is stupid....distinction for the sake of distinction"

I realise the marketing potency of it being a XBox/Playstation/Wii instead of "Personal Computer" as well as the support/warranty issues but yeah....

Perhaps one day there will be a bootable operating system to turn a PC into a 'console platform' alongside traditional console hardware which IS just a purpose built PC system with hardware.

Edit - Going to make a separate thread for more focused input! http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=17264232
Click to expand...

This is right tbh, consoles are just turning into PCs with each generation. So why not just buy PCs in the first place that can do your gaming better and mailing/browsing.
 
Deific said:
This is right tbh, consoles are just turning into PCs with each generation. So why not just buy PCs in the first place that can do your gaming better and mailing/browsing.
Click to expand...

Cost of the hardware mainly, and as my friend put it, you just turn it on and the game is there. Many people don't know and don't care about maintaining an OS and hardware configs and all tha
. To a lot of people, a pc, or laptop more frequently, is just an internet machine and nothing more.
 
Making it prettier does make it more enjoyable, when I had my GTX260 I played in DX9 mode with no FSAA because it was the only way to get 45-60fps on my 24" screen at all times but now with the 460 I play with 8xCSAA and in DX11 (I guess the same applies for DX10 too due to DX11 path having small performance gains and better soft shadowmaps) mode and get the same frames and the whole game is more enjoyable because of the all nice little effects and touches and smoother graphics - I just find it more engrossing especially in a firefight where explosions involved, a grenade blows up in front of you, debris flies everywhere, smoke fills your immediate view and you have to haul ass out of it just incase someone spotted you so you're running through smoke, can't see **** like:

can%27tseeshiz.JPG


It was fun before but now it's just even more fun with the special effects :D
 
Last edited:
Evilsod said:
Why is everyone getting there hopes up over scrapping DX9? Last time i checked graphics were not the hallmark of gaming and the mechanics of the game will not be affected. Just because it might look prettier won't make it any better or worse of a game.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody is getting their hopes up at all tbh, I think everybody here would just like make use of what they've had for a while which is vista/W7/DX10/10.1/11 etc etc.

It's too much to ask we know because atm there's so many games out there with good stories and depth with great gameplay and mechanics, right? ;)

cheets64 said:
I use XP and refuse to go back to Win 7 its crap

PC gamers need to wake up and smell the money the PS3 and 360 makes
Click to expand...

lol wut? XP is outdated and frustrating if anything, how can you say Win 7 is crap :confused: I think someones afraid of a little change ;)
 
Last edited:
[ZiiP]carrot;17280172 said:
And I then purchased my first piece of hardware (ati 9600 pro) because of this, became interested in PC's, and the rest as they say is history :)

Like people have said, graphics aren't everything, but dx10 and 11 is also about doing stuff that can be done in 9 quicker and more efficiently. Best case scenario the beta will be probably summer next year (just guessing) so we're looking at a release somewhen around this time next year. That's another year for people to upgrade. a lot can change in 12 months!
Click to expand...

BF2 certainly was a game worth upgrading for. I was a massive fan of 1942 and built a whole new pc after playing the bf2 demo.:D

When the forced people to upgrade, it was just because they wanted their game to look better. Even for it's day bf2 wasn't the greatest looking game. It came out after far cry, doom 3 and hl2, all of which produce much prettier screenshots than bf2 ever did.
 
yea but bf2 has ragdoll physics so its all good :) The open nature of the game design and maps is what constricted them slightly, it was based on a decade old game engine


win 7 is not crap, just bloated. 4 gig and a couple of cores and its ok
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom