DirectX 10 - Think Your Ready?

[gord]

I haven't seen the video but regardless of how good it looks, it doesn't prove to me that it couldn't be done in DX9. If you raise the minimum system requirements for Crysis above what they were for Far Cry then obviously you can achieve more.

Almost all of the functionality shown there CAN be done in DX9. HA!, i hear you say

I hate to quote myself after ive posted, as it indicates to me that you are not reading my post properly. Nevertheless, ive orchestrated it so that you will have to read my above post to gain any sense from the quote.

How many games make full use of DX9 anyway? Most games still cater for DX8 cards and as was just pointed out to me, DX9 has been around for about four years.

We were told that DX9 would be amazing yet to me games look little better than with DX8. What do we get, a subtle difference in how water is rendered in Half Life 2 between DX8 and 9 and stuff like that. Woo hoo.

http://gear.ign.com/articles/567/567437p1.html

Take a look at that, i tried to find you the decent res crysis video aswell, but gamershell seem to have a problem with that file... i imagine its other places too though.

IGN clearly describe differences, with images to back up the improvements. True it isnt gargantuan improvements, but thats the point of my original post. DX10 is dropping the older incarntations in order to bring us a leap.

 

[dirtydog]

I think IGN exaggerates the differences between DX8 and 9 in those HL2 screenshots - saying there is a 'world' of difference etc - I think the average man in the street wouldn't agree. I am a PC geek and I can hardly tell the difference except when it's pointed out to me and I look hard!

 

[gord]

Okay I watched this video, is this the one?

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/694/694190/vids_1.html

Nothing to get excited about there.

Aye thats the one although, thats low res. A pure beauty, its absolutely awesome. The foliage interaction, the real time day/night cycle with that scale of map and lighting. The fantastic shadows of the foliage. All in relatively decent frames.

You *Yawn* at the prospect of DX10, i can understand the stereotypical nature of Microsoft rolling out another update. However this indeed seems to be a big change.
As people are pointing out, it is most likely games will include the ability to just play with DX9 features etc if thats the best your card can handle and so forth.

 

[gord]

I think IGN exaggerates the differences between DX8 and 9 in those HL2 screenshots - saying there is a 'world' of difference etc - I think the average man in the street wouldn't agree. I am a PC geek and I can hardly tell the difference except when it's pointed out to me and I look hard!

You digress, i clearly stated.

True it isnt gargantuan improvements, but thats the point of my original post. DX10 is dropping the older incarntations in order to bring us a leap.

If we can keep on track with the DX10 upgrade.

 

[dirtydog]

I just wish game developers would put gameplay first, and then put a 60fps+ smooth framerate with zero stuttering or slowdown second. Fancy features should come third but all too often it seems they have the order reversed.

 

[gord]

I just wish game developers would put gameplay first, and then put a 60fps+ smooth framerate with zero stuttering or slowdown second. Fancy features should come third but all too often it seems they have the order reversed.

Your impossible, can. worms. everywhere.

In succinct off topic notation. I agree, nevertheless, did you not enjoy FarCry? At least the single player experience.

 

[dirtydog]

I have never played the full version of Far Cry, only the demo which wasn't my cup of tea really. The graphics also were rather garish and bright. Each to his own, I know it was a big hit.

I do think some game developers put features first and the actual game is almost incidental. Take Doom 3 - the big selling point was the graphics engine and its shadow features etc. Never mind that the actual textures were as blocky as a N64 game and the gameplay was abysmal - it had fancy features.

 

[Street]

If no one ever pushed forwards and tried out the "fancy features" then we'd all still be playing text based adventure games! There have been plenty of games that have made use of these features to advance the realism of the game that have also had good gameplay.

 

[HangTime]

I just wish game developers would put gameplay first, and then put a 60fps+ smooth framerate with zero stuttering or slowdown second. Fancy features should come third but all too often it seems they have the order reversed.

Unrealistic. Look at all the sponsorship which is prevalent in games nowadays, e.g. Nvidia's TWIMTBP program. Do you really think NV are gonna be shelling out $$$$$ in sponsorship on a game that will run smoothly on ancient hardware? The developers need to get their money from somewhere.

Likewise the publisher needs someway of selling it's product, such as fancy pictures on the box, in magazines and on websites. Graphics is one of the easiest things for them to portray; it's much harder for them to prove that game X has better gameplay than game Y than it is to prove that X>Y in graphical terms.

Don't forget that due to the diversity of hardware people have in their machines, it's fairly hard to provide everyone with 60+fps smoothness. Furthermore, a lot of casual gamers care more about graphics than framerate. Don't get me wrong, I'm in your camp, for me even 60fps is too low for optimal gameplay and I can tell the difference between 125fps and 75fps. But most (not all) games at least provide the ability to turn down settings to get games running at some semblance of smoothness on modern hardware.

IIRC you have a ti4200, which is approaching 4 years old now and I think I'm right in saying is not even fully dx8.1 compliant (no ps1.4 support) never mind dx9. That's pretty old hardware. I've seen you mention how smoothly you thought NFS:HS ran on your voodoo3 in the past - but imagine how slowly it would have run on a 1995 graphics card (pre voodoo graphics). So maybe the fact that your hardware doesn't cut it anymore is influencing your views somewhat.

Like you I've been frustrated in the past at how slowly games ran - I still had a voodoo1 when Quake3 came out, and several other examples over the years. But when you take a step back and look at things objectively, it's inevitable that developers will be looking to woo potential publishers and sponsors with "fancy stuff". If you can make a FPS with groundbreaking graphics, it's almost guarenteed to sell well.

 

[dirtydog]

Yeah you make good and valid points, HangTime. You're right that I have an old card but I'm not foolish enough to think that the latest games should run well on it In fact some do run well but I wouldn't complain too loudly if they didn't. Meh I dunno, I guess I'm just getting jaded and disillusioned with the whole PC gaming scene.

 

[mysticsniper]

My point is that when DX10 is released, we will see a new era of PC gaming and we will extinguish the console presence and doubt of who rules in the gaming community, as we all know that DX is the factor between the X-Box games & the PC games

 

[HangTime]

Don't buy it myself. There's been a lot of hype about new directX versions down the years, but we haven't really seen anything revolutionary since DX5.

I reckon it's just getting a lot of fuss and attention due to the supposed 'requirements' of Vista.

 

[gord]

My point is that when DX10 is released, we will see a new era of PC gaming and we will extinguish the console presence and doubt of who rules in the gaming community, as we all know that DX is the factor between the X-Box games & the PC games

Hmmm. The xbox 360 and only the 360 is directx generation compatable. Part of the sly coding i think from Microsoft and Ati. But xbox 360 can be directX10 compliant.

As opposed to current rumours about PS3, as that uses a modified 7800 chip which is solely DX9.