DX10 Water in Bioshock

[jrodga2k5]

There is an interview up on the Bioshock official sie which shows a nice video of the water effects in the new game Bioshock and my god it looks pretty
They also discuss the technology involved etc and tell of the benefits of direct x 10 as well in a small snippet!

How much of the DX10 technology will you be using for water effects?


JJ: All the water effects in the game were developed to work on both DX9 and DX10 technology. Where applicable DX10 is used to accelerate the performance of some of the effects, and this may allow more detailed water in some areas.

Nice to see it is implemented and they also confirm directx10 accelerates performance allowing them to do more. This was one of the things people suspected wouldnt happen with the new DX!

Anyways there are links to a streaming video and an HD download one, its a good read and a nice watch too!

http://www.2kgames.com/cultofrapture/waterfeature.html

Check it out

 

[Mortster]

I saw this the other day, it does, indeed, look fabulous.

Speaking of DX10 though, have you noticied how 'cagey' many developers are about what to expect from DX10 in the first generation of DX10-enabled games (e.g. crysis, bioshock).

I predict that with this first generation of DX10 titles that we will be seeing performance optimisations relating to DX10 rather than new and fancy eye-candy effects.

There is much hype about Crysis looking more 'spectacular' with DX10 rather than DX9, but, really, I reckon both versions will look very similar, but with some performance benefits derived from the more efficient DX10 api.

 

[Darkwave]

I predict that with this first generation of DX10 titles that we will be seeing performance optimisations relating to DX10 rather than new and fancy eye-candy effects.

There is much hype about Crysis looking more 'spectacular' with DX10 rather than DX9, but, really, I reckon both versions will look very similar, but with some performance benefits derived from the more efficient DX10 api.

Tim Sweeny said this exact thing in an article way back in October of last year, and I got the crap flamed out of me for citing it. It's not like Tim Sweeny would know is it, I mean he's only a founder of Epic Games and the guy in charge of developing the Unreal 3 engine.

People expecting incredible new eye candy straight away are going to be very disappointed. The progression to Shader Model 4 is going to be just like the progression to Shader Model 3, in the sense that at first it will be used for nothing but optimisation and minor effects like water and a tiny bit of lighting, then it will become more widely adopted two or more years down the line when Shader Model 4 capable hardware becomes mainstream.

It's all happened before, it's happening again. History always repeats itself, especially in the graphics market.

 

[jrodga2k5]

Yeah I have to admit the whole directx10 thing for the first few games will be interesting, as lets be honest they arent fully directx10 written! The main thing is it allows the developer more freedom to add in more effects and create a more realistic or cinematic atmosphere into a game.

Wont shrug my shoulders at a prettier game though!

 

[spb251272]

There is much hype about Crysis looking more 'spectacular' with DX10 rather than DX9, but, really, I reckon both versions will look very similar, but with some performance benefits derived from the more efficient DX10 api.

Yeah, but that's a good thing - Crysis already looks amazing, so if DX10 cards boost performance, then you can max out the settings and still have good frame rates.

 

[jrodga2k5]

Tim Sweeny said this exact thing in an article way back in October of last year, and I got the crap flamed out of me for citing it. It's not like Tim Sweeny would know is it, I mean he's only a founder of Epic Games and the guy in charge of developing the Unreal 3 engine.

People expecting incredible new eye candy straight away are going to be very disappointed. The progression to Shader Model 4 is going to be just like the progression to Shader Model 3, in the sense that at first it will be used for nothing but optimisation and minor effects like water and a tiny bit of lighting, then it will become more widely adopted two or more years down the line when Shader Model 4 capable hardware becomes mainstream.

It's all happened before, it's happening again. History always repeats itself, especially in the graphics market.

I remember reading that mate! It certainly does free up a lot more resources due to its efficiency allowing for developers to have mroe freedom in terms of effects. it will only develop further and further however, people tend to have unrealistic expectations for DX10 if you ask me

 

[Steedie]

Very impressed, only thing that looked remotely bad was the splash effects near the beginning, but the video says work in progress so I'm sure they'll fix it

Other than that, fantastic

 

[Marc Fraser]

Tim Sweeny said this exact thing in an article way back in October of last year, and I got the crap flamed out of me for citing it. It's not like Tim Sweeny would know is it, I mean he's only a founder of Epic Games and the guy in charge of developing the Unreal 3 engine.

People expecting incredible new eye candy straight away are going to be very disappointed. The progression to Shader Model 4 is going to be just like the progression to Shader Model 3, in the sense that at first it will be used for nothing but optimisation and minor effects like water and a tiny bit of lighting, then it will become more widely adopted two or more years down the line when Shader Model 4 capable hardware becomes mainstream.

It's all happened before, it's happening again. History always repeats itself, especially in the graphics market.

DX 10 compiles all of its shaders against SM4.0. To be DX10 compatible a card must use SM4.0. Therefore if a game runs on DX10 it will use SM4.0.

I do not believe that SM4.0 itself adds much optimisation. As far as I know the main benefit of DX10 is that the CPU cost of making a Draw Call or changing the state of the device such as the texture, shader, or vertex buffer is greatly reduced. This enable far more objects to be displayed per frame.

Yeah I have to admit the whole directx10 thing for the first few games will be interesting, as lets be honest they arent fully directx10 written! The main thing is it allows the developer more freedom to add in more effects and create a more realistic or cinematic atmosphere into a game.

Any game that works with DX10 will have to be fully written for DX10. You cannot just tag in a few new DX10 effects on top of a DX9 game. The whole render device needs to be rewritten to support dx10.

 

[jrodga2k5]

Any game that works with DX10 will have to be fully written for DX10. You cannot just tag in a few new DX10 effects on top of a DX9 game. The whole render device needs to be rewritten to support dx10.

I meant mroe to the fatc of DX10 intended from the start, like from the ground up, as I doubt they made that decision to begin with, its a kind of optimised version of the game by the looks of it!

KInd of like the way MS have approached Halo 2 for vista, not that they couldnt have done that game in Dx9 lol!

I think in Crysis we will see a lot more from Dx10 than in Bioshock

 

[Darkwave]

DX 10 compiles all of its shaders against SM4.0. To be DX10 compatible a card must use SM4.0. Therefore if a game runs on DX10 it will use SM4.0.

I do not believe that SM4.0 itself adds much optimisation. As far as I know the main benefit of DX10 is that the CPU cost of making a Draw Call or changing the state of the device such as the texture, shader, or vertex buffer is greatly reduced. This enable far more objects to be displayed per frame.

But DirectX 10 / Shader Model 4 capable hardware is not going to become mainstream for years, so don't expect any miracles right away. At first it won't offer much more than performance optimisation and the odd water/lighting effect, just like Shader Model 3 did at first, and just like Tim Sweeny himself has explained to everybody.

Any game that works with DX10 will have to be fully written for DX10. You cannot just tag in a few new DX10 effects on top of a DX9 game. The whole render device needs to be rewritten to support dx10.

I never, not once, said that you can use DirectX 10 / Shader Model 4 effects in a DirectX 9 game.

Seriously, where on earth do you keep pulling this from? This is two threads now where you've misunderstood me and tried to say that I'm talking about DirectX 10 / Shader Model 4 being used with the DirectX 9 API, and I never said any such thing. I think it's time you started actually reading what I'm saying before replying.

 

[Marc Fraser]

But DirectX 10 / Shader Model 4 capable hardware is not going to become mainstream for years, so don't expect any miracles right away. At first it won't offer much more than performance optimisation and the odd water/lighting effect, just like Shader Model 3 did at first, and just like Tim Sweeny himself has explained to everybody.

Fair enough the hardware may not be mainstream but the point is you can only run dx10 on dx10 cards. You therefore know what the hardware capabilities are and can add effects as needed.

I never, not once, said that you can use DirectX 10 / Shader Model 4 effects in a DirectX 9 game.

Seriously, where on earth do you keep pulling this from? This is two threads now where you've misunderstood me and tried to say that I'm talking about DirectX 10 / Shader Model 4 being used with the DirectX 9 API, and I never said any such thing. I think it's time you started actually reading what I'm saying before replying.

Oh dear! Before you start throwing a hissy fit and asking me to read your posts can you please take your own advice and read mine properly. If you notice I was quoting someone else and replying to what they said. You really have some serious issues in thinking the whole of every post is aimed at you.

 

[Darkwave]

Oh dear! Before you start throwing a hissy fit and asking me to read your posts can you please take your own advice and read mine properly. If you notice I was quoting someone else and replying to what they said. You really have some serious issues in thinking the whole of every post is aimed at you.

Your first quote was very much directed at me by the way, this is what I was responding to. But why should you go on about it at him too? What did he say wrong? Are you just going to rant at people about the difference between DirectX 9 and 10 every time it comes up, even if they're not saying anything to the contrary?

 

[eekfek]

yawn ^^

anyways back OT , everything about this game looks stunning and if dx10 can enhance it more, its defo gonna be shiny

 

[Marc Fraser]

Your first quote was very much directed at me by the way, this is what I was responding to. But why should you go on about it at him too? What did he say wrong? Are you just going to rant at people about the difference between DirectX 9 and 10 every time it comes up, even if they're not saying anything to the contrary?

Of course it was directed at you I was quoting you and replying to your post. Please don't try to pretend that you didn't think the second part of my post was directed at you. You quoted it and then said you had never said anything of the sort. It is was quite clear you were responding to that part.

Can you explain how the second part of my post was a rant. I was pointing out that the whole render device would need to be written for DX10 in response to the following "as lets be honest they arent fully directx10 written!".

People were talking about the capabilities of DX10 and I thought that it was a relevant point. I have got some experience of programming both DX9 and DX10 so thought I would add to the discussion.

I don't see why you are having a go at me.

I think one of the problems is that you like to talk about things that you don't actually have much knowledge about and then take offence when someone points out technical inaccuracies in what you are saying and questions you on them. For example when I asked you to explain what you knew about SM2 and SM3 to back up your arguments in another thread. You managed to completly ignore my questions.

 

[Jabbs]

Ignore

 

[TheDean]

Looks absolutely stunning - Wow

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Oh noe's were not starting the creaming over a water effect again are we, we had this with the SM3.0 water years ago in Pacific Fighters, please everyone its just a water effect, dont start the frapping again, its nothing special.

 

[jrodga2k5]

Loadsa its more of an example of what directx10 brings, the ability to use resources better in which to create better effects, the water is just an example of it!

Oh and you can tell its a beta still due to the graphical glitches throughout also

 

[TheDean]

Oh noe's were not starting the creaming over a water effect again are we, we had this with the SM3.0 water years ago in Pacific Fighters, please everyone its just a water effect, dont start the frapping again, its nothing special.

You're kidding?! It looks stunning.....people have clearly put a lot of work into that and it really shows! Well done them....game people...Hurrah!

 

[jolly]

Loadsa its more of an example of what directx10 brings, the ability to use resources better in which to create better effects, the water is just an example of it!

Oh and you can tell its a beta still due to the graphical glitches throughout also

Thats like saying "its just a wall texture" or "its just a lighting effect"

Regardless of the work it takes to achieve it or its simplicity/complexity it's still part of how the game looks. Obviously you like your water flat and motionless, theres nothing wrong with celebrating looks, heck its what the world revolves around these days