DiRT 2 PC Delayed for DirectX 11 Tweaks
"We believe that the DirectX 11 feature set is too compelling to ignore, especially considering how much more it can add to the visual experience for PC gamers," said Codemasters technical officer Bryan Marshall, who further cited "key new technologies such as hardware tessellation, multi-threading and Shader Model 5.0."
Codemasters added that "hardware tessellation will further improve the appearance of water and other surfaces as well as crowd animations," with SM 5.0 "enhancing key image quality parameters such as depth of field, ambient occlusion and shadows."
Supported in both Windows Vista and the forthcoming Windows 7, the latest version of Microsoft's DirectX technology hits later this year, as does hardware that enables it.
-
valcan_s
replyI have to say I 100% agree with this move.
At first I hated that PC games where delayed and would get the 360 version first than I would sell it when the PC version came out.
But let’s face it there are hundreds of awesome PC games now that are directly from the consoles, who the hell can play them all?
As long as the PC version is pimped out I don't care at all if it takes longer.
DX11 nice :), you have my support.
Some examples recently, Trine, SF4, Fuel are all outstanding version over their console brothers.
-
Trine/SF4/Fuel are not using DirectX 11. DX11 isn't even out yet and launches with Windows 7.
It's going to be another DirectX that no one bothers to take advantage of (DirectX 10 anyone).-
-
Sorry, I dunno how to follow your posts. They are always so broken up with ideas.
-
I had no problem following it.
-
I had no problem following it.
-
Problems with following it didn't exist for me.
-
I'm jumping on the "I had no problem following it." train too.
-
OP was easy to follow
-
-
-
Most games aren't using the DX10 specific features, 2 years after the fact. I got burned by MS on the DX10 promises and won't be doing the same with DX11.
-
It is my advice to you kind Sir, that you stop using Microsoft products all together. It is apparent that the quality of Microsoft products and below par for your standards.
I would recommend that you buy a Macintosh or get some kind of flavor of Linux.
This will ensure that you do not get burned by Microsoft again.
Enjoy !
-
Why because I don't believe the 5 month pre-hype for DirectX 11 features? Microsoft and game companies did the same thing with DirectX 10. Age of Conan is a perfect example. The DX10 features didn't come until a year after release.
I have zero issue with Microsoft, I just don't see how any rational person will believe that DX11 will be any different than the DX 10 fiasco we experienced with Vista. Windows 7 is awesome but these specific DX11 instructions (that will take another brand new $400+ video card to take advantage of) will be just like the DX10 instructions.
You don't need to be super insulting in your posts.-
How is delaying a game the same as adding in support a year later? It seems DX11 is going better than DX10 just by using your examples.
-
-
-
That's probably because DX10 was/is shit and the average user couldn't see a point over DX9. However if DX11's improvements are actually substance and something directly noticeable by people, it will be a lot more convincing for devs. Considering MS is doing things right with Windows 7, I'm taking that as a cue that they actually care about their dev quality again and are making DX11 actually worth something, much like they did with DX9.
-
DX10 improvements are directly noticeable in every game that uses it.
-
in a LOT of cases you can do exactly the same thing in DX9 though
-
Isn't Crysis the only instance you can actually hack to do this in?
-
I'm still amazed to this day by lotro's dx10 water. It blends into the land with no "edge line" which makes it beautiful. Lotro is a beautiful game altogether and even moreso when I enable dx10. I don't think that the seamless water design could work in dx9, at least I've never seen it before.
-
Stalker Clear Sky does that. I can't remember if it did it in the DX9 version though. But I am pretty sure ArmA2 does it in DX9
-
-
-
-
-
All evidence suggests that DX11 will have a much smoother adoption than DX10 did. I won't elaborate much on why, I'm sure you can do your own reading. But to be quick, DX11 has a lot more developer and publisher buy-in, it's pretty much drop-in compatible with the previous version, and it will have a large install-base capable of using games built for it.
Developing games for DX10 was very costly, with little return on investment due to the limited install base. It required Vista - even if Vista hadn't been incredibly unpopular, it wouldn't have had much of an install base due to its infancy on the market. It required Geforce 8 level video cards, which at the time of DX10 release were costly and not yet widely used. Games written in DX11 will work perfectly fine on that same Geforce 8 level hardware, which by this point is old, cheap, and widely installed. More importantly, between the continuing adoption of Vista and the eager anticipation for Windows 7, DX11 won't have the misfortune of being unused because no one is using the OS that can run it.-
DX11 is going to require Windows 7, not any different than 10.
DX11 SPECIFIC features are going to require new cards from AMD/nVidia, not any different than 10
DX11 backwards compatible with non-DX11 hardware, same as DX10
DX10 SPECIFIC features required a certain video card to be used, not any different than 10
DX10/10.1 hardware supported DirectX 9 as well, same with Vista
I realize that developers aren't going to have to do any fancy business on their end for this but this is the same dog and pony show we got way before DX10/Vista came out. That's all I am saying. Initial performance was shit with the first gen cards. 2nd gen cards came out and it was better but still very few games used DX10 specific features.
I am just hoping that history doesn't repeat itself.-
DX11 will be use able on Windows 7 OR Vista.
DX11 developed games will render in whatever the card can use, back to 9.0c.
Windows 7 is anticipated to have a much higher adoption rate and overall market penetration than Vista.
It ends up with this, if Windows 7 fails, DX11 will also fail, and Microsoft as a software developer may be in trouble for the first time in the history of the company. -
"DX11 is going to require Windows 7, not any different than 10. "
That is blatantly wrong. There has never been any ambiguity on this point. It has been stressed and made clear at every point since the beginning that DX11 will NOT require Windows 7.
"DX11 backwards compatible with non-DX11 hardware, same as DX10 "
That is also false. DX10 was not backwards compatible with DX9 hardware. If developers wanted to implement DX10, they still were still required to program it for a DX9 codepath as well. This greatly increased the development cost. In the case of DX11, the game can be made for DX11 only, with no special consideration given to DX10 - basically, there is absolutely NO reason to program for DX10 anymore once DX11 is released. They do of course still need to program for DX9 if they want backwards compatibility that far - that's less of an issue now than it was when DX10 was now, but admittedly the abundance of users that refuse to leave XP behind will probably obligate developers to make games DX9 compatible.-
Sorry, I was misinformed of the Windows 7 thing. I assumed because it was shipping with it, it was going to be required. Reading more into it it looks as if Vista will get a DX11 version probably with SP2.
They probably won't have to do any special programming to get it to work with DX9 again. DX10 uses the Vista display driver and emulates DX9 using that.
DX11 is built off of DX10 and the Vista display driver tech (Windows 7 uses WDDM as well) so it's easy for them to just blaze over DX10.
Reading some more white papers on DX11 it seems as if it's going to be a much better leap in DX than 10 was. I just hope AMD/nVidia aren't going to be overcharging dicks for the cards :(-
AMD will be over-charging dicks with their cards because they will be first to market. Their next generation of cards will be launching in the same time-frame as Windows 7, but you can expect them to be incredibly over-priced until nVidia has competing DX11 hardware a couple months later.
-
When Is Nvidia NOT overcharging for their cards? They were the first to advertise the $1000 consumer grade GPU. Not workstation GPU's. I think it was the 8800GTX Ultra that they priced to the moon and back. If AMD overcharges a little, I'm fine with that. Nvidia though, they take the cake, eat it, then demand another.
-
NVIDIA does overcharging for their cards when AMD offers a competitive card at a lower price point. That's just how the market works. If NVIDIA has a product against which there is no competitor, it is extremely expensive. The Geforce GTX 280 launched at an obnoxious $650 price point because there was nothing else on the market that could touch it. When AMD Radeon 4000 series came along, NVIDIA had to drop their prices - but then the Radeon 4870x2, having no competition at the top, inherited the obnoxiously over-priced crown.
That is how it always goes. Whoever has the top performing 'halo' product can get away with a top price, too. Usually this is NVIDIA. Regardless of which company it is, though, it's never a cost-effective choice.-
Should read: NVIDIA does not overcharge for their cards when...
Me fail English. -
Nvidia has vry compeditive prices, there cards are much higher quality, I am a 5870 user and have used both card brands for many years, Nvidia always has the upper hand in price and quality over ATI, because of that they sell 4 times more cards then ATI. Sure ATI beats them to new API's but thats only one of the few upper hands ATI has. But as I said I am a 5870 user, that is because I do not want to wait for DirectX 11 cards to come out from nvidia.
The 8800 Ultra cost them allot to make, and they still are more expensive then even the GTX 295. That card was more for Super Enthusiasts of the 8 series days... You could only imagen how much the Ultra 295 card would cost.. amirite?
Cheers
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I think DX10 was was avoided by a lot of game developers because Vista wasn't as popular as Microsoft hoped it would be. The launch was a disaster and it was plagued by bad drivers for a long while. Most people stuck with XP, and so the developers stuck with them and DX9.
I've been running Windows 7 for a few weeks now, and I think Microsoft have got it right this time. The OS is not even released yet, and already I think it's as stable as Vista with SP2. I think people will be more willing to ditch XP for Windows 7 than they were to go to Vista. This will hopefully convince a few more developers to develop games with DX11.
Windows 7 and DX11 FTW :D
-
-
-
-
-
"As long as the PC version is pimped out I don't care at all if it takes longer."
Well thats the real catch isn't it? The "pimping out" as you put it is not really happening too often.
Hopefully dx11 will become a reason to enhance multiplat games but Im not optimistic. There are still many (lame) excuses for the developers to consolize and release bastard PC versions.
-
