The DX Argument Options

[tkrow21]

I just want to point out that while everyone is arguing on whether DX11 is going to actually bring anything new to the table, you're skipping over a fact or two that's probably the most instrumental in deciding which DX version is going to shine.

DX9 seemed like such an amazing version with ridiculous improvements over the last. This is mostly because it's been around for so damn long, and developers got better and better with using it for prettier explosions and realistic lighting.

DX10 seemed like such a flop, and DX11 probably will too, because developers just aren't going to code the game for it from the ground up. The consoles don't support these new DX versions, so the PC counterparts are mainly DX9 with a few unnoticeable DX10/11 features. Especially since we see lead developers who had been long time fans of the PC just create a direct port *cough MW2*. These developers might go as far as to add features in the game, but to recode the entire graphical engine to actually support DX10/11? Nah. We won't see a jump in graphics like we did in '06-'07 until new consoles come out.

Just take a look at Shattered Horizon. PC exclusive, not compatible with DX9. It really shows, the graphics of the game are great, especially since it's a very small release from a very small studio for the first time.

[N.E.A]

[tkrow21]

I'm just tired of people arguing over why DX10 seemed like a flop and how DX11 is going to suck also.

[N.E.A]

I'm just tired of people arguing over why DX10 seemed like a flop and how DX11 is going to suck also.

i think dx11 will not be that bad ..
at least not like dx10

[tkrow21]

i think dx11 will not be that bad ..
at least not like dx10

But game developers aren't going to bother in writing a new code for the PC market.

The real money for them is in consoles (Xbox, PS3) and they won't spend a lot of effort in making the PC game take advantage of DX11, especially since console games are written for DX9.

[N.E.A]

But game developers aren't going to bother in writing a new code for the PC market.

The real money for them is in consoles (Xbox, PS3) and they won't spend a lot of effort in making the PC game take advantage of DX11, especially since console games are written for DX9.

well lets hope that crytek writes a new code , they bothered in dx10 ..so they can do it in dx11 ..

This post has been edited by N.E.A: Nov 7 2009, 07:22 AM

[tkrow21]

well lets hope that crytek writes a new code , they bothered in dx10 ..so they can do it in dx11 ..

Actually, Crysis 2 is looking to be a major console release.

Their new code is mostly optimized versions of the CryEngine 2 code.

[N.E.A]

Actually, Crysis 2 is looking to be a major console release.

Their new code is mostly optimized versions of the CryEngine 2 code.

in any case i am waiting for new games with better graphics ( not talking about dx11 )
god i hate consoles

[Keishii~89]

I for one actually support the idea of moving onto DX11.

Unless DX11 is really taken up, the GPU market will start to die out. The only reason for anyone to upgrade to a GT300/HD 58xx is DX11 and a few nifty features. With so many games runing on DX9, more or less any middle range card can handle those games. Red Alert 3, Deadspace, Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead etc I can max out @ 1080p on a GTX 260/216. You can see where I'm going with this. Why would anyone want a new high end card if they're mainly playing DX9 titles? hopefully DX11 games will be almost flooding the market come Q3 2010. Or noone's going to pay the price for a DX11 card.

Add this to the fact that there's a damn sight more gamers still running XP, DX11 isn't going to be possible.

There's the three deciding factors on DX11. Developers actually USING it on new titles. Nvidia and ATI selling cards people actually WILL buy for those games. And the percentage of gamers running a DX11 capable OS.
If developers start implementing it, consumers will WANT to buy a DX11 card. Which will hopefully lower the price of cards. That's me being optimistic. It could just inflate the prices. But I'm not an economics grad.

There's my thoughts. Not trying to cause an argument; just throwing in what's buzzing round my mind.

[N.E.A]

I for one actually support the idea of moving onto DX11.

Unless DX11 is really taken up, the GPU market will start to die out. The only reason for anyone to upgrade to a GT300/HD 58xx is DX11 and a

i will disagree with ya , people buy new cards for more features more performance not dx support

[Keishii~89]

My point is stated later in that.

If a straight up gamer can run all of his DX9 games at an acceptable level of play/fps why should he/she want to upgrade? If devs don't take on DX11 enough, that gamer isn't going to want to take on the cost of a new card.
Features? Like tessalation? That's been done for years. And the CUDA/GPGPU aspect means nothing to a gamer. only if you use it it'd mean something to get a nexgen GPU.

I'll admit. I'm an enthusiast/gamer so I will be buying a 5870.Not for the pure speed increase alone, but as I stated in another topic, my aim for my build is to be furture proff for more than a year. My i7 will definatley be enough. I've had it at 4.2ghz on a lapped Corsair H50. temps during OCCT and wPrime didn't go over 82°C after 6 hrs. And that's before I get my Swiftech WC loop setup. All I need now is 5870/5890. I can happily say after those two upgrades, I'll be good for 2 years tops.

[Crazy_Nate]

i will disagree with ya , people buy new cards for more features more performance not dx support

But, what's the difference between 150 FPS and 180 FPS? Unless new games are really demanding, there won't be a whole lot of motivation to keep the GPU technology increasing.

It seems like the game developers need a rather large range of game performance (playable on a wide amount of hardware, yet, still capable of pushing the limit with all the settings turned up)

It usually goes back to how tightly hardware is tied to the games that play on it. Maybe this should be a hint for both industries to work together better?