• DirectX 12... seriously?
    189 replies, posted
Not saying DX11 is bad, but maybe MS should work on producing quality over quantity. Work hard at creating a powerful version of the product that won't go out of date in a year. Although that is kind of tough to do with all the crazy new shit that comes out for PC users each year.
Why don't they make it like how the source engine is? Source is easy to modify with new tech, Valve added in Multicore support without rewriting very much of the engine's code.
I'm still waiting for game devs to implement DX11. :(
[QUOTE=Chicken_Chaser;31697752]I'm still waiting for game devs to implement DX11. :([/QUOTE] Blame consoles
OPENGL is better, isn't it? Full retro-compatibility w old versions of software/hardware...........
[QUOTE=gnappoman;32123883]OPENGL is better, isn't it? Full retro-compatibility w old versions of software/hardware...........[/QUOTE] + multiplatform, yeah, much better!
It's always boggled me on why devs don't use OpenGL.
More devs know DirectX probably, and Microsoft made a pretty big marketing push towards it (and spread a bit of FUD about it not working properly on Vista or higher when it was in development)
Isn't AMD OpenGL support pretty bad anyway? It would be pretty hard to get it done thorougly if many cards will play it like shit.
AMD's support is pretty good actually, they provide EGL support whereas Nvidia don't (for example)
[i]3 years later[/i] [b] MICROSOFT ANNOUNCES DIRECTX 15, WITH SUPER REALISTIC AMBIENT OCCLUSION THAT EATS UP 90% OF YOUR PERFORMANCE AND LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE YOUR AVERAGE SSAO SHADER. IN OTHER NEWS, MICROSOFT HAS ANNOUNCED THAT DIRECTX 16 WILL SUPPORT DYNAMIC B-B-B-BLOODY SCREEN SIMULATION. NOT ONLY DOES IT SUPPORT ALPHA, BUT IT ALSO SUPPORTS REPOSITIONING OF BLOOD SPRITES ON THE SCREEN AND DYNAMIC SCALING OF THE SPRITES, EVEN THOUGH ALL OF THIS WAS POSSIBLE AGES AGO.[/b]
DirectX is now a graphics framework as the CoD engine is a game engine Updates are incremental and fucking useless.
Who gives a shit.
[QUOTE=Chubbs;32254563]Who gives a shit.[/QUOTE] considering we've barely harnessed DX10, I do and so do a lot of people
Direct3D sucks balls anyway, developers should just use OpenGL.
Isn't DX11 compatible with "DX10 cards"? The same will most likely be true for DX12. [QUOTE=LEETNOOB;32196921][i]3 years later[/i] [b] MICROSOFT ANNOUNCES DIRECTX 15, WITH SUPER REALISTIC AMBIENT OCCLUSION THAT EATS UP 90% OF YOUR PERFORMANCE AND LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE YOUR AVERAGE SSAO SHADER. IN OTHER NEWS, MICROSOFT HAS ANNOUNCED THAT DIRECTX 16 WILL SUPPORT DYNAMIC B-B-B-BLOODY SCREEN SIMULATION. NOT ONLY DOES IT SUPPORT ALPHA, BUT IT ALSO SUPPORTS REPOSITIONING OF BLOOD SPRITES ON THE SCREEN AND DYNAMIC SCALING OF THE SPRITES, EVEN THOUGH ALL OF THIS WAS POSSIBLE AGES AGO.[/b][/QUOTE] You have no idea what you are talking about. Graphics APIs like D3D and OpenGL are becoming more general with each version. Something as specific as SSAO would never be implemented. I think it will lead to developers being able to write "to-the-metal" like they do with consoles, but still having compatibility with all new cards because they are becoming more and more like normal CPUs with many, many cores. Direct3D has to support that.
DirectX 11.1 is confirmed. [url]http://www.anandtech.com/show/4806/build-details-on-direct3d-111[/url]
[QUOTE=KD007;29163374]I hear talk about nVidia and AMD working on supporting 11.1 and 12.0 versions of DX (which may get merged). What the hell? Is it just me or is all of this happening too quickly? Remember when DX90 was around for years and years? What happened? I just got myself a DirectX 11 card and now I'm about to get fucked in the ass by the market... again. Supposedly, all of that new crap is due in 2012. I think the 11.1 release (if it stays) shouldn't be bad... [b]Sources, for all you conspiracy 'tards[/b] [url]http://www.rumorpedia.net/microsoft-directx-11-1-and-12-2/[/url] [url]http://www.osgenius.com/directx-12-and-directx-11-1/[/url] [b]Edit[/b] Oh wait, there's also a milestone for Windows 8 leaked. Perfect. Not only will I be shut out from DX12 on a hardware level, I will also need to get a new OS to have DX12 on a software level. FML. >.> Thanks for the artistic rating, btw. I take pride in my rants :D [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Missed the Windows section" - SteveUK))[/highlight][/QUOTE] The last one messed up everyones XP computers right? Hopefully it wont mess with vista on 11.1 and 12 will it? (Messed meaning it wasn't compatible without the xpdiag hack) Actually it doesn't matter to me because im running windows 7 but my laptop runs vista so thats why im concerned.
Maybe because graphics technology is advancing quicker than it used to?
[QUOTE=gamerman345;32363323]Maybe because graphics technology is advancing quicker than it used to?[/QUOTE] Simply not true, there are games from 2007 that still look better than games today (Crysis for example), we've limbo'd out in the past few years due to consoles eating up all the developers and will continue to until the new generation of consoles are released.
Maybe it will be released late 2012? either way, I'm still chillin with dx9
I remember when I ran on DX7 and now DX12! D: and now we start to see games that almost look real life and stuff.
for santas sake I'm going back on ubuntu XD, barely managed to buy a dx10 card and dx12 is near to reach day light ....
[QUOTE=MPKaboose;33597462]for santas sake I'm going back on ubuntu XD, barely managed to buy a dx10 card and dx12 is near to reach day light ....[/QUOTE] If you're going back to Linux, at least use a decent distro.
Pretty much every decent game I've played runs in DX9 still and the graphics and effects often don't compare badly to games in DX10/11
[QUOTE=Panda X;33597799]If you're going back to Linux, at least use a decent distro.[/QUOTE] I was very happy with it altrough(typo?) back then I also had XP which I rarely used
Get used to it people...technology moves at a faster and faster rate. It's just the way of things. I totally get how people feel...dx10 comes out and barely any software takes advantage of it, but also remember games take 'years' to develop and at some point the developers make a decision on what kind of platform they are gonna use. But should DX developers not continue forward and just stop for awhile? The answer is no. If anyone is to blame it's the video card makers and there marketing pitches about Direct X support when very little software is actually using it, or for that matter, using it properly at high performance levels. Make a purchase and try and be happy with it, or you can second guess yourself to the wee of hours of the night.
[QUOTE=Ese;33777596] [B]Make a purchase[/B] and try and be happy with it, or you can second guess yourself to the wee of hours of the night.[/QUOTE] Because DX9 is soo shit graphix compared to DX11 and rest of hardware+new games+os are cheap. This is exactly why i got myself PS3, no more hardware/software drama, while i can still watch videos and do internets on my PC.
[QUOTE=dajoh;32282478]Direct3D sucks balls anyway, developers should just use OpenGL.[/QUOTE] I couldn't agree more. The one thing that PC's struggle with against consoles is the amount of draw calls it can make, and that's causing frame rate issues. OpenGL is obviously more efficient, just by the fact it can make more draw calls than DirectX.
[QUOTE=Hostel;33904498]I couldn't agree more. The one thing that PC's struggle with against consoles is the amount of draw calls it can make, and that's causing frame rate issues. OpenGL is obviously more efficient, just by the fact it can make more draw calls than DirectX.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure the xbox 360 uses direct X. Like. 8.0b though.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.