Originally Posted by SimplyTheBest
I think what people are saying is drop XP/dx9 support so dx11 can be further evolved and tapped into.
Right, it's fine for what it was, but it's dated now. Developers are still natively coding for DX9... DX11 is significantly more efficient (~30% more FPS in WoW for example
But people saying DX11 isn't a huge improvement over DX9... we're approaching photo-realism. Every improvement is essentially on a logarithmic scale. The jump from an NES to a SNES? Enormous. SNES to N64? Huge. N64 to Gamecube? Pretty big. Gamecube to Xbox 360 or PS3? Decent bump.
Even if something like those "unlimited detail" voxels or ray tracing came about right this very instant, the jump from our current tech to that is still not going to make a huge difference to the way our eye perceives it. It'd still be a noticeable increase to photo-realism, but much less so than previous breakthroughs.
Originally Posted by jcde7ago
We haven't even run into a generation of solid, DX11-focused game development yet, so to say that DX11 is 'nothing special' when hardly anyone takes advantage of it is a bit ignorant.
This. Crysis 2 is the first game I've heard of that uses tessellation, and it was a very poor implementation. Just wait until the industry matures a bit.Edited by Homeles - 8/20/11 at 6:28pm