Overclock.net › Forums › Video Games › PC Gaming › DirectX 11 Rendering in Battlefield 3 (Indepth from GDC 2011)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DirectX 11 Rendering in Battlefield 3 (Indepth from GDC 2011) - Page 5

post #41 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post
PC game developers cannot drop APIs. If they did, they would have to develop with the knowledge of each and every single hardware capability. Since PCs are customizable and hardware change every 6 months or so, this is not cost effective. This is why consoles have the advantage of direct-to-metal and not requiring APIs since the hardware is static.

Read: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/gra...l-to-directx/1
Yes, I know. Programming to an API is easier and less time consuming. Games would be more optimized if they were programmed directly to the metal, but it is not financially sound on a diverse hardware platform such as PC's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post
Rendered in real time making full use of the DirectX 11 API. You were saying?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgS67BwPfFY
It is nothing special that I have not already seen before. Same old boring stuff. Plasticy character models and backgrounds with lots of shiny grease on them. *yawn*

IIRC, that required 3 GTX 580's just to run at 30 fps on a canned demo. Actual game performance is going to be much lower. We might as well wait for DX12 cards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcde7ago View Post
I think Riou was just trying to prove in every page of this thread that he has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to the difference between DX9 and DX11.

Eventually, games WILL look like that, but it's still a little ways off - and the hardware/development costs are still astronomical; that said, DX11 is far and away superior to DX9.
No, DX11 is not anything that special. It is not ground-breaking or new. We have had tessellation before. We had depth of field effects.

It is just more fluff that no one cares about.
Edited by Riou - 8/23/11 at 12:42pm
post #42 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riou View Post
It is nothing special that I have not already seen before. Same old boring stuff. Plasticy character models and backgrounds with lots of shiny grease on them. *yawn*

IIRC, that required 3 GTX 580's just to run at 30 fps on a canned demo. Actual game performance is going to be much lower. We might as well wait for DX12 cards.

It is just more fluff that no one cares about.
My point is that, try to make a real-time demo like that with DirectX 9 and you won't be able to. And it is fluff that people care about.

With that sort of mentality innovation would be halted. Seeing as everything works as is and future investments are only a minor improvement, why the hell use it?

So why should car makers invest in improving the mpg of engines? I mean, if they can only increase them 5-10 per year, what's the point? But after 30 years...those 'little' increments have added up to a drastic change. It's like setting up a loans company as a business. You won't see the money start rolling in until after decades. But after a few years you see a little bit of money coming in.
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Yosemite" 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Yosemite" 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PC Gaming
Overclock.net › Forums › Video Games › PC Gaming › DirectX 11 Rendering in Battlefield 3 (Indepth from GDC 2011)