Microsoft, Direct X 10

[Defrag]

Another year, another DirectX. Sigh.

Believe it or not, DirectX9 came out in December 2002. DX10 is the first big release in ages.

[dissonance]

Another year, another DirectX. Sigh.

Believe it or not, DirectX9 came out in December 2002. DX10 is the first big release in ages.

Durp.

[-HP-]

DX10 is the first big release in ages.

[clayman]

and dx10 is special in which way???

come on people, its all bullshit, yaay we get support for 2 new neat effects to put in our games, go microsoft!

you can as i saw, tweak crysis with dx9 to look like dx10 and dont give me that bull about it beeing fake, because everything is fake in games, period..

they could have introduced dx10 ages ago if it wasnt for vista..

[clayman]

look this shit up before questioning me.. look it up, look it up, look it up NOW!

http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/ ... windows-xp

In any case, in doing this, MS removed the only impediment to backporting DX10 to XP, it is now, and has been for quite a while, completely possible. MS is screwing its customers to force an upgrade and you are a pawn in their revenue generation scheme.

as I said, its a fucking joke and you know it...

more relevant stuff:

http://www.technospot.net/blogs/downloa ... y-project/

http://spel.feber.se/feber/art/32537/cr ... dx10_p_xp/ (swedish)

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/232833-34-dx10

[dissonance]

and dx10 is special in which way???

Two digits, son!

[Zacker]

There are so many misunderstandings around DX10 and it almost seems like two sides in a battle.

Microsoft on the one hand is trying to make DX10 the sole reason why Crysis looks better than Halo, which is complete bullshit. There is also a bunch of whiny gamers who can't see any instant change in the DX10 version of their game and thereby concludes that DX10 has nothing to offer over DX9 - this is also very wrong.

[clayman]

this isnt about which game looks better, this is about microsoft beeing fucking liars and nobody should beleve in a word that comes from their big mouths..

dx10 = bullshit, thats a fact, period

they could have done dx20 by the year 2006 if they wanted, but then they would lose money in the long run.. now think about it..

[^Slick]

At the moment DX10 is just being used because of its optimizations, so yes the same stuff is being displayed on screen but because of DX10 its displayed more optimized. Running Crysis on DX10 on XP would run much worse that running it on Vista (because on XP its just "fake DX10", so to speak).

That being said, Vista being a complete whore of resources completely off-sets the whole point of DX10 (being incredibly well optimized) so in the end, you'll probs be better off with DX9.

[Sindwiller]

That being said, Vista being a complete whore of resources completely off-sets the whole point of DX10 (being incredibly well optimized) so in the end, you'll probs be better off with DX9.

Or OpenGL 2.0 because it's in fact better optimized than DX9 (needs less calls for operations) and it's platform-independent. The OGL 3.0 specs are coming out soon, and with it, cards that support 3.0.

[Wunderboy]

Or OpenGL 2.0 because it's in fact better optimized than DX9 (needs less calls for operations) and it's platform-independent. The OGL 3.0 specs are coming out soon, and with it, cards that support 3.0.

Isn't OpenGL also just an implementation rather than a hardware "need"? I remember *ages* ago reading a comparison of DX vs GL and it saying that DX is just a hardware API, whereas GL us a rendering system which *may* be hardware accelerated. I think thats why GL is more portable over DX.

[Sindwiller]

Or OpenGL 2.0 because it's in fact better optimized than DX9 (needs less calls for operations) and it's platform-independent. The OGL 3.0 specs are coming out soon, and with it, cards that support 3.0.

Isn't OpenGL also just an implementation rather than a hardware "need"? I remember *ages* ago reading a comparison of DX vs GL and it saying that DX is just a hardware API, whereas GL us a rendering system which *may* be hardware accelerated. I think thats why GL is more portable over DX.

Basically, yes. OpenGL is "just" a specification, a bunch of concepts and API calls that a GPU support to be "OGL 3.0 compliant" or something, while the actual implementation (WGL on Windows, AppleGL on OS X, GLX on X11-based systems) can differ. Sure, there actually are lots of software OpenGL implementations (like Mesa), but they are only intended for testing extensions which are not supported by the GPU or when there's no GPU support. But the fact that OGL is an open specification, in contrast to DirectX, which isn't open, makes it perfect for platforms other than Windows.

[FrieChamp]

Woah Clayman, relax!

[^Slick]

That being said, Vista being a complete whore of resources completely off-sets the whole point of DX10 (being incredibly well optimized) so in the end, you'll probs be better off with DX9.

Or OpenGL 2.0 because it's in fact better optimized than DX9 (needs less calls for operations) and it's platform-independent. The OGL 3.0 specs are coming out soon, and with it, cards that support 3.0.

Nice. Hopefully that may bring OpenGL back into action, would be nice.

[clayman]

At the moment DX10 is just being used because of its optimizations, so yes the same stuff is being displayed on screen but because of DX10 its displayed more optimized. Running Crysis on DX10 on XP would run much worse that running it on Vista (because on XP its just "fake DX10", so to speak).

That being said, Vista being a complete whore of resources completely off-sets the whole point of DX10 (being incredibly well optimized) so in the end, you'll probs be better off with DX9.

yeah, and the fact that we are talking about VISTA so it lowers the bars anyway, there we go..

are we talking about dx10 working better on vista than xp or the "new features" in dx10??

sure everything can be optimized, but you dont go and just create a nex dx because you optimized lines of code, that could have worked fine just as a dx9 update..

here you have the reality:

vista released, and needs reasons why people should buy it.. now you know why dx10 exists and why xna exists.. maximize profit, thats the whole plan..

or, im a total idiot, go ahead and prove me wrong and show me/tell me what dx10 can do..