DirectX 11 - Who Cares?

(Bloodbite) #1

General curiosity on my part. Who here cares about its inclusion and intends on using it?

And I wonder if at some point it may become an issue of advantage to go one way or the other. Kind of like turning the foliage, sun flare, etc off in W:ET… could any additional post processing give a sensory (dis)advantage?

This is just a speculative question. I know the current DX11 function is heavily un-optimised and not visually tweaked to be too much different looking than dx9 (not at all from when I last tried it)… but what if???

Like I could happily never see the kind of super glow bloom used in BFBC2 ever again.

Or could environmental, or even character tesselation become a hitbox/sensory issue pros bitch about?

(warbie) #2

I know what you mean. Many current fps have this blurry, bright, hazy look to them. Bloom, dof, and all types of other things that get in the way of a good fight and mess with gameplay. Have you played Natural Selection 2? - it’s like gaming in fog when maxed out.

(Reacto) #3

I don’t really care much about the graphics, as I put everything at the lowest anyway, and I do believe many other competitive players share my opinion here. Also, keep in mind that DB is a free to play game, they’ll want to cater to the player groups that don’t have the sharpest computers, and thus it’s important to keep the game running smooth on bad computers too.

On the other hand DX11 and better graphics gives the game a better reputation between the more casual players with good computers. I don’t really mind how it turns out in the end, as long as we’re given options to turn off all the annoying settings (bloom, fog etc.), like we can now. I do think that they should focus on making the game as compatible with bad hardware as possible first though, especially if they want it to be competitive.

(j4b) #4

DX11 is a nice to have for movies :smiley:

(EnderWiggin.DA.) #5

I think most of the players here prefer smoother frame rates and clearer views; however, there are a lot of gamers out there that are into the graphics and don’t mind playing at 30 or 45 fps if there graphics are awesome. Graphics may not keep them playing a game, but it definitely gets them to try it.

This guy was active on the ETQW forums (mostly beta). His rig is a beast and he’s looking to upgrade it. If you open up the images in the post below you see he’s definitely interested in graphic fidelity. He makes posts like this all the time for new games with good graphics although his enthusiasm may be the the exception rather than the rule.
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=29282874

(Dthy) #6

The graphics I have all depend on the game really. If it’s offline I’ll go for the highest possible with a stable FPS. If it’s an online FPS then I’ll go as low as possible for the highest FPS.

(Bloodbite) #7

But who’s to say it will be the best option for that? The way OpenGL is being re-embraced… DX11 might just be the more efficient ‘purrty’ version that runs quickest on the DirectX platform… maybe. We might see a return to the ole days when oGL was the superior renderer.

Portal 2 managed to pull off certain DX11 looking effects without being DX11. Is it quite possibly redundant beyond being used as a tech demo feature, a way to benchmark your stoopidly powerful SLI setup?

I’d like to see one of the programmers add their 2 cents on the value of DX11 within DB considering their goal of a dual Win/Linux client release. Its value for both in-game play and demo movie making.

(Mustang) #8

Tentatively puts hand in the air

(zenstar) #9

[QUOTE=Bloodbite;419277]But who’s to say it will be the best option for that? The way OpenGL is being re-embraced… DX11 might just be the more efficient ‘purrty’ version that runs quickest on the DirectX platform… maybe. We might see a return to the ole days when oGL was the superior renderer.

Portal 2 managed to pull off certain DX11 looking effects without being DX11. Is it quite possibly redundant beyond being used as a tech demo feature, a way to benchmark your stoopidly powerful SLI setup?

I’d like to see one of the programmers add their 2 cents on the value of DX11 within DB considering their goal of a dual Win/Linux client release. Its value for both in-game play and demo movie making.[/QUOTE]

The problem with OpenGL is that a AMD had problems with their drivers (not sure if they’ve fixed it yet) and the Radeons were underperforming on OpenGL engines a fair amount, whereas both graphics card manufacturers have good directX support.

Traditionally OpenGL used to be better because it was lower level than directX, but the difference has been getting smaller and smaller all the time. IIRC even John Carmack was saying that there’s little difference between them nowadays (don’t ask me where he said it… I read it somewhere a while ago).

Personally I think that directX 11 should be supported if it doesn’t take much time away from the rest of the game. You can always turn it off if you don’t like it or if you don’t get the framerates, but a good looking game will attract more players.

Of course gameplay should come first as an average looking game with great gameplay should beat out a good looking game with average gameplay.

The game should not look bad as some people will not play simply because of the graphics, but it already looks pretty good and I doubt we’ll slip backwards.

my $0.02

(Bloodbite) #10

pfff… ATI/AMD drivers not working poorly, that’s nothing new. My horrific experience with drivers on a 5770 swore me off Radeons forever.