Shacknews just posted a bunch of screenshots for some upcoming 360 and PC titles. The one title, Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures has screens in both the DirectX9 Variety and the DirectX10 Variety. The difference?
This really burns me. I have no desire to run Vista, but I also really want to play this game at its best. Like Godfather, I wonder how the 360 version will look.
I don't see why those second shots are "DX10 only", i know that a DX9 card could pull that off; i've seen them do better already. Minor faked raytracing isn't that difficult to pull off; nor are simple polygons for background images....
Microsoft needs more compelling reasons than a bunch of minor eye candy that could be done easily in DX9 anyway to convince gamers to switch to a new OS that might make a significant portion of their Windows XP games (let alone 95, 98, or 2k) not work.
__________________
"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." --James D. Nicoll
Microsoft needs more compelling reasons than a bunch of minor eye candy that could be done easily in DX9 anyway to convince gamers to switch to a new OS that might make a significant portion of their Windows XP games (let alone 95, 98, or 2k) not work.
They don't need to convince you, the need to convince developers. Because when they convince the developers the games get made that you want to play. And then you end up buying Vista to play those games on.
I don't see why those second shots are "DX10 only", i know that a DX9 card could pull that off; i've seen them do better already. Minor faked raytracing isn't that difficult to pull off; nor are simple polygons for background images....
I would guess the major reason is that with DirectX 10 and a compatible card they can offload that work to the video card entirely, and it comes with very little cost. Otherwise they'd need to handle all the calculations on the CPU.
If you have access to an GeForce 8800 on Vista, or know someone that does, try to take a look at the DX10 Cascades tech demo from nVidia - it's not very flashy, but when you realize that everything is being handled on the GPU it's pretty impressive.
I agree with bapenquin. However, it could be that these screenshots are bad examples of DX10's full potential.
DX10 hardware is just now coming available, iirc. The hardware in current xbox360s is a year old as of last november. I doubt the hardware in the 360 (as it current configured) will be DX10 capable. That doesn't mean that the rumored revamp of the 360 won't change this.
I doubt the hardware in the 360 (as it current configured) will be DX10 capable. That doesn't mean that the rumored revamp of the 360 won't change this.
The 360 doesn't have the shader hardware required for Direct3d 10. The 360 is a different architecture though and has strengths in other areas.
__________________ OPS 305 SPEC50 - When it really starts to get interesting. This Link Kills Spam
It could just be me, but those DX10 shots do not look at all much more impressive then the DX9 shots. It could be that I have been using my TI200 then 5200 for too long. Don't get the wrong impression, both are amazing, but the differences are more subtly and not flashy. At least to me.
Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by trip1eX
I couldn't really tell much difference with those shots. I wouldn't upgrade to DX10 based on those. Crysis seems to make better use of DX10.
Glad I am not the only one.
Last edited by PathMaster; 03-07-2007 at 07:36 AM..
Reason: opinions
It honestly looked like just a bit of a lighting effect change.. not too much else... not enough to upgrade from a 7800gt to a DX10 card.. just not worth it yet.
Fuck MS for forcing me to use their bug-ridden, UAC-having, DRM-filled piece o'shit OS to play modern games. I am still refusing in the hopes that a new possibility emerges. It is already theorized that Vista could be the next Windows Me; it is the only MS OS to have such abysmal sales. Of course, to fight this, I would have to buy a 360, and they still get my money.
That being said, the shots here are not glaringly better on DX10, albeit noticably better. But, this game was probably not built from the ground up on DX10, as some other future games may be. Then we might see more of a difference. I am hoping not, but guessing it will be so.
__________________
"Come for the easy anal; stay for the hordes of children raised in strict obedience to the Pope!" - Oxonian
I don't really see what there exactly is that couldn't be done in DX9 like said already. It seems like they just set the drawing distance to minimum and all settings to low and removed the normal maps from the ground in the DX9 pics. How much difference is in the performance, that i obviously can't comment on
I don't see why those second shots are "DX10 only", i know that a DX9 card could pull that off; i've seen them do better already. Minor faked raytracing isn't that difficult to pull off; nor are simple polygons for background images....
I too don't see what's so special about the DX10 shots. I've seen light bloom before. Granted, compared to the DX9 shots, they are great looking, but I've seen stuff that looks just as good as the DX10 shots in already existing games, that don't use DX10.
What gives?
__________________
Graphics matter only when gameplay can't fully deliver an experience. Otherwise they're simply frosting - violentp
The first comparison shot is obviously using different settings for both shots, beyond the DX9/DX10 difference. The draw distance is much farther on the DX10 shot. That should be affected by the different versions at all. This looks like BS to me.
The first comparison shot is obviously using different settings for both shots, beyond the DX9/DX10 difference. The draw distance is much farther on the DX10 shot. That should be affected by the different versions at all. This looks like BS to me.
Agreed.
Bullshots.
__________________
Graphics matter only when gameplay can't fully deliver an experience. Otherwise they're simply frosting - violentp
