Your thoughts on the state of DirectX 10?

[SH64]

Originally Posted by nutcrackr

Gears for me runs slower but I get a lot less stuttering in dx9 mode which I have no idea why. I also don't know why they don't let us customize the AA level in gears, 4aa hurts most gpus, 2aa would be a good trade.

I was wondering about that too. i guess i was just lucky & most others to have a 8800 card by the time of the GoW release that made use dont care about custom AA levels instead of the mandatory 4xAA in DX10 mode.

[Revs]

I would have been alot happier with DX10 if it haden't been so effing hyped. "oh it'll be twice the speed of DX9 with film quality gaming!1!!", 'THAT'S BOLLOCKS AND YOU KNOW IT'

DX9 can do just about everything DX10 can do at higher FPS in most cases. The only things better as far as I can see is Volumetric smoke, etc. I'm not saying it hasn't got potencial but, they did 'big it up' massively. I expect alot more in the way of GPU physics too.

[ATOJAR]

Originally Posted by Revs

"oh it'll be twice the speed of DX9 with film quality gaming!1!!", 'THAT'S BOLLOCKS AND YOU KNOW IT'

+1

[LordJuanlo]

Originally Posted by crainger

Half-Life 2 came out awhile after DX9 was new and I didn't notice any difference between DX8 and 9 apart from the fact 9 looked much better.

It depends on the graphics card and resolution, check this comparison



Anyway the image quality was much better in DX9 vs DX8 (water was awesome), the difference between DX9 and DX10 is quite subtle in most games.

[asd]

Originally Posted by LordJuanlo

BTW DX9 first days with Half Life 2 were hard too, game speed was cut in half in DX9 vs DX8, so the story repeats.

Not at all, the truth is that Crysis or DX10 is a ****, the day that DX9 came out, I still can play most of the games smoothly, for example, HL2 and CSS, even with my 9800pro, the only game I remember that defeated my 9800pro was FarCry, but nowadays even my 8800GTX can't play DX10 games very smoothly, only Bioshock, LP, GoW, WiC can be consider smooth, games like CoH ,Crysis and HG:L runs like a ****.

[Logical]

I don't blame Microsoft or DX10 for its current situation. The developers are to blame for simply not putting enough money, time and effort into making dx10 games.

Have we seen a dx10 only game yet?....No.

There is more to dx10 than just shader model 4 and better HDR and in given time it will be proven.

[rudedog]

With game development the way it is and the hardware guys releasing their DX10 parts when they are actually finished, where is the time the developers need to release a good DX10 game?

What I mean is, Nvidia and ATI don't hold back their DX10 cards for a year or so, so developers can work with actual hardware and drivers before they release their DX10 supported games.

Tell me how you develop a game with only specs and emulators, from a company (MS) who can't get 1st version software to work for themselves?

If anything, we should all know this, you can't count on any game unless it goes into development when the hardware and drivers are machore(sp?).

Only then will you see a good product with the latest tech. We all think because we go out and buy the latest on day one, it's always going to live up to it's hype (ours and theirs), it's not and we do it every rev, every new feature and every version of DX10. Don't blame the developers or hardware guys , blame us the "early adopters". Now don't get me wrong the latest parts run DX9 faster then anything before them, but that does not mean the developers are going to work miracles with these games in DX10, there is a learning curve once the tech is actually in their hands.

If anything, look at what CoD4 and a host of other games can do with DX9. Where the drivers, software and APIs where basically set in stone.

[Jonelo]

The first game DX9 - real SM 2.0 - was Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness , the FX series killer , in summer ? June ? of 2003 . The second game... I believe that Far Cry

[Revs]

Where's NVidia's Quantum physics?? It looked good but then just faded out. There's no mention of it on NVidia's site at all. Am I right in thinking all 8 series cards are equipt with the hardware for this or did it never even make it that far?

[Dragunov]

Crysis was made on DX9, cause there was no DX10 yet ...

[Bman212121]

Originally Posted by LordJuanlo

It depends on the graphics card and resolution, check this comparison



Anyway the image quality was much better in DX9 vs DX8 (water was awesome), the difference between DX9 and DX10 is quite subtle in most games.

I'm not sure how much that graph shows. Most of those cards are horrible where as the 5900XT would actually have enough frames to lose.

[LordJuanlo]

Are you kidding?. You call the Radeon 9700 horrible?. And the 5900XT did have enough frames to lose?. Man were you living in a cave that year?. That card coulnd't afford to lose a single frame!!!. Ati Radeon 9700 pwned nVidia for more than a year. It totally destroyed the GeForce 4 series, and the nVidia response, the FX series, arrived several months later and was a complete joke (much like the X2900 was this summer), with just decent DX8 performance but really terrible at DX9. Hence the framerate loss at this graph.