What Game Developers Think about DirectX 10 115
mikemuch writes "In the last of his series of interviews with the stakeholders in Microsofts upcoming DirectX graphics API, Jason Cross speaks with the developers of Hellgate, Crysis, Flight Simulator X, and Age of Conan. They seem pretty stoked about the new technology's ability to get visual detail to a much higher level of realism, and to offload physics and AI to the CPU." From the article: "Without hardware, it is hard to evaluate which features will really make the biggest performance impact. The geometry shader looks pretty full of potential. So does the fact that you can write to buffers from any shader and then read them into another shader. Texture arrays look like they will make a big dent our batch count, which should lead to much better frame rates. At this point I feel like I'm looking at a shiny new toy through a shop window: I can't wait to get my hands on it and play with it, but I don't really know what it can do."
How is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that says it all. All we have now are lofty marketing claims and unfounded speculation. I am as excited as anyone to see what it can do (I admit to being a fan of flight sims) but this does not really help me understand any better. Since this is
Re:How is this news? (Score:5, Interesting)
From reality: It will require Vista. That's all Microsoft needs it to do.
Re:How is this news? (Score:5, Interesting)
From what I've read, technically it doesn't. I was reading an interesting article in PC Format (UK Magazine) today, and them trying to find out why DX10 will be restricted to Vista - the best answer they were able to come up is that the structure in Vista (eg. usermode rather than kernal mode) is slightly different and therefore it would require modifications to make it work with XP.
In fact, the article states that ATI are working with DirectX 10 under windows XP (with a few modifications to make it fit Vista). So the question is - if they can, and it's obviously possible, why can't we we?
If anyone has a better explanation as to why it's Vista limited, I'd be very interested in hearing it (as would many others, from the impression I've got - even ATI, Nvidia and Microsoft, who PC Format contacted, were unable to provide much of an answer.)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Because we don't develop graphics hardware. A new version of DirectX is pretty useless without hardware that supports the changes. Vista is a beta platform making it a poor choice to develop things on right now, you would never know if a problem is because of what you did or because of Vistas beta code.
So rat
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
The point is, if they can create a version that works in XP for ATI then they can create a version that works in XP for everyone else, too. Which just brings us back to the conclusion that DirectX 10 is yet another damned Microsoft forced upgrade.
Re:How is this news? (Score:1, Troll)
I predict that one day the word "forced" is going to be used on Slashdot correctly, and that the massive shockwave caused will shut down the entire internet for a whole day...
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
[I should probably not post right now, because my ability to write coherently seems to be damped by my sleepiness, but this is Slashdot...]
Something tells me that you misunderstand the nature of "force". Tell me, if somebody puts a gun to your head and says, "Install Vista", and you do, could you say you were "forced" to do so?
It's about gaining compliance through coersion. In both cases, somebody is doing something that they don't want to do, but are doing anyway because the drawbacks of non-complian
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
I doubt it's your sleepiness that is affecting your coherence on this topic.
Something tells me that you misunderstand the nature of "force".
No, something tells me a hell of a lot of people on Slashdot say "force" when they really mean "justify a purchase in a socially acceptable way".
Tell me, if somebody puts a gun to your head and says, "Install Vista", and you do
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
I disagree, but this argument is completely missing the point. If the word "forces" is so dear to you, we can drop it. The problem remains: Microsoft uses its market position to gain additional sales, from unhappy customers, that would never occur in a perfectly competitive market, and this practice is draining resources from the economy that would otherwise be invested in developing better technology that would benefit consumers.
This phenomenon is often summarized as "Microsoft is forcing me to buy XYZ
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
No, it's not.
If the word "forces" is so dear to you, we can drop it.
It's got nothing to do with the word, it's the (incorrect and irrational) implication behind its use.
The problem remains: Microsoft uses its market position to gain additional sales, from unhappy customers, that would never occur in a perfectly competitive market, and this practice is draining resources from the economy that would otherwise be invested in developing better
You miss the point (Score:2)
Therefore, if they have it working well enough for the developers, what reason (besides forcing gamers/etc to switch to Vista) could they have for not allowing it to work for consumers on XP as opposed to just Vista?
Re:You miss the point (Score:2)
If I remember correctly, Quake was originally developed on either a Linux or an SGI box. That doesn't mean consumers had access to the *nix version of Quake when the original DOS version was released.
Or maybe that was Doom.
That's different (Score:2)
However, this isn't a case of ATI etc not releasing directX10 for WinXP (it's not their product). Rather, directX is made by Microsoft, windows is made by Microsoft, and getting a newer DirectX looks like it's going to require you buy a newer Microsoft OS (Vista).
If this was the case of ID software
Re:That's different (Score:2)
That's my point. Some other people have been arguing that there is little technical reason why DirectX 10 don't run on Windows XP, since it's being developed on WinXP. My argument is that just because somebody can run a development verion of D
2 words (Score:2)
Or why'd you get Vista?
What about virtualisation? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What about virtualisation? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Microsoft simply doesn't have much incentive for DX10 to be available on Windows XP, even though it might be very easy to port it. They want to do everything they can to get people to buy Vista. If you want to run a DX10 game, you either have to buy Vista or an XBox360 --- either of which is a goo
Re:How is this news? (Score:1)
Re:How is this news? (Score:1)
And why not? Nobody complained when Apple failed to backport Quartz 2D Extreme to Panther.
There's technically no reason why Microsoft couldn't give away free copies of Vista to everyone in the world. That doesn't mean you're entitled to it.
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
So by not backporting it, Apple provide incentive to upgrade to the latest version, but they aren't blackmailing you by intentionally making new apps incompatible with the old version.
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Mainly because when I recieved NT4 for free when getting my MCSE many years ago. Directx3 was available and you could download directx5 beta for it. THen Microsoft decided it would be better to force me to upgrade to Windows2000 instead or have my downgrade to Windows98 (shudder). That pissed me off and I began looking at Linux as a result.
What platform do you think the directX team uses? Its not Vista. Its too unstable right now for real production use. They use WindowsXP and backporting di
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
That's a mighty big assumption given how famous Microsoft is for "eating their own dog food".
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
On the other hand, some third parties will most likely hack it to work on older versions...
I remember the hacked directx6 for nt4 (which only officially supported version 3 i believe)
Re:How is this news? (Score:3, Insightful)
... because "Slashdot" is an individual rational being.
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
It will once they completely scrap it all, and start over from scratch to make it run DirectX 10!
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:1)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:1)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Re:How is this news? (Score:1)
Re:How is this news? (Score:2)
Thanks DX10! (Score:5, Funny)
Woo hoo! I hope 'offloading' MS Office to the CPU is next!
Seriously, though, is this supposed to be a feature?
Re:Thanks DX10! (Score:2)
Re:Thanks DX10! (Score:4, Informative)
So in fact, it offloads (even) more graphics processing to the GPU; it does not offload AI and physics processing to the CPU, it reduces the CPU's load so it can focus on that sort of task.
Re:Thanks DX10! (Score:2)
However, DX10 also makes general parallel computation easier to accomplish on the GPU, so we'll likely start seeing some game devs compute physics on the GPU as well.
Re:Thanks DX10! (Score:2)
What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:1)
Considering the investments represented by a game, I think it is safer to develop for DirectX 9 for the months comming.
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Unless of course everything were to run in a virtual machine, but I can hardly see that happening for performance reasons.
Some serious cross-platform thinking would be needed , and I don't think even MS could make (most) game developers think that way.
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
How is it possible that OpenGL works on the vastly different PPC, x86, and even MIPS (sgi boxes) chips?
Oh, right: because it's an API!
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
But the binaries themselves would have to be made for two different architectures, or are they similar enough for it to be trivial?
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:1)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
One thing I can see coming out of this and hinted at my MS in other ways are games developed for the XBOX360 that will also run on Vista. I can see that as huge market potential.
Yes, but what you're missing is that although those games will run on the xbox and Windows, they won't run on the PS3, Wii, or Macintoshes (sans a lot of work porting them or parallel development anyway). The big players want portable code for strategic and quality reasons. It saves them money in the long run.
Any company that
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Ummmm a LOT of games are Xbox exclusives. It may be stupid, but its nothing new.
Yeah half of those are made by companies MS purchased. The others were paid by MS to keep the games exclusive to the xBox (or greatly discounted license fees). How do you think those companies will feel about no longer getting that kickback, but still not getting to the rest of the market? How will they feel if this results in the xBox taking a huge chunk of the market and the resultant lack of kickbacks plus greatly increase
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:1)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Because that's where the market/money is. The vast majority of the audience for a PC-based game run Windows. DirectX is part of that, while OpenGL is an add-on. Sure you could have the game install OpenGL along with the game, but it is easier to just go with what is in the OS already as long as it meets your needs. For most games out there (FPS seem to be the exception) DirectX works just
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Because that's where the market/money is.
Actually it is about risk management. The most successful game companies not purchased by MS use OpenGL because it makes them more money (As did several of the companies MS bought until after the acquisition). Development houses that are uncertain of the success of their game, however, often make a smaller up front investment and use DirectX (easier to find cheap talent). Those that are failures lose less money that way. Those that are successful then pay to port
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:1)
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:1)
Did you know that SDL tries to make the interface for GUIs the same on multiple platforms? They aren't trying to rewrite those interfaces, just to make an intermediate level for programmers so they don't have to know how to write for a particular platform. That SDL uses DirectX doesn't surprise me, nor anyone else who understands what the SDL is trying to do. DirectX is a great API. Why not use it? Put simply, beca
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:1)
Because another layer of indirection could impact performance, and because you may not be able to use all the features that DirectX offers. It does seem odd to me though that they'd use DX over OpenGL.. after all, OpenGL is already cross-platform.
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Theres much bigger support for OpenGL 2.0 on pretty much all hardware and platforms.
OpenGL != DirectX.
I never saw why people use DirectX when all it does is limit your application to MS platforms and is dictated by MS.
Indeed. Limiting themselves to 99% of the market. Whatever could they be thinking !
Re:What will be the market of DirectX 10 ? (Score:2)
Flight Simulator X is an MS game (Score:1, Funny)
Imagine this scenario:
- FSX developer says something about DX10 (it is a mild critique of lack of Device Caps etc.)
- MS heavy circles around the developer
- Developer starts to sweat
- MS heavy circles to front of Developer and looks him up and down
- Developers starts trembling, starts to speak
- Developer is interrupted by fist to stomach and drops to the floor
- MS Heavy (Nazy voice): You will choose your words more wisely next time Her D
/. Posted Title???? (Score:2)
What kind of open-ended question is that? On
Re:/. Posted Title???? (Score:3, Funny)
I am a game developer (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll tell you what developers think about it:
DirectX 10 is supposed to be Vista exclusive. Smart people know Vista is a pile. Of course Microsoft will shove Vista down people's throats eventually, but you're still being locked into a piece of software that will tank for the first 12-18 months.
Realistically there is very little the new API will offer in this generation of games, in some cases it detracts from it (Hellgate, which looked much better without the normal mapping), because Microsoft is buying out these folks in mid-development so they can say they've got support for this API and make marketting-articles like these.
Lastly, DirectX 10 is going on a platform that will rule out OpenGL. Not many people use OpenGL in the last few years, so, sadly, this is a minor point. But it's great to have choices, and to have your choices superficially limited always gets me in an uproar.
In a nutshell DirectX 10 is not bringing anything terribly new to the table, while removing very critical freedoms from developers in the first place. They will fill pages with positive bullet points on DX10, but when you plop down a DX10 title next to a DX9/whatever-else title in the end, they will not be noticably different.
Sorry for the ranty-rant.
Re:I am a game developer (Score:4, Interesting)
Lastly, DirectX 10 is going on a platform that will rule out OpenGL.
This has yet to be seen. Vista may or may not make OpenGL more difficult for the average person.
Not many people use OpenGL in the last few years, so, sadly, this is a minor point.
Sure, not many companies, but they include companies in the gaming market that really matter. ID and Blizzard come to mind. Really, the major players that Microsoft has not bought out (RIP Ensemble and Bungie) mostly use OpenGL because they know their games are going to be successful and it is easier to build using a cross-platform API up front than to try to port it later. I don't think too many gamers are going to switch to Vista if it means World of Warcraft and all the games on the Doom engine will no longer work.
Re:I am a game developer (Score:1)
They are providing the framework for people to shim in their own API for video acceleration. What more do you want? Should they come on over to your studio and write your game for you too? Wo
Re:I am a game developer (Score:3, Informative)
but when you plop down a DX10 title next to a DX9/whatever-else title in the end, they will not be noticably different.
It's up to developers if they want to use geometry shaders or not, even if you're a lazy developer and
Re:I am a game developer (Score:2, Troll)
A more interesting question (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:A more interesting question (Score:1)
Clearly, since if they knew anything at all, they'd hate DX. Clearly.
The Jeopardy Answer to the Question in the title (Score:2)
offloading physics to where? (Score:2)
I thought the next cool thing was to offload the physics to a dedicated physics processor [ageia.com] so that you'll have more cpu cycles for better AI. Heck, it says so on Ageia's frontpage! "The next big thing to hit PC gaming."
Offload from where? (Score:2)
Because those musty old DX9 games do all their physics calculations using, umm... the interrupt controller?
further fragmenting the market (Score:5, Insightful)
With all the talk of physics engines and vista exclusivity it has me concerned that what is already a small market is just going to get smaller. My last video card upgrade was $400 and it was an upper mid-range card (x850 xt platinum) not top of the line. My friends and family thought I was insane since many of their pc's cost less than that. I cant even count how many clients I have that get pissed off that their new dual core system cant run a two year old game because the video included was an onboard intel gpu.
IMHO thats whats wrong with the PC gaming world and what pushes users to "casual" gaming. Most folks I know dont even bother to look at the new games on the shelves because they assume they cant run it and refuse to put up the cash to upgrade what they see as a minor part of their pc. I understand Microsofts and their vendors desire to get people upgrading again but unless computer manufacturers either start uncluding decent video cards or intel increases their integrated performace by leaps and bounds the market is just going to dwindle even more.
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:5, Interesting)
I see no real reason to even move to directx8 unless I did a flight sim or an FPS, the extra bells and whistles aren't neccesary for my genre. And why *anyone* would build a game engine around a dedicated physics card that 0.01% of the market has is totally beyond me. Still, I dont understand why Civ4 was so 3D. Was it to limit the number of people who could play? or just make it expensive to develop?
I'm sure that the vast majority of games designers (as opposed to graphics programmers) would rather the pace of API and technology releases slowed dramatically. Then we could all concentrate on this legendery 'fun' thing, that used to be the whole point of these 'tech demos' that pass for modern agmes.
Bah. Rant mode off...
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:2)
Why not just use SDL, and let Mac, Linux, Nintendo*, and Playstation* people play your game too?
*The Wii and PS3 are going to have Xbox Live-like services that you could put your game on, I think.
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:2)
The new round of consoles have great possibilities, athough theres always that barrier of some big licensing company to decide if your game is 'right' for their console. Thats the beauty of the PC. Can you imagine if only Sony made TVs, and decided what TV programs could be made?
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:2)
Please do! It would allow me to consider buying your games (which I can't do now, since I'm a Mac and Linux user).
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:2)
see, i even had to outsource it because of my stupidity in not using SDL
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:4, Interesting)
I personally don't look at new games because they're such a pain to use. Download the new drivers, download a bios update, install the latest patch, fight through the DRM... ugh. Not to mention I only run a 6600GT, so your other point bears weight as well.
Personally, I feel like this will be a big blow to developers. MS is trying to squeeze out Nvidia for being "the friend of my enemy" in a different war. Nvidia will support XP to its dying end, while ATi will be pressured by MS to force users into a Vista purchase. In the end, everyone loses as consumers don't know what to buy, card makers don't know what drivers to support, developers don't know what DX version to target... and everyone buys a Wii.
Re:further fragmenting the market (Score:2)
Only on VISTA (Score:3, Insightful)
I think by now, everyone realizes that Microsofts product isn't good until the second or third version and people will wait. As such, games released with Directx will be directly affected by this.
does it matter? (Score:1)
Here's what this "game developer" thinks (Score:3, Interesting)
I've taken a look at DX10 (well, at the parts you get to see if you're not one of the huge studios, at least). Yes, a few things look promising. But considering the downside, I'll think twice before switching over to DXX.
First of all, it's a new beast. The transitions between DX7 and DX8, and to a lesser degree to DX9 have been considerable. Yes, the changes were minimal, but if you wanted to go with the new flow, you had to rework your code. For rather little gain, if you ask me, since "small developers" certainly don't use the wonderful new features offered. Yes, a programmable shader is nice, HLSL was a big, big help for creating a better shader and it was a big speed boost in code creation. But, frankly, it's not something I'd wet my pants over. Whether the easier creation of some parts and more flexibility in others was worth the time input to revamp your code to the new calling conventions is debatable.
Second, and more important, Vista-only. Now, as I've said, my "target group", so to speak, are people who want to play a li'l game now and then, not hardcore gamers that spend their vacation money rather on new hardware than on a trip to the Bahamas. In other words, my clients will have second line computers, not bleeding-edge hardware. And likewise they will most likely not jump onto Vista the moment it is released, so why should I? I would lose a considerable part of my market.
It might be useful for studios that really work on state-of-the-art games, that HAVE to go to the top and grab the most advanced features available in drivers. It's likely that soon you'll only get top performance out of hardware with Vista, because driver development for older systems will be slacking, just like it was for the Win95/98 line at the wake of 2k/XP. Because test pages will always go for the most current system, so drivers for those will invariably get perference when it comes to tweaking and performance tuning.
Likewise, MS will soon start to abandon fixing anything but the most glaring bugs in older DX versions and newer features of hardware will only be supported in DX10, just like it's been with older versions of DX.
So yes, game development will shift to DX10 and Vista at some point. The question is when their target audience shifts. If consumers don't buy into Vista, studios will have to continue making games for DX9. Or MS will have to port DX10 to XP, appearantly it is somehow possible (though it's quite possible that they only ported the SDK and the runtime won't be working with XP).
Whether or not games will require DX10 is finally up to a few questions:
1. How many people will go to Vista (and thus DX10), so how big is the market?
2. What "killer" features will DX10 offer that DX9 won't?
3. Is it easier or harder to use DX10 compared to 9?
4. How much more horsepower will DX10 need to run games comparably fast with DX9?
Re:Here's what this "game developer" thinks (Score:2)
The runtime must have been ported too, or else how would anybody be able to run and debug their code?
Re:Here's what this "game developer" thinks (Score:2)
Re:Here's what this "game developer" thinks (Score:2)
Re:Here's what this "game developer" thinks (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/06/17725
No hardware? (Score:2)
Re:No hardware? (Score:2)
Or Crytek is blowing smoke up people's ass. Not saying they are, but PR and reality don't always meet-up in the game industry. ;)
The real high-end video cards on the market now can reproduce a lot of the DX10 features, but they are not "true DX10". Crytek may be using a hopped-up gaming rig, like the rest of the DX10 developers I've talked to.
Re:No hardware? (Score:2)
It's all market demand. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think what's really going on is that Microsoft is addressing the demands of the gaming industry with DirectX 10. The game industry is obsessed with realism. There's this overwhelming desire to make games look and feel real, with gameplay taking the backseat.
I also can't help but think that developers are getting every more sloppy because they're depending on consumers having sufficiently powerful machines. It almost feels like it's done intentionally. Release a game that struggles to run well even on some of the fastest machines out there and suddenly the game is used for performance benchmarks. It's free marketing. The game is mentioned in computer magazines everywhere. Now the consumer has a game that they absolutely need to get in order to test the limits of their machine.
DirectX 10 seems to offer a few neat features, specifically those dealing with physics. Unfortunately, DirectX 10 is simply perpetuating the poor habits of the gaming industry. It's ensuring we're going to be seeing contrived FPS games for years to come.
However, it's not going to stop anyone who wants to be more creative. Microsoft is simply responding to market demand.
Astroturf (Score:2)
Oh, gee, the Microsoft employees who develop Microsoft Flight Simulator are upbeat about DirectX 10? I'd never have guessed that.
Re:Astroturf (Score:1)
According to Microsoft themselves [microsoft.com], FSX is developed by "game developer ACES". I'm not sure what this means, but my guess is that ACES is a game studio that develop the game with Microsoft as the publisher.
hype? (Score:1)
Re:They all work for M$ (Score:2)
Namco... Xbox 360? I thought all their good games were on Sony's hardware
Ace Combat
Arc The Lad
Katamari
One Piece
Soul Calibur
Tales of Legendia
Tekken
Time Crisis
XENOSAGA
etc.
All they've released for the Xbox 360 is Ridge Racer... unless I'm missing something. Heck even their PC and Xbox 1 support was pathetic. Namco's support might have some merit considering they've been pretty apathetic to MS products thus far.
Re:They all work for M$ (Score:3, Funny)
Pac-man, Pole Position, Galaga, and Dig Dug.
And I'm pretty sure those mainly ran on their own hardware (with coin slots).
Re:They all work for M$ (Score:2)
Then again it's surprising that those great titles haven't even made their way to the Xbox 360's Live Arcade... sad really.
Re:In summary... (Score:1)
It's not so much one better than DX9, than one more (I know, that's the way some British english speakers talk)