For a DX9 game, it looks much better than certain games that uses DX11. It shows what talent and optimisation can do. Very good job, CD Projekt.
It is DX9 only, for now.Some games have been patched to make use of DX10 or DX11 after release; I don't know whether anything like that is planned.DX9 is the only suitable choice for a game that has a core market in countries where "latest and greatest" technology is not widely distributed or easily affordable. Plus there are all those Windows XP users who "won't be reconstructed and do not give a damn".DX10 was an even bigger step backward than Vista was. Microsoft trashed the audio hardware market, for no advantage in features or performance whatsoever.DX11 at least promises some interesting new features, as soon as graphics card vendors and game engine developers figure out how to make them not run slower than hand-coding the same work for DX9.In ther meantime, DX10 and DX11 support would be a lot of money spent for no commercial or artistic advantage. CDPR is clearly smart enough not to waste the resources available to them on useless features.
and looks at least twice as good as the TW2 because of it, right?right?Drasill said:
Indirectly proving my point: it stinks on DX 11; it plays much better on DX 9.There is as of now no reason to port a game to DX 11 unless you have coders with nothing better to do, or you can actually do something better with DX 11. No game developer can afford the former, and none have succeeded at the latter.Drasill said:
Extended explanation of why tessellation isn't worth the silicon it's fabricated on until programmers get around to making some use of it that makes games perform better, not worse:The problem with tessellation in DirectX 11Drasill said:
Well come on. I have the game and Directx11 features were not optimized well enough. How is it GTX 570 and up in SLI can't get 60+ fps? The graphics also aren't on The Witcher 2 level. Not bashing DA2. I do like Bioware but come on they clearly didn't optimizie DA2.Drasill said:
From what i have seen, rise of the white wolf is a remake of the EE for the current gen consoles.I would guess that the wise thing would be to make and release the game in DX9 and then at a later date possibly include DX 11 in a patch,Look at CD projekt RED's History, they do things no ordinary deveolper does, how many companys take back the first game and based on the critisim and faults remake it alowing the patching to it for free (i think) and then the boxed version in the shops has nice decent physical contents with the game being in a pretty decent state.....except for the crashes ( i swear it has something to do with the order and when certain soldiers try to fight geralt)I think they may use DX 11, if they do then this will be thee best looking RPG of this year.Speaking of refrence to crysis 2, its DX9 its also a console port, crysis was built on the pc communtity and crytek have received massive lashback from its player base on the pc for they way it all panned out. I still can't log into the game. I was disapointed with crysis 2, i prefer the first game. i don't think high end pc games should be placed on out of date consoles, it seems to ruin the pc version. I had a look at DA2 it doen't look very great, i didn't like it.The Witcher2 is made for the pc, i don't think it will get airing on current gen consoles, the 360 has what 64mb or 128mb of vmem?To look at another favourite RPG elderscrolls, its Skyrim is going to be on current gen consoles, it might also go the same way as crysis and become a console port, sadly.I guess the answer to the post is no, not now, not yet and CD porject won't comment propperly on anything for the future as that can cause bigger problems if they go back on it, i still think they will though
Considering that GeForce 8800 which is the minimum requirement is a DX10 card, your argument is invalid.
That's not the case why most modern DX10/11 games suck - its just that they are mostly outdated and terribly optimized console ports with a few new age effects thrown in to justify the DX10/11 tag for the pr purpose. We won't see any real DX10/11 games until the generation of consoles changes or some publisher/dev decides to make a real pc game which utilizes all the power of modern pcs, like original Crysis did.Any game which is designed for consoles as well as for pcs is destined to have a rotten graphics core with just a few fluff effects to cover it.
LOLTell me you didnt try to make Crysis an example of a PC game!Crysis is a terribly optimised piece of crap that even with the latest hardware it cannot run on max above 60 fps...Whereas the second crysis features good looking graphics and runs great on systems with low end cards even if it is dx9!Now if you could make Metro 2033 aan example i would gladly accept it!Irx said:
IMO Crysis 1 looks better than both Metro 2033 and Crysis 2. It is terribly optimized, that's true. And from what I've heard it is not truly a dx10 game...but still looks amazing. Metro 2033 has the worst physics i've seen in 2010. The lightning is great, though. And I can't stand even looking at crysis 2. It is just...bad.
if it makes you feel any better: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sw_1P2dvWU&feature=related basically, while it is being developed to be cross-platform, it is being developed on the PC first and the PC version will be higher res etc. I am not denying there has been concessions for the consoles in their previous games, but I really do believe they are considering the PC as a viable market, and are responding to criticism to the terrible UI on PC's. They know damn well how important the modding community is to their games, and that is a purely PC thing. Also, they have rethought the UI for Skyrim, basically taking notes form one of the most popular UI mods around for the PC, DarNified UI. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH0FsT1I5D0&feature=related (I've read elsewhere about it too, it seems like some aspects will be 'flashier' and more graphic based, inspired by iTunes of all things, but they are working on making the HUD as minimal as humanly possible by displaying info only when needed, which is a primary feature in DarNified) yes, I have been reading up on Skyrim a lot, I was very curious which direction they would go. Some things HAVE been 'streamlined' which I realize to many gamers is a dirty word, and can be code for consolizing a game, but they seem to have done it in such a way that things are merely reorganized, not taken away, (Mysticism as a category has been removed, but the spells it contained are still present, just shuffled into other categories, for example) aside from classes, an that decision seems to have nothing at all to do with consoles. they've also added more complexity back in, such as additional armor slots. basically, while I do think sometimes design decisions ARE based on the desire to have a game on console, I think sometimes fans overreact to certain things, and label any change as 'consolizing' when that's not the case. sometimes it may be the case, but often it isn't. Like, earlier in this thread someone said DirectX 9 = consolized, but this also means a wider variety of PC players (on XP or whatever) can play it, and I doubt consoles had anything at all to do with the decision.Ruaridh said: