Ancient76 said:
I follow the debate. But you are persistent and you talk about things you don't understand. If you want to discuss about this, make something. Experience it.
While I have never programmed or created any games, I think you are overestimating
your understanding and underestimating mine. You've been flat out wrong on quite a few of your arguments, if you hadn't noticed..
Btw, with todays programmable pipelines you can create programs (shaders) with your own instructions to create better effects, totally ignoring any API. But your game can still use dx9.
If that's the case, why are new shader models released when new APIs are released? DX11 has SM 5.0. DX10 had SM 4.0, DX9 had SM 3.0..
As far as I know, you can't use SM 5.0 in a DX9 game on DX9 hardware, as they don't support SM 5.0's advanced feature set..
Game devs often lie about certain features to be only dx10/11. Just remember first Crysis and very-high dx10 only settings. They work under dx9 and XP with better performance.
DX10 was mostly supposed to increase performance (not image quality), but Crytek messed it up as they didn't have the experience to properly implement it the first time. The first Assassin's Creed had a DX10 path that was faster than the DX9 path however, and it supported MSAA..
Anyway, if you ever get around to making your own AAA games, then you can come back to lecturing us and CDPR about why they should stick with ancient and outdated programming models and hardware whilst the rest of the World progresses.
And native dx11 games do not exist.
Tell that to DICE, Crytek, Firaxis, Ubisoft, 4A Games and finally CDPR