Direct X10, or why you're going to upgrade to Vista

Soriak · 08-19-2006, 11:37 AM

http://blogs.technet.com/windowsvist...es/447226.aspx

The article is rather long, so I won't copy it... but here a look at some of the screenshots.

A face from Halo, rendered in dx9:

Faces from Crysis, an upcoming game using dx10

Is this going to save EQ2? It just might!
Imagine character models in any MMOG designed such detailed... I don't know how much GPU power that'd require, but if it could be scaled depending on how many people are on the screen - win. I'd actually upgrade my 9800pro 128mb graphic card for that.

Screenshots taken from Microsoft's Flight Simulator - this is also a background in Windows Vista:

Looks actually pretty cool as a background, very detailed. Now with dx10:

Also graphics will be able to simulate the passing of time in a game. Those are images with dx10 of the same entrance:

Imagine the possibilities for games... after a certain amount of playtime a new path may become available in an RPG, or if you take too long, one might close and deny you some items.

DX10 will be exclusive to Windows Vista:

Quote:

The new display driver or graphics model in Windows Vista, WDDM (Windows Display Driver Model), is the main reason for DirectX10’s exclusivity to the operating system. It may come as a surprise to know that the graphics driver model hasn’t changed much since Windows NT4 – WDDM is the first major revamp of the system and is designed for scaling high-capability graphics.

Bizantium · 08-19-2006, 11:47 AM

.... I like it

Bralkan · 08-19-2006, 12:45 PM

imagine the porn with that.

IronKeeb · 08-19-2006, 01:25 PM

i dont understand the passing of time bit

Phoenix · 08-19-2006, 01:58 PM

Comparing a 4 year old console game to one that has yet to even be released, amazing.

Nehrak · 08-19-2006, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Article

*snip* DirectX10 facilitates the game engine to dynamically change the appearance of the crypt with passing time. This enables the in-game levels/scenarios to evolve with time passed inside the game, thus replacing the static environment with a unique one by simulating natural growth.

DirectX9 is not capable of creating new geometry on the GPU. It is also not capable of storing intermediate geometric results, i.e. scenarios between Picture 8 and Picture 11 could not have been GPU-generated using DirectX9.

Does that answer your question?

Kiksar · 08-19-2006, 02:31 PM

I'm all for Direct X10 and leaving the backward compatibility out in favor of a much needed upgrade and I think it'll yield some nice results, but that first comparison is straight retarded. Halo is old and busted, Crysis is the best looking upcoming game I've seen. And if I'm not mistaken, Crysis was running at E3 on DX9 and looking quite nice. I'm excited about volumetric effects, displacement mapping, and better shaders in general, but why does it always have to be about propaganda instead of the obvious improvements of which there are many?

softwillow · 08-19-2006, 02:39 PM

If you look at every generation of video card, they have similar before and after shots. Remember Nvidia aging that old pickup truck with a video card that was about to get released 2 years ago?

You never see games that utilize the photorealism powers of a video card or graphics api...it just takes too much horsepower to render, too much hard drive space for texture maps and too much time for programmers.

FoghornDeadhorn · 08-19-2006, 05:22 PM

The aging feature and following exclamations are retarded. If the developer wanted to do it before they could have...if they don't now, they still won't.

Furthermore, the halo comparison shot is beyond retarded, into the realm of retardeder.

HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE

Christ.

Soriak · 08-19-2006, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoghornDeadhorn

The aging feature and following exclamations are retarded. If the developer wanted to do it before they could have...if they don't now, they still won't.

Really? I didn't think that was possible... all they could do was change the graphic after you hit a certain spot in game - but it wouldn't gradually change, just a big jump.

Tingteng · 08-19-2006, 05:37 PM

I saw this on digg a few days ago. It has been flagged as a possible photoshop bad link.

Sean · 08-19-2006, 05:54 PM

While I am very much looking forward to DX10 and do believe it will bring about some big improvements and possibilities...

The article disgusted me right away. Using a shitty fucking xbox game as an example is absurd. There is far better current tech out there in games, hell even newer PS2 games such as Kingdom Hearts 2 (especially the Pirates area, it has insane detail for being rendered on that machine) have some 500 times more detail. And let's not forget how long ago MGS2 came out and how it looks.

Fuck, never mind the top end things they do with dx9 right now. Idiotic article.

qxx · 08-19-2006, 06:09 PM

Why didn't they use the same Crysis SS with DX9 vs the same picture with DX10?

This is Frogger with DX9, this is an artists's rendition of what games in 2019 will look like in DX10....

tanjo · 08-19-2006, 06:11 PM

That shot of MS Flight Simulator isn't in-game. It's an "artists conception" of how the game will look with DX10. It was probably made with photoshop just as much as it was made with DX10. That article is misleading

Mario Speedwagon · 08-19-2006, 06:17 PM

That may be but look how much better it looks than halo!

08-19-2006, 12:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
Bralkan Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 2,118 -1 Internets	imagine the porn with that. __________________ We're all idiots. http://nottheparrot.blogspot.com

08-19-2006, 02:31 PM	#7 (permalink)
Kiksar X-D Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 814 +6 Internets	I'm all for Direct X10 and leaving the backward compatibility out in favor of a much needed upgrade and I think it'll yield some nice results, but that first comparison is straight retarded. Halo is old and busted, Crysis is the best looking upcoming game I've seen. And if I'm not mistaken, Crysis was running at E3 on DX9 and looking quite nice. I'm excited about volumetric effects, displacement mapping, and better shaders in general, but why does it always have to be about propaganda instead of the obvious improvements of which there are many? __________________ Last edited by Kiksar : 08-19-2006 at 02:34 PM.

08-19-2006, 05:22 PM	#9 (permalink)
FoghornDeadhorn Avarice Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Rolling down Rodeo with a shotgun Posts: 3,632 +9 Internets	The aging feature and following exclamations are retarded. If the developer wanted to do it before they could have...if they don't now, they still won't. Furthermore, the halo comparison shot is beyond retarded, into the realm of retardeder. HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE Christ. __________________

08-19-2006, 05:37 PM	#11 (permalink)
Tingteng Thread Killer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Portland,OR Posts: 1,189 -4 Internets	I saw this on digg a few days ago. It has been flagged as a possible photoshop bad link. __________________

08-19-2006, 05:54 PM	#12 (permalink)
Sean Fires of Heaven Officer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Washington Posts: 5,099 +17 Internets	While I am very much looking forward to DX10 and do believe it will bring about some big improvements and possibilities... The article disgusted me right away. Using a shitty fucking xbox game as an example is absurd. There is far better current tech out there in games, hell even newer PS2 games such as Kingdom Hearts 2 (especially the Pirates area, it has insane detail for being rendered on that machine) have some 500 times more detail. And let's not forget how long ago MGS2 came out and how it looks. Fuck, never mind the top end things they do with dx9 right now. Idiotic article. __________________

08-19-2006, 11:47 AM	#2 (permalink)
Bizantium Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 741 +0 Internets	.... I like it

08-19-2006, 01:25 PM	#4 (permalink)
IronKeeb Registered User Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 177 -2 Internets	i dont understand the passing of time bit

08-19-2006, 02:39 PM	#8 (permalink)
softwillow Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Redmond, WA Posts: 450 +1 Internets	If you look at every generation of video card, they have similar before and after shots. Remember Nvidia aging that old pickup truck with a video card that was about to get released 2 years ago? You never see games that utilize the photorealism powers of a video card or graphics api...it just takes too much horsepower to render, too much hard drive space for texture maps and too much time for programmers.

08-19-2006, 06:09 PM	#13 (permalink)
qxx We're not happy til you're not happy. Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Boston Posts: 1,286 -4 Internets	Why didn't they use the same Crysis SS with DX9 vs the same picture with DX10? This is Frogger with DX9, this is an artists's rendition of what games in 2019 will look like in DX10.... __________________

08-19-2006, 06:11 PM	#14 (permalink)
tanjo like a dum whore cripple Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: St. Louis Posts: 614 +0 Internets	That shot of MS Flight Simulator isn't in-game. It's an "artists conception" of how the game will look with DX10. It was probably made with photoshop just as much as it was made with DX10. That article is misleading

08-19-2006, 06:17 PM	#15 (permalink)
Mario Speedwagon Banned Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: 3rd Place Posts: 1,016 +0 Internets	That may be but look how much better it looks than halo!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: