Direct x 11?

http://n4g.com/dev/News-98433.aspx

Draw your own conclusions

 

I am waiting for DirectX 15, before i upgrade.

regards

John.

 

Yes, I agree. I`m also waiting until DX24.0z for the next upgrade.
Seriousely, there isn`t even a real DX10 game yet

 

Maybe DX11 will be a leap frog over DX10...actually offering improved performance along with the enhanced visuals.

 

i was gonna say wat about 10.1... but that apparently will go by quick.... why cant they take dx10 and make upgrades to video gfx without needing new hardware for each one.... besides the fact it makes every1 more money wen ppl have to buy new stuff every year.... -_-

 

Er, how exactly would they enable new features without, you know, getting them supported by the hardware?

 

This garbage is why people are buying consoles for gaming

 

That is the best sentence I have heard on this forum in a long time...

 

So sad that Bioshock and COD4 look nearly identical on 360 as they do on PC.

Tis why I now have a 360.

 

I second that notion!

I also purchased an XBOX 360 Elite which can play games HD for fraction of the cost... Don't get me wrong, I love to play on my G1A, but I can't keep wondering at the graphic output of a $450 USD device over a device that costs four times as much!!! LOL...

 

What, because PC's get better and better graphics? Yeah, that makes sense.

I'm sorry, but I didn't see anywhere in the article that "Starting tomorrow, all existing graphics hardware will be useless, and everyone will have to upgrade".

Could we please be just a tiny bit realistic here? Games still support DX9, ffs. It's not like we're going to see DX11-exclusive games for the next 5 years, at least.

Have some sense of proportion.

Please tell me how it can possibly be a bad thing that even better graphics now become possible on extreme high-end systems? It doesn't change anything for the rest of us, who get the same graphics as we would otherwise, and for those who are willing to fork out, it'll give them better graphics. Where's the downside?

 

~~~~hehe,,plz don't bring me back to realism,,,what's real is we have to spend more than $200 on display card in order to playing any dx10 game,,,

 

Every five years you buy a console for around $300- $500. Every three years you have to upgrade your PC to play the latest games for around 2x more.

 

See this is the what had always troubled me, consoles and PC are getting similar to each other as time pass. They plays Movies, Games, and some even offer functionalities. Consoles are smaller or slightly bigger while comparing to desktop or laptop. So why can't they just make PC out of the same concept they used to create consoles?!or EVEN BETTER merge the two platforms and create something revolutionary, a power house that's affordable. Just imagine one day there is only laptop-styled PCs Small, portable, and packs lots of power!

Oh, How i dare to dream. Haha

 

Huh?
If you need to spend $1000 on your PC every 3 years, you're buying the wrong hardware.
The PC also has the advantage that you don't have to drop all the money at once. With a console, you end up playing games on 4 years old hardware. If that's what you want to do, you can do that on PC as well. The PC just also gives you the option of gradually upgrading from year to year.

Then of course there's the fact that the PC can do a wee bit more than a console.

And of course, none of this has anything to do with DirectX 11.

Because the concept for consoles is "We control the hardware. We know exactly what is in the box. You're not allowed to change it or upgrade it."

A concept that simply doesn't work for PC's. Or what? Would you like one company to have a monopoly over your PC? No competition between ATI and NVidia, AMD and Intel to drive performance? Just one company who decide to upgrade your computer when they feel like it. Yeah, I can see how that's a good thing. If that was how PC's worked, we'd be stuck with Pentium 3's today.

Then of course there's another little thing you're forgetting. My PC can play any PC game. No matter who made it, who published it and when it was made.

A PS3 can't play Wii games. A 360 can't play Gamecube games. Would you really like the PC to follow that example? Make it so Vista can't run XP games? Intel-based PC's can't run games for AMD-based PC's. Sound good?

 

consoles will never kill the PC, mainly good for gaming thats it.

PCs have so much more functionality and more flexible with gaming imo. you can easily upgrade and sell old parts. totally mod it to your liking.

consoles are proprietory boxes of companies.

jalf = smart.

 

well then buy a ps3 360 and Wii then you wont have any problems playing all the games and you still have extra money to buy yourself a half gallon of chocholate ice ream yumm

 

Well console games cost more then the same pc games (here in sweden anyway), so you loose much more money their.
example:
Call of Duty 4 for PS3/XBOX360 cost 549:-
http://www.webhallen.com/prod.php?id=75605
For PC it cost 449:-
http://www.webhallen.com/prod.php?id=75603

Colin McRae Rally - DiRT
PC: 199:-
http://www.webhallen.com/prod.php?id=69802
PS3: 549:-
http://www.webhallen.com/prod.php?id=69801

 

Yes, here in the US ALL console games at launch will cost 10-20$ over the PC versions, if you add up just 5 or 10 games you've already paid for a major PC upgrade.

The extra cost is because M$, Sony, and nintendo demand royalties on their systems. If you sell a product on their system, you owe them %20 per sale.
PC requires no royalties, M$ does not get money for PC games sales.

 

And you can usually get a new PC game on sale for $30 a week or two after it is released. Plus they drop in price more quickly than console games. Since my time is limited I usually wait a few months before buying a new release game because I haven't finished playing the last new release yet. By then I can get a good deal. Whereas console games will cost $60 each for six to nine months or even a year.

I tend to keep oin top of my PC upgrade path to a high middle end or low upper end system. Cost is probably about $400 per year for new CPU, or GPU, or memory, or mobo.

 

DX11? Jalf said everything. I agree.

Ivan

 

Only available for the forthcoming XP service pack 3? Now that would be hilarious :laugh:

(If you haven't guessed, my question is unfounded without a single drop of research or common sense. Although it would fit Microsofts profile for them to offer "cheap £100" downgrades for the vista users)

 

Your quite right, however a gaming console is restricted to just that. Where as you can multi task with a laptop / desktop. How many consoles allow downloading videos, games, files. Or to browse the internet at a reasonable pace? Or to encode dvd's and compose soundtracks?


Plus gaming consoles have also risen in price, PS3 anyone?

 

Absolutly. Agree totally.
I slightly regret why I decided to choose a laptop with a dedicated graphics card now - there was no point!! I would rather have an 8400GS now.

May seem incredibly stupid, but I waited 7 months to buy a laptop and the entire reason was because of Dx10 compatible GPU's!!

I assume that Dx11 will not function on my laptop. And anyway, if it did, it wouldn't be of high playability I woul've thought.

- Jam.

 

I think you should not worry a lot. Still no DX10 game that really works better than on DX9 (they are getting closer but not so close). So go ahead and buy the laptop... just remember: get a good graphics card and not an almost low-end card.

 

PC's will never have the same "fun" factor of consoles. Especialy when friends and family are around. PC's are only decent for 1 player FPS's imo.

 

I understand your opinion, but with a pc you can also have that "fun" factor.
Like, go to lan-party or create one with a couple of friends lol.
The PC has much more functionality than consoles.

 

Well, yes and no...

I usually connect my Asus G1S to a 37" LCD we have on the living room (I haven't tried HDMI yet tho) so I can play with the Nephews

We even play some games online (not as fun as XBOX Live on my 360 but close)...

@Dragonpet: Well, things are changing now on the console side... The WII have some cool functionalities only available on the PC, like online news readers, weather forecasts, etc... The PS3 have PC capabilities through Linux... XBOX 360, er, well eventually will have it's own web browser (supposedly on the next update), Ubuntu Linux although unnofficially ... So in a strange way, we are getting there!

Peace!
RayanMX

 

Perhaps the word "concept" is not the right word in my original post, my apologies . It should have been "Technology". I was referring to why consoles while not bigger than average desktop or some laptops but it still pack good enough performances to play most of todays game and probably games for 3 or 4 years into the futures. For example, the modified graphic processing units in PS3/Xbox 360. If the manufacture were able to modify the existing DX9 chip sets and make it as powerful to play games in decent res and details in consoles, why don't they just sell/manufacture that for the PC? To play any game on PC with the quality on par with the mentioned two consoles you need to have a pretty beastly rig and in just the graphic component of that rig would probably cost as much as a new console. My question is if they can make chips that powerful and sell them in console with the whole package at only a fraction of the price for PCs; why can't they just sell the component for desktops gaming rigs and still keep everything affordable.

 

But you won't be able to run older games. Say, Genesis, Nintendo 64, Dreamcast. You can't run all Xbox games either, and unless you get the uber-expensive version, you can't play *any* PS2 games.

And honestly, if you need to spend more on a PC than on ps3 + 360 + wii, you're not very good at picking the right hardware.

We can use that word if you prefer. My answer is the same. The magic technology they use is "we control the hardware. We know exactly what's in the box because we put it there, and you don't have a way to change it".
Developers can target that precise hardware, they can test and tweak and optimize on that precise hardware, and they know it'll run exactly the same way on the end user's system as it does on theirs.
On a PC, you have to make your game so it'll run ok on an old single-core A64 as well as the latest quad-core. On a DX10 GPU from ATI, a DX10 GPU from NVidia, a SM3.0 GPU, a slightly crippled SM3.0 GPU from ATI, on integrated GPU's, on GPU's with fewer shader units but faster memory, on GPU's with more memory, but fewer texture units, GPU's on an AGP bus, and so on.

They do. It's called Geforce 7900. That's what the PS3 uses. No magic there.
As I said above, the secret ingredient is not the technology, it's the console business structure.

Console hardware has always sucked. (With a very few exceptions).
For the last 15 years or so, consoles have generally been weaker than PC's at the time they were released. The original PS had a 33mhz CPU. That was in what, 1995? PC's ran a couple of hundred mhz. It had something silly like 4MB RAM.

No point? You got a GPU that can run more games than a 8400. How is that "no point"?

Yes... Now you mention it, it does seem incredibly stupid. And not because of DX11. On the contrary, how many DX10 (exclusive) games have you seen so far? Enough to wait 7 months for? Because I've seen precisely zero. And funnily enough, that is how many DX10 games that are currently in development too. Zero. You waited seven months to get a laptop for a feature that won't be necessary for *at least* 3 years.

And now you're (all of you) whining about DX11? Give me a break, Microsoft just *announced* that they're going to make it. So f'ing what? We knew that. It just means that one day, there will be more powerful features available to developers. It doesn't make your current rig any less powerful. You can still run the exact same games you could if this piece of news hadn't got out.
And by the time the first DX11-exclusive game comes out, you've all upgraded anyway.

Hell, I'm willing to bet you've upgraded before the first DX10-exclusive game comes out. So what's the big deal? Why all the crying and whining and angry ranting?

Here, I've got some other news for you. One day, your car will be obsolete too. Do you regret buying it?

 

Its called a debate.....

 

Yes?

I don't think anyone is denying that

 

quite honestly I haven't seen anything in terms of pc gaming that blows away what I get out of my xbox360, and that hardware is 2 years old. you can talk all day about how games cost $10 for consoles on average, but you need to remember that that is where the money is made ( software ). With pcs there is much more money made off the hardware. I would have to bet that if you beefed up your computer to the specs of a 360 at the time of the 360's release it would've cost you a smidge more than $400. Also some people prefer to not have to search for drivers, assess system requirements prior to software purchase, wait for update patches to make prematurely released and poorly optimized software playable on anything but the most expensive hardware ( eg Crysis of course ), and tweak system settings for every different title. With console gaming this is all done for you. All of this said, I personally prefer to game with pcs for the most part ( mostly because of the freedom given to users as far as gaming mods and patches go ). I just think console gaming holds its own and is far less of a glitchy headache.