PC Exclusive FPS! No, it isn't April fools

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

WMD

Senior member
Apr 13, 2011
476
0
0
DirectX 9 is a solid API, I don't think anyone is questioning that. With a few updates it's lasted almost 10 years, and remains prevalent despite Microsoft releasing two successors. Great-looking games can still be made with DirectX9.

The point is, I think, that as much as DirectX 9 can do, DirectX 11 can do more. Tessellation can add detail to artwork. More realistic lighting systems can be implemented without taxing the system as much as it would in DirectX 9. It makes programming games for multi-threading easier. DirectX 11's potential is greater.

Why don't we see games truly meeting that potential, though? Because they're still coding for DirectX 9 as well. Almost no game developer wants to lock out XP users and users still using pre-DirectX 10 hardware, thus games at their core must be compatible with DX9. Only once DX9 is left behind can DirectX 11 reach its full potential. Two things probably need to happen for developers to get on board with that: first, XP's market share must shrink so that it doesn't matter anymore. Secondly, Microsoft needs to release a new console based on DirectX 11. Battlefield 3 is the single game coming up that will only support DX10 and DX11 on PC, but it's still being made to be compatible with the DirectX 9-based Xbox 360.

A PC-only game is not tied down by needs of consolization, and can be made for DirectX 10/11 only. They have the opportunity not only to add DirectX 11 but to make it from the ground up for DirectX 11. If they did, it could be better than The Witcher 2. PC gamers feel let down if a PC exclusive game does not meet its full potential.
Again we are making excuses for why Dx11 has failed to impress. That DX11 potential you are talking about have been talked to death since 2009. And it still remains a speculation without any solid proof. Besides without a DX9 render path to compare to, how do we know what has been improved in a DX11 game. DX9 sure made a dramatic difference in lighting/ shading over DX8 and games with BOTH DX8 and DX9 render path prove it. (example COD3)
 

Dankk

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2008
5,558
25
91
Why don't we see games truly meeting that potential, though? Because they're still coding for DirectX 9 as well. Almost no game developer wants to lock out XP users and users still using pre-DirectX 10 hardware, thus games at their core must be compatible with DX9.
This actually disappoints me. I would really like to see some more developers making games with DX10/DX11 only. Then they could talk some sense into XP users and say, "Guess what guys, you're still using a 10-year-old operating system. Seriously, make the upgrade to Win7." I have a hard time accepting that there are still PC gamers out there who insist on using XP. Really, why? Unless you're piss-poor, there is very little reason NOT to upgrade to Windows 7. Hell, whenever I see a developer announce that a game will be Vista/7 only, there is always that little group of XP users that complain. They don't understand that Windows 7 has better features, better optimization for newer hardware, better everything. There is really no point.

Just Cause 2 was probably the first major game to be DX10 only. As a result, it turned out to be absolutely gorgeous. Some people tease DX10 for being the red-headed stepchild between DX9 and DX11, but Just Cause 2 did a seriously good job of utilizing DX10 to it's fullest. It's still one of the best-looking games there is, and it still has the best IQ out of most other games.
 
Last edited:

WMD

Senior member
Apr 13, 2011
476
0
0
This actually disappoints me. I would really like to see some more developers making games with DX10/DX11 only. Then they could talk some sense into XP users and say, "Guess what guys, you're still using a 10-year-old operating system. Seriously, make the upgrade to Win7." I have a hard time accepting that there are still PC gamers out there who insist on using XP. Really, why? Unless you're piss-poor, there is very little reason NOT to upgrade to Windows 7. Hell, whenever I see a developer announce that a game will be Vista/7 only, there is always that little group of XP users that complain. They don't understand that Windows 7 has better features, better optimization for newer hardware, better everything. There is really no point.

Just Cause 2 was probably the first major game to be DX10 only. As a result, it turned out to be absolutely gorgeous. Some people tease DX10 for being the red-headed stepchild between DX9 and DX11, but Just Cause 2 did a seriously good job of utilizing DX10 to it's fullest. It's still one of the best-looking games there is, and it still has the best IQ out of most other games.
LOL I wonder just how much of that is based on how the game actually looks vs placebo effect of simply being DX10.

JC2 DX10


Crysis DX9
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
Again we are making excuses for why Dx11 has failed to impress. That DX11 potential you are talking about have been talked to death since 2009. And it still remains a speculation without any solid proof. Besides without a DX9 render path to compare to, how do we know what has been improved in a DX11 game. DX9 sure made a dramatic difference in lighting/ shading over DX8 and games with BOTH DX8 and DX9 render path prove it. (example COD3)
Try comparing DirectX 9 Crysis 2 with DirectX 11 Crysis 2. There is a dramatic difference to be found. Now you might say "The first Crysis was way better than Crysis 2!" Keep in mind that it's hard to compare the first game to the second, due to the different setting (jungle vs NYC). Just compare the two rendering paths in Crysis 2 specifically.
 

Dankk

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2008
5,558
25
91
LOL I wonder just how much of that is based on how the game actually looks vs placebo effect of simply being DX10.
Uhh, none. It's a legitimately beautiful game. It also doesn't help that you linked to a console version of the game. Yep, I checked. I searched for "Just Cause 2" on Google Images just like you, and that image popped up from the PS3 version. Nice try though.

Here are some screenshots I took myself (and not from a random website):





Aw heck, one more for good measure :) Because I love skydiving

 
Last edited:

WMD

Senior member
Apr 13, 2011
476
0
0
Uhh, none. It's a legitimately beautiful game. It also doesn't help that you linked to a console version of the game. Yep, I checked. I searched for "Just Cause 2" on Google Images just like you, and that image popped up from the PS3 version. Nice try though.

Here are some screenshots I took myself (and not from a random website):


Aw heck, one more for good measure :) Because I love skydiving
That was from PC.

http://pc.ign.com/dor/objects/862518/just-cause-2/images/just-cause-2-20080129091532298.html

Your images doesn't look any better. And compared to crysis it still does not convince me that a DX10 exclusive title has anything over a Dx9 title.

I hate to use RE5 again. Your JC2 image:


Resident evil 5 in DX9


RE5 looks better runs faster on the same hardware.
 

Dankk

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2008
5,558
25
91
Your images doesn't look any better. And compared to crysis it still does not convince me that a DX10 exclusive title has anything over a Dx9 title.

I hate to use RE5 again. Your JC2 image:


Resident evil 5 in DX9


RE5 looks better runs faster on the same hardware.
Resident Evil 5 and Just Cause 2 run on entirely different engines. RE5 is a third-person corridor shooter designed for smaller levels and environments. JC2 is an open-world action game capable of continuously rendering an entire southeast-asian country, 400 square miles in size, and it succeeds quite gorgeously at 60+ frames per second. It handles large view-distances better than any other game I've seen. (It's extremely more optimized than something like... oh, I don't know... Crysis.) :)

Let's just give it a rest. I never said JC2 was as good looking as Crysis, and although Crysis is certainly very pretty for a 4-year-old game, the JC2 engine manages to come fairly close, while being 10x more efficient.

I own Crysis, played it finished it, and I'm not discounting the fact that it's a good game.
 

WMD

Senior member
Apr 13, 2011
476
0
0
Resident Evil 5 and Just Cause 2 run on entirely different engines. RE5 is a third-person corridor shooter designed for smaller levels and environments. JC2 is an open-world action game capable of continuously rendering an entire southeast-asian country, 400 square miles in size, and it succeeds quite gorgeously at 60+ frames per second. It handles large view-distances better than any other game I've seen. (It's extremely more optimized than something like... oh, I don't know... Crysis.) :)

Let's just give it a rest. I never said JC2 was as good looking as Crysis, and although Crysis is certainly very pretty for a 4-year-old game, the JC2 engine manages to come fairly close, while being 10x more efficient.

I own Crysis, played it finished it, and I'm not discounting the fact that it's a good game.
Your original post was about how JC2 have some of the best looking graphics because it is a DX10 exclusive title. Now you do admit that it does not look as good as crysis in DX9 and how it cannot be compared to RE5 because of different engines. Which pretty much agrees with what I said earlier: How good a game looks depends more on game engine and art direction rather than the API.
Just cause 2 may look good to you but it has nothing to do with being DX10. Besides, JC2 must have support for DX9 as well to be able to run Xbox360's DX9 hardware. The only true DX10 exclusive game is Shattered Horizon and there is nothing impressive about it.

 

-Slacker-

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2010
1,563
0
76
dx11>dx10>dx9. Period.

Obviously the reverse can be said in terms of end results, but that can be said about anything. A steam powered car can be faster than an internal combustion engine car which, in turn, can be faster than a car powered by -I dunno, matter-antimatter reactions. It can happen if the people with the better technology are taking the piss.

edit: seems like the modded dx9 crysis is being compared a lot with dx10 JC2, and the consensus is that it looks better. Well, yeah, but does it run as smooth? I was under the impression that it was slower.
 
Last edited:

NoSoup4You

Golden Member
Feb 12, 2007
1,253
6
81
DX10 and 11 are worthless, for the time being. They add nothing or next to nothing that couldn't have been done in DX9 instead.
 

Marty502

Senior member
Aug 25, 2007
497
0
0
Some of you guys are weird.
A new studio, a PC exclusive shooter focused on it's single player experience, and you think that if it has DX11 or not is actually important?

You guys shouldn't give a pig's ass about that kind of stuff. There's Futuremark and other benchmark tools for visuals.

I don't care if it's in freakin' DirectX 7 as long as it offers a solid story, new ideas and injects some much needed fresh air into the PC gaming scene.
 

Anomaly1964

Platinum Member
Nov 21, 2010
2,460
4
81
some of you guys are weird.
A new studio, a pc exclusive shooter focused on it's single player experience, and you think that if it has dx11 or not is actually important?

You guys shouldn't give a pig's ass about that kind of stuff. There's futuremark and other benchmark tools for visuals.

I don't care if it's in freakin' directx 7 as long as it offers a solid story, new ideas and injects some much needed fresh air into the pc gaming scene.

exactly!
 

Emultra

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2002
1,166
0
0
Will follow this. The FoV looks good, just as PK's FoV was both very good as a default value, and very (easily) customizable.
 
Apr 17, 2005
13,465
3
81
Yes seriously, if im going to buy a new PC game full price near release its going to have to have one of the following:

1. Be Diablo III
2. Have leading edge best in class graphics
3. Have a metacritic score of 95+, or multiple reviews of 9.5+/10


If it doesnt meet one of those three things i will wait till it hits the steam bargin bin at $5 a year or 2 later. I prefer to wait and save money on games so i have high standards if im going to pay $60 for a game.
what kind of noob buys games based on metacritic scores?!?

edit: i was being an ass.
 
Last edited:

Dankk

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2008
5,558
25
91
what kind of noob buys games based on metacritic scores?!?

edit: i was being an ass.
This is a good question though. There are games with a 90+ Metacritic score that I could never get into, and there are games with a ~60 Metacritic score that I've absolutely enjoyed. Review score can't be the only thing that factors into your decision to purchase a new title. Different people enjoy different things. If a game is well-received, that doesn't necessarily mean you'll enjoy it.

Rifterut should probably just write "I'll only buy if it scores over 95 on Metacritic" in his signature, since he brings it up in almost every thread about a new game. :rolleyes:
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,372
896
126
Actually provide visual modifiers such as anti-aliasing and I'll be happy. Jaggies make angry! :twisted:
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
Easy to say, hard to believe. Graphics is an integral part of the game's narrative, just like sound. It builds immersion.
Do you not play any games from the early 2000's and earlier? Great visuals help immersion, of course, but they aren't nearly the primary factor for many people, and visuals go far beyond the latest version of DirectX anyways. The superior artistic direction of Max Payne or Mafia > the superior engine capabilities of FEAR.
 

-Slacker-

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2010
1,563
0
76
Do you not play any games from the early 2000's and earlier? Great visuals help immersion, of course, but they aren't nearly the primary factor for many people, and visuals go far beyond the latest version of DirectX anyways. The superior artistic direction of Max Payne or Mafia > the superior engine capabilities of FEAR.
Is graphics any kind of factor in your purchasing decisions or isn't it? Why would you get hyped by a trailer of a game that looks like delta force land warrior?

I'm not talking by the game itself here, or it's graphics, I'm just commenting on your dx 7 post.
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
If the gameplay is promising, yes. The release of The Nameless Mod (full-length single player mod for Deus Ex, another DirectX 7 game) was more exciting than anything that has come since. I'm more excited for new Minecraft videos than Bioshock Infinite or whatever newest and most advanced game is coming out.
 

HeXen

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2009
7,828
35
91
ah, another edgy looking game that according to history, turns out to suck more often than it turns out to be good. I'm thinking Time shift effect all over again, sounds good on paper, looks good on paper but sucks to play
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
750
126
This is a good question though. There are games with a 90+ Metacritic score that I could never get into, and there are games with a ~60 Metacritic score that I've absolutely enjoyed. Review score can't be the only thing that factors into your decision to purchase a new title. Different people enjoy different things. If a game is well-received, that doesn't necessarily mean you'll enjoy it.

Rifterut should probably just write "I'll only buy if it scores over 95 on Metacritic" in his signature, since he brings it up in almost every thread about a new game. :rolleyes:
well look at it this way, you can base it off review sites which get paid for giving good reviews or metacritic on which the non professional scores are actually normal everyday gamers, who are you going have more faith in?

EDITED to add. Its not like you ca DL demos anymore no one makes any, as playing the game first would obviously be best.

Of course you could always pirate it first and try it out but thats not so legal.

IMO metacritic non-professional/user scores are about as good as we have right now at rating a game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ASK THE COMMUNITY