Who is waiting for Crysis

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
Tentative release date is mid November, with a fat "COMING SOON" at the end of the latest trailer.

mid november?

where'd you hear/see that?

 

[HardWarrior]

The inCrysis site, I think. Mid November seems like a long time to you, Fen?

 

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
Tentative release date is mid November, with a fat "COMING SOON" at the end of the latest trailer.

mid november?

where'd you hear/see that?

GameSpot reports Nov release date too...

Damn it, I was planning on Bioshock in August and Crysis in Sept...

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: aCynic2
I have a feeling, all this hype of Crysis is going to work against it in the end.

That's the way you "feel", huh? It's up to us as individuals whether or not we buy the hype and allow our imaginations to run wild. If you can't summon enough control to read a review or 3, BEFORE you buy, you deserve to have your head bumped.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: SteelSix

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
Tentative release date is mid November, with a fat "COMING SOON" at the end of the latest trailer.

mid november?

where'd you hear/see that?

GameSpot reports Nov release date too...

Damn it, I was planning on Bioshock in August and Crysis in Sept...

damnit indeed. damnit indeed .

well in that case i can just wait for the DX10 refreshes before getting a new video card

 

[nwfsnake]

Amazon just updated my pre-order this past weekend from Sept 11 to Nov 12.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
The difference between DX9 and DX10 are subtle, but noticeable. What are the performance costs?

severe in CoJ and Lost Planet in my experience ...

The strange thing is that this is the opposite of the way it SHOULD work. A correctly coded DX10 game should run much smoother than the DX9 version at the same resolution and detail level.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
The difference between DX9 and DX10 are subtle, but noticeable. What are the performance costs?

severe in CoJ and Lost Planet in my experience ...

The strange thing is that this is the opposite of the way it SHOULD work. A correctly coded DX10 game should run much smoother than the DX9 version at the same resolution and detail level.

it depends on what the coders are trying to achieve. in both mentioned cases there are larger textures and it takes a lot of GPU power to do HDR correct AA and motion blur in DX10 then what is simply not done at all in DX9c.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
The difference between DX9 and DX10 are subtle, but noticeable. What are the performance costs?

severe in CoJ and Lost Planet in my experience ...

The strange thing is that this is the opposite of the way it SHOULD work. A correctly coded DX10 game should run much smoother than the DX9 version at the same resolution and detail level.

it depends on what the coders are trying to achieve. in both mentioned cases there are larger textures and it takes a lot of GPU power to do HDR correct AA and motion blur in DX10 then what is simply not done at all in DX9c.

Bare in mind, I'm just starting to get a grasp on the technology: Doesn't the far more streamlined rendering process coupled with fast DX10 hardware make such effects possible at high frame rates? My understanding is that there is little that DX10 can do that DX9 can't in terms of feature set. The real difference is that DX10 can do it 6-8 times faster. What do you mean when you say that it depends on what the coder is trying to do?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
The difference between DX9 and DX10 are subtle, but noticeable. What are the performance costs?

severe in CoJ and Lost Planet in my experience ...

The strange thing is that this is the opposite of the way it SHOULD work. A correctly coded DX10 game should run much smoother than the DX9 version at the same resolution and detail level.

it depends on what the coders are trying to achieve. in both mentioned cases there are larger textures and it takes a lot of GPU power to do HDR correct AA and motion blur in DX10 then what is simply not done at all in DX9c.

Bare in mind, I'm just starting to get a grasp on the technology: Doesn't the far more streamlined rendering process coupled with fast DX10 hardware make such effects possible at high frame rates? My understanding is that there is little that DX10 can do that DX9 can't in terms of feature set. The real difference is that DX10 can do it 6-8 times faster. What do you mean when you say that it depends on what the coder is trying to do?

do i have a recent article just for you by AT's Derek Wilson!

Real World DirectX 10 Performance: It Ain't Pretty

in very small part from the Final Words:

... DirectX 10 isn't an instant pass to huge performance and incredible effects.

Let's look at it like this: there are really three ways a game can come to support DirectX 10, and almost all games over the next few years will ship with a DX9 path as well. The easiest thing is to do a straight port of features from DirectX 9 (which should generally be slightly faster than the DirectX 9 counterpart if drivers are of equal quality). We could also see games offer a DirectX 10 version with enhanced features that could still be implemented in DX9 in order to offer an incentive for users to move to a DX10 capable platform. The most aggressive option is to implement a game focused around effects that can only be effectively achieved through DirectX 10.

Games which could absolutely only be done in DX10 won't hit for quite a while for a number of reasons. The majority of users will still be on DX9 platforms. It is logical to spend the most effort developing for the user base that will actually be paying for the games. Developers are certainly interested in taking advantage of DX10, but all games for the next couple of years will definitely have a DX9 path. It doesn't make sense to rewrite everything from the ground up if you don't have to.

We are also hearing that some of the exclusive DX10 features that could enable unique and amazing effects DX9 isn't capable of just don't perform well enough on current hardware. Geometry shader heavy code, especially involving geometry amplification, does not perform equally well on all available platforms (and we're looking at doing some synthetic tests to help demonstrate this). The performance of some DX10 features is lacking to the point where developers are limited in how intensely they can use these new features.

Developers (usually) won't write code that will work fine on one platform and not at all on another. The decisions on how to implement a game are in the hands of the developers, and that's where gamers rightly look when performance is bad or hardware and feature support is not complete. Building a consistent experience for all gamers is important. It won't be until most users have hardware that can handle all the bells and whistles well that we'll see games start to really push the limits of DX10 and reach beyond what DX9 can do.

In conversations with developers we've had thus far, we get the impression that straight ports of DX9 to DX10 won't be the norm either. After all, why would a developer want to spend extra time and effort developing, testing and debugging multiple code paths that do exactly the same thing? This fact, combined with the lack of performance in key DX10 features on current hardware, means it's very likely that the majority of DX10 titles coming out in the near term will only be slightly enhanced versions of what could have been done through DX9.

read the whole article ... there is a lot more to it then meets the casual eye

 

[apoppin]

and it looks like we may be *waiting* for Crysis till '08

http://pc.ign.com/articles/808/808807p1.html

At this point, I'm not entirely certain that Crysis will be releasing this year. I've been asking for an answer for a while and no one really seems to know the release date. After hearing plenty of rumors about Crysis being pushed to November, we have yet to get a real response from the giant publisher.

:Q

 

[HardWarrior]

A VERY interesting read apo, thank you.

A note though, and it's a whopper. DX10 was never, at least in my mind, the cure for all that ails us. This aspect of the acticle was fairly weird in that I expected hard tech talk, not game HW/SW politics. I never expected anything more than an incremental change in game visuals. Sort of like what we got with the advent of DX9.

I've been gaming on computers since the green phosphur days, so I've seen a fair amount of golly-gee HW/SW appear and then be quickly supplanted by something newer. The difference THIS time, to a far greater degree than I've ever seen before, is the sheer ferocity of current/last gen tech users seemingly demanding that things remain pretty much the way they are. The article spents too much time, IMO, tilting towards these folks.

As a person who loves computer games, and accepts the fact that time marches on, I find this situation amazing.