Grumps said:
...along with a nice shiney DX19 graohics card. But wait! Where's
DX10? And what about the games - when are they coming out? So just
HOW long do we have to wait?
Methinks MS have mislead me. Isn't that unlawful?
I doubt you'll really see DX10 games any time soon. Reason is fairly simple.
DX10 and DX9 are vastly different in their implementation. DX10 has no fixed
function pipeline anymore just for starters requiring vertex shaders and
pixel shaders for even the simplest tasks....bad idea in my opinion.
So for that reason, a game developer can't very easily, if at all, make an
engine supporting both DX9 and DX10. The rendering paths are just too
vastly different. It'd almost be like writing two game engines as far as
the rendering pipeline is concerned.
On top of that comes this:
XP Supports DX9, does not support DX10.
Vista Supports DX9 and DX10.
I'd say it is more than safe enough to say that the XP users still by far
outnumber Vista users.
I'd even go as far as to say that a high-end gamer is less likely to move to
Vista than the average user. DX10 is of little reason yet as there is not
much out there using it. Vista's resource requirements leave less resources
to the game on the same hardware and most non-casual gamers tend do be
picky about their game's performance.
Also consider that only 8800's and above video cards support DX10. Meaning
that any game using DX10 will only work on the most absolute high-end
hardware out there that not many users have.
Also consider the time it unfortunately takes these days to make a game.
Long gone are the days when a single person could easily make a game that
can compete in the market place. These days games can take several months
if not even years in same cases to develop. Meaning that everything in
development right now, is still DX9.
Any developer intending to start development this year and release this year
or even not until next year, is also still best using DX9 as that will give
the broadest audience. Both in terms of OS usage and hardware requirements.
Also consider that most games don't even really use DX9 to its fullest
potential yet. If I had to name games using Pixel Shader 2.0 I can name
several. If I had to name games using Pixel Shader 3.0 not even one comes
to my mind. Vanguard...maybe? There are games that use it...but they are a
minority.
Bottom line, I really don't think that DX10 is that viable a choice for any
developer at this moment. The key problems with it being the hardware and
OS requirements that won't be widespread enough met for at least I'd say 2
years.
Even if someone has a machine running Vista, that does not mean they have a
8800 GTS/GTX or higher to go with it to run DX10 software.
I think the only thing DX10 makes sense for right now are projects that have
a development time of 2 years or more. Assuming that MS' doesn't blow its
legs off with Vista, I don't think that the OS nor the required hardware
for DX10 will become mainstream enough for a developer to consider using
it.
The only way really, at this point in time, for a developer to write an
application that will run on all of todays hardware but *also* have
features for the high-end DX10 level hardware is quite honestly...OpenGL. I
am wondering if maybe this scenario may not get some developers to consider
using it. It can do everything DX9 and DX10 can without needing two
completely different APIs.
That actually puts OpenGL into the unique position of having quite an
advantage over DX in that regard. In my opinion anyway.
Not to mention that using OpenGL means that the game isn't tied to one
operating system and can run on any platform on this planet further
broadening the audience.
I am quite curious to see what the future will bring in that regard. =)
--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6
å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
However, you need to have a DX10 card to