Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Marcel van der Linden, Aug 19, 2013.
Any plans for it because i think it will be better for overall performance for new gpu and cpu.
New Q and A, its in there somewhere.
DX11 is just a sales pitch for iRacing, as with so many other things - sad to see it works
I agree I seen nothing in pCARS or any other DX10/11 titles I want for rF2.
I do not want it looking like perfection.
How could I have driven GPL or so long otherwise.
If it was just a sales pitch Microsoft wouldn't have invested millions of dollars in it. The latest direct x allows for better effects and better proformance with newer video cards.
wooo wooo wooo hey now, who wants better effects and better performance with their new cards..... and people say DX11 is a gimmick, clearly have there head in the clouds. Im sure that person said the same thing when it came time to upgrade his 486 to something more from the late 90s,. or he might have even questioned why anyone would need more then 1 MEG of ram........
Heres a game for you guys to play, the rest of us will be playing the latest and greatest technology has to offer.
From what I understand, DX11 doesn't necessarily deliver better visuals, but it does deliver a better optimised version of those visuals. So at the end of the day, the DX engine is the glass, the content is the wine.
Which some could argue you are already doing with rF2...
Good to see the entirely reasonable arguments being put forth regarding DX11 and being in the stone age...
...However I personally love Ayrton Senna's Super Monaco GP 2 XD
Pole Position was truly cutting edge -- the first to feature a real race track. Quite fitting for rF2 in different ways.
Iracings dx11 is being updated to various items on various tracks, the dx11 parts do look better
(not sure if it's the dx11 or the fact they've just been updated/worked on) but when your speeding around the track things like this are just unnoticable
I'm happy either way dx : 9 10 or 11 -they all look good
Wouldn't life be awesome if people actually read what you write and stopped reflecting on what you didn't ?
DX9 is often not even pushed to it's limitations, adding the same effects from the DX11 library is like the progress from running Notepad on WinXP and Win8. GPU and CPU cycles are limited and all effects comes at an expense, it's all about getting the best out of them...
Yes and you get the best out of those effects by using the latest direct x version that's coded for the latest cards. For instance implementing DOF and motion blur or heat haze will cost a great deal more power in dx9 vs 11. There's all sorts of stuff we will never get to experience if rf2 stays with dx9 because its just too costly.
This is exactly this !
The DX version do not make the beauty of the game.
Take a look at this and tell me which is the best.
iRacing guys did not make the most feature-rich graphics engine, but they did make pretty solid and well-optimized one.
At some point, they decided to move to DX11 to optimize their engine even more.
So they did that for a reason.
Exactly. All the latest changes in DirectX and OpenGL are almost entirely about performance and new design of game engines. One does not take advantage of DX11 simply by moving it's code base to it. You need to design your game engine an your tools towards these new features.
That's why it's not something I believe would happen with rF2. ISI is a small company and is using "cheap" modding tools (just some plugins for 3DS) and will not be able to take advantage of all DX11 features. It's rather a priviledge of big companies or companies making non-moddable games.
In the end, offering no visual improvements and only some performance improvements, DX11 version of rF2 would not be as much different to DX9 version, as some of you may expect.
Right, is not about better visuals but optimised code, better performance.
But looks like ISI doesnt care
"Q: Any internal talks about DX11 in the future ? Is the move to DX11 much to complex?
A: It’s not about complexity, it is about benefit. There isn’t enough benefit to using it right now, though that does not mean there won’t be benefit going forward (though that might be with DX12, DX13, etc)".
Yes, because here's an idea, it's not that they "don't care". If that statement by them is correct, then that shows you they have weighed up their options and figured out that there is not going to be much of a ROI regarding DX11 in rF2. Still, DX11 would be technically better in terms of what it offers.
For most games I've tried in the last year (where the main GFX settings have stayed the same or not been tinkered with behind the scenes) DX11 hasn't really done a much to the visuals. Tessellation in some instances looks nice, but then again IMO it seems like a pretty small gain for what it is.
So then you say it might make it slightly easier for developers to "get things done" in the core of the game, make multithreaded/multicore stuff easier to take advantage of, different abilities with the API. Thing I remember reading is that simulation games cannot work over multiple processes as everything being processed must be tightly in sync for it to work well. Something about it almost being inherent in simulation software, an ability to "spread things out" is not possible.
It's just the way that I see it. They know what they are doing with their product and what they want to do/achieve. The time spent is not worth what the return would be it seems. To say there are just straight out gains to be had that they don't care about is a bit rash
Totally agree, it sound rash, not my intention (my vocabulary is some limited) we know that ISI know what to do (we want to believe that), still think that they must consider that option, sure is not their priority.
I would rather like rF2 to move to OpenGL and ported to GNU/Linux. Don't care too much about graphism, better to have a good feeing in the game.
Separate names with a comma.